Category: 6220

Complete your final reflection on your final project paper (i.e., Implementation Research Design).

With your final revised implementation research design turned in, how do you feel about what you did?

With my final submission, I feel so-so about it. I put a lot of work into the paper and then used the paper as a foundation for the presentation. Kolb’s theory is nearly 40 years old, and thousands of researchers have referenced or applied Kolb’s theory in one way or another. In this instance, I felt like I couldn’t hone in on the literature review articles and felt like I could easily spend another year reading articles on how folks applied Kolb’s theory.

While I feel that my implementation example is solid, I know that there is still room to grow. In thinking through the development process, I feel that things could easily get messy and that the suggested course structure would need to be programmed down to the minute with everything painstakingly detailed ahead of time.

For this topic, I feel like I just scratched the tip of the iceberg.

What did you learn from the project?

My biggest takeaway is that Kolb’s theory can be used as a course design framework. I don’t know if this was necessarily Kolb’s intent when creating the framework, but it’s interesting to see how other researchers have applied the four components to course design. Additionally, I was unaware that a learning style survey came out of this research as well. When I’ve seen Kolb’s theory presented in the past, the presenter never discussed the ability to use the theory as a course design framework, nor discussed that the theory had a learning style survey associated with the research. (Who knows, maybe next time I’ll be the one presenting about Kolb.)

What might you use in any implementations you might do in your work life or in other research (e.g., dissertation). 

Unfortunately, I don’t see myself applying the proposed implementation in the near future. Without fully breaking down the time allotments for the proposed course on Kolb using Kolb’s framework, I would say a rough estimate on this course would be a minimum of 2-3 hours. This would be too long of a course, and with our current course block structure, our faculty just don’t have this much conductive time for faculty development. Yes, we do a boot camp in the “off-season” but that weeklong seminar is already jam-packed with content, and there would be no room to add this activity in as well.

All-in-all, I learned a lot about Kolb’s theory and the various ways it can be applied…and I’ll keep it in my pocket should the opportunity arise in the future to leverage my new knowledge.

Prompt: How do you feel your Implementation Theory Presentation went? What did you learn from the readings you did that went into your presentation? How do you feel the presentation information conveyed to your classmates what they need to know? 

Well, I think my presentation was only so-so. This has been a challenging semester for me due to pre-scheduled travel and I was unable to attend the in-class sessions where my classmates presented their theories. Thus, to complete the assignment, I recorded my presentation and uploaded it to YouTube.

It’s odd how you can practice and rehearse a presentation, and still fumble here and there. In my recorded presentation there were moments where I wanted to use the laser pointer to highlight the connection between the theory and the example; well, I think I fumbled too much trying to use the laser, and it distracted me from the message. I will have to practice more with these tools when I record future lectures.

Yet, overall, I felt my presentation relayed good content and aligned good examples of previous research that utilized Kolb’s Theory and Framework. In the future, I think this topic could have been divided into two components, as Kolb presented the four learning phases of Concrete Experience, Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization, and Active Experimentation. However, Kolb also introduced the four quadrants of learning styles which included Diverging, Assimilating, Converging, and Accommodating. The examples I provided within the presentation primarily focused on the four phases of the learning cycle, and I did not provide examples of the learning styles within the framework. I feel like I could have created an entirely separate presentation just on the learning styles alone.

The main thing that surprised me from the readings was that folks are using Kolb’s Theory of Experiential Learning as a framework for lesson plan design. I’ve known of Kolb, on a surface level, for many years but I never considered this theory to be used as a framework for instruction. As a former instructional designer, I think this might be an area of further interest when working on course design projects. Two of the examples presented, the Healy Jenkins study and the Wijnen-Meijer et al., study, were reminiscent of a team-based learning (TBL) approach. I would also be interested to do some additional research on TBL and see if Kolb’s Theory of Experiential Learning is mentioned as part of the supportive research in the development of TBL.

I selected Kolb for this project because his theory is mentioned here and there at my place of employment, and during our faculty training sessions. Yet, he was a theorist that I did not know much about. I was glad to have this opportunity to fill in the gaps on this theory and the theorist.

What implementation will you study?

For the final assignment, I will write about implementing Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory in a professional development course for new faculty. The course will teach about Kolb’s Theory within a structure that aligns with Kolb’s methodology.

Why will you study this implementation?

I originally chose Kolb’s Theory because this is a theory taught every semester during our new faculty boot camp. Each time the theory was taught I would realize that I did not know much about Kolb’s Theory, and each year I would tell myself I would research the theory and never did. The assignment within the 6220 course was the perfect opportunity to finally research Kolb.

In this case, the proposed implementation will take place within the faculty development session. These sessions are scheduled during the “off-season” when many of our faculty are in-between course loads. The proposed structure of the implementation will follow Kolb’s framework of Concrete Experience, Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization, and Active Experimentation

How will you be able to collect data on this implementation?

A mixed-method study will be designed with survey response and observation components. A pre- and post-assessment survey will be developed, as well as faculty self-assessment surveys and simulated classroom observations. The pre- and post-surveys will include both quantitative response questions and qualitative open-text question responses. The data collected from the surveys will be analyzed using statistical analysis methods to identify significant changes. The qualitative data from the open-text questions will be analyzed using thematic analysis to gain deeper insights into faculty members’ experiences and perspectives.

How does this implementation relate to your implementation theory?

The implementation will be structured as a course for new faculty and will be designed using Kolb’s theory, allowing faculty members to engage in activities aligned with the four stages of the learning cycle. They will experience a simulated classroom session, reflect on their observations, connect their experiences to theoretical frameworks, and engage in active experimentation by planning and executing their own learning event. The experience is designed to be very meta, or self-referential.

What is the implementation’s purpose and are there existing measurable outcomes?

The purpose of the implementation is to teach new faculty about Kolb’s theory while allowing them to experience it in action. Existing measurable outcomes have been identified within the literature and will be further delineated within the paper assignment. Researchers within the literature have applied Kolb’s theory to specific classroom settings, and technology learning applications, but I have not yet come across a study that uses Kolb’s theory to teach Kolb’s theory to new faculty members.