Kolb x Siemens

Being anchored in the learning theories of Dewey, Lewin, and Piaget, Kolb (1984) defines the nature of learning as being a holistic integrative process. He explains that learning will take place to resolve some form of friction, conflict or disrupter. For Dewey, such conflict derives from impulses that need to “be transformed into high-order purposeful action” (Kolb, 1984, p. 22). For Piaget, the dichotomy happens between accommodation versus assimilation, whereas Lewin sees room for friction between abstract and concrete concepts.

Kolb developed a learning cycle model in a reaction against reliance on behaviorism to understand learning by examining the role of cognition. The four quadrants are formed by linking a perception pole (concrete experience and abstract conceptualization) with a transformation pole (reflective observation or active experimentation). Ideally, learners should carry a balanced amount of all four quadrants and learning abilities grow out of these four strengths.

 In addition, Kolb argues that knowledge comes from social knowledge and personal knowledge, which reflects the importance of taking learners’ contexts into account. Having that said, it is important to acknowledge that some of Kolb’s shortcomings. Given that "learning involves transactions between person and environment", Kolb's does not seem to address how the environment affects his model. The same goes for the role of affect. It is admittedly important, but its value as an enhancer or inhibitor of learning was not addressed in depth. Therefore, individual knowledge and situated knowledge should walk hand in hand, which seems to be one of the points that Siemens defends.

According to Siemens, behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism “do not attempt to address the challenges of organizational knowledge and transference” (2005, p.3) and that “complete knowledge cannot exist in the mind of one person”. His statement that learning is no longer an internal, individualistic activity, although pertinent, might me misleading in the sense that the impact of external factors on learning has never been addressed up until now. For instance, Boud, Keogh, and Walker tackle the presence of barriers which can inhibit or block learners’ preparedness for the experience, which can both internal or external (1993). Wenger discusses the role of communities of practice, which can foster engagement through sharing interests and information, joint activities, and discussions (2005).  

To my mind, Kolb and Siemens’s concepts are a nice complement to each other since learning cannot be detached from neither the individual’s experience nor the connection he or she establishes with the environment.

Finally, I couldn't help to notice that much of my study notes are filled with drawings, formulas and models I make up myself. I made a little graphic of what I believe represents the ideal path (or one of them) towards meaningful learning and decided to share it with you guys. Any ideas on how to improve it are welcome! I'd love to hear your thoughts.