Rick,
>Aren't these presented by Kolb as activities in a sequential cycle?
That's the way it has been presented. And yes, it is necessary to
understand and utilise all four learning activities. However, some of the
metrics point to a preferred learning activity. Knowing our "strength" we
can then work on strengthening the other learning activities.
There has also been some enhancement of the model, (I do not think by
Kolb) that sees each of the learning activities as happening in a
scattered approach; that typically we do not think
sequentially/cyclically, so we tend to use each of the methods at
different times, sometimes "out of turn". To me, this makes a lot of
sense and improves the learning model. This interpretation would mean
that we do not always make use of all the learning activities, but that we
do use all the learning activities over a range of learning situations.
>the recommendation then would be to develop the flexibility to learn well
>in all four modes.
I think this still holds, whether the activities be sequential or not.
Our learning is richer for the use of all activities.
The cycle is well adapted to action research and action learning.
Still learning,
/Les
--Leslie Lax Kelowna BC
e-mail: leslax@cnx.net web: http://members.cnx.net/leslax
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>