Learning Cycle. For Kids Only?
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-1714,single-format-standard,bridge-core-1.0.5,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-child-theme-ver-1.0.0,qode-theme-ver-18.1,qode-theme-bridge,qode_header_in_grid,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.0.2,vc_responsive

Learning Cycle. For Kids Only?

Learning Cycle. For Kids Only?

As part of a professional development workshop on Inquiry in the Classroom (which is a part of our school’s yearlong investigation), my fellow teachers and I were (re)-introduced to the Learning Cycle model.

The basic model, initially developed in 1984 by David Kolb, looks something like this:

This is nothing new.  Many teachers already know this, intuitively or from experience.

It goes something like this: Give students opportunities to explore a concept and/or material. Then see what is stimulated from the experience by reflecting on it — talking, discussing, writing, whatever.  Use the ideas, concepts, knowledge or misunderstandings from that reflection to devise/tailor content to meet students’ needs/interests. Then give students a chance to apply new knowledge in relevant context. Reflect. Repeat.

Below is an expanded version of the learning cycle with some guiding questions:

Such questions can help to steer the lesson/unit planning process. They provide the teacher with a loose framework for crafting any number of lessons in any number of subjects or content areas.

Below is an even more expanded and elaborate modification of the learning cycle replete with activity ideas:

Learning Without (Titled) Borders

My question is this: Why is it that we utilize (or at least realize we should utilize) this technique or model when working with students, but not always with teachers?

In many professional development situations — including introductions to new curricula and new technologies — teachers are expected, in one or two days of sit-n-git, to absorb and meld the new tricks with their old ones. The process isn’t that simple.

Teachers are often expected to accept something new not just as learners, but as competent instructors — able to implement and teach with a new tool, without mistakes, as complete adopters.  This is especially challenging for teaching teachers to take advantage of technological tools.  Understanding enough web 2.0 to teach with it requires a number of hours experimenting with various programs before ever reflecting on how to integrate it into the curriculum (a curriculum that is often pre-mandated to be supremely full and pulsing with high-stakes pressure).

While I often employ the strategy of not knowing what I’m doing and learning with the students (more due to reality and necessity than intentional, feigned ignorance), it is not a practical one in all scenarios.  How can we help teachers learn new tools to the point where they feel confident of introducing those tools to the class?

Turns out that threats and coercion have limited capacity for stimulating long term sustainable growth.

However, employing the learning cycle with teachers stands to bring us two benefits, at a minimum:

  1. Teachers learn how the learning cycle works in application as well as how it feels to be in a learning curve.  This builds their teaching repertoire while also building their empathy and understanding of the student experience.
  2. Teachers gradually attain proficiency over a new concept, skill, or curricular tool that can be implemented in the classroom.

Too often we seem in a hurry to either reform teachers’ practices & behavior or install some new get smart quick program that is guaranteed to raise student scores.  Such horse race schemes often put numbers and short term results over people, forgetting that things can take a while to change.

Slow change isn’t always bad change.  Sometimes its the change that lasts the longest.

Images: E-Learning Cycle, agpa.uakron.edu
Kolb’s Cycle, Serc.Carlton.edu
Learning Cycle, STEM Resources
Action Learning Cycle, Enviroschools.org
Confused dude, Icis.com
Inspector Gadget, QZABTeachers.wikispace.com
  • Shelly S Terrell
    Posted at 22:08h, 11 February Reply

    RT @prestwickhouse: Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? http://bit.ly/bYnre6 via @jasonflom

  • Alfonso Gonzalez
    Posted at 00:03h, 12 February Reply

    RT @ShellTerrell: RT @prestwickhouse: Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? http://bit.ly/bYnre6 via @jasonflom

  • Monte Tatom
    Posted at 04:33h, 12 February Reply

    RT @ShellTerrell: @prestwickhouse: Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? http://bit.ly/bYnre6 via @jasonflom #fhuedu508 #ll4educ #fhuedu320

  • Pingback:Change Is a Skill Development Learning Process
    Posted at 04:17h, 15 February Reply

    […] […]

  • Bethe Almeras
    Posted at 00:02h, 23 February Reply

    Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? http://bit.ly/cl9bSO via @jasonflom #edu

  • Alison Kerr
    Posted at 00:18h, 23 February Reply

    [I doubt it!] RT @balmeras

    Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? http://bit.ly/cl9bSO via @jasonflom #edu

  • Monte Tatom
    Posted at 01:49h, 09 March Reply

    Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? http://tinyurl.com/ylj2kzz #fhuedu508

  • Pingback:Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the Learning Revolution
    Posted at 08:33h, 28 May Reply

    […] Learning Cycle. For Kids Only? […]

  • gwynethjones
    Posted at 06:20h, 16 August Reply

    @keisawilliams Found that graphic! Here it is for your attribution: http://ecologyofeducation.net/wsite/?p=1714

  • Anonymous
    Posted at 17:57h, 22 April Reply

    Good one Jason. Giving Children the opportunity to explore a topic, and then discussing it, and rectifying any misconceptions is the best way to educate the children! Works so well. Excellent article this. I being a teacher myself fully appreciate these techniques.

    Rose Pink

  • Apunkagames
    Posted at 17:06h, 11 January Reply

    Thanks for such beautiful articles. Its really knowledgable. Apunkagames Team

  • Terrell Rasnick
    Posted at 20:03h, 12 January Reply

    It is indeed my belief that mesothelioma is actually the most deadly cancer. It has unusual properties. The more I actually look at it the greater I am certain it does not work like a real solid flesh cancer. When mesothelioma is really a rogue virus-like infection, in that case there is the possibility of developing a vaccine and also offering vaccination for asbestos uncovered people who are at high risk involving developing future asbestos associated malignancies. Thanks for giving your ideas for this important health issue.

  • Science Lover
    Posted at 11:08h, 30 January Reply

    Charles Franklin Kettering, an inventor once said, Whenever you look at a piece of work and you think the fellow was crazy, then you want to pay some attention to that. One of you is likely to be, and you had better find out which one it is. It makes an awful lot of difference.

  • best proxies
    Posted at 19:29h, 29 March Reply

    Simply desire to say your article is as surprising. The clarity in your post is simply excellent and i could assume you’re an expert on this subject. Well with your permission allow me to grab your feed to keep updated with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please keep up the gratifying work.

  • scrapebox proxies
    Posted at 19:59h, 29 March Reply

    Its like you read my mind! You appear to know so much about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you can do with some pics to drive the message home a bit, but instead of that, this is great blog. An excellent read. I’ll definitely be back.

Post A Comment