Foundations of Experiential Learning

The roots of Experiential Learning can be traced back to John Dewey’s progressive pedagogy, Kurt Lewin’s social psychology, Jean Piaget’s work on developmental cognitive psychology, George Kelly’s cognitive theory of personality, and to humanistic psychology, notably the work of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers. More recent theories include the Multiple Intelligence theory advanced by Howard Gardner (1983; 1993) and the conception of emotional intelligence by Daniel Goleman (1995; 1998).

In his well-known progressive pedagogy, Dewey (1938) emphasized the importance of learning by doing: Experience acts as an organizing focus for learning. Dewey described his approach as cultivation of individuality, learning through personal experience, and as a dynamic, here-and-now view of learning for current relevance. Learning is situated in concrete environments.

Lewin’s work (1951) on group dynamics and the methodology of action research has been very influential. In his encounter groups he made the important discovery that learning is best facilitated in an environment where there is a tension between immediate, concrete experience and analytic detachment and reflection. Lewin noted that learning must also include an element of concept formation, aiming at an integration of theory and practice. His famous saying, “there is nothing so practical as a good theory”, symbolizes his commitment to the integration of scientific inquiry and practical problem solving.

In the basic model of Experiential Learning advanced by Lewin, immediate personal experience is the focal point for learning. In his model, (1) immediate concrete experience is the basis for observation and reflection. It is accompanied by (2) reflective observation that leads to the (3) formation of abstract concepts and further to (4) testing the implications in new situations.

Piaget’s classical work on developmental psychology led him to discover age-related regularities in stepchildren reasoning processes, and how intelligence is gradually shaped by experience. Intelligence is a product of the interaction between the child and his environment. Thus the powers of abstract reasoning and symbol manipulation can be traced back to the infant’s actions in exploring and coping with his immediate environment, whereby experience is translated into a model of the world.

Kelly (1995) proposed that we perceive and interpret the world of experience through personal constructs. The notion of construct refers to the categories of thought by means of which the individual interprets his personal world of experience. Constructs are abstracted from experience and can be revised in the light of ongoing events in life. Each individual views reality through his personal constructs that are unique to him. Reality is thus a subjective interpretation of the events, based on the individual’s past experiences and history of life. Meanings of external events are open to interpretations from a variety of perspectives, and the interpretations are also subject to change. Learning cannot thus provide final answers as the individual can find new questions and discover new possibilities. Knowledge is ultimately governed by what Kelly calls constructive alternativism: The individual can revise his present interpretations of the universe.

Kelly’s basic assumption is that the individual makes sense of the world through his or her constructs.

The importance of personal experiences for the growth of personality is similarly prominent in the humanistic psychology of Rogers (1975). He argues that the individual’s self-concept is a social produce that is shaped gradually through interaction with the environment. It is an organized, integrated pattern of self-related perceptions, becoming increasingly differentiated and complex. The development of a healthy self-concept is promoted by a positive self-regard and an unconditional acceptance by the “significant others”. He notes that conditional acceptance, based on the desired actions or feelings, is detrimental to the development of a balancedself-concept.

Gardner’s theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983; 1993) and Golemans conception of emotional intelligence (1995; 1998), rather, intelligence should be seen as a wide spectrum of human talents involving seven key intelligences or “frames of mind” as he puts them: bodily-kinesthetic, musical, linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence.

Gardner includes interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligences in his theory of Multiple Intelligences. He breaks interpersonal intelligence further down to the following abilities:

•　Leadership: organizing groups and coordinating team efforts;

•　Personal connection: recognizing and responding appropriately to people’s feelings and concerns, nurturing human relationships;

•　Negotiating solutions: having talents of a mediator, preventing and resolving conflicts;

•　Social analysis: being able to detect and have insights about people’s feelings, motives and concerns.

Intra-personal intelligence is a correlative ability, turned inward. It is a capacity of self-knowledge, forming an accurate and realistic model of oneself. It entails an access to one’s own feelings and the ability to discriminate among them and draw on them to guide behavior.

Emotional intelligence refers to our capacity to recognize feelings and express them appropriately and to engage in self-critique of our ways of feeling and knowing. It involves the following main domains (Goleman, 1995; Askew & Carnell, 1998):

•　Knowing one’s emotions: developing self-awareness to recognize and name a feeling as it happens, having a surer sense about how one really feels about personal decisions;

•　Managing emotions: learning to handle one’s feelings, e.g. frustration, tolerance, anger and stress management;

•　Motivating oneself: emotional responsibility and self-control, e.g. delaying gratification and stifling impulsiveness;

•　Recognizing emotions in others: developing empathy and sensitivity to others’ feelings, learning to be a good listener;

•　Handling relationships: developing social competence by analyzing and understanding human relationships, being assertive and skilled at communicating.

(Kohonen, Viljo et al., 2001)

Emotional intelligence develops our awareness of emotions and helps us understand them and accept them. In addition to accepting our emotions we should, however, also be able to challenge our emotional reactions when appropriate. By questioning our attachments to a particular emotional experience we can reframe the experience and perceive it differently.

A central tenet in Experiential Learning is, then, that learning involves the whole person, including the emotion, social, physical, cognitive and spiritual aspects of personality. When we function as whole persons we have connection to ourselves, connection to other people and connection to a spiritual source of purpose and meaning in life. Capacity to whole-person learning is not fixed; it can be increased. Learning capacity increases as learning increases. Prior learning can be used as a resource for further learning. Emotional state affects the learner’s capacity to learn. This capacity increases when learners understand themselves better. Learning to learn is a capacity that can be enhanced by conscious pedagogical measures. This perspective suggests a process-oriented view of learning (Askew and Carnell, 1998; cited by Kohonen et al., 2001: 24-27).