The seed-sowing metaphor for learning suggests that the condition of the
soil - the characteristics of the learner - is critically important.
Learning is an emerging property of the complex adaptive systems of our
organizations. People are not machines into which we can load a new
program and get new behaviors, nor are they soldiers who will blindly
follow the orders we give them. People learn and adapt in different ways,
at different speeds, for their own reasons, with unique results. In other
words, people have a "style" when it comes to learning. Understanding the
learning styles of our colleagues can help us create more effective
environments for learning. ... The Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ)
is based on the work of educational psychologist David Kolb (circa 1970).
Copies of the LSQ questionnaire, and an interpretation handbook, can be
obtained from The HRD Quarterly, managed by Organizational Design and
Development, Inc., 800-633-4533, order code 1205.
Figure 1 provides a brief description of the four learning styles:
Activist, Reflector, Theorist, and Pragmatist. We all exhibit each of
these types to some degree, but most people will have a tendency towards
one or two predominant types in a given learning situation. You can either
get copies of the LSQ instrument and complete it as a group, or simply
have a good discussion, using figure 6 as a guide, to talk about how
different group members approach learning about complex adaptive systems.
Many people report that their learning style depends somewhat on the topic
they are learning about. So, it is important that you have the topic of
complex adaptive systems in mind as you assess learning styles according
to the LSQ.
Figure 1: The Four Dimensions of the Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ)
Activists:
Activists involve themselves fully and without bias in new experiences. They
enjoy the here and now. They are open-minded, not skeptical, and this tends
to make them enthusiastic about anything new. Their philosophy is: "I'll try
anything once." They tend to thrive on the challenge of new experiences but
are bored with implementation and longer term considerations.
Reflectors:
Reflectors like to stand back to ponder experiences and observe them from
different perspectives. They collect data, both first hand and from others,
and prefer to think about it thoroughly, postponing definitive conclusions
as long as possible. Their philosophy is to be cautious. They are thoughtful
people. They enjoy observing other people in action. They listen to others
and get the drift of the discussion before making their own points.
Theorists:
Theorists adapt and integrate observations into complex, but logically sound
theories. They think problems through in a vertical, logical, step-by-step
way. They tend to be perfectionists who will not rest until things are tidy
and fit into a rational scheme. They like to analyze and synthesize.
Questions they frequently ask are: "Does it make sense?" "How does this fit
with that?" "What are the basic assumptions here?" They tend to be detached,
analytical, and dedicated to rational objectivity, rather than anything
subjective or ambiguous.
Pragmatists:
Pragmatists are interested in trying out ideas, theories, and techniques to
see if they work in practice. They like to get on with things and act
quickly and confidently on ideas that attract them. They are essentially
practical, down-to-earth people who like making practical decisions and
solving problems. Their philosophy is: "There is always a better way, and if
it works, it is good."
Adapted from Honey, P and Mumford, A (1989) Learning Styles Questionnaire:
Participants Guide. Available from Organization Design and Development, Inc.
Order Code: 1205, tel: 800-633-4533.
Figure 2 provides thoughts about constructing learning environments that
appeal to the four LSQ types. As before, the point of this chart is not to
stereotype, but to encourage diversity in learning approaches. In other
words, do not assume that the way you learned about complexity (be it
through reading, through discussion in groups, by understanding the science,
or by hearing how other people applied it) is necessarily the way everyone
else should learn about complexity.
Figure 2: Constructing Learning Environments for the Four LSQ Types
Activists:
Learn best from activities where they are:
*engaged in new experiences, problems, and opportunities from which to
learn.
*engrossed in short, here-and-now activities like a role play or game.
*seeing excitement, drama, and challenge; things change; there are many
activities.
*getting some limelight and visibility (they chair the meeting, give a
presentation).
*thrown into the deep end with a task that they think is difficult.
*involved with others, bouncing ideas around and problem solving in teams.
Learn least, and may react against, activities where they are:
*involved in a passive role like reading, watching, or listening to
lectures.
*asked to stand back and not get involved.
*required to assimilate, analyze, and interpret lots of "messy" data.
*asked to engage in solitary work.
*offered statements they see as too theoretical.
*asked to repeat essentially the same activity over and over.
*asked to do a thorough job, dot all i's and cross all t's.
Key questions for them as learners:
*Will I learn about something really new to me?
*Will there be a wide variety of activities or will I have to just sit a
listen?
*Will it be OK to get involved, let my hair down, make mistakes?
*Will I encounter some tough problems and challenges?
*Will there be other like-minded people with whom to mix?
Reflectors:
Learn best from activities where they are:
*allowed and encouraged to watch, think, chew over activities.
*able to stand back from events and observe a group at work or watch a
video.
*allowed time to think before acting; assimilate before commenting.
*carrying out painstaking research and investigation.
*provided an environment where they can exchange views with others without
danger.
*can reach a decision on their own without pressure and tight deadlines.
Learn least, and may react against, activities where they are:
*forced into the limelight (to chair the meeting, role play in front of
others).
*involved in activities that require action without planning.
*given cut and dried instructions on how things should be done.
*worried by time pressures or rushed from one activity to another.
Key questions for them as learners:
*Will I be given adequate time to consider, assimilate, and prepare?
*Will there be opportunities for me to assemble information for myself?
*Will there be opportunity to listen to many points of view so I can decide
for myself?
*Will I be under pressure to decide on something too quickly or to
extemporize?
Theorists:
Learn best from activities where they are:
*offered part of a system, model, concept or theory and challenged to find
the rest.
*given time to explore methodically the associations among ideas and
concepts.
*given time to question and probe (a Q&A session, or looking for
inconsistencies).
*intellectually stretched. *listening to or reading about ideas that are
presented in a rational, elegant way. *offered interesting ideas and
concepts; immediate relevance is less important.
Learn least, and may react against, activities where they are:
*pushed into doing something without context or apparent purpose.
*asked to participate in activities that emphasize emotion or feelings.
*given a hodgepodge of techniques with shallow explanations as in an
overview course.
*doubtful that the subject matter is methodologically sound.
*out-of-tune with other participants (with Activists or people of low
intellectual caliber).
Key questions for them as learners:
*Will there be plenty of opportunity to question?
*Do the objectives of the activity indicate a clear structure and purpose?
*Will I encounter complex ideas that will stretch me intellectually?
*Is the subject matter "respectable;" sound and valid?
*Will I be with people of similar intellectual caliber as myself?
Pragmatists:
Learn best from activities where they are:
*seeing obvious links between subject matter and problems on the job.
*shown techniques with obvious practical advantages (helps them get
something done).
*given the chance to try something out with feedback from a credible expert.
*exposed to a role model they can emulate (through a case study, video,
peer, etc.)
*given immediate opportunities to implement what they have learned.
*directed to concentrate on practical matters (such as drawing up a list of
next steps).
Learn least, and may react against, activities where they are:
*involved in learning that they do not see as immediately relevant.
*interacting with people they feel are distant from reality; "ivory-tower"
people.
*not given opportunity to practice, nor clear guidelines on how to proceed.
*faced with political, managerial, or personal obstacles that prevent
action.
Key questions for them as learners:
*Will there be plenty of opportunity to practice and experiment?
*Will there be lots of practical tips and techniques?
*Will we be addressing real problems and making real action plans?
*Will I be exposed to experts who know how to do it themselves?
Adapted from Honey, P and Mumford, A (1989) Learning Styles Questionnaire:
Leaders' Guide. Available from Organization Design and Development, Inc.
Order Code 1205, tel: 800-633-4533.
Use figure 2 for reflection both before and after learning activities. Key
questions for reflection are:
*Have we provided something for everyone in the group?
*What will (did) individual members like most and least about the learning
experience? Have we interleaved these items such that no one has to go
through too long a time of discomfort before they are engaged in some
activity that appeals to them?
*Are the individual likes and dislikes expressed after the activity
consistent with the learning style preferences of the group members?
*Are we developing more "style flexibility;" are we each taking personal
steps to become more comfortable in learning in new ways and are we each
honoring the preferred ways of others in the group?
There are many other learning style frameworks and each provides insight
into the individuality of adults when it comes to learning something new.
Regardless of the framework you choose, the key points to keep in mind are:
*In a complex adaptive systems, emergent learning comes through things like
information flow, diversity, connectedness, generative relations, and so on;
not through the direction of a central, knowledgeable individual.
*Do not think that the way you learned about complexity is necessarily the
best way for everyone else to learn about it.
*People are unique individuals; frameworks often help us understand this
uniqueness, but when frameworks become labels and stereotypes, they do harm.
Copyright ) 1998, Paul E. Plsek & Associates,
http://www.directedcreativity.com courtesy of http://www.edgeware.com
Permission to copy for educational purposes only. All other rights reserved.
========================================================
PS I have no interest in or relationship with the organizations quoted
above.
I am very aware of the differing styles having worked as a change agent in
several organizations at executive levels. The chemistry of change is indeed
heuristic. These tools merely act as probes to help us establish a baseline.
Cheers...Keith
Keith Cowan
kcowan@orion.GlobalDEN.com (CIS:72212,51)
--"Cowan, Keith" <kcowan@ORION.GLOBALDEN.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>