The ecological model of Bronfenbremnner and the Kolb liner theory are considered in this paper. These models are learning styles’ examples. They have been adopted widely in different systems of education (Martin & Fabes, 2009). Learning styles refer to consistent ways of enabling students to respond to any stimuli during the learning process. They are the basis of cognitive, physiological as well as effective factors which indicate the way learners perceive, interact and respond to any form of learning. The discussion of this paper focuses on external forces that differentiate Brofenbrenner’s model from the Kolb’s linear model. The paper also outlines the crucial Kolb’s model analysis with consideration of Bronfenbrenner’s model. The paper will also critique Kolb’s model. The ecological model of Bronfenbremnner and the Kolb liner theory are considered in this paper. These models are learning styles’ examples. They have been adopted widely in different systems of education (Martin & Fabes, 2009). Learning styles refer to consistent ways of enabling students to respond to any stimuli during the learning process. They are the basis of cognitive, physiological as well as effective factors which indicate the way learners perceive, interact and respond to any form of learning. The discussion of this paper focuses on external forces that differentiate Brofenbrenner’s model from the Kolb’s linear model. The paper also outlines the crucial Kolb’s model analysis with consideration of Bronfenbrenner’s model. The paper will also critique Kolb’s model.

1. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model
Compared to Kolb’s Linear Model
- See more at: http://www.customwritingservice.org/blog/bronfenbrenners-
ecological-model-compared-to-kolbs-linear-model/
Introduction
The ecological model of Bronfenbremnner and the Kolb liner theory are considered in this paper.
These models are learning styles’ examples. They have been adopted widely in different systems
of education (Martin & Fabes, 2009). Learning styles refer to consistent ways of enabling
students to respond to any stimuli during the learning process. They are the basis of cognitive,
physiological as well as effective factors which indicate the way learners perceive, interact and
respond to any form of learning. The discussion of this paper focuses on external forces that
differentiate Brofenbrenner’s model from the Kolb’s linear model. The paper also outlines the
crucial Kolb’s model analysis with consideration of Bronfenbrenner’s model. The paper will also
critique Kolb’s model.

2. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model
According to Brofenbrenner, to understand human development fully, the ecological
environment where a person grows in should be analyzed. He notes that the system has five
major external factors known as the subsystems. They direct and support human development.
They also depend on the lifestyle of a person and they provide different sources and options to
growth (Evans, 2010). A person is able to increase the ability to solve problems in the learning
environment, develop self-exploitation ability and improve social skills due to their access to
these subsystems.
Brofenbrenner’s model is different from Kolb’s linear theory because it stresses the effects that
the environment in which a person grows in has on their development. Thus, environment
influences learning. There are five external forces that Brofenbrenner outlines in his model
which are not considered important for any learning process by Kolb’s model. They include the
mesosystem, microsystem, exosystem, chronosystem and macrosystem (Merriam, et al., 2007).
Microsystem is the environment that is closer to the child. It provides contact with different
structures. It is made of relationships of the child such as relationships with family, friends,
neighbors, classroom or childcare. The implication of this system is that the child is affected by
inner influences which are stronger than external forces. The microsystem offers the first avenue
via which a child learns about the word. It also acts as the reference point of the child.
Essentially, the child is nurtured by this system because it provides haunting occurrences within
the child’s memory. Relationships are powerful within this system because they influence a
child’s personality. They also develop trust from the attachment that a child has with parents as
well as the existing mutuality (Shaffer, 2009).
The mesosystem offers a point where a person’s microsystem structures meet. Interactions of
microsystem factors characterize it as well as determination of whether these are familiar or not.
These affect a child’s development since they offer a communication means between different
aspects of the life of a person. Connections between teachers, parents, neighbors and church
represent the mesosystem.
The exosystem is characterized by a large social network that a child is not exposed to. This
subsystem has factors that interact with those of the microsystem of a child. Thus, they affect the
child’s development. In this regards, examples include the workplace of a parent and resources
that the community supply to the family. The interaction force between microsystem and
exosystem affects a child either negatively or positively. A child’s development can be degraded
or empowered by this interaction. Macrosystems on other hand comprises of ethics, laws and
cultural values. Their characteristics are the pattern or organization of a group or the society.
This subsystem plays the role of holding different life aspects together. It also affects how
relations or events are executed.
Transformations and environmental occurrences during the life of a person as well as historical
events characterize chronosystem. Such occurrences include deaths of loved ones, divorce and
earthquake which might affect development. Within a learning environment, learners exhibit
different reactions because of the variation of factors that affect their microsystem. By

3. interacting with one another, students learn from one another. They also comprehend different
means of learning.
Critique of the Kolb’s Model
Kolb’s Linear Model
Before critiquing Kolb’s model, it is important to comprehend its framework and scope. There
are learning styles that were developed by David Kolb in 1984. This model was created out of
these styles. Many discussions have emerged from this model. In most cases, it is applied in
adult learning. Kolb argues that this model cannot happen by simply reading about or watching
something. For knowledge to be acquired, one has to practice (Martinez-Pons, 2001). The
framework of this model comprises of two features. These are the four learning stages and
Learning Style Inventory (LSI) (Kolb, 1984). In the four-stage style, a learning cycle where
experience is translated into concepts via reflection is described. These concepts are used in
guiding the active experimentation and new experiences’ choices. These processes can be
summarized as a concrete experience, abstract conceptualization, reflective observation, as well
as active experimentation. They all follow one another as follows (Jordan, et al., 2008).

4. Since Kolb’s did this work in the 1970s, scholars have criticized it for various reasons. While
doing this, the work was examined thoroughly to address several issues. These include
answering questions like; what does learning means? Are learning methods different to make the
four-stage cycle necessary?
The examination discovered that the learning definition of Kolb was incorrect because it distorts
major references on which it is based. His proposal is a different definition which is consistent
with the fundamentals of his model. According to Kolb’s model, learning definition implies that
it affects domains’ choices. The definition of Kolb supports knowledge stance which is a sensory
participation’s function that cognitive process follows. Nevertheless, this definition contradicts
the empirical fundamentals because it draws from the Piaget’s cognitive development levels.
These do not indicate the essence of any learning experience (Shaffer, 2009).
Although Kolb’s model has facilitated learning as well as understanding among different adults,
it does not indicate an actual representation of the way learning takes place in humans.
Unresolved issues and contradictions on the theory’s foundation have been accumulating since
the model was examined. In the second Kolb’s linear model review, basic propositions of the
foundation of the model are addressed as well as their nature, various learning modes and their
position in relation to learning theory. The review indicates that the four learning modes are
unnecessary for any learning and inconsistent. The conclusion of the review is that this section of
this theory contradicts itself and it comprises of inherent inconsistencies. A study of the four-
stage style of learning shows several findings (Merriam et al., 2007).
First, the indicated four stages are not important or necessary for any learning to occur. However,
they can demonstrate real learning effectively if revised reasonably. Second, the
conceptualization and experience stages are not positioned properly in this cycle. A person
acquires knowledge after changing their experiences fully. Consciousness is involved. Third,
active experimentation and reflective observation are not placed properly in the transformation
cycle. Additionally, active experimentation and reflective observation are not distinguished
properly in this cycle. The point of correct differentiation ought to have focused on intension and
extension. Nevertheless, activities that are directed towards the environment and learners have
been declared inherent in the two stages (Watts et al., 2009).
Similarly, Kolb portrays the four-stages as distinct and inseparable. This makes the stages look
interpenetrating and interconnected. Consequently, the implication is that learning needs
opposite and polar abilities that a person must choose continuously so that they can feature in
various learning situations. This notion distorts other famous people’s finding such as Dewey,
Lewin and Piaget. These stages should be interpenetrating, reciprocal and dependent. They ought
to be represented in a manner that is more appropriate so that integrity and validity can be
achieved.
False learning definition in reference to the adaptive choices is another critique. The entire
learning process ought not to compare to adaptive learning because the cause of adaptive choices
is learning and adaptive choices can bring new experiences, hence one can learn something from
it. This implies that it can create a learning avenue. However, adaptive choices cannot create
knowledge, intuition or understanding. As such, different contradictions of the four stage

5. learning style raise questions about Kolb’s model validity, measures, and four -stage styles as
well as techniques Merriam, et al., 2007).
The proposition of Kolb is that learning comprises of conflicts and tension. This is another
misappropriation. Tension is a bad way of mediating the learning stages. The proposal of Kolb is
that tension acts as a connecting mechanism for these stages, the environment and the learners.
Nevertheless, tension cannot be applied in learning because conflict drives learning (Watts,
Cockroft, & Duncan, 2009). Additionally, these stages do not have to be there for any learning to
occur. However, when revised reasonably they can depict real learning (Shaffer, 2009). Second,
conceptualization and experience stages are not positioned properly in the cycle. A person
acquires knowledge after experiences change fully. This entails consciousness. Third, active
experimentation and reflective observation are not placed properly in the transformation cycle.
To critique any system, the system’s failures must be examined. The foundation of Kolb’s model
is assumptions, erroneous and false principles. This has led to inconsistencies. To correct the
situation, one must use assumptions from thoughts, development of another system, providing
justifications or abandoning this theory.
Conclusion
From the analysis of this paper, it is apparent that there are several theories that attempt to make
learning process simpler. The emphasis of Brofenbrenner’s model is on the impact that
ecological environment has on an individual’s development which impact on the learning ability
later. Kolb’s liner model on the other hand presents a learning cycle that has four stages with
inseparable modes. Nevertheless, there has been criticism for Kolb’s model due to the
inconsistencies that it has on fundamental assumptions. Consequently, the model should be
amended. Different factors of Bronfenbrenner have been outlined in this paper. However, these
are absent in Kolb’s model. Additionally, the paper has discussed Kolb’s model critiques.
References
Evans, N. J. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jordan, A., Carlile, O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to learning: A guide for teachers.
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

6. Martin, C. L., Fabes, R. A., & Fabes, R. A. (2009). Discovering child development. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
Martinez-Pons, M. (2001). The psychology of teaching and learning: A three step approach.
London [u.a.:
Continuum.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A
comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shaffer, D. R. (2009). Social and personality development. Australia: Wadsworth/Cengage
Learning.
Watts, J., Cockcroft, K., & Duncan, N. (2009). Developmental psychology. Cape Town, South
Africa: UCT Press.
Would you like assistance in writing an essay like the one above? Get in touch with us by
clicking here. Alternatively you can peruse through the archives to read more essays and
other academic papers.
- See more at: http://www.customwritingservice.org/blog/bronfenbrenners-ecological-model-
compared-to-kolbs-linear-model/