Experiential Learning Models

Experiential learning theories define learning as the process of creating knowledge through the transformation and internalisation of concrete experiences (Kolb, 1984). Experiential learning has been the dominant mode of learning since humans first appeared on the earth (Kraft, 1995). Experiential learning involves facilitation of the creation and transfer of abstract principles, values, attitudes and understandings from concrete experience, which are retained and may be applied and influence future experience and behaviour (Jarvis, Holford, and Griffin, 1998).

According to experiential learning theory, optimal learning takes place when educators place learners in direct contact with experiences that are structured to require problem solving, curiosity, engagement, and inquiry of the learner. Such action learning experiences are supported by educators who select suitable experiences, pose problems, set boundaries, provide physical and emotional support, and facilitate reflection, critical analysis, and synthesis through actively posing questions, and requiring learners to take initiative, make decisions, and be accountable for results (Itin, 1999). Experiential learning in adventure programming utilises novel and unfamiliar environments that place learners outside of their comfort zone in a state of dissonance, which requires self-directed adaptation resulting in growth and learning (Gass, 1993a). The experiential learning activities generally engage learners on multiple levels, including physical, intellectual, emotional, social and spiritual.

They challenge them to explore issues of values, relationships, diversity, inclusion, and community. And the learning from these experiences is then used as the basis for engagement in future activities and learning (Itin, 1999). In developmental adventure programmes the experiential learning process is utilised to expose participants to strengths, coping strategies, and makes them aware of internal reserves and resilience that can be harnessed to face challenges in their everyday life-world. When used for therapy, experiential learning is utilised to challenge dysfunctional behaviours and reward functional change, making use of therapeutic activities that carry natural consequences for the client, and utilising reflection as a critical element of the therapeutic process resulting in functional change that has present and future relevance for the client in their home, community, and society (Gass, 1993a). The philosophy of experiential education can be traced back to the work of a number of

influential individuals (Itin, 1999; Kraft, 1995, 1999). Prominent among these is John Dewey, who reflected the progressive education movement in the United States, and emphasised linking experience with reflection. At the core of his thinking was the understanding that education was not simply about transmission of facts but the education of the entire person for participation in a democratic society. Jean Piaget emphasised that four factors are crucial to cognitive development: physical maturation, experiences with concrete objects, social interaction, and equilibration that results from bringing the previous factors together to build and rebuild mental structures. Kurt Hahn took ideas from Plato in terms of the development of the citizen and particularly the citizen's ability to serve the community. His idea was that education should prepare students to be principled leaders. Finally, Paulo Freire influenced experiential education in his belief that education is a tool for social change (Itin, 1999; Kraft, 1999). Based on the principles set down by such theorists, over 17 process models of experiential learning have been proposed to describe the passage of learning from experience through processing to change (Neill; 2004). John Dewey's (1938) three stage model of experience + reflection = learning was one of the first; but Kolb's (1984) 4-stage model is most probably the most well known.

Kolb's cycle starts with concrete experience, moving on to observation and reflection, formalisation of abstract concepts and generalisation, and then to testing implications of the concepts in new situations. This learning is then transferred to the next experience, where the model starts again. Greenaway (1993) proposed a cyclical four stage model emphasising the role of reviewing in energising the learning process, enriching the experience, allowing participants to assign meaning to their experience, make connections, and develop learning skills. His model cycles between experience,

expression, examining, and exploring. On the other hand Joplin (1981) proposed a cyclical model consisting of five stages that spirals out into another 5-stage cycle and so on: (a) focus stage, where the learner is presented a task and their attention is focused on the specific activity; (b) action stage, in which participants engage in the experience; (c) support stage, whereby educators provide encouragement and security for clients to get through the experience; (d) feedback stage, during which educators provide participants with feedback about their performance strengths and weaknesses;

and then (e) debriefing stage, in which participants and educators engage in reflection to help organise and integrate learning. Similarly, Pfeiffer and Jones (1983) also produced a 5-stage cycle model for managing experiential learning. Critiques of stage models have suggested that they are overly simplistic, mechanistic, have limited pedagogic potential for design and management of teaching and learning, separate processes that most likely run concurrently, and fail to take into account the social, historical and cultural aspects of self, thinking and action (Beard & Wilson, 2006;

Berry, 2011; Seaman, 2008). A useful information processing meta-model that addresses many of these concerns, pulls together many existing experiential learning theories, and provides a pedagogic framework for the design and management of experiential learning is the Learning Combination Lock (Beard, 2010; Beard &

Wilson, 2006; Wilson & Beard, 2003). According to this model a number of factors need to be considered in balance and alignment with one another during experiential learning. The model addresses six learning dimensions: (a) where, when and in what climate or social/political/environmental context, whether real, virtual or imaginary is learning taking place; (b) what kind of learning activity would best suit the kind of learning being targeted; (c) how should the experience be received by the senses of

the learner for it to be most effectively internalised; (d) what is the emotional impact of the experience, ranging from calm pre-contemplation, to determined focused attention, to enthusiastic discovery; (e) how is the mind processing the experience, how is the mind stimulated and engaged, and what kind of thinking is taking place;

and (f) what kind of change or transformation, if any, is occurring.

A visual metaphor for this model, presented in figure 2.2, uses six tumblers to represent the various dimensions of learning, and their virtually limitless number of combinations, which should continually be evaluated and aligned to provide for the best 'fit' of learning ingredients for the learner's needs and the programme's envisaged outcomes.

Figure 2.2: Learning combination lock (Beard, 2010)