Voluntary nature of action learning
Participants in action learning engage in the process voluntarily. That is, they make a positive conscious decision to join an action learning set. Action learning does not work where it is imposed on the person. Voluntary implies a willingness to engage with the process. Resistance to the process may result in negative outcomes, leading to behaviour that militates against constructive learning. The effect is likely to lead to departure from the set and potentially the breakdown of the set as a whole. Because the action learning process is unusual in the context of traditional forms of learning, potential set members may come to the early meetings of a set with a degree of scepticism or doubt about its potentiality.
This is understandable given the past that most of us have experienced in education and subsequent development where we have had to accept the burden of endurance before the benefits. Provided the facilitator accepts this healthy scepticism and set members are asked to suspend judgement until some experience of the process occurs, new set members are likely to pass beyond their scepticism into a positive approval of the novel form the process takes. Voluntarily embarking on action learning is more likely to yield a positive approach to the whole experience and substantially underpins the trust that emerges.
Confidentiality and trust
Confidentiality is an essential precondition for action learning to work effectively. We will say more about this subject later. Essentially it means that set members do not disclose the content of other set members’ contributions outside the set. Each set member may take their own issues elsewhere. This forms the basis of any trust that develops in the set and is a core need to enable significant learning and development. Without trust, set members are not going to disclose what may be, to them, a vulnerability, a perceived weakness or helplessness. Yet these qualities in each of us can also be a strength, when revealed, that enables us, with the support of others, to move on. Emerging trust is also the basis of the story and history that will inevitably be created by the set about its life, which in turn has the effect of endorsing and building that trust.
Recognition of all the domains of learning
Traditional learning lays emphasis upon knowledge or cognition and its transmission and acquisition. We do not underestimate its importance in our development. The approach, however, understates the other two aspects. The three ‘domains’ of learning have long been identified by educationalists (Bloom, 1964), and they cover the three aspects as follows: cognitive (knowing); conative (doing); affective (feeling) (Brockbank and McGill, 1998).
These terms are abstractions which overlap in practice. However, they may be presented in terms which describe the outcome of learning in each domain, eg cognitive learning results in knowledge; conative learning results in action/changes in the world; affective learning alters appreciation of the self in relation to self and others. If learning is limited to one of these domains, the others are affected and learning is limited. The emphasis on cognition in adult (including higher education) learning has neglected the development of conative and affective intelligence. While practical applications have become an integral part of much adult development, the denial of emotion in learning remains in place for many parts of adult development. In action learning the affective and conative aspects of learning are given their significance in the learning and development process – a recognition of the emotional and action dimensions in learning. In the facilitator’s role is embodied knowledge, self and world, the three domains of expression, whereas in traditional teaching and training the practice emphasizes primarily one domain, that of knowledge.
Autonomy and mutuality
Action learning is noted for its development of the individual with greater autonomy and independence. Action learning works primarily by individual set members bringing their issues to the set and working towards some form of resolution and potential action. This journey to autonomy and independence needs to be qualified. We are not suggesting an individualistic journey, for we are asserting that while the learner may be experiencing a journey towards that autonomy and independence of learning, it is one undertaken with others.
Learning is a social process. Here we are using that term to convey the interdependence between facilitator and learners and between learners. The interaction between these ‘actors’ represents a relationship between them. By relationship we are implying a mutuality. In the words of Buber ‘I-Thou establishes the world of relation’ (1994 p.18), in contrast to an object relation where thou is an it or object.
Such a different way of relating with the learner can be achieved through facilitation, where the focus is on the learner, as learner (not as object). Therefore, we are putting forward the idea that facilitators of learning, both facilitators and other set members, will move into a different way of seeing their role, a different way of being and relating with the set member as presenter, and will do things that are different from traditional teaching or ‘up front’ training.
Read More : The values in action learning
