Four-stage learning cycle (D. Kolb, R. Fry). Learning styles by David Kolb

Flask cycle– one of the learning models based on the gradual formation of mental actions.

Its author is a specialist in the psychology of adult learning David Kolb(David A. Kolb). In his opinion, The learning process is a cycle or a kind of spiral. This is a kind of cycle of accumulation of personal experience, further reflection and reflection, and ultimately action.

Basic 4 stage model The flask is as follows:

1) Direct, concrete experience(concrete experience) - any person must already have some experience in the field or field that he wants to learn.

2) Observation and reflection or mental observations(observation and reflection) – this stage involves a person thinking and analyzing his existing experience and knowledge.

3) Formation of abstract concepts and models or abstract conceptualization(forming abstract concepts) - at this stage, a certain model is built that describes the information received and experience. Ideas are generated, relationships are built, new information is added regarding how everything works and is arranged.

4) Active experimentation(testing in new situations) – the last stage involves experimenting and testing the applicability of the created model and concept. The result of this stage is immediate new experience. Then the circle closes.

Stage name	Essence	Result
Experience gained	A person tries to do something from what he learns in practice, and in the way he can now, regardless of whether his skills are sufficient.	Understanding the need for further training (it didn’t work out or didn’t work out too well) or the conclusion that everything is fine as is. Obviously, in the latter case, further steps are not needed.
Reflection	Analysis of the pros and cons of the experience gained, conclusions about what was done successfully and what could have been done better or differently.	Preparedness for the need for change and training, in some cases - full or partial knowledge of how to act correctly.
Theory	Obtaining theoretical knowledge about how to act correctly in conjunction with acquired experience and its analysis.	The correct action algorithms for the future were obtained.
Consolidation in practice	Development of theory, translation of knowledge into skills and abilities, adjustment by the manager.	The necessary skills have been fully or partially practiced and consolidated.

The main dangerous moment of the Kolb cycle can be demotivation and a decrease in the individual’s self-esteem in the case when the experience gained is frankly unsuccessful. Therefore, if you decide to use the Kolb cycle in working with employees, be patient and think in advance about how you will act in such a situation. When using this method, you will need all your art of feedback, knowledge of the rules of criticism.

Kolb (1984) observed that different people have distinct preferences for different behaviors—either practical action or theorizing. Then he suggested that most of the time we study in one of four ways:

• concrete experience (Concrete Experience);
• reflexive observation (Reflection);
• abstract modeling (Abstract Conceptualisation);
• active experimentation.

English psychologists P. Honey and A. Mumford(P. Honey, A. Mumford) described various learning styles, and also developed a test to identify the preferred learning style (Honey Mumford Preferred Learning Style Test).

The following have been highlighted four learning styles:

• "activists"– independent trial and error: actively doing new and new things,
• "thinkers"– come up with your own before execution: measured, detached analysis of a lot of information,
• "theorists"– logically structure what is happening: creating a sequence of goals and algorithms,
• "pragmatists"– try new ideas to solve real problems: quick practical benefits.

Activist loves to learn something new, gain new experiences, he wants to experience everything himself and take part in everything himself. He likes to be in the center of events and attention, and he prefers to take an active position rather than remain an outside observer. Solve problems quickly.

Thinker prefers to first observe, reflect, fully understand new things, and only then act. He tends to re-analyze what he has seen, experienced and gone through. He likes to find his own solution, does not like to be rushed, and prefers to have a reserve of time to find a solution on his own time.

Theorist He is characterized by developed logical thinking and methodicality, he prefers to move step by step towards solving the problem, asks a lot of questions. He is characterized by a certain detachment and an analytical mindset. Likes tasks that require intellectual effort, distrusts intuition and non-standard thinking, preferring the construction of models and systems. Step by step we are approaching the solution of the problem.

Pragmatist he does not need a theory, he only needs a solution suitable for the current problem. The pragmatist strives to find practical solutions, try everything quickly and move on to action. I am not inclined to delve into theory. Likes to experiment, look for new ideas that can be immediately tested in real conditions. He acts quickly and confidently, approaches everything in a business-like manner, is down-to-earth and takes on solving emerging problems with passion.

It should be noted that people do not consciously choose which stage to start with. They are hostages of their approach (model of behavior).

In order to determine what type a person belongs to, E. Cameron and M. Green suggest answering the following question:

“If you were writing a book about change and wanted to convey as much knowledge as possible to future readers, you would need:

• conduct an experiment (activist);
• enough questions to think about (thinker);
• carefully examine various models (theorist);
• illustrate your thoughts with examples and include useful tools, techniques and applications (pragmatist).”

Below is approximately one of the most common interactive lesson structures, built according to Kolb's principles:

1. Motivation and announcement of a new topic
2. Consolidation (repetition) of what has been learned– 20% of the total lesson duration;
3. Learning new material– 50% of the time of the total lesson duration;
4. Assessment– 10% of the time of the total lesson duration;
5. Summing up the lesson (debriefing, reflection)– 10% of the time of the total lesson duration.

The time distribution in this scheme can be considered conditional; the teacher can, at his own discretion and depending on the characteristics of the lesson, extend or shorten certain stages of the lesson, however, it is desirable that all of the listed qualitative stages of the lesson are preserved.

The students’ preferred learning style is determined using special questionnaires, but a preliminary interview will also help you get your bearings. When conducting it, you need to pay attention to the nature of the questions regarding the upcoming training that its future participants ask ( table 1).

Table 1. Types of students and their preferences

The process of improving skills and increasing professional skills never stops: it can be represented as an endless spirals of competence development(Fig. 4).

Spiral of Competence Development

Management Consulting Specialist Reg Revans formulated a kind law of successful business adaptation: “A company (and employees) will prosper as long as its rate of learning is greater than (or equal to) the rate of change in the external environment.”

There is an opinion that D. Kolb’s model is a rehash of the classical theory of the phased formation of mental actions, developed by the Russian psychologist P.Ya. Galperin and his colleagues back in the early 1950s. Subsequently, this theory was developed by the works of didactic specialists - first of all, N.F. Talyzina (Talyzina N.F., Theoretical problems of programmed training. Moscow State University Publishing House, 1969).

Content:

The concept of socio-psychological training

Social-psychological training is an area of ​​psychological practice aimed at developing competence in communication using the methods of active social-psychological training. At the same time, competence in communication is understood as a set of stable individual psychological characteristics, knowledge and skills that ensure effective interaction of a person with other people in the system of interpersonal relationships.

The development of a person’s communication competence is carried out primarily through:

1. acquisition of psychological knowledge;
2. development of specific skills that ensure effective interaction with people;
3. awareness and expansion of the field of strategies used in interaction with people;
4. deepening understanding of yourself and others;
5. awareness and transformation of motives and attitudes towards oneself, other people, situations of communication and interaction. Social and psychological training usually takes place in the form of group classes, although there are also options for individual training.

Thus, socio-psychological training is a type of training focused on developing competence in communication. This makes it significantly different from other trainings that are aimed at developing skills and personal qualities that are not directly related to a person’s effectiveness in communication (for example, self-regulation or time management training).

The recipients and consumers of socio-psychological training are most often two categories of people. Firstly, these are people whose profession involves constant communication: they need the ability to communicate effectively in order to be successful professionals. This category of consumers is addressed, for example, to communicative business trainings, professional communication trainings for psychologists, teachers and social workers. Secondly, these are people who experience difficulties in certain communication situations or when interacting with a certain circle of partners. For example, trainings on child-parent interaction, marital communication trainings, and assertive behavior trainings are intended for them.

It is important to note that the socio-psychological training group differs significantly from the psychotherapeutic group. First of all, this difference is due to the fact that training involves training, teaching effective behavioral models, and developing competencies that are directly related to success in communication and interaction with other people. Unlike training, a therapeutic group in most cases involves working with the deep psychological attitudes and needs of the participants, although they are not necessarily directly related to communication and interaction with other people. Thus, the object of influence, so to speak, differs significantly in training and psychotherapeutic groups. This difference does not apply, however, to the only type of psychotherapeutic groups, namely behavioral groups, built on the principles of behavioral psychology. Moreover: many methodological principles of conducting training groups are borrowed from behavioral principles.

There is another point of intersection between socio-psychological training and psychotherapeutic groups. Both the psychotherapeutic group and separate socio-psychological training groups examine the psychological attitudes of participants that are directly related to communication. These are the so-called fourth type trainings.

Social-psychological training groups, compared to psychotherapeutic ones, are usually of a shorter duration. The training can last one to three days or even several hours, although there are also regular classes as part of a long training course. A psychotherapeutic group focused on deeper psychological impact has been working regularly for quite a long time.

Socio-psychological training as a means of developing communication competence is sometimes interpreted as an area of ​​psychological practice aimed primarily at training. This point of view is only partly correct. Indeed, the training uses methods of active socio-psychological training. However, the development of communication competence is possible not only through learning new behavior patterns, but also through the development, awareness, revision and overcoming of personal attitudes that impede effective interaction with the world and people. Social-psychological training deals not only with teaching specific behavioral patterns, it also helps to change the personal attitudes of participants related to communication.

However, since we are talking about training, one cannot help but compare the training with traditional forms of training, in particular lectures and seminars.

Obviously, the training involves a much greater degree of activity of the trainees, their involvement in the process. The training allows participants to directly come into contact with the reality under study through their personal experience, to be included in communicative situations that correspond with a high degree of accuracy to those that they have to face in their personal or professional life. The training operates with a more or less correct model of reality, allowing participants to immerse themselves in this reality, explore it and solve certain problems in it. All this is not available in the traditional lecture-seminar form of education. In addition, communication flows in the training are organized differently; they are retial (network): potentially, each member of the group can conduct a dialogue with each member of the group. Of course, interaction and communication in a group is always controlled to one degree or another by the trainer, but the construction of communication is fundamentally different from what participants are used to at lectures and seminars, where communication flows are predominantly axial.

With all the features of the training form of education listed above, there is one more, extremely important one. Training education, compared to lectures and seminars, is influenced much more seriously by group dynamic processes.

Group dynamics- a set of socio-psychological processes and phenomena in a small group at different stages of its development, from emergence to collapse. These include the processes of norm formation, group pressure, leadership and status distribution, the formation of the socio-psychological structure of the group, cohesion, conflicts, etc. Since the entire group is actively involved in the training process, since the training allows for the presence of real communication, since the group often has to carry out joint activities in on the scale of mini-groups or the entire group as a whole, group dynamics inevitably begin to manifest themselves and affect the entire course of the training. It cannot be canceled or removed, cut out from what is happening. A skilled trainer plans training taking into account group dynamics in such a way that it not only does not serve as a hindrance, but also increases its effectiveness. An inept coach with group dynamics often struggles and in this struggle is doomed to failure.

Social and psychological training groups are distinguished by the heterogeneity of the tasks they solve, despite the fact that they are all aimed at developing the communicative competence of the participants. Nevertheless, the principles of constructing training are quite universal and lend themselves well to description.

Listed below are the basic (basic) principles of constructing socio-psychological training.

Basic (fundamental) principles of constructing socio-psychological training

1. The principle of activity. Social-psychological training implies the active involvement of participants in the process. The forms of work during the training are such that if the participants are passive, the very fabric of the training is disrupted and it falls apart. This is fundamentally different from a lecture and seminar. If, for example, in a role-playing game the participant behaves passively, the process of the game is destroyed. Analysis of a role-playing game cannot take place without the activity of observers. The same rule applies to almost every form of group work during training.

2. Feedback principle. Training and development within the framework of socio-psychological training is inseparable from feedback. Experimenting with the use of new skills in the field of communication, performing exercises, solving cases - almost all forms of group activity aimed at mastering new experience are provided with feedback. In this case, the trainer, as well as members of the training group, act as a source of feedback. It is also possible to use video feedback. Feedback makes it possible to see yourself “from the outside,” through the eyes of other people, to make adjustments to your behavior, and provides a powerful impulse pushing for change.

3. The principle of polylogue. One of the basic principles of socio-psychological training is the principle of subject-subject, polylogical, partner communication. This principle provides for openness and clarity, “transparency”, congruent communication in the group, focus on the perception of all those present as subjects with their own interests, needs, their own position, and dialogue.

The principle of polylogue also presupposes the trainer’s refusal to force group members to participate in training and specific forms of work, the orientation of the training to the needs of the group, and the trainer’s refusal to use manipulative models of communication.

Unfortunately, in practice the principle of polylogue is not always implemented. Often it remains only a rule formally written down in the book. Moreover, the author of these lines had to communicate with trainers who were confident that polylogue in training is a fiction - simply because it is absolutely impossible to remove the manipulation of the group by the trainer from the fabric of the training. After all, even a training program is often created with the expectation that specific forms of work will provoke certain states in the group, which will then be used by the trainer.

4. The principle of psychological safety of participants. Learning and gaining experience, as psychological research shows, are most effective when the subject has a certain optimal motivation. participants in the training, its severity is determined by a variety of circumstances, one of which is the degree of psychological safety of a group member.

It is extremely important to create a training environment in which participants feel comfortable and safe enough to experiment with new behaviors. Otherwise, the mental strength of students will be spent on providing protection.

Psychological safety is determined primarily by the coach’s style of behavior, his attitude towards mistakes, as well as the rules governing what happens in the training group. The optimal level of complexity of tasks performed by the group, selected in strict accordance with its zone of proximal development, also contributes to its provision.

The presence of management at the training (at corporate trainings), and the assessment of those present during the training process, which the group knows or suspects, sharply reduces the psychological safety of the training and calls into question its effectiveness.

The degree of psychological safety that is optimal for successful learning varies from person to person. As they say, “some people like it hot.” However, when planning and conducting a training, it is important for the facilitator to take care to create the necessary basic level of comfort and safety for himself and the group.

5. The principle of experimentation. The training gives participants the opportunity to experiment with new models of behavior and interaction with the world, and experiment in a safe environment, make mistakes with impunity and learn from them with minimal losses. It is important for the trainer to create an active, creative environment in the group during classes and encourage participants to experiment. Here a lot depends on the leader, since it is he who openly and secretly sets and regulates the norms in the group. The participants’ readiness for the experiment is determined by many factors, one of the most important being the degree of psychological safety.

6. The principle “from simple to complex”. This principle describes a group’s mastery of complex communication skills. After all, the vast majority of communication skills that come into the focus of training are complex skills that are provided by simpler, “elementary” ones. Complex communication skills cannot be mastered in one sitting, in one sitting. Their development is carried out through the development of first simple skills, and then their combination, composition into complex ones. In training, procedures aimed at developing a complex skill are preceded by the development of simple, “elementary” ones that are part of it.

7. The principle of modular construction of training. This principle means that the training consists of separate modules. In this case, a module is understood as a closed (complete) fragment of training in semantic terms, dedicated to a specific topic. Unlike a module, a training block is a part of training between two breaks, for example between lunch and an evening coffee break. If, for example, there are three breaks in a training session per day - one for lunch and two coffee breaks before and after lunch - then the training day contains four blocks. Moreover, on the same day the group can complete only two or even one module. Thus, the concept of a module refers to the content side of the training, while the concept of a block refers to the organizational side.

Which modules will be included in the training, why it will be these particular modules and not other modules - the trainer answers these questions when creating a training program, based on information obtained during pre-training diagnostics, information about the needs of the group and the zone of proximal development . The topics of the modules and their content directly correspond to the goals and objectives of the training formulated at the initial stages of creating its program.

Flask cycle

As I mentioned above, the module is characterized by a certain closure and completeness in terms of meaning. The logic of presenting material (a specific topic) within a training module is described by a pattern known in training literature as flask cycle(named after the name of the author who proposed and described this pattern).
So, in accordance with the Kolb cycle, the logic of presenting material within the training module looks like this:

Rice. 1. Classic training cycle according to O. Kolb

The figure presented here, illustrating the classical Kolb cycle, can be provided with the following explanations:

1. Experience - by chance or as a result of a specially planned procedure, the group gains some experience.
2. Comprehension of experience - the group actively comprehends the experience and its meaning.
3. Generalizing experience, obtaining a theory - the group generalizes the experience gained, itself or with the help of third parties creates certain theories or concepts that can be useful for application in the event of similar situations.
4. Experimentation - The group puts theory into practice by experimenting with new behaviors. During the experiment, she gains new experience, and the cycle closes.

The Kolb cycle is currently widely used by specialists in the field of active social-psychological learning. Links to it can be seen in a variety of sources. Some authors use the Flask cycle in a modified form. In particular, Vyacheslav Letunovsky actively uses a modification of the Kolb cycle, which has the following form: Actualization of experience - Theory - Skill development - Discussion.

This modification makes it easy to build the structure of the training module and select the necessary forms of group activity, as well as set the logic for their alternation.

Personally, in my work I use a modification of the Kolb cycle, which seems to me universally suitable for creating socio-psychological trainings of any type (not only trainings aimed at developing and practicing skills). Here she is.

Rice. 2. Modified O. Flask cycle

Explanations for the figure.

1. Actualization/creation of experience, its comprehension.

In order for a group to learn, it needs some source material that is the subject of consideration and actively involves it in its work. During socio-psychological training, the form in which the group receives new material can be different. Sometimes this material is created by the group itself during the training process, due to its own activity, and then it needs experience, based on the consideration of which it will make generalizations. This could be experience gained through a role-play, an exercise, a case analysis, involvement in a real activity, etc.

In some cases, new material is not created during the training by the group, but is presented by the trainer. However, even in this case, starting a training module with the presentation of new material, with a mini-lecture, is not a winning move. The group is not included in the work, and new material is highly likely to be rejected. In order to warm up the group, engage it in work, and set it up to perceive new material, procedures are used that update the group’s current life and professional experience - discussion methods, exercises, role-playing games, tests, etc.

In any case, the experience created or updated by the group needs awareness, comprehension and response, for which special procedures for analysis, feedback exchange, and sharing are used. There is a general rule: carrying out any procedures in a group that create new experience (exercises, role-playing games, business games, etc.), with insufficient understanding of this experience, is fraught with a rapid increase in psychological tension in the group (not to mention the fact that the educational effect in the group suffers). in general).

2. Generalization of experience, obtaining theory.

Within the framework of socio-psychological training, as already mentioned, a variety of ways for a group to obtain theory are possible. The creation of a certain theoretical, or more precisely, a generalizing experience model is possible through the independent efforts of the group. The theory can be transferred to the group by the trainer in finished form. A generalizing model can also be built through the joint efforts of the coach and the group.

None of these options has an absolute advantage over the others; it all depends on the specifics of the training. It is great when the group itself is able to summarize its experience and create a theoretical model - we can guarantee that this model will firmly settle in the heads of the participants and will most likely be used, since they themselves created it, through their personal efforts. At the same time, this is not always possible - in business trainings focused on training newcomers, for example, training is often carried out with a focus on a certain ideal model of professional activity; this model is normatively specified, and not created by the participants. Here, collective creativity is often simply impractical.

If the theory is transferred to the group by the trainer in finished form, then this is done, as a rule, through a mini-lecture, less often - other ways of transmitting the finished material (familiarization with video and audio materials, visual aids, etc.). If a model summarizing experience is created by a group, then discussion-type methods are usually used.

3. Experimentation.

If the training were not a training, but a lecture, perhaps the experimentation stage would not be necessary. However, if the task is not just to convey to the participants some information useful to them, but to achieve certain changes in the way they interact with the world, in their behavior, a stage is needed at which the participants could experiment with the application of new knowledge to solving practical problems .

The experimentation stage may have its own specifics in training of various types. Thus, in trainings dedicated to the development of communication skills, experimentation is presented as practical mastery of a specific skill(s), their “practicing”; At the same time, exercise and role-playing are the main procedures that ensure experimentation. Trainings with other goals may provide for other methods of experimentation and other procedures to ensure it.

4. Discussion.

A mandatory stage following experimentation.
The training module most often includes only one four-step Kolb cycle. Due to time constraints, training cannot continue for as long as desired. Therefore, within the framework of the training module, the Kolb cycle turns rather into a sequence of stages, the final of which is discussion.

During experimentation, the group gains valuable practical experience. It is extremely important that this experience be qualitatively assimilated, “assimilated and digested” by the group, otherwise it will not be integrated into all previous experience and will not be used in practice. Therefore, the group’s implementation of practical work aimed at experimenting with new knowledge and new skills must necessarily be replaced by a qualitative analysis of what they saw, heard and experienced. Analysis is carried out at the level of awareness (all aspects of experience must be realized), emotional response, cognitive and semantic processing. Very often, regardless of the type and nature of the training, the direct participation of the trainer is required to implement this debriefing procedure.

The forms of group work during training, so well and in detail described in the specialized literature - role-playing and business games, exercises, group discussions, mini-lectures, etc. - can easily be distributed in terms of finding their “place” in the Kolb cycle . Thus, a role-playing game can be used at the stage of updating/creating experience or at the experimentation stage, a mini-lecture - at the stage of summarizing experience and obtaining theory, etc. The Kolb cycle makes it quite easy to plan the logic of constructing a training module, as well as select the appropriate forms group work. Drawing up detailed instructions and introductions to games and exercises is justified only after the trainer has determined the goals and objectives of the training, the number and topics of training modules. The structure of the module is planned in accordance with the Kolb cycle, then for each stage of the cycle the form of work that is most appropriate for the given group, training and situation as a whole is selected. And only after this can you proceed to drawing up specific instructions. It may seem to you, reader, that I am focusing your attention on platitudes. However, believe me, very often a novice coach builds his training program in the reverse order - starting with writing instructions to the players.

There is one more rule, extremely important, from my point of view. It helps the trainer develop the content of the training module. I formulated this rule myself and called it fish skeleton rule.

Have you, reader, ever seen how salted fish is dried? It is strung on a string and hung somewhere in the shade. When it dries, it becomes clearly visible that all the bones, without exception, all the tissues are ultimately attached to the spine. The spine is one, it is like the main axis to which bones and soft tissues are attached. Something similar happens in training. The content of all forms of group activity within the training module must clearly correspond to its purpose. This is exactly how the fish skeleton rule is formulated.

The trainer, when starting to create a training module, formulates and writes down its goal for himself. After this, he decomposes the goal, breaking it into subgoals, and to achieve each of the subgoals, he plans forms of activity for the group during the passage of the module, each time asking himself the question: “How exactly will this form of activity work to achieve the goal of the module? What am I using it for? The goal set for the group, for example in a role-playing game, should clearly correspond to the goal of the module as a whole. The task proposed to the group as part of the training case must correspond to the goal set within the module. The same goes for any(!!!) forms of work with the group that the trainer plans.

Let me give you an example. Sales training for employees of an electronics salon, consumer electronics department. The topic of the training module is working with objections. The purpose of the module is to teach salon employees to effectively respond to customer objections. Stage of updating experience. As a means of updating the group’s experience, the trainer invites the group to think a little and answer a simple question: which customers most often raise objections when buying household appliances? (This form of work is called facilitation; its procedure is briefly described in the fourth chapter of this book.) The group thinks conscientiously, then begins to respond. “Elderly people, old women”, “arrogant, self-confident people who believe that they know everything better than the seller”, “buyers who themselves do not know what they want”, etc. What is the value of this facilitation? Zero - because the topic does not correspond to the goal of the training module and does not work to achieve it. In order to learn how to overcome buyer objections, you don’t need to know the types that object most often, because objections can potentially arise when making any purchase and by any buyer. It would be more logical to ask what exactly causes discomfort in buyers, what exactly they object to - they are not satisfied with the price, design or design, the material from which the product is made, or the manufacturer is questionable. This would be much more in line with the theme and purpose of the training module. In the above example, the trainer, when constructing a training module, violated the fishbone rule, as a result, about 15 minutes of the group’s time and effort went “into the sand.”

For those who are engaged in training and study at trainings

About the effectiveness of trainings

Thoughts about why, despite the huge number of products on the business education market, very little changes at the enterprises themselves, are depressing. After all, managers are regularly sent to various trainings and seminars. And it is these people who are responsible for the formation of production culture. And when observing companies, one trend is clearly visible. Changes occur where two basic principles are observed: work with people is carried out systematically, and managers are trained by practitioners who have themselves achieved results in management.

I don’t want to once again throw stones at the coaches. Most likely, their fault for the low effectiveness of training is not so great. That's how they were taught. Much more harm is caused by an inconsistent methodological base and the associated misunderstanding of the learning process for adults. That is, in essence, the lack of a sufficient number of professional methodologists. And the lack of the necessary worldview among trainers who work according to standard programs. Managerial.

Managers are all trained in very similar tools. Some do it better, some worse. Some have a stronger methodological base, some have a weaker one. However, when the teacher is taught by a manager who himself has gone through managing a department, putting people under control, firing employees, raising successors and all the other joys of managerial life, the learning results are much higher. Even if this manager has less training in conducting training than a girl with a psychology degree who has a bunch of certificates from various business schools.

The Kolb cycle in executive education practice

The solution to the low effectiveness of management training is simple. It can be easily obtained using one of the most popular theories regarding adult learning - the Kolb cycle. Just in case, let me remind you of its stages:

1. Concrete experience
2. Observation of and reflection on that experience (Review and analysis of existing experience)
3. Formation of abstract concepts based upon the reflection (Formation of a new theoretical concept)
4. Testing the new concepts.

Kolb - Having specific experience

If the education of children in the first stages is based on transferring knowledge to them “in reserve” and only then moves into the practical plane, then education of adults is necessary so that they change their approach to what they are already doing. Thus, firstly, it is almost impossible to teach a person something that has not been in his experience (You can prepare for situations in which he has not yet found himself, but this is a completely different training). Therefore, I always warn that there is no point in studying in management training for those who have less than three months of management experience. And secondly, the one who teaches must have experience similar to the experience of the students. If it is not there, then the teacher will simply have nothing to catch on.

What situations will he talk about if he has never seen the faces with which subordinates come to their leader, and what reasons do they give to justify their mistakes? Or if you never reported problems or achievements to your boss? He has no choice but to use other people's stories about it or fictitious ones. And people instantly sense falsehood and incompetence. And it’s impossible for someone who has studied management interactions only in theory to go into the nuances. His experience simply does not have these nuances.

Kolb - Review and analysis of existing experience

What do coaches do to fill their own gaps? They use a game (case or exercise) in which they think people will activate their experience. However, being far from their workplace, and even in an environment that assumes much less responsibility for their own decisions and actions, the participants begin to play carefree. And they do not use their real experience, but often those models of behavior that they, on the contrary, cannot apply in real life. This means that in this game it is not experience that is actualized, but potential. This is probably why I often hear from coaches that “the boss there is completely useless, but one young employee gives them all a head start.” After all, the coach observes both the boss and the young employee in game reality, when money, plans and jobs do not depend on the decision. And in this environment, the boss uses the training time to relax and not make decisions. A young employee, on the contrary, does what he is not allowed to do during working hours.

Of course, you can also benefit from such cases. But to do this, you need to know the nuances of people’s behavior outside of training. And here we again return to the managerial experience of the coach.

Trainers who come to my management programs are often disappointed. After reading the reviews of the participants, they expect that they will now learn some new exercises. After all, they don’t come to learn how to lead, but to borrow something for their programs (by the way, I’m all for it). However, in the first part of the training there is simply no vigorous activity observed: we discuss various practical situations with the participants. That's what we're discussing. We don’t play games, we don’t throw balls to each other, we don’t draw presentations. And coaches often simply do not understand that the first stages of the Kolb cycle are launched precisely at the moment when the usual conversation about managerial everyday life takes place. After all, at this time the leaders are experiencing the existing experience. And they analyze it. Well, trainers who do not have this experience simply sit and wait for the training to begin. (By the way, this is a real phrase of several trainers: “I’m waiting for the conversations to end and the training to begin.” They usually say it at lunch on the first day of training).

Kolb - Formation of a new theoretical concept

At the next stage of the Flask cycle, a new thinking model must be formed. That is, a new theory is not just studied, but is transferred to existing experience and a new algorithm of actions is developed. Which is immediately tested for strength. The thought experiments begin. Participants make various assumptions about the effectiveness or, conversely, the uselessness of the tools proposed to them. At this stage, the trainer must not only have management experience, but also experience in successfully using the tools that he teaches. And not only. It is important that he also has a set of beliefs (psychologists would call them attitudes) that make the very use of the tools possible and form the basis of the leader’s worldview. For example, you need to be pragmatic when evaluating employee performance. It is necessary to correctly consider both the encouragement of employees and punishment and dismissal. Otherwise, management tools will be handed over to an ordinary executive who dreams of being treated favorably by his own boss (or customer) rather than in a practical manner. And his recommendations will be the recommendations of a subordinate, not a leader. And he will answer questions like a performer.

A huge arsenal of working with objections has been developed for trainers in order to withstand this stage of training. And this arsenal needs to be mentioned separately. When trainings came into our reality, due to incorrect translations from English, the very essence of many necessary tools was distorted. For example, we use the word “recycle” to mean “throw away,” whereas the true meaning of this word is “use.” That is, when working with an objection from a training participant, in the original concept, it is supposed to use the objection in order to build arguments on it. And convince the person. In our reality, methods of “excluding a difficult participant” from the process are more often used. In essence, silencing a person who has his own opinion. Maybe. Someday I will write a large article about this “toolkit”, but for now I will return to the main topic.

So, at the stage of constructing new theoretical concepts, the leader’s very worldview must be conveyed. And, of course, it can only be conveyed by a person who has relevant experience or, in rare cases, a specialist who has studied and experienced someone else’s experience to such an extent that he can consider it his own.

Kolb – Testing a new concept

The next step is to turn the thought experiment into a practical one. This is a very important stage. You can ruin everything on it. After all, on the one hand, you need to let the participants make their own mistakes, and on the other hand, you need to give them the opportunity to correct these mistakes and use the tool correctly. Here you need to know a large number of nuances. Moreover, there are nuances concerning not only subordinates and their reactions, but also the nuances of what the leader himself experiences at the moment of using the tool. You need to be able to explain to a person not only the mistake, but also why he made it. Which, again, is very difficult to do if you don’t have your own experience of making mistakes and correcting them.

Many trainers, while practicing tools, do not pay attention to the fact that participants use behavior models that they will never use in real life. Well, for example, it’s rare that a boss will start a conversation with the words: “Dear Ivan Ivanovich, you and I have been working together for many years, so let’s discuss the current situation.” Rather, he will say: “Ivan Ivanovich, there is a conversation.” However, during training, unnatural patterns of behavior when practicing new tools are found everywhere. And no one corrects them. After all, the coach simply does not have experience in such conversations with subordinates. And the result? People leave a “good” training with the feeling that “there” everything was cool, and tomorrow everything will be normal. Instead of taking with you clear and understandable phrases that you can use tomorrow in conversations with employees. But at the end of the training, it also happens that a situation arises when the trainer “turned off” everyone who could be indignant at the pathos and improve the situation, so that they would not interfere with him conducting the training. It’s no secret that “difficult” participants are often people who are ready to argue. By the way, some coaches completely forget that a person does not argue if he does not want to be convinced. When a person doesn’t want it, he remains silent.

Kolb – Repetition

There is one more stage in the Flask cycle. Repetition. Of course, it must be implemented in training. And the right program is developed so that when practicing new tools, participants use elements of those already learned. But the learning doesn't end there. In fact, it is just beginning.

People leave the training and their normal work routine begins. Some people don’t even remember that they learned anything after two days. Some are trying their best to introduce new management tools into their work. And here they are faced with a large number of practical nuances. They gain new experience of mistakes and correct actions. Some people experience it themselves. And someone turns to the coach. And this is where the most unpleasant consequences of the coach’s lack of management experience begin. If during the training he manages the process, then in one-on-one communication (and people often do not want to advertise real cases at any post-training events), he does not have such an advantage. But he must have experience in solving the problems with which the person came to him. They're pretty standard. And if you spent five years in a managerial chair, then you know them like the back of your hand. However, theorists do not know these nuances. And they turn out to be useless. And they refuse people contacts, either citing they are busy, or under some other plausible pretext. Although, no one is stopping them, for example, from writing an article in response to a request from a former training participant. And place it in the public domain.

Games and trainings

Well, the last thing I would like to say in this article. It is possible that the root of the problems in the effectiveness of business training is not only that there are few training practitioners. Many of whom, by the way, are stopped from teaching by the tarnished image of the coaching profession. The problem is that almost any training format is now called training. And they raise the customer's expectations. But you can separate trainings, seminars and business games. And let the trainers do the first thing, the lecturers second, the game technicians and entertainers third. Then expectations will be formed more correctly. No one will expect to complete a large number of practical exercises in a seminar. Or that he will receive real tools in a business game. Well, the training will be ordered by those who clearly understand what competencies need to be developed in employees.

In 1984, Professor David Kolb created a learning model based on the gradual formation of mental actions. His theory includes a learning cycle consisting of four distinct stages and four different learning styles.

Kolb defined learning as the process of acquiring and accumulating abstract concepts, the ability to apply them to different situations, and the emergence of new experiences from these.

Learning cycle

According to Kolb's theory, the acquisition of new knowledge and skills occurs during a cycle consisting of four stages:

1. Specific experience- acquiring new experience or a new interpretation of the old.

2. Observations and reflection- observation of any new experience. It should be noted that the experience itself and its understanding do not correspond to each other.

3. Formation of abstract concepts- building a new idea, as well as modifying an existing abstract idea.

4. Active experimentation- application of experience in new conditions, experimental verification.

Learning styles

Based on the four stages of the learning cycle, Kolb identifies four different learning styles. In his opinion, different people prefer different learning styles, the choice of which is influenced by many factors, including educational experience, characteristics of the cognitive sphere and social environment. Preference for a particular learning style is the result of two choices.

Kolb views his model of learning as two continuums: the poles of the first representing concrete experience and the formation of abstract concepts, and the poles of the second representing reflective observation and active experimentation. The horizontal axis is called the processing continuum and represents how we learn. The vertical axis is called the perceptual continuum, and it shows how a person responds to learning. According to the scientist, a person can never be at two ends of the same axis at once. Based on this, four learning styles can be distinguished, presented in the figure below.

So Kolb identifies four different learning styles that people use depending on which end of the continuum they gravitate toward: accommodation, withdrawal, assimilation, and convergence. Although we use different learning styles at different times in our lives, everyone unconsciously chooses one that suits them. To better understand how these styles work, consider the following table and diagram, which are discussed in more detail below.

	Active experimentation (AE)	Observations and Reflection (O&R)
Concrete Experience (CR)	Device (KO/AE)	Suspension (KO/NR)
Formation of abstract concepts (AP)	Convergence (AP/AE)	Assimilation (AP/HP)

Device (KO/AP)

This learning style is based more on intuition than logic. Such people are often guided by a sixth sense; to obtain information they rely on others, after which they analyze it independently; prefer to carefully work out their plans. They are attracted to new situations and challenges.

Suspension (KO/NR)

People with this learning style prefer to observe rather than do, and solve problems through information gathering and imagination. Therefore, they are able to view situations from different perspectives and are at their best when they need to generate new ideas, such as during a brainstorming session. They tend to be sensitive, emotional and artistic. They enjoy working in a team, receiving feedback on their work, collecting information; they readily listen to other people's opinions.

Convergence (AK/AE)

Such people are called techies; They are more attracted to solving technical problems rather than interpersonal problems. They realize their potential most fully when solving practical problems, and make decisions by searching for specific answers to specific questions; enjoy experimenting with new ideas, modeling, and working with specialized applications to solve real-world problems.

Assimilation (AK/NR)

Here the emphasis is on a logical approach to abstract ideas and concepts that these people find more important than interpersonal communication or practical applications. They are able to understand a wide range of information and organize it in a clear, logical order, which makes assimilation more effective in a scientific environment. These people also like to think deeply about a situation and explore different analytical models.

Understanding which learning style is preferable for you and others is extremely important and beneficial; this knowledge can be applied to the real world with great success. Thanks to this, we can, for example, understand how to convey information to others in the most effective way and how to improve our own results.

Paul Kleinman: Psychology. People, concepts, experiments.

The Kolb cycle is a learning model that is based on the principle of the gradual formation of the student’s mental actions. The fundamental difference of this model is that it is designed specifically for teaching adults who already have personal experience in studying objects and at the same time have a more stable and pronounced motivation to learn.

Author of the method

Its author is a specialist in adult learning psychology, David A. Kolb. In his opinion, the learning process is a cycle or a kind of spiral. This is a kind of cycle of accumulation of personal experience, further reflection and reflection, and ultimately action. According to David Kolb, the learning process is a kind of spiral, the main stages of which are the accumulation of personal experience, its reflection, and subsequent action, which is the result.

The Kolb cycle involves the following stages of training:

1. Concrete experience (CR). This stage presupposes that a person has some personal, specific experience in the aspect that he plans to study.

2. Mental observations (MN). This stage involves thinking and analyzing the initial knowledge that a person has.

3.Abstract conceptualization (AC). At this stage, the obtained information is summarized and a specific model is built. It is during this period of training that new ideas are generated, relationships between phenomena are built, and information about patterns in the topic being studied is added.

4. Active experimentation (AE). This is the final stage during which the created model or concept is tested in practice, the student checks its effectiveness and practicality.

Based on Kolb’s teaching principles, a scheme for the most effective implementation of interactive training has been developed:

1. Motivation and announcement of a new topic. This stage is also called “problematization” among trainers. Its goal is to attract students’ attention to the topic, arouse interest, and create a sense of the significance of this issue. Also at this stage, exercises are used that can demonstrate to the participants the lack of knowledge in a given topic and motivate them to acquire new knowledge.

1. Consolidation (repetition) of what has been learned. This stage implies a generalization of the knowledge, methods and methods that the participants already possess. It allows you to structure the participants' experience and prepare them for the transition to the next stage.

This stage takes 20% of the time.

1. Learning new material. This is the main stage, which involves students acquiring new knowledge and skills. Participants receive answers to the questions that were raised at the beginning of the training and learn how to practically resolve them. When learning new material, it is also advisable to use exercises and practical exercises.

This stage takes 50% of the time.

1. Assessment. At this stage, an assessment is made of how well the participants have learned new knowledge and skills. It can take place in the form of practical, test tasks, discussions, and cases.

This stage takes 10% of the time.

1. Summing up the lesson (debriefing, reflection). The final stage, during which the trainer asks what was useful and effective, collects wishes and encourages further independent study of the material.

This stage takes 10% of the time.

In addition, the Kolb cycle formed the basis for the typology of training participants. It reflects the specifics of mental operations and the usual ways of acting of the participants.

Types of participants:

1. Activist(Accommodative style, combination of personal experience and practice). This type gains knowledge primarily based on their experience through trial and error. They do not like theory, preferring simple explanations that they want to immediately experience in practice.

Example: such a person, having bought a new phone, runs home and, without reading the instructions, immediately turns it on and starts pressing buttons, trying to see what the result will be.

1. Thinker(Divergent style, combination of personal experience and reflections). This type, similar to the Activist, also likes to receive knowledge in a simple form, in the form of casual communication, but he is in no hurry to put it into practice. He tries to understand everything to the end, asking questions and repeatedly clarifying details of interest.

Example: this is a person who is in no hurry to make a purchase, asks the seller a lot of questions, asks to show everything and explain it. If necessary, call the hotline and ask to tell everything again.

1. Theorist(Assimilating style, combination of theory and reflection). This person likes to understand theory on his own and appreciates thoroughness and structure. Delving into theory, he sometimes doesn’t even get to practice.

Example: this person has already read everything about the phone on websites and forums, studying all the advantages and limitations of each model, and if he still makes a choice, he comes to the store fully prepared. Having made a purchase, he first reads the instructions, then begins to use it.

1. Pragmatist(Convergent style, theory-practice linkage). A participant of this type loves to receive theoretical knowledge, but its practicality is fundamentally important to him. He studies only the amount of information that is necessary for practical application.

Example: I read the minimum required on the Internet, asked a few questions to the seller, read the instructions only if something is not clear.

To summarize, it can be noted that the Flask cycle is a convenient and practical model for building and. It is easy to understand and adapted specifically for adult participants who have their own specific perception of information.