BEHAVIOURISM

Behaviourism is a learning theory that only focuses on objectively observable behaviours and
discounts any independent activities of the mind. Behaviour theorists define learning as nothing
more than the acquisition of new behaviour based on environmental conditions.

DISCUSSION
Experiments by behaviourists identify conditioning as a universal learning process. Conditioning
can also be said to be associative learning. There are two different types of conditioning, each
yielding a different behavioural pattern:
1. Classic conditioning(Pavlov-dogs experiment) occurs when a natural reflex responds to a
stimulus. We are biologically “wired” so that a certain stimulus will produce a specific
response. One of the more common examples of classical conditioning in the educational
environment is in situations where students exhibit irrational fears and anxieties like fear
of failure, fear of public speaking and general school phobia.
2. Behavioural or operant conditioning(Skinner) occurs when a response to a stimulus is
reinforced. Basically, operant conditioning is a simple feedback system: If a reward or
reinforcement follows the response to a stimulus, then the response becomes more
probable in the future. For example, leading behaviourist B.F. Skinner used reinforcement
techniques to teach pigeons to dance and bowl a ball in a mini-alley.

There have been many criticisms of behaviourism, including the following:

 Behaviourism does not account for all kinds of learning, since it disregards the activities
of the mind.
 Behaviourism does not explain some learning–such as the recognition of new language
patterns by young children–for which there is no reinforcement mechanism.
 Research has shown that animals adapt their reinforced patterns to new information. For
instance, a rat can shift its behaviour to respond to changes in the layout of a maze it had
previously mastered through reinforcements.

HOW BEHAVIORISM IMPACTS LEARNING

This theory is relatively simple to understand because it relies only on observable behaviour and
describes several universal laws of behaviour. Its positive and negative reinforcement techniques
can be very effective– such as in treatments for human disorders including autism, anxiety
disorders and antisocial behaviour. Behaviourism is often used by teachers who reward or
punish student behaviours.
Behaviourism is often seen in contrast to constructivism. Constructivists are more likely to allow
for experimentation and exploration in the classroom and place a greater emphasis on the
experience of the learner. In contrast to behaviourists, they feel that an understanding of the
brain informs teaching.
READING
D.C. Phillips & Jonas F. Soltis, Perspectives on Learning, Chapter 3. Teachers College Press.
Behavioural Theories
1. Abraham Maslow (1943) “Hierarchy of needs theory”
Abraham Harold Maslow (April 1, 1908 – June 8, 1970) was an American professor of
psychology at Brandeis University, Brooklyn College, New School for Social Research and
Columbia University who created Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. He stressed the importance of
focusing on the positive qualities in people, as opposed to treating them as a ‘bag of symptoms’.

Theory and Fundamentals

Prof. Abraham Maslow had put forward the 'hierarchy of needs theory' which saw human needs
in the form of a hierarchy, ascending from lowest to the highest. He argued that lower level
needs had to be satisfied before the next higher level need and once one set of needs is
satisfied, this kind of need ceases to be a motivator.

Physiological needs
- the most basic human life needs which are important for sustenance like food, water, warmth,
shelter, sleep, sex etc. Maslow argued that unless physiological needs are satisfied to a degree,
no other motivating factor can work.
Safety or Security needs
- to be free of physical danger and emotional harm like the fear of losing a job, property, food or
shelter. It relates to security, protection and stability in the personal events of everyday life.
Social Needs
These are needs for love, affection and belongingness and social acceptance. People are social
beings and try to satisfy their needs for acceptance and friendship.
Esteem
Once people's social needs are satisfied, they look for esteem (reputation). This need produces
such satisfaction as power, prestige status and self-confidence. It includes both internal esteem
factors like self-respect, autonomy, achievements and external esteem factors such as
recognition and attention as well as personal sense of competence.
Self-actualization
This need is the drive to become what one is capable of becoming. It's the need to grow and use
abilities to the fullest potential. It includes growth and self-fulfilment by achieving one's
potential to accomplish something. Looking at Maslow's hierarchy of needs pyramid, as each
needs are substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant. (eg. esteem needs become
dominant after social needs are satisfied). Also, when a need gets substantially satisfied, it stops
to be motivating.

Theory Criticisms:
 The main criticism of the Maslow’s Pyramid that there is no empirical evidence to
validate the theory.
 There is no metric to measure the success of the theory after being implemented.
 The quantitative impact of Maslow's theories cannot be accurately measured.
 Theory doesn’t expose to the living environmental factor and its influence on the
percentage of fulfilment for each level of needs. ( e.g. Urban citizen level of fulfilment is
differentiated than rural and Bedouins for each level of needs )
 Theory ignores to show the dynamic relationship and interaction between the levels of
needs according to the surrounding changes. (e.g. cultural, political , educational , wealth,
health ,… changes)
 2. Two Factor Theory by Frederick Herzberg
As a complementary of Pyramid of Need theory; Frederick Herzberg's (1959) has built his theory
of motivation based on Maslow’s Pyramid by dividing the pyramid levels into main two factors;
 Hygiene Factors those are essential requirements for living (Basic/Biological and Safety
needs) and their absence will lead to a dissatisfaction.
 Motivating Factors those are responsible about creating the level of satisfaction and
motivation (Esteem and Self Actualization), with taking into consideration of the shared
level of between both the Hygiene and Motivating factors what is the (Belonging and
Social needs).
Finally; The crux of Maslow's theory is to focus on finding out the level of hierarchy the person is
in and
focusing on satisfying his needs and the needs above it. The theory's ease of understanding and
intuitive logic makes it easy to implement.
 3. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory
In 1964, Canadian professor of psychology Victor Vroom developed the Expectancy Theory. In it,
he studied people’s motivation and concluded it depends on three factors:
Expectancy, instrumentality and valence. Abraham Maslow and Frederick Herzberg also
researched the relation between people’s needs and the efforts they make. Vroom distinguishes
between the effort people put in, their performance and the final result. His theory primarily
relates to motivation within a work environment. When employees can make choices in their
work, Victor Vroom argues that they will mostly choose that what motivates them the most.
Victor Vroom uses a formula to calculate the motivational force:
Motivational force = Expectancy x Instrumentality x Valence
Expectancy
This is about what employees expect from their own efforts and the relation to good
performance. Part of this expectation is the level of difficulty he experiences. An organisation
can respond to that by finding out which factors can motivate the employee to deliver his best
possible performance. Those factors can be facilities, training or support from a supervisor who
builds his employees’ confidence. Victor Vroom indicates that, in general, more effort leads to
better performance. Employees can be stimulated to make an effort by offering them a juicy
carrot if they complete their task properly and quickly. Of course, it’s also important that they
have the right resources at their disposal, that the employees have the necessary skills and that
management provides the right level of support.
Instrumentality
Each employee is a cog in the machine and an instrument that contributes to the business
results. From that perspective, instrumentality isn’t difficult to grasp. It’s about the
employee’s performance being good enough to achieve the desired result. An organisation can
stimulate this by actually making good on promises of additional rewards such as bonuses
or promotion. The employee has to believe that if he performs well, appreciation will be shown
for the results. Transparency throughout the reward process is an important condition for
instrumentality.
Valence
The final result that employees achieve is valued differently by each individual. This value is
based on their own basic needs. As such, it’s a good idea for an organisation to find out what an
individual employee values and what his personal needs are. One might value money, while
another values more days off.
Individual factors
According to Victor Vroom, behaviour is the result of a conscious choice from alternatives.
Employees have a preference for getting the most possible joy from their work with little effort.
Individual factors play a large role in the goals that have to be achieved and the behaviour of
employees. For instance, think of an employee’s personality, his knowledge and skills, and the
expectations he has of his own abilities. Together, these form a motivating force that makes the
employee act in a certain way. The individual effort, performance and motivation are always
interconnected. To properly motivate employees, Vroom argues that it’s essential that there is a
positive correlation between effort and performance.
Perception
Perception is an important factor in Vroom’s Expectancy Theory. An organisation might perceive
that it, as an employer, offers its employees everything they need to sufficiently motivate them.
For instance, a salary that’s 10% above industry average, 10 extra days off, training programmes,
or career opportunities. But not all employees will be sufficiently motivated by that; each
individual has a different perception. There might be employees who would appreciate more
support from their supervisor.
If an organisation fails in that respect, chances are the employees will be less motivated.
Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of motivation is not always about employee’s personal interest in
rewards. It’s also about the associations employees have regarding their performance and the
result it will yield.
Application
According to Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, you can expect employees will increase their efforts at
work when the reward has more personal value to them. They’ll be more aware of the fact that
there is a link between their effort and the results. It means that both the organisation and the
employee have to be aware of the following three processes:
1. Increased efforts will improve work performance
2. Increased performance will lead to bigger rewards
3. The offered reward will be appreciated by the employee
If one of these conditions is not met, it’s hard to motivate the employee. Particularly the last part
can become an issue. An organisation therefore has to find out – together with its employees –
which rewards individual employees value; which rewards motivate them. Organisations often
consider financial bonuses to be the best way to motivate employees, even though the
Expectancy Theory shows that this is by no means always the most important factor to
employees. That’s why there has to be a proper balance between offering a financial bonus and
setting a clear performance standard, tailored to individual employees.

More information
1. Isaac, R. G., Zerbe, W. J., & Pitt, D. C. (2001). Leadership and motivation: The effective application
of expectancy theory. Journal of managerial issues, 212-226.
2. Lawler III, E. E., & Suttle, J. L. (1973). Expectancy theory and job behavior. Organizational behavior
and human performance, 9(3), 482-503.
3. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Oxford, England: Wiley.
A critique of Behaviourism
(of International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 2005 Page 22)

Myers (1988) details some of the most telling critiques of behaviourism that initially emanate from its
pure positivist reductionism. Firstly, behaviourism reduces all behaviour to the level of a correlation
between an external stimulus and an internal response. This supposition Myers argues is faulted for
ignoring the importance of cognitive psychological processes, which focuses on internal process such as
perception and learning from reflection, which have a major part to play in facilitating an understanding
learning. This focus on reductionism also led behaviourism to adopt a very simplistic approach to the
correlation between learning and the development of language. This led Chomsky (1959) to subject
behaviourism to one of its most devastating critiques, based on the capacity of humans to create never
before uttered sentences. Supporting this stance Mennell (1980, p.8) argues that since “language is
inseparable from social activities, Chomsky’s theory of language in itself makes a telling case against the
determinism of the behaviourists.” Kolb (1988) also criticises behaviourism for conceptualising the
environment-person relationship as being one way when in fact this is not the case. Kolb criticises
behaviourism for creating empirically verifiable models of learning that are only applicable in the artificial
laboratory environment.
Another important critique of behaviourism developed out of the work of Piaget (1926) and Vygotsky
(1962) and became known as constructivism. Although Derry (1996) posits that there is little agreement
on a universal constructivist theory of learning there is agreement on a number of common themes and
issues that span this disparate spectrum of concepts (Hanley, 1994). Foremost amongst these criticisms is
that, while behaviourism emphasises observable external behaviour and avoids reference to meaning,
representation and thought, constructivism adopts a cognitive approach. Significantly this difference in
emphasis has profound consequences for every aspect of learning theory ranging from how knowledge
and skills are acquired to the relationship between the student (coached) and teacher (coach).

Supporting this contention Von Glasersfeld (1995) clearly articulates the difference in the role of the
teacher (coach) between constructivism and behaviourism as respectively a ‘midwife in the birth of
understanding’ as opposed to being ‘mechanics of knowledge transfer’. Thus, as Wilson and Cole (1991)
contend, constructivism must place the learner in active control of their learning through trying to solve
rich and authentic problems in a real world environment.

Further supporting this critique of behaviourism, Fosnot (1996) suggests that the focus of learning should
be on concept development and developing deep understanding rather than simple behaviour or skills
acquisition. Learning is therefore viewed as a process constructing meaningful representations of one’s
own experiential world. This also means that educators and coaches are challenged with the need to
construct a model of the conceptual worlds of students (coachees) because, argues Von Glaserfeld
(1996), this could be very different from what educators (coaches) intended. Constructivism also argues
that learning is affected by the interaction between individuals and their environments as evidenced in
the work of Jonassen (1994) who suggests that there is a characteristic array of design principles for
learning that need to be followed. Constructivism itself has been criticised for expecting too much of the
learner and risking critical gaps in what is learned. Hodson and Hodson (1998, p.35), for example, argue
that “it is absurdly naïve to expect (learners) to be able to invent for themselves the abstract notions such
as gene, molecule and magnetic field that scientists have developed over many years.”

I fully endorse these criticisms but contend that there is a danger that much of what is useful about
behaviourism is viewed as being flawed and therefore not used, without thought for what coachees may
gain from such interventions. Or that, as Berglas (2002) has argued, these techniques are used without an
awareness of their theoretical makeup, which must limit their effective application. I would also suggest
that, without developing an eclectic theoretical base incorporating numerous learning theories,
developments from psychology and practitioner experiences, coaching could fall foul of the same
deterministic reductionism that has haunted behaviourism.
An example of this is the view that constructivism is the only learning theory that applies to coaching. This
view has been attacked by Masani (2001), as having the same potential for a deterministic ‘new slavery’
in terms of its omnipotence that behaviourism has been criticised for during its early prominence.
Consequently the rest of this paper will seek to address this issue by focusing on how behaviourism has
attempted to answer these criticisms and demonstrate this adaptation through specific exemplars of
behaviourism.

Attempts to answer the critique of Behaviourism

Many behaviourists made efforts to address criticisms of behaviourism and develop theory and practice
that would mitigate the deficiencies highlighted above. This led to the beginning of attempts to combine
behaviourist and cognitive principles based on an acceptance that people do not simply respond to
stimuli but also act on beliefs, express attitudes and strive towards goals (Hill 1990). Most notable
amongst these psychologists were Tolman (1959) and Bolles (1972) who still maintained that there was a
link between stimuli and behavioural responses. More important than this suggestion was the fact that
Tolman (1959) and Bolles (1972) also argued that this link was affected by a range of intervening variable
or cognitive processes. The significance of this movement was profound because it opened the door for
the development of an integrative approach, which could utilise the best of both of these disciplines.

More recently a number of psychologists have tried to integrate behavioural and cognitive psychology
principles more successfully. For example Bandura (1977, 1986), a staunch proponent of behaviour
modeling and other behavioural techniques, has developed a ‘social learning’ theory. This theory views
learning as a continuous, dynamic and reciprocal interaction between individuals, which in turn affects
their attributes, values and behaviour. An example of how this theory is applied in practice can be seen in
the United States Special Forces training programmes for Parachute jumping which takes place
throughout the country. These programmes are based on observing an ‘expert’ carry out ‘safe jumps’ and
talk about it in detail before the trainees do the same and receive one to one coaching (David and Davis,
1998). Additionally, Gagne´ and Briggs (1979) also adopted a similar integrative approach to Bandura and
developed a system of task analysis, which includes training domains such as ‘cognitive strategy’,
‘intellectual skills’, as well as less cerebral domains such as ‘motor skills’. These authors suggest that each
of these domains will require a different developmental approach.

The ‘new’ Behaviourism applied

A concrete example of behaviourism applied directly to higher-level training, as a result of Bandura’
(1977) work, is behaviour or role modelling. The terms are used interchangeably. This uses techniques
such as "goal setting" and "self-reinforcement" to help people acquire the characteristics of a competent
role model. Further elements of modelling can also be found in role play exercises and other kinds of
behaviour simulation suggests Peltier (2001). The principles of modeling are outlined by Geroy et al
(1998), Crouch (1997), Horsfall (1996), Alder (1992) and Zenger (1991), as a combination of ‘skills based
training’ and a variety of other facilitative techniques including discussion, demonstration and feedback.
Geroy et al (1998), further suggest that these techniques provide the opportunity to identify, and if
appropriate, help individuals to change their values. This can have a greater impact on behaviour than
changing skill levels alone. Supporting the significance of modelling is the work of Pescuric and Byham
(1996), who suggest that modelling provides the most effective means of skills development and
behavioural change that is currently available.
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SOCIAL COGNITION
DEFINITION
The social cognition learning model asserts that culture is the prime determinant of individual
development. Humans are the only species to have created culture, and every human child
develops in the context of a culture. Therefore, a child’s learning development is affected in
ways large and small by the culture–including the culture of family environment–in which he or
she is enmeshed.
DISCUSSION
1. Culture makes two sorts of contributions to a child’s intellectual development. First, through
culture children acquire much of the content of their thinking, that is, their knowledge. Second,
the surrounding culture provides a child with the processes or means of their thinking, what
Vygotskians call the tools of intellectual adaptation. In short, according to the social cognition
learning model, culture teaches children both what to think and how to think.
2. Cognitive development results from a dialectical process whereby a child learns through
problem-solving experiences shared with someone else, usually a parent or teacher but
sometimes a sibling or peer.
3. Initially, the person interacting with child assumes most of the responsibility for guiding the
problem solving, but gradually this responsibility transfers to the child.
4. Language is a primary form of interaction through which adults transmit to the child the rich
body of knowledge that exists in the culture.
5. As learning progresses, the child’s own language comes to serve as her primary tool of
intellectual adaptation. Eventually, children can use internal language to direct their own
behaviour.
6. Internalization refers to the process of learning–and thereby internalizing–a rich body of
knowledge and tools of thought that first exist outside the child. This happens primarily through
language.
7. A difference exists between what child can do on her own and what the child can do with
help. Vygotskians call this difference the zone of proximal development.
8. Since much of what a child learns comes form the culture around her and much of the child’s
problem solving is mediated through an adult’s help, it is wrong to focus on a child in isolation.
Such focus does not reveal the processes by which children acquire new skills.
9. Interactions with surrounding culture and social agents, such as parents and more competent
peers, contribute significantly to a child’s intellectual development.
HOW LEV VYGOTSKY IMPACTS LEARNING:
Curriculum–Since children learn much through interaction, curricula should be designed to
emphasize interaction between learners and learning tasks.
Instruction–With appropriate adult help, children can often perform tasks that they are
incapable of completing on their own. With this in mind, scaffolding–where the adult continually
adjusts the level of his or her help in response to the child’s level of performance–is an effective
form of teaching. Scaffolding not only produces immediate results, but also instils the skills
necessary for independent problem solving in the future.
Assessment–Assessment methods must take into account the zone of proximal development.
What children can do on their own is their level of actual development and what they can do
with help is their level of potential development. Two children might have the same level of
actual development, but given the appropriate help from an adult, one might be able to solve
many more problems than the other. Assessment methods must target both the level of actual
development and the level of potential development.
READING
Lev Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published
1934)
Learning theories:
Experiential Learning - David Kolb (1939 - )
Transformatve Learning Theory - Jack Mezirow
Instructional design theories and learning models:
Facilitation Theory - Carl Rogers (1902 - 1987)
Invitational Learning - William Purkey (1929 - )
Other important contributors: John Holt, Malcolm Knowles, Paulo Freire

Criticisms
Common criticisms of humanism suggest:
- humanist approach has a reduced capacity for experimental research,
- lack of methods for treating of different mental health problems, and
- disagreement on the basic humanist assumption of inherent human goodness.
Experiential Learning Theory
General
Experiential learning theory is a cycle learning theory introduced by American educational
theorist David Kolb1) in 19712) and was inspired by earlier works of Kurt Lewin, Jean Piaget3) and John
Dewey. As it was developed within humanist paradigm, experiential learning offers a holistic
perspective on learning and is orientated mostly on adult learning. Name of this theory was
intended to should emphasize the importance of experience in the learning process.

Experiential learning theory defines learning as

 “the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience. Knowledge
results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience.”4)
What is experiential learning?
The experiential learning theory is based on six propositions5) short described with the following three:

1. Learning is best described as a holistic process of creating knowledge and adapting to the world.
2. Learning is actually relearning, since it is greatly dependent on already learned material.
3. Learning is driven by conflict, differences, and disagreement and results in assimilation and
accommodation.
Kolb6) suggests two opposite modes of acquiring experience:
 concrete experience or CE (feeling through practical experiencing),
 abstract conceptualization or AC (concluding and thinking about the experience),
and two opposite modes of transforming that experience into knowledge:

 reflective observation or RO (actively observing experience and its outcomes),

 active experimentation or AE (planing on how to test something and finally doing).
All of these components together form a circle of learning in which they follow one after another:
CE→RO→AC→AE→CE→… The very process of learning can begin in any of them. Still, every
learner develops strengths in some of mentioned modes more than in others and learn better under
those conditions, which results in four different learning styles identified also by Kolb7)8):

 Assimilator - Strong in AC and RO components. Prefers abstract conceptualizations and

theoretical models, requires time to think through. Values logical validity more than practical
applications.
 Converger - Strong in AC and AE components. Prefers practical applications of concepts and
theories he learns and like experimenting. They are often good problem solvers and like dealing
with technical issues.
 Accommodator - Strong in CE and AE components. Prefers practical experiences and acting
more according to the feeling than based on logical analysis or theoretical aspects.
 Diverger - Strong in CE and RO modes. Prefers learning through observing and collecting
information, good at viewing concrete situations from different points of view. This kind of people
are often imaginative and emotional, and often specialize in arts.9)

Kolb's model was later refined by himself and other researchers10)11)12) through improvement of the
learning styles grid resolution from 2×2 to 3×3 by introducing five additional learning styles13):

 Northerner - Strong in CE and balanced in AE and RO modes. Has a capacity for deep
involvement and learns through experimenting, but has problems with conceptualizations.
 Westerner - Strong in AE and balanced in CE and AC modes. Has great action skills and
possibilities for thinking and conceptualizing, but problems with analyzing past experience.
 Easterner - Strong in RO and balanced in CE and AC modes. Has great observation and
reflection skills as well as learning from concrete experience, but problems with putting his plans
into action.
 Southerner - Strong in AC and balanced in AE and RO modes. Has great conceptualization
skills, but little use of practical experiences.
 Balancing - Evenly balancing both modes of acquiring experience and both modes of
transforming that experience into knowledge.
In order to identify preferred learning style in Kolb's model, “learning style inventory” method has
been developed. This method for determining an individual’s optimal learning style, strengths
and weaknesses consists of a survey which explores one's perceiving (how one prefers to acquire
information) and processing (how one makes sense of new things). Various variants of this method
can be found in simplified free on-line tests and newer methods like the adaptive style inventory or the
learning skills profile have also been introduced14).

Kolb's theory has also influenced other authors to create similar models for determining of preferred
learning style. The critique that Kolb's learning styles inventory was difficult to apply to people who
never really paid attention to how they learn more efficiently encouraged Peter Honey and Alan
Mumford to create their Learning Styles Questionnaire15). It was based on Kolb's theory, but instead of
asking people how they learn it was probing for most common learning behaviors. Other similar
models include: Anthony Gregorc's Mind Styles Model16), Neil Fleming's VARK Model17) and other.

What is the practical meaning of experiential learning?

Experiential learning is a model suggested for adult learners. General implications of this model are
that teaching/learning process should consist of all four stages of Kolb's model, but it also
suggests individual changes should be applied, depending on learners learning style.

 Assimilators - prefer watching, thinking and good explanations of theories and ideas to
practical experiences. This kind of learners usually enjoy lectures and readings as well as having
enough time to think about new ideas.
 Convergers - prefer doing and thinking, finding practical solutions to problems. This kind of
learners usually like new ideas and their practical applications.
 Accomodators - prefer practical experiences and intuitive approach instead of reading
instructions. This kind of learners also usually prefer teamwork.
 Divergers - prefer watching, collecting information, working in groups and brainstorm instead
of having practical experience.
Kolb's theory was applied in a number of studies on topics that include (online) education, computer
and information science, psychology, management, medicine, nursing, accounting and law.18)19)20)

Criticisms
Some of the criticisms referring to Kolb's theory suggest:

 his learning cycle is oversimplified and ignores non-experiential ways of learning21),

 his learning cycle pays insufficient attention to goals, purposes, intentions, choice and decision-
making, which are also a part of learning22)
 the results of learning style inventory are based solely on the way learners rate themselves which
results in questionable results23)
Results of experimental validation vary: a meta-study of 81 studies implementing experiential learning
resulted in 61.7% of the studies supporting it, 16.1% showing mixed support, and 22.2% not support
experiential learning theory.24) In another meta-study of learning style inventory assessment, out of
analyzed studies, 49 showed strong support, 40 showed mixed support, and 12 studies showed no
support at all.25)
Bibliography
Kolb, D. A, R. E Boyatzis, and C. Mainemelis. Experiential learning theory: Previous research and
new directions. Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. The educational psychology
series: 227–247. 2001.

Experiential Learning (Kolb). Learning Theories Knowledgebase. Retrieved February 9, 2011.

Kearsley, G. Experiential Learning. Theory Into Practice Database. Retrieved February 8, 2011.

Greenaway, R. Experiential Learning articles and critiques of David Kolb's theory. Retrieved March
21, 2011.

Lowy, Alex, and Phil Hood. The power of the 2x2 matrix: using 2x2 thinking to solve business
problems and make better decisions. John Wiley and Sons, 2004.

Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition: Honey and Mumford's Learning Styles
Questionnaire. Retrieved February 8, 2011.

Read more
Kolb, David A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development.
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1984.

Kolb, David A. Learning style inventory. Boston, MA: McBer and Company. 1985.

Kolb, D. A, R. E Boyatzis, and Mainemelis, C. Experiential learning theory: Previous research and
new directions. Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles: p227–247. 2001.

Kayes, D. Christopher. Experiential Learning and Its Critics: Preserving the Role of Experience in
Management Learning and Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education 1, no. 2: 137-
149, December 2002.
Transformative Learning Theory
General
Transformative learning theory is a humanist learning theory introduced by Jack Mezirow in 19811).
This theory does not address general aspects of learning, but rather transformative learning in
adults: the learning that strongly influences learner, his beliefs and values. In this theory,

 “learning is understood as the process of using a prior interpretation to construe a new or revised
interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience in order to guide future action.”2)
What is transformative learning theory?
Since it is based on the importance of experience and its understanding, Mezirow's theory applies to
adult learning. Adults accumulate during their lives plenty of experience in terms of associations,
concepts, values, feelings, and beliefs. These elements of the experience form a number of
various meaning schemata, each of which contains only specific knowledge and values. As defined
by Mezirow, a meaning schema is

 “the constellation of concept, belief, judgment, and feelings which shapes a particular
interpretation.”3)
An example of a meaning schema is how we act around a homeless person.4) All the meaning
schemata together form the meaning perspective, as Mezirow describes one's complete perspective
on the world or a general frame of reference. Meaning perspectives are acquired passively until early
adulthood, often through significant experiences with teachers, or parents, and are later modified
through transformative learning.

What characterizes transformative learning is the initial inability to fit the new material into the existing
frames of schemata, what results in a need to change them. For example, a change of attitude to
homeless people after realizing how hard their life is. These-like experiences are also
called perspective transformations. They often come due to life experiences, often related to strong
emotional responses. These may be personal crises like divorce, death of a friend or a family
member, wars, natural or man-caused disasters, health crises, etc, but do not have to be so radical.5)

In the classroom, commonly three types of experience can result in transformative learning6):

 experience,
 critical reflection, and
 rational discourse.
Usually these follow one after another: a strong emotional experience fosters critical reflection and
analysis of similar past experiences, which will, when discussed with others with different or similar
points of view, result in new conclusions and a perspective transformation.

What is the practical meaning of transformative

learning theory?
Different authors suggested different roles of students and teachers during the transformative
learning. The role of the students is mostly to take responsibility for their learning and creating a
pleasant environment, and suggestions to the teachers generally refer to7) :

 creating a safe environment facilitating relationships characterized by trust and care,

 understanding why they want to encourage a change in students and not only how and which
change,
 assisting in the development of the critical reflection in students,
 taking into consideration and talking about students' feelings,
 enabling their students to apply the new insights outside the classroom,
 helping others by sharing his experiences, and
 being a role-model displaying his own willingness to change and learn.
Keywords and most important names
 transformative learning theory, adult learning, meaning perspectives, meaning
schemata, perspective transformations, experience, critical reflection, rational discourse
 Jack Mezirow
Bibliography
Taylor, Edward W. Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, no. 119: 5-15. 2008.

Cooper, S. Theories of Learning in Educational Psychology. Jack Mezirow: Transformational Learning

Theory. Retrieved April 1, 2011.

Read more
Mezirow, J., and Associates (eds.). Learning as Transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000.

Cranton, Patricia. Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning: A Guide for Educators of
Adults. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. Jossey-Bass, 350 Sansome Street, San
Francisco, CA 94104-1310, 1994.

Taylor, Edward W. The theory and practice of transformative learning: a critical review. ERIC
Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, 1998.

1)

Mezirow, J. D. A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education Quarterly, 32(1), 3-24.
1981.
2)

Mezirow, Jack. “Contemporary Paradigms of Learning.” Adult Education Quarterly 46, no. 3: 158 -
172, Spring 1996.
3)

Mezirow, Jack, and Others. Understanding Transformation Theory. Adult Education Quarterly 44, no.
4: 222-44. 1994.
4)
, 6)
Taylor, Edward W. The theory and practice of transformative learning: a critical review. ERIC
Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, 1998.
5)

Taylor, Edward W. Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, no. 119: 5-15., 2008.
7)

Mezirow, J. Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New directions for adult and continuing
education, no. 74: 5–12, 1997.