Research Article
PDF Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

Year 2021, Volume 7, Issue 20, 108 - 116, 05.09.2021
https://doi.org/10.18768/ijaedu.961144

Abstract

References

  • Dilley, R. (1989). Secrets and Skills: Apprenticeship among Tukolor Weavers. In M.W. Coy (ed.) Apprenticeship: From Theory to Method and Back Again, pp. 181-198. New York: SUNY Press.
  • Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.
  • Kolb, D. A. (1976). Learning Style Inventory. Boston, Massachusetts: McBer.
  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experience as the source of learning and development. In D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning (p. 41). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
  • Entwistle, N. (1997). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & W. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The Experience of learning. Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education, Second Ed. (pp. 3-22). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
  • Esther N. Goody (1982). From Craft to Industry: The Ethnography of Proto-Industrial Cloth Production. Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Field, J. & Dubhchair, M.O. (2001). Recreating Apprenticeship: Lessons from the Irish standards-based model, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 53, pp. 247–261.
  • Flavell, J.H. (1979). "Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. A new area of cognitive-development inquiry". American Psychologist. 34 (10): 906–911
  • Fuller, A. & Unwin, L. (2001). From Cordwainers to Customer Service: The changing relationship between apprentices, employers and communities in England. Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance (SKOPE) Monograph No. 3, Oxford and Warwick Universities.
  • Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1993). Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 20–33.
  • Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2006). Learning styles and learning spaces: a review of the multidisciplinary application of experiential learning theory in higher education. In R. S. Sims (Ed.), Learning styles and learning: a key to meeting the accountability demands in education (pp. 45-91). Hauppauge, NY: Novus Publishers.
  • Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In A. W. Chickering (Ed.), The Modern American College (pp. 232-255). San Francisco, LA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Lancy, David F. (2012). “First You Must Master Pain”: The Nature and Purpose of Apprenticeship. Anthropology of Work Review, Volume XXXIII, Number 2, pp.113-126.
  • Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
  • Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & W. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The Experience of Learning. Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education. Second Ed. (pp. 39-58). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
  • Millroy, Wendy L. (1992). An Ethnographic Study of the Mathematical Ideas of a Group of Carpenters. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph, Vol. 5. pp. +ix-x+1-210
  • Newstead, S. E., & Hoskins, S. (2003). Encouraging student learning. In A Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Enhancing Academic Practice, second ed. London: Kogan Page.
  • Passarelli M. A., & Kolb, D. A. (2012). Using Experiential Learning Theory to Promote Student Learning and Development in Programs of Education Abroad. In Student Learning Abroad. Sterling, VA.
  • Spencer, J. A., & Jordan, R. K. (1999). Learner centered approaches in medical education. BMJ, 318, 1280–3. doi:doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7193.1280
  • Walkin, L. (2000). Teaching and Learning in Further Adult Education. Cheltenham: Stanley Thomes Publishers Ltd.
  • Yballe, L., & O'Conner, D. (2000). Appreciative pedagogy: constructing positive models for learning. Journal of Management Education, 24(4), 474–83.

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING THEORY AND TRADITIONAL CRAFTSMANSHIP – THE OBJECT-THEME RELATIONSHIP

Year 2021, Volume 7, Issue 20, 108 - 116, 05.09.2021
https://doi.org/10.18768/ijaedu.961144

Abstract

The Experiential Learning Cycle Theory (ELCT) formulated by David Kolb is the thread that weaves together the divergent approaches taken by experiential educators and practitioners. It has, by virtue of its status in the discipline, also received its fair share of criticism, from its overly-discrete separation of the four stages of learning to assuming that learning results from adaptive choices and not the other way round. In our attempts at implementing it, what we found lacking in Kolb’s formulation was in the disappointing student performances in the four stages of the ELC. We observed how students describe experiences disconnected from the learning outcomes, exhibit fleeting emotions triggered by novelties encountered in the field, and struggle to explain how the skills acquired could possibly be applied in other situations. Students perform as if they have spent an entire course learning how to swing a bat – without knowing that they were supposed to be hitting a ball, scoring points, and winning the game. In short, students had no idea what they were supposed to experience, observe, conceptualise, experiment with, and the larger ends for doing so. If experiential learning is the “most natural way to learn”, it pays to heed how humans across epochs and cultures have always naturally learned. In our search for a practical way to ensure that courses under our charge remain faithful to Kolb et al’s work yet transformative for their recipients, we found inspiration from anthropological research into craftsmanship. This paper presents a framework for course design that seeks to make the ELCT much more workable within institutional settings, through integrating central characteristics of traditional craft apprenticeship with that of the ELCT. From the study of ethnographies of traditional crafts, we identified their four key components, namely, the “object”, “objective”, “skill” and “theme” present in every craft. These four components – and the relationships between them – provide the “what” and the “why” towards which the four actions found in the ELCT are directed. In so doing, we not only inject substance into the formal nature of the ELCT stages, anchor traditionally abstract academic content in practice, but also resurrect a pedagogical method that has survived natural (and cultural) selection. In the following sections, we will first compare the ELCT with the didactic approach as a means of highlighting the core strengths of the former, and the challenges we met while trying to implement it in its ideal form. This would be followed by a discussion of the four key components of craft apprenticeship, how we synthesize them with classical ELCT to create a new experiential learning framework, and finally, comparisons of students’ performance before and after its implementation.

References

  • Dilley, R. (1989). Secrets and Skills: Apprenticeship among Tukolor Weavers. In M.W. Coy (ed.) Apprenticeship: From Theory to Method and Back Again, pp. 181-198. New York: SUNY Press.
  • Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.
  • Kolb, D. A. (1976). Learning Style Inventory. Boston, Massachusetts: McBer.
  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experience as the source of learning and development. In D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning (p. 41). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
  • Entwistle, N. (1997). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & W. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The Experience of learning. Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education, Second Ed. (pp. 3-22). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
  • Esther N. Goody (1982). From Craft to Industry: The Ethnography of Proto-Industrial Cloth Production. Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Field, J. & Dubhchair, M.O. (2001). Recreating Apprenticeship: Lessons from the Irish standards-based model, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 53, pp. 247–261.
  • Flavell, J.H. (1979). "Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. A new area of cognitive-development inquiry". American Psychologist. 34 (10): 906–911
  • Fuller, A. & Unwin, L. (2001). From Cordwainers to Customer Service: The changing relationship between apprentices, employers and communities in England. Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance (SKOPE) Monograph No. 3, Oxford and Warwick Universities.
  • Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1993). Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 20–33.
  • Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2006). Learning styles and learning spaces: a review of the multidisciplinary application of experiential learning theory in higher education. In R. S. Sims (Ed.), Learning styles and learning: a key to meeting the accountability demands in education (pp. 45-91). Hauppauge, NY: Novus Publishers.
  • Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In A. W. Chickering (Ed.), The Modern American College (pp. 232-255). San Francisco, LA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Lancy, David F. (2012). “First You Must Master Pain”: The Nature and Purpose of Apprenticeship. Anthropology of Work Review, Volume XXXIII, Number 2, pp.113-126.
  • Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.
  • Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1997). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & W. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The Experience of Learning. Implications for Teaching and Studying in Higher Education. Second Ed. (pp. 39-58). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
  • Millroy, Wendy L. (1992). An Ethnographic Study of the Mathematical Ideas of a Group of Carpenters. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph, Vol. 5. pp. +ix-x+1-210
  • Newstead, S. E., & Hoskins, S. (2003). Encouraging student learning. In A Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Enhancing Academic Practice, second ed. London: Kogan Page.
  • Passarelli M. A., & Kolb, D. A. (2012). Using Experiential Learning Theory to Promote Student Learning and Development in Programs of Education Abroad. In Student Learning Abroad. Sterling, VA.
  • Spencer, J. A., & Jordan, R. K. (1999). Learner centered approaches in medical education. BMJ, 318, 1280–3. doi:doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7193.1280
  • Walkin, L. (2000). Teaching and Learning in Further Adult Education. Cheltenham: Stanley Thomes Publishers Ltd.
  • Yballe, L., & O'Conner, D. (2000). Appreciative pedagogy: constructing positive models for learning. Journal of Management Education, 24(4), 474–83.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Education and Educational Research
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Jonathan LEONG (Primary Author)
Singapore University of Social Sciences
0000-0002-9367-8886
Singapore


Chee-han LİM This is me
Singapore University of Social Sciences
Singapore

Publication Date September 5, 2021
Application Date July 6, 2021
Acceptance Date August 10, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021, Volume 7, Issue 20

Cite

EndNote %0 IJAEDU- International E-Journal of Advances in Education EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING THEORY AND TRADITIONAL CRAFTSMANSHIP – THE OBJECT-THEME RELATIONSHIP %A Jonathan Leong , Chee-han Lim %T EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING THEORY AND TRADITIONAL CRAFTSMANSHIP – THE OBJECT-THEME RELATIONSHIP %D 2021 %J IJAEDU- International E-Journal of Advances in Education %P 2411-1821-2411-1821 %V 7 %N 20 %R doi: 10.18768/ijaedu.961144 %U 10.18768/ijaedu.961144

 Published and Sponsored by OCERINT International © 2015 - 2022

Contact: ijaedujournal@hotmail.com

Creative Commons License

International E-Journal of Advances in Education by IJAEDU is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://ijaedu.ocerintjournals.org