This study examined whether David A. Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) can be applied to Japanese. ELT has received particular attention in describing individual learning processes in English speaking countries where Learning Style Study is prosperous. ELT postulates two orthogonal bipolar dimensions of cognitive development: the active-reflective dimension and the abstract-concrete dimension. Kolb uses these polar extremes to define a four-stage cycle of learning. It begins with the acquisition of concrete experience (CE). This gives way to reflective observation (RO) on that experience. Next to that, theory building or abstract conceptualization (AC) occurs. The theory is then put to the test through active experimentation (AE). The cycle thus recommences since the experimentation itself yields new concrete experience.
There are two questionnaires based on Kolb’s theory in wide use The Learning Style Inventory (LSI) and Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ). LSI is one of the most popular questionnaires in English speaking countries; however, some researchers have called into question its reliability and validity. LSQ was developed after considering LSI’s problems, but its reliability and validity also have not been examined sufficiently.
The author translated LSI and LSQ into Japanese to apply them in a pilot study. Some problems ware reported, such as the method of answering LSI, the ambiguity of LSQ, and factors that are difficult to understand for English non-native speakers. The author accordingly developed a new questionnaire that was based on ELT but revised for Japanese. The questionnaire consisted of a set of 12 randomly arranged items on each of the four learning stages to be measured. The Likert-scaled 48 items ranged from Strongly Agree (6) to Strongly Disagree (0). The questionnaire was distributed at two national universities and 218 students completed it.
The principal component analysis was carried out and promax rotation was used. Contrary to Kolb’ theory, which has two bipolar axes and four poles of learning, in this study five factors were found: Deliberative, Logical, Pragmatic, Challenge and Systematic. The Deliberative style means that when a learner has this ability, he or she makes decisions after deliberation and progresses step-by-step. The Logical style represents a learner who attaches importance to logic and correctness. The Pragmatic style stands for a learner who always thinks about using language in the real world. The Challenge style means a learner who is flexible to new things and solves problems actively. The Systematic style describes a learner who finds rules from a lot of information and learns systematically. The result of Cronbach’s alpha analysis indicated that all the five factors have a high degree of internal reliability from .77 to .65 and possess some degree of correlations from -.07 to .51. The result means that there are not two bipolar axes as Kolb supposed, but five factors that are independent with only factor one and two having a correlation with each other.
Because the five factors are independent and have a high degree of internal reliability, Japanese university students have foreign language learning styles that are different from Kolb’s theory. Although the theory has received much attention and LSI and LSQ are widely used in English speaking countries, they cannot be applied directly to Japanese university students. Thus it is concluded that a new theory and questionnaire are needed in order to grasp the foreign language learning style of Japanese.
本稿ではまず、欧米で広く認められているKolb (1984) のExperiential Learning Theoryとそれに基づいて作成された２つの調査票The Learning Style Inventory（LSI）とLearning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ)の概略と問題点についてまとめた。次にその問題点を踏まえて筆者がKolbの理論に基づいて新たに外国語学習スタイル調査票を作成し、日本人大学生を対象に調査を行った。その結果、Kolbが想定した２つの軸や４つの学習能力を示す因子は抽出されず、「熟考」、「論理」、「実用」、「挑戦」、「秩序」の５因子が抽出された。この5因子はそれぞれ独立しており内的一貫性も認められるため、日本人大学生にはKolbの理論とは異なる外国語学習スタイルが存在する可能性が高い。このことはLSIやLSQを日本人大学生に使用し、結果をKolbの理論にそのまま当てはめて解釈するのは問題があることを示してい
