I think this was the most difficult class for me so far. I have a hard time talking about myself and trying to figure out why I do things the way I do. I have never really thought about my learning style before, so I really enjoyed this activity. It was determined that I was a Converger. I don't think I would have ever considered myself to be a converging learner, but that description seems to fit me pretty well.
I need to know why I am doing something in order for it to make sense. Some people get really frustrated at me because I will pick and pick at this until I know why. I don't like to consider different view points. I want the facts. I learn best by hands on, not lecture.
After our class discussion, I do not think that learning for me goes in a continual circle from concrete experience to reflective observation, to abstract conceptualization and finally to active experimentation. I tend to start in between reflective observation and abstract conceptualization. Depending on what I am trying to learn, I may need to go back to concrete experience to reflect, or may have a drive to move straight towards active experimentation.
My background in psychology has drilled into my head that our personality is pretty much set and there is not a lot we can do to change it. I know we discussed this in class in regards to our learning styles, and I think these could change over time. I don't think a person would do a total change from one extreme to the other, but I think the older I get and the farther I advance in education, the more I like to sit back and reflect or put the pieces together before I just jump in.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi, Amanda,
ReplyDeleteYou have some great points here. I, too, feel that learning style is a great deal more flexible than personality, which is definitely ingrained or "hard-wired." We can all attempt to do that which doesn't come naturally in terms of our learning style -- for example, engaging in reflective practice, when our Reflective Observation score on the Kolb is low. I, too, believe we can become more versatile over time if we work on it. Often, however, I think we tend to focus on a predominate mode of making sense of situations and the learning within them and miss out on the value of all four steps in the cycle. If you only use two or three at present, you're not alone, but you can continue to "stretch" and learn to use more. I'm glad you found this class interesting; it's great to be challenged, too.
tjc
Hi Amanda-- Kolb is a bit difficult for me, too, especially the learning circle. I agree with you that people don't always start at one point and end at another. I also feel that the same person might use the learning cycle in two different ways depending on the type(s) of learning taking place. Like you, I think my designated style ("diverger") fits me, but I'm not sure that I always use this style for all the sorts of learning I do. Sometimes I feel like you-- I'd rather have the cold hard facts rather than approach a concept from a million different angles. Then other times, I like to take my time and analyze things from every perspective possible. I think it just depends.
ReplyDeleteAmanda, it’s fun to read writing of others who have different perspectives than me. I don’t think that a fact is the only way to examine a topic. For example, woman A took a purse in a lady’s room. Woman A met woman B as soon as A got out of the lady’s room. The purse was woman B’s and she left her purse in the lady’s room. Woman A said that she just tried to find the owner so she carried the purse. However, woman B asserted that woman A tried to steal the purse and she was lying. What do you think that fact is in this story? Do you think what woman A said is a fact? I wish I had a better example.
ReplyDelete