Action learning and action reflection learning: are they different?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to compare action learning and action reflection learning (ARL), exploring the similarities and differences. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a bibliographic search through ProQuest to collect scholarly journal publications on the definition and evolution of action learning; scholarly dissertations on ARL and their bibliographic references applying to this comparison. The origins of both action learning and ARL are explored. Action learning is first compared with ARL, using the taxonomy of Rimanoczy of ARL's principles and elements. Then ARL is compared with the characteristics listed for action learning by Smith and O'Neil. Findings As a result of this double comparison, a list of commonalities and differences is established. The comparison indicates that, while there are action‐learning aspects in some of the ARL‐based interventions, the eclectic characteristics developed by practitioners convert ARL into a learning architecture that brings together best professional practices described in various theoretical lines. Originality/value This paper offers guidelines to designing and implementing learning interventions in a wide scope of contexts.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.