Learning Styles and the Learning Cycle (Kolb, Honey & Mumford)
Kolb's experiential learning cycle is a model created by David Kolb (1984) in which people learn by moving through four stages: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. Peter Honey and Alan Mumford built four learning styles on it: Activist, Reflector, Theorist and Pragmatist. Matching teaching to one preferred style has little evidence behind it.
Quick facts
- Type
- Model (learning cycle) with a typology of learning styles
- Origin
- David A. Kolb, Experiential Learning (1984); Peter Honey & Alan Mumford, The Manual of Learning Styles (1982)
- Used when
- Designing training and learning support for a change
- Related models
- Conscious competence · VARK® · Gagné's nine events
- Exam relevance
- APMG CM Foundation, People & Change (PC0209); Practitioner (PC0306)
Model at a glance
- Concrete experience — doing something or having an experience; suits Activists
- Reflective observation — reviewing what happened from several angles; suits Reflectors
- Abstract conceptualization — drawing conclusions and forming concepts; suits Theorists
- Active experimentation — planning and trying out what was learned; suits Pragmatists
What are the four stages of Kolb's learning cycle?
David Kolb drew on the work of John Dewey, Kurt Lewin and Jean Piaget to describe learning as a cycle:
- Concrete experience: doing something, or having an experience.
- Reflective observation: stepping back to review what happened.
- Abstract conceptualization: making sense of it through concepts, rules or models.
- Active experimentation: trying out the conclusions, which creates a new experience.
A learner can enter the cycle at any stage, but learning is fullest when all four are completed. Kolb also named four learning styles from pairs of stages, now called diverging, assimilating, converging and accommodating.
Kolb's learning cycle therefore treats learning as a loop between doing and thinking, not as the transfer of information.
What are Honey and Mumford's four learning styles?
Peter Honey and Alan Mumford adapted Kolb's ideas for managers and named four styles, each linked to a stage of the cycle:
| Style | Learns best by | Cycle stage |
|---|---|---|
| Activist | Doing: new experiences, jumping in | Having an experience |
| Reflector | Observing, collecting information and thinking it over before acting | Reviewing the experience |
| Theorist | Understanding models, concepts and the logic behind them | Concluding from the experience |
| Pragmatist | Trying ideas out in practice and seeing how they apply to their own job | Planning the next steps |
Most people have one or two stronger preferences. Honey and Mumford's aim was to help people notice weaker styles and strengthen them, so that they could learn from more situations.
Honey and Mumford's styles are therefore preferences for parts of the cycle, not fixed categories of learner.
How can a change manager use the learning cycle to design training?
At Larchfield Logistics, warehouse teams must learn a new returns process. Instead of a slide briefing, the session runs the whole cycle:
- Experience: pairs process three sample returns in a test system.
- Reflection: the group discusses what was hard and what surprised them.
- Concepts: the trainer explains why the process changed and the rules behind each step.
- Experimentation: each person handles a real return the next day, with a coach on hand.
Every participant goes round all four stages, so Activists, Reflectors, Theorists and Pragmatists each meet the part they prefer and practice the parts they find harder.
The learning cycle is therefore most useful as a checklist for designing learning, not as a way to sort people into groups.
What does the evidence say about learning styles?
People do report preferences for how they learn. The disputed claim is the matching, or "meshing", hypothesis: that people learn more when teaching is matched to their preferred style.
Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork (2008) reviewed the research and found almost no studies with a design able to test the hypothesis, and among those that did, little support for it. An earlier review by Coffield and colleagues (2004) also questioned the reliability and validity of several learning style instruments.
The cycle survives this critique better than the styles do: varied activities, reflection and practice are sound design principles in their own right.
Learning styles are therefore best used to make training varied and complete, not to tailor it to each person's label.
Kolb and Honey & Mumford vs. VARK: what is the difference?
| Kolb; Honey & Mumford | VARK | |
|---|---|---|
| Originator | David Kolb; Peter Honey and Alan Mumford | Neil Fleming |
| What it describes | How people learn from experience, and which stages they prefer | Preferred modes for taking in information |
| Categories | Four cycle stages; Activist, Reflector, Theorist, Pragmatist | Visual, Aural, Read/write, Kinesthetic |
| Main use in change | Design learning that runs the full cycle | Choose formats and channels for messages and materials |
| Evidence caution | Matching teaching to a style has little support | The same caution applies to matching by mode |
Kolb and Honey & Mumford describe how people learn from experience; VARK describes how they prefer to receive information, which is why it sits with communication rather than training design.
Exam focus
At Foundation level (PC0209) expect recall of the four stages of Kolb's cycle and of Honey and Mumford's four styles, and recognition of which activity suits which style: Reflectors observe and think before acting, Pragmatists want to apply ideas to a real task. A common trap mixes these terms with VARK's modes or adds an invented stage to the cycle.
Practise this syllabus area →FAQ
What are the four stages of Kolb's learning cycle?
The four stages are concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. Experimenting creates a new experience, so the cycle repeats. A learner can start at any stage, but learning is fullest when all four are completed.
What is the difference between an Activist and a Pragmatist?
Activists learn by doing and enjoy new experiences, often jumping in without much preparation. Pragmatists want to see how an idea works in practice and how it applies to their own job, so they learn best by trying a new method on a real task with support.
How do Honey and Mumford's styles relate to Kolb's cycle?
Each style matches a stage: Activists prefer having the experience, Reflectors prefer reviewing it, Theorists prefer drawing conclusions, and Pragmatists prefer planning and trying the next step. Honey and Mumford built their styles on Kolb's cycle for use with managers.
Are learning styles a myth?
Preferences are real, but the idea that matching teaching to a person's style improves learning has little evidence behind it, as Pashler and colleagues concluded in 2008. Designing training that includes doing, reflecting, explaining and practicing remains good practice.
Sources
- Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall. 2nd ed. 2015, Pearson.
- Honey, P. & Mumford, A. (1992). The Manual of Learning Styles (3rd ed.; 1st ed. 1982). Peter Honey Publications.
- Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D. & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.
- Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E. & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning: A Systematic and Critical Review. Learning and Skills Research Centre.
- APMG International — Change Management certification (syllabus topic PC0209)
- Last reviewed