ABSTRACT
Experiential approaches to education, despite popularity amongst stalwarts (e.g. Kolb, 1984; Warren et al., 2008) and budding supporters (e.g. Eyler, 2009; Rudolph et al., 2007), have been suffering a recent identity crisis. Oft-cited theoretical and practical influences grounded in cognitive epistemologies (e.g. Kolb, 1984) and moral psychology (e.g. Hahn, 1934) are being openly critiqued as inadequate and naïve, aristocratic and militaristic (Brookes, 2003 a, 2003b; Brown, 2009, 2010; Delandshere, 2002; Fenwick, 2001; Quay, 2003; Roberts, 2008; Seaman, 2007, 2008; Seaman and Coppens, 2006; Seaman and Nelson, 2011; Worsley, 1985). Further, oversimplified translations misconstrue influential scholars’ work as compatible, if not mutually informative (e.g. Joplin, 2008; Panicucci, 2007), adding to the already murky waters through which educators must identify educative practices. While early views of experiential learning founded on individual, cognitivist epistemologies were undoubtedly helpful in shaping a distinguishable field of practice, the growing chorus advocating a paradigm shift warrants discussion.
