Adult Learning Styles, Theories and Its Importance in Employee Training

Almost everyone that we deal in human resource development are adults and it is very important to understand how adults learn.

STYLES OF ADULT LEARNING

Here we aim to look at why people want to learn, what they want to learn, and how they want to learn. The provider of training and development for adults is faced with a range of elements to consider in building learning opportunities. It might be helpful and encouraging to end with some cautionary notes (Moore, A., 2022). 

Behaviourist theories of learning 

The basic idea of this school of thought is learning that happens as a result to a stimulus. How we react to outside situations and depending on how good or the bad the reaction would make us feel, we learn to react the same or similarly to similar situations or stimuluses. (Pavlov. J.P.,1927) According to Wilson. J.P (2004), Behaviourists focus on modifying good or positive behaviour by reinforcements, while negative or unwanted behaviour is treated with negative reinforcement. This we have experienced this learning in schools, and it was said to have strengths as well as weaknesses such as it focuses only to provide a certain behaviour and has no or little room for alternative behaviour exploration (Hautzinger, M., 2022). 

 Behavior is directed by stimuli. An individual selects one response instead of another because of prior conditioning and psychological drives existing at the moment of the action (Parkay & Hass, 2007).“Employee behavior may be managed by developing the talented and skilled staff in an organization. This can be managed with the help of an effective reward managed system. Management must formulate and implement such talent management policy and ensure its implementation in the organization processes. For a comprehensive development and growth of optimistic employee behavior, hotels‟ policies and strategies must include employee development and appraisal plans linking an effective rewards and incentives. Focus on change management and implementation must be supported by preimplementation assessment of human needs. A well thoughtout strategy including new plans and incentive program may be initiated thereafter.” (Awasthi, A., Dhawan, D. and Soyav, M., 2020) 

Social Cognitivist theories of learning 

 This theory focusses on how information is received, organized, stored and retrieved by the mind. As regarded by cognitivist, the key feature of learning as a human being is that we are intelligent seekers. Cognitivist learning is about being proactive. Also, they see that how we experience the world is how we perceive the world to be and we seek knowledge in to do something about the misfit. We seek new information, we adjust our view of the world, we may create a new way of seeing the world. (Wang, Y., 2003). However The human nature is that we resist change and Piaget (1950) claimed the same. He developed a classification of responses to new information, suggesting that we may: 

• Assimilate–the new information poses no great challenge to our existing framework of thought and is absorbed. 
• Accommodate–the new information does not fit easily into existing frameworks but can be taken in with some changes.
• Reject–the new information is so different from anything we have already that we cannot take it in without great changes in our framework of thinking, and we are not willing to make the changes. 

 Cognitivists see human beings as intelligent and rational, in which we are consciously trying to make logical sense of our ideas and bring order to the world as we perceive it. However, the world is not very orderly, nor are human beings totally rational. 

 Kelly (1955) suggested that we humans create our own model of the world and of other people and their relationships and existence in it. As a result, we all also create our own, individual, way of learning, which is closely related to our beliefs and values, is shaped as much by feelings, beliefs, and values, as by our experience. Social learning is active, iterative, and generally seen to have a transformative role in facilitating stakeholders to address issues through collaborative actions (Koutsouris, 2009; March & Wilkinson, 2009). Importantly, social learning has been supported as it aligns with the ‘bottom-up’ or adaptive approach that underpins good governance processes (Medema, Wals, & Adamowski, 2014; Pahl-Wostl, 2009). It can facilitate social change through the process of collaboration (Koutsouris, 2009) and in turn has been counted with empowering different stakeholder groups such as local residents and freelance service providers who often have little or no power in traditional management approaches (Giampiccoli, A., Dłużewska, A. and Mnguni, E.M., 2022). 

Humanist theories of learning 

This school of thought believes that the knowledge and feelings are closely related and as this learning as an attempt to understand/ to make sense of the world (Rogers, 1974). This perspective was also expressed by Galileo stating that 'You cannot teach anyone anything. You can only help them discover it for themselves.' This teaching leads to the learner centric learning, in which the teacher is viewed as a facilitator for the learner to learn. In learner-centred learning, the learner sets the momentum of learning, and the learner's existing knowledge and skills are recognized and used positively (Wilson. J.P.,2004). 

 We can summarise the above as to why people learn, into as follows. 

Some people learn as a response to a stimulus. People learn what is right and wrong, positive and negative overtime by experience and they use that learning to retain or to sustain in an organization or in career (Sosna, M., Trevinyo-Rodríguez, R.N. and Velamuri, S.R., 2010) 

 Some learn with their need to improve the perception of their world or the image of the organization into the reality (Wang, Y., 2003). Whatever that an employee learns at an induction programme is also a proactive measure. Moreover, an employee at their employment also learn by determining solutions to different scenarios that may arise in future events (Wilson, T.D. and Gilbert, D.T., 2005). 

 And, some learns because they are encouraged to develop their potential as they realise they are capable of learning in order to to increase your independence or efficiency, to improve how you do things (Shepherd, D.A., 2004). 

 People learn to acquire knowledge and skills. However, there is a broad distinction between generic knowledge and skills vs superlative knowledge and skills (Kuncel, N.R., Hezlett, S.A. and Ones, D.S., 2004) 

Bloom (1956) classified skills under three domains: cognitive, psychomotor and affective. His taxonomy is explained at the figure 1.0 Figure 

There are 4 styles of learning styles classified by Honey and Mumford (1986) 

• Activist–the style of those who learn by doing things, intentionally or unintentionally. 
• Pragmatist–the style of those who learn by deliberate experimentation. 
• Theorist–the style of those who learn by analysing information and developing models to help them understand. 
• Reflector–the style of those who try to stand back and view events from several angles. 

Conclusion : 

Hayes and Allinson (1993) observed that while many person-environment interconnection studies which focused on learners’ characteristics such as gender, age and aptitude have found very little evidence of an interconnection effect with the success of learning activity, those that have focused on learning styles have produced more promising results, denoting the possibility that learning style may be a more potent characteristic of learners, that matching learning style and learning activity facilitating learning achievement than many of the other individual learner characteristics which have been examined (Hayes,J. and Allinson,C.W. 1996). Hence, understanding How adults learn, why adults learn, what adults learn and the learning styles of different individuals in an organization would adapt and benefit the design of learning and development methods for the betterment of the organization. Moreover, it could bottom up the sustenance of employments and the organization as a whole. 

References 

Awasthi, A., Dhawan, D. and Soyav, M., (2020). Role of employee behaviour in hospitality industry. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(1), pp.2208-2210. 

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. and Krathwohl, D.R., (1956). Handbook I: cognitive domain. New York: David McKay. 

Elshaer, A.M., Marzouk, A.M. and Khalifa, G.S., (2022). Antecedents of Employees’ Perception and Attitude to Risks: The Experience of Egyptian Tourism and Hospitality Industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, pp.1-29. 

Giampiccoli, A., Dłużewska, A. and Mnguni, E.M., (2022). Host Population Well-Being through Community-Based Tourism and Local Control: Issues and Ways Forward. Sustainability, 14(7), p.4372. 

Hautzinger, M., (2022). Behavioral Modification and Its Relevance in Coaching. In International Handbook of Evidence-Based Coaching (pp.65-76). Springer, Cham. 

Hayes,J. and Allinson,C.W. (1996) 'The Implications of Learning Styles for Training and Development: A Discussion of the Matching Hypothesis' British Journal of Management, Vol. 7, 63-73 

Honey, P and Mumford, A (1986) Manual of Learning Styles, London, Peter Honey 

Kelly, G A (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs, New York, Norton

Kuncel, N.R., Hezlett, S.A. and Ones, D.S., (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all?. Journal of personality and social psychology, 86(1), p.148. 

Koutsouris, A. (2009). Social learning and sustainable tourism development; local quality conventions in tourism: A Greek case study. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(5), 567–581. 

March, R., & Wilkinson, I. (2009). Conceptual tools for evaluating tourism partnerships. Tourism Management, 30(3), 455–462. 

Medema, W., Wals, A., & Adamowski, J. (2014). Multi-loop social learning for sustainable land and water governance: Towards a research agenda on the potential of virtual learning platforms. NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 69, 23–38. 

Moore, A., (2022). Onboarding of New Success Coaches: Development of a Training Program (Doctoral dissertation, Wilmington University (Delaware)). 

Pahl-Wostl, C. (2009). A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity andmulti-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Global Environmental Change, 19(3), 354–365. 

Parkay, F. W., & Hass, G. (2007). Curriculum planning (7th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. 

Pavlov, J P (1927) Conditioned Reflexes, Oxford, Oxford University Press 

Piaget, J (1950) The Psychology of Intelligence, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul 

Rogers, C (1974) On Becoming a Person, London, BBC Publications 

Shepherd, D.A., (2004). Educating entrepreneurship students about emotion and learning from failure. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(3), pp.274-287. 

Sosna, M., Trevinyo-Rodríguez, R.N. and Velamuri, S.R., (2010). Business model innovation through trial-and-error learning: The Naturhouse case. Long range planning, 43(2-3), pp.383-407. 

Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55. Elsevier. 

VARGAS-HERNÁNDEZ, J.G. and RAMOS-HERNÁNDEZ, J.J., (2016). Organizational Development action: Induction program. Ecoforum Journal, 5(2). 

Wang, Y., (2003). On cognitive informatics. Brain and Mind, 4(2), pp.151-167. 

Wilson,J.P. (2004) Human Resource Development. 2nd edn. London. Kogan Page Limited 

Wilson, T.D. and Gilbert, D.T., (2005). Affective forecasting: Knowing what to want. Current directions in psychological science, 14(3), pp.131-134. 

Yilma, E.A., (2015). Induction and socialization process and its impact on newly recruited staffs in Dashen Banks SC (Doctoral dissertation, St. Mary's University, Ethiopia).