Article

Management Learning

Anxiety and experience-based

43(1) 75–95
© The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
learning in a professional sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1350507611406482
standards context mlq.sagepub.com

Sarah Gilmore and Valerie Anderson

University of Portsmouth, UK

Abstract
This article contributes an analysis of the use of experiential learning and reflection within a management
education context where its use has received less attention: a learning environment dominated by the
requirements of a professional body, where successful attainment of the qualification offered by the
programme is linked with entry into the profession and to promotion within it. Using a psychoanalytic lens,
this study shows the tension occurring between experiential learning methods and the ‘expert knowledge’
requirements of professional bodies. Tension is essential for learning but we argue that the consequences of
it are uncertain and that it deserves more attention within the management education domain. We highlight
the ways by which anxiety generated by this tension can stimulate meaningful and reflexive outcomes but
our findings also indicate that ‘learning inaction’ (Vince, 2008) is also possible, particularly where tutors are
unable to provide a sufficient ‘holding’ environment when anxieties arising from experience-based learning
and expert knowledge demands become too hard to bear.

Keywords
anxiety, assessment, experiential learning, professions, psychoanalysis, reflection

Introduction
Since the early 1960s, experiential learning theories have increasingly influenced a diverse range
of management education approaches (Kayes, 2002; Miettinen, 1998: 170; Vince, 1998). These
affirm the humanistic belief in the capacity of individuals to grow and learn through a process that
has spontaneity, space for individual insight and reflection; focusing on how managers acquire and
transform new experiences and how these experiences lead to the development of more holistic
views of managers as managers (Kayes, 2002). Using a psychoanalytic approach, this article
depicts a critical case spanning a full academic year where experiential learning methods were
adopted by a Learning, Training and Development (LTD) module teaching team within the context

Corresponding author:
Sarah Gilmore, The University of Portsmouth Business School, Richmond Building, Portland Street, Portsmouth PO1
3DE, UK
Email: sarah.gilmore@port.ac.uk

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

76 Management Learning 43(1)

of a professionally accredited programme: a context with a good fit between the subject area and
experiential learning approaches. Our findings suggest that a deep-seated tension exists between
experiential learning methods and the expectations of accreditation bodies relating to the demon-
stration of ‘expert knowledge’ as an assessed outcome; highlighting that this tension is consequen-
tial for all parties involved in the learning process. It also illustrates how assessment and an
associated need for clarity or certainty is a fundamental defining feature of students’ and tutors’
experiences (Struyven et al., 2005). The emotions and tensions involved in such a context can oper-
ate as a source of significant anxiety (Antonocopoulou and Gabriel, 2001) and the article highlights
how this can underpin productive learning processes, for both students and tutors, but that in some
circumstances it can also serve to inhibit learning.

Experiential learning in management and professional education

In the areas of management and professional education, experiential learning is becoming increas-
ingly prominent, particularly for post-experience student programmes (Reynolds, 2009). Many
such programmes now publicly promote the view that learning takes place most effectively when
using the experiences of learners (Elliott, 2008; Rigg and Trehan, 2008) and when those experi-
ences are subject to critical individual and collective reflection (Reynolds, 1999). According to
Boud et al. (1985) the capacity to reflect directly relates to how effectively individuals can learn
from their personal experiences as a meaningful way of gaining understanding. Concepts such as
reflection-in-action (Schön, 1983), action learning (Revans, 1971) and ‘learning-in-action’ (Vince,
2008) have become increasingly influential as ways of surfacing tacit understanding through criti-
cal, reflective conversation on experience (Ahmad and Broussine, 2008; Boud and Walker, 1999;
Boud et al., 2009; Senge et al., 1999) enabling more open talk about ‘undiscussable’ subjects ena-
bling learners to reveal the complexities of experience and generate ‘rich learning’(Rigg and
Trehan, 2004). However, the extent to which this form of learning encourages critically reflexive
ideas rather than the reinforcement of existing knowledge continues to be an area of debate
(Reynolds, 1999; Vince, 1998, 2002; Vince and Reynolds, 2004; Wilson and Beard, 2003). One
area of difficulty concerns the affective features of experiential learning. Experience is often
synonymous with emotions and their deeper meaning but this is rarely taken into account within
higher education programmes where tutors tend to see emotion as something to control or ignore
(Moore and Kuol, 2007; Rigg and Trehan, 2008; Vince, 2010), suppressing it in order to encourage
rational argument and objective thought. This is further exacerbated where learners constitute a
practice community because the deployment of emotion might prohibit or undermine the effective
questioning and critique of the assumptions held by this community and its professional institute
(Kayes, 2002).
An additional problem with the deployment of experiential learning concerns the ways by
which learning outcomes and processes are assessed. Assessment is differently understood by
those involved. Within the academic community assessment is depicted as a means to motivate
students and provide feedback to enable improved academic performance and encourage learning
(Boud and Falchicov, 2006;Yorke, 2003) and methods of assessment that aim to engage and involve
students in the learning process, to contextualize learning and to develop and affirm the use of
higher level thinking and intellectual skills are increasingly advocated (Maclellan, 2004). However,
professional accrediting bodies expect assessment to enable students to demonstrate the acquisition
and ability to deploy forms of expert knowledge that are often enshrined in specific professional
standards. In this context, expert knowledge is seen as crucial in providing a basis for a profes-
sion’s aim to create credible, trusted future professionals and new generations of members

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 77

(Macdonald, 1995). From the perspective of the assessed the consequences that arise from the
contradictions, emanating from the various knowledge stakeholders within professional and man-
agement education programmes, combined with a sense of unequal power relationships that is
implicit within assessment processes have an emotional cost: heightening student anxiety and
potentially causing disruptions to learning (Elliott, 2008). This suggests that the process of experi-
ential learning and the products of it, might sit uneasily within an environment where outcomes are
ultimately assessed on the attainment and demonstration of expert knowledge (Stein, 2004). Given
the growth of professionally accredited management programmes, coupled with the take-up of
experiential learning methods, this may be an issue in a wide range of management development
and learning contexts.

Emotion and learning: a psychoanalytic perspective

Psychoanalytic approaches towards learning emphasize the psychological work involved: trying to
provide a way of understanding what goes on in human beings when we attempt to make sense of
our experience, accepting and tolerating the anxieties associated with it. Anxieties can be triggered
by earlier experiences of failure and disappointment or by threatening feelings of uncertainty,
dependency and vulnerability. From this perspective, learning is not seen as a spontaneous unleash-
ing of individual or collective potential but is involved with overcoming resistances to it, many of
which will be operating unconsciously (Antonocopoulou and Gabriel, 2001; French, 1997; French
and Vince, 1999). In this way, learning represents a challenge to individuals because it has the
potential to endanger some valued ideas and beliefs about the individual, about others in their
organizations and about the world. The emotions involved in learning can generate a degree of
discomfort or even pain that can lead to both encouragement and transformation but can also re-
shape, subvert or prevent learning (Vince, 2008).
Our article makes use of a Winnicottian perspective (Winnicott, 1960, 1965, 1989) which places
the ability to learn within a developmental model that involves a profound intersection between
internal and external processes and as such finds resonance with our data findings. At the heart of
Winnicott’s view of learning lies a deceptively simple developmental model where our ability to
learn depends upon our ability to navigate the internal stages of unintegration, integration, person-
alization and realization. This process is highly dependent upon a ‘holding environment’ which
facilitates a space for experimentation and play and is appropriately balanced between security and
overbearing, stifling attention. It also requires ‘primary maternal preoccupation’: a facilitating
carer whose adaptive consideration underpins this process.
This focus on physical and mental holding is also witnessed in Bion’s concept of containment
(1959) which is seen as an important feature of the learner-tutor relationship (Salzberger-Wittenberg
et al., 1983). Because learning instigates anxiety, what is needed is not only a figure who can care
and worry but one who can think about, clarify and differentiate between kinds of feelings. Within
a classroom setting, the tutor’s imaginative reflection (what Bion terms ‘reverie’) enables him/her
to bring together the different elements of experience into meaningful conjunctions. When anxie-
ties become heightened, they are evacuated. What is required within a teaching and learning setting
is not just tutor tolerance of anxieties and their evacuation but an ability to enable the learner to sort
out the nature of the experience, to digest it mentally and give it meaning, to be a thinker in an
emotional sense. If this occurs, learners become able to internalize not only a ‘container’ of feelings
but a mind that can hold thoughts. Ultimately, if a person has repeated experiences of the anxiety
of learning being understood and detoxified by another, they can gradually come to contain those
frustrations and pain and find it less overwhelming and be able to think about those experiences.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

78 Management Learning 43(1)

Hence, the task of the teacher may be thought of as resembling the parental function: acting as a
temporary container for anxieties of students at times of stress. This will inevitably involve the
tutor him/herself experiencing some of the mental pain of learning with the potential of seeing an
example of maintaining curiosity in the face of chaos (Salzberger-Wittenberg et al., 1983).
Using a psychoanalytic frame of reference, therefore, facilitates an exploration of the frustration
and disappointments that can occur in experience-based learning in professionally accredited situ-
ations, where time, critical reflection, toleration of ambiguity and persistence are required to seek
out, probe and digest experiences to provide the foundations of knowing and critical reflection
(Bion, 1962; Raab, 1997). Whilst there has been a focus on the use of experiential learning within
the management and professional learning domains (e.g. Cheetham and Chivers, 2001) few studies
address the emotionality of learning within this context or connect these issues with assessment
(Elliott, 2008). This study contributes to the growing body of empirical studies which, using psy-
chodynamic approaches, highlight the interdependent relationship between emotion and learning,
particularly the paralysing and productive effect of anxieties (Levine, 2002) and tensions involved
in reflection upon experience whilst simultaneously coping with curriculum assessment expecta-
tions (Valentin, 2007).
The article is structured in the following way. The research aims and the professional educa-
tional setting of the study are outlined and the research approach and data-gathering and analysis
processes are then described. Key issues emerging from the data are highlighted before a discus-
sion of the psychodynamic features of the way in which student and tutor expectations and
responses to the experience-based learning process changed over the year-long duration of the
module. Finally, the implications for those involved in learning and teaching in educational envi-
ronments that are also sites of professional assessment are discussed.

Research aim and setting

The article addresses two central questions: first, how did student and tutor expectations and
responses to the experience-based learning process change over the year-long duration of the
module? Second, what emotions were evident as the programme went on and what effect did they
have on learning? The respondents comprised 65 part-time professional students over a full aca-
demic year, distributed across three class groups over two different sites, and five members of
their teaching team from a UK University delivering an LTD module on a Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development (CIPD) accredited education programme. In the UK, the CIPD is the
largest UK professional body for those specializing in people management and development
(CIPD, 2010a) and the attainment of their accredited Professional Development Scheme leading
to Chartered membership of the Institute, effectively operates as a licence to practice in an HRM
or HRD role (Gilmore and Williams, 2007). In this way, the CIPD and its accreditation mecha-
nisms achieve a degree of social closure in that access is restricted to ‘ineligibles’: denying access
to those who fail to demonstrate successful completion of this award and concomitant member-
ship of the profession (Larson, 1977). For the students in this study, success and failure were
consequential and would cement the status of successful students as a professionalin terms of
their career progression and personal, professional identity—with uncertain occupational conse-
quences for those who did not pass.
Achievement of the CIPD accredited qualification requires the successful completion of an
approved postgraduate-level course where the curriculum and its assessment strategies have to
comply with professional or capability statements which specify what practitioners ‘need to do’;
what they ‘need to know’, and what ‘predominant behaviours’ are considered to be essential (CIPD,

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 79

2010b). The students were mostly employed in HRM or LTD roles and the two-semester long
module was positioned in the final year of their two-year course. Each class of about 20 people had
already established relationships from the first year of their course. The students were generally
employed in post-entry and junior management HR or LTD roles and about half were sponsored by
their employer. For these students who enjoyed company sponsorship, their progression through
the programme is typically subject to forms of scrutiny and semi-public evaluation through infor-
mal questioning by colleagues (many of whom have often gone through the programme them-
selves) or via more formal reviews such as performance appraisal—arguably exacerbating learner
anxiety because of the degree of transparency their progress was subject to.
The teaching team comprised five tutors, all of whom had extensive higher education experi-
ence (ranging from five to 16 years) and had worked in general management, HRM or HRD roles
prior to their careers in higher education. There was also a depth of experience of teaching on the
LTD module (ranging between three and eight years). Although the group had a loose identity of
themselves as the LTD teaching team, the approach to working that had developed over the years
can best be described as relaxed coordination. Over time the module had become dominated by a
tutor-orientated and mostly didactic pedagogy. Handouts and teaching materials were centrally
designed and issued to all three class groups to provide a measure of consistency of input. Individual
tutors then used the materials as they thought fit, devising their own approach to the delivery of
each session.
However, as with other management-orientated and professionally based disciplines, a defining
characteristic of LTD education is a close relationship between theory and practice (Wang and Sun,
2009) and the didactic approach was increasingly seen as problematic by members of the teaching
team. An experiential learning pedagogy was attractive, offering both immediacy and relevance,
particularly for students employed in related, professional roles in organizations. An evaluation by
the teaching team at the end of the 2007–8 academic year led to a proposal to introduce amore
participative and experience-based approach to encourage critically reflective thought and action
(Barnett and Coate, 2005). The pedagogic intention of the new approach was to enable learners to
construct meaning from conversation and reflection based on their experiences so that the tacit and
explicit features of knowledge could be brought together (Ahmad and Broussine, 2008; Baker et
al., 2005; Kayes, 2002), and sense-making and ‘metacognitive’ learning skills could be developed
(Barnett and Coate 2005;Cameron et al., 2003). In taking forward this approach the team sought to
address the apparent contradiction involved in teaching an HRD module in a practice-based con-
text that did not involve some form of experiential learning. This kind of pedagogic strategy is
conceptually congruent with key principles within both the LTD and general management subject
domains where the basis of ‘learning from each other’ takes a more dialogic and less hierarchical
and tutor-dominated approach and application of knowledge is encouraged as part of the develop-
ment of an informed critique of ‘taken for granted practice’ in a range of different individual,
group, organizational and societal circumstances (Kuchinke, 2007).
The resultant pedagogic approach involved students working in small groups to research, design
and deliver interactive sessions for their peers in both semesters. An individual coursework assign-
ment based on the first tranche of sessions was designed for submission at the mid-point of the year
and, in line with accreditation requirements, the module concluded with an unseen examination
that covered the remainder of the syllabus. Four of the five tutors involved in this decision had
experience of using some form of experiential approach, either in their teaching or in their HRD
practice outside of higher education. However, there was no prior experience of using it in a profes-
sionally accredited context and the teaching team were mindful of the potential challenges of let-
ting go of a content-led and assimilative approach in a context where professional examinations

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

80 Management Learning 43(1)

loom large. The context of post-experience management education processes such as workload
demands, other stakeholder interests (in our case: university, employers and the accrediting body)
is also a powerful influence on the extent to which experience-based learning can be encouraged
and achieved (Elliott, 2008; Griffiths et al., 2005; Haggis, 2004; Kember and Kwan, 2000; Prosser
et al., 2003) and power-relationships within student groups may also limit critical reflexivity
opportunities as prejudice and pre-judgement may influence what can and cannot be said as well
as what and who is heard (Baker et al., 2005). Given these concerns we undertook to carry out a
careful and continuous evaluation of the first year in which the approach was utilised and this arti-
cle is grounded in that process.

Methodology
We adopt an interpretivist orientation, grounded in the assumption that knowledge is created and
understood from the point of view of individuals in a context of practice. Our intention was not to
provide evidence from which to justify action or generalization but to understand the features of
experience-based learning in the context of an accredited programme; working with practitioners
(as learners and teachers) to enhance the learning process (Huang, 2010). As such our data-gather-
ing process resembled action enquiry; both of us are researchers, curriculum designers and teachers
(Kember, 2000). We set out to engage students and tutors in partnership and participation (Vince,
2001) and to encourage ongoing reflexivity so that a learning process could guide action, interpre-
tation and sensemaking.
An iterative approach to data gathering and analysis was undertaken. We planned to gather
teaching team and student reflections and reactions on three different occasions within the year,
accepting that the focus and detail on each occasion would be influenced by the experiences of the
new pedagogic approach by both tutors and students. We were conscious that a potential limitation
of action research is that it may be descriptive and unduly influenced by power relations (Coghlan,
2007) and in all but one instance we were able to ensure that the data gathering was carried out by
a member of the team who was not responsible for week-by-week teaching of any particular stu-
dent group. A process resembling a focus group procedure was initially anticipated; we felt this to
be congruent with our overall aim of encouraging participation and a more collective approach to
meaning making and knowledge creation. For tutors the data gathering occurred in pre-arranged
meeting times and was followed with a summary of the data being circulated to participants, invit-
ing further comments or reflections. With students data gathering was incorporated into scheduled
class-time; each class group formed into four or five smaller groups to discuss our questions and
summarize their responses on flip-chart paper. Towards the end of the sessions each group offered
an oral summary to the larger group and this gave the opportunity for other students to hear and
respond to points made and also for the facilitator to probe further into areas that may have been
initially unclear. We also invited students to continue their reflections and to share, in email form,
any subsequent observations.
The flip-charts formed the basis for initial analysis of student data which occurred on each occa-
sion within 24 hours. This involved identifying themes and issues and was undertaken by both
researchers who reviewed the flip-charts and compared and evaluated the themes they had identi-
fied so that an agreed set of categories could be defined. After the first data set had been gathered
we identified six main data categories: cognitive (the intellectual expectations of the approach);
functional (the likely practical implications); skills issues; assessment issues; the ‘novelty’ of the
approach and emotional responses.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 81

As a result of our emerging awareness of the importance of emotions and feelings we decided
in subsequent data gathering to probe more into this aspect and the value of a psychoanalytical
perspective was discussed. At the half-way point of the module we encouraged students and
tutors to revisit their initial expectations and concerns to reflect on whether these had been real-
ized but, in addition, asked them to reflect on their feelings about the learning process. As we
later came to realize this encouraged participants to reveal what might have otherwise remained
hidden or obscured in a conventional module evaluation process; students were encouraged to
articulate issues that are not normally surfaced during formal learning and teaching processes in
higher education (Rigg and Trehan, 2008; Vince, 2010). Our initial analysis at this mid-point
provided us with more data for our original categories and a further category was identified: lack
of clarity. Table 1 provides an illustration of data that informed our categorization at these two
stages. As the analysis process went on over the course of the year we revisited the data to look
for patterns and trends within and between groups and to identify and probe for meaning within
the various categories.
We had to revise our plans for the final data-gathering process. A focus group meeting with staff
occurred as planned but students were invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire based on
open questions. As discussed later in this article, this came about in response to many of the emo-
tional and relationship consequences of the learning and teaching approach. The response rate to
this questionnaire was poor and responses tended to reflect a polarisation of opinions.

Findings
In this section we offer a brief description of the main features of the data. We provide some illus-
trative quotations from the flip-charts, notes from meetings, associated email correspondence and
extracts from the questionnaire responses but, to preserve anonymity, the discrete quotations are
not labelled in more detail than to denote group membership.

Early stages: nervous enthusiasm to anxiety

Indicative examples of comments from the flip-charts in the first two data-gathering processes are
shown as Table 1 although these quotations inadequately reflect the breadth of responses and the
elements of difference as well as commonality between the groups. The early data indicated a
mixture of positive feelings, familiarity, novelty and excitement at the prospect of assuming greater
involvement and responsibility for knowledge creation and assimilation but also some concerns
about assessment and knowledge acquisition. Although one group, Group 3, stated their general
unfamiliarity with experiential learning, this pedagogic approach had been used within three man-
datory two-day workshop sessions held each academic year and this potentially accounts for Group
1 and Group 2’s greater familiarity with a less didactive learning mode.
Group 2 were very articulate about their cognitive expectations, identifying the potential for
enhanced insight and better integration between different aspects of LTD, between theory and
practice, and about skills (such as facilitation, giving and receiving feedback, practical application
skills) that they hoped to develop. However, by the mid-point of the module most of the responses
indicated that students in all three groups felt the approach took up too much time and comments
expressed concerns about the experience-based approach such as: ‘fun and interactive, but did we
really learn anything?’ (Group 1); ‘not learned much from student-led sessions: would prefer to
learn via lectures as it could be interactive but not student-led’ (Group 2) and ‘we feel that we have
more important things to concentrate on than having to produce a student-led session’ (Group 3).

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

 82

Table 1.  First and second data sets— illustrative quotations

Category Student group 1 Student group 2 Student group 3

Cognitive/ Active learning—take in more; retention Feel positive about finding out for self Better understanding; able to remember
intellectual—1st rather than being taught better through practical learning
data set
Cognitive/ Over-used active learning; need equal Time dedicated is disproportionate to the I only focused on my own sessions
intellectual—2nd amount of structured learning and active outcomes for the student-led sessions, so didn’t learn as much from other
data set learning. except for the one we participated in presentations.
Functional/ We won’t be provided with the Lots of reading will be needed Concerned about getting my preferred
practical—1st information so we will have to do the topic
data set leg work
Functional/ Difficult for those who live outside Not enough time to meet the lecturer’s Difficult to commit to additional time—
practical—2nd the area or have different time expectations in terms of reading and but still committed though!
data set commitments. acquiring knowledge.
Skills—1st data Transferable skills—might be useful for Competency in key areas—not just broad Forced to be more interactive
set the day job knowledge of everything
Skills—2nd data Good insight into LTD profession but Interaction helped with the assignment Group work was beneficial—it was easy
set will we recall anything in the exam? to learn through practical activities
Assessment—1st Will we learn what is required for the Making sure we get what is needed from The self-teaching approach is new and our
data set exam? Could a bad session turn into a the sessions for the exams assignment will be on a self-taught topic

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

bad assignment?
Assessment— Don’t feel I took enough in from
2nd data set student-led sessions and no way of
knowing what is missing for the exam.
Concerned about preparation for the
exams; don’t know where to start with
revision.
Not convinced that handouts/reference
information received from student led
sessions are going to be adequate to
answer exams
Management Learning 43(1)
 Gilmore and Anderson

Table 1.  (Continued)

Category Student group 1 Student group 2 Student group 3

Novelty—1st Familiar with this approach, used in parts Already done something like this last This is very unfamiliar—so unlike anything
data set only of other courses/modules and in the year so it can be done although it may be we have done before
workplace harder in some subject areas
Lack of clarity— Confused about expectations of Don’t know what we are meant to have Getting it right—want back-up
2nd data set only assignment with student-led sessions. learned—different perspectives have information from tutors so I know it is
been taken right.
Emotions—1st Nervous, excited, apprehensive, Excited, apprehensive, ‘proof in the Panic, dubious—need to be convinced:
data set worried, open to change! pudding’; reserved, concerned it’s a bit complicated
Emotions—2nd Scared, tearful, feel the need to go Frustration; don’t know what we’ve Unmotivated; ready to finish; don’t feel
data set away and start from the beginning for learned so far and what to revise. prepared for the exams; don’t feel we
the exams with very little notes from have learned anything; bored.
lectures.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

83
84 Management Learning 43(1)

Concerns about assessment were expressed by Groups 1 and 2 who articulated concerns about
the implications of the pedagogical approach for both the assignment and the examination. By the
mid-point stage of the module members of all of the groups were very anxious about assessment
and also about a perceived lack of clarity. Concerns about clarity related to feedback from the
student-led sessions but also related to the assignment that had (by then) been submitted and
returned, for example: ‘no real feedback from student-led sessions so still unsure as to whether the
research carried out was right or wrong’ (Group 3) and ‘assignment criteria was very vague; lack
of structure; self-reflection shouldn’t be in the word count and shouldn’t be marked’ (Group 3).
Although Groups 1 and 2 made fewer comments in this area at this juncture, they shared the gen-
eral concern as to their learning.
At the beginning of the module members of Group 1 articulated more apprehension than the
other groups; words such as worry, fear, apprehensive, lack of confidence were used along
with excited, positive, comfortable and pleased. However, at the mid-point of the module the
data indicated high levels of anxiety about the examination across all three groups, for exam-
ple: ‘Exam anxiety! Limited learning on topics: not having enough for the exam’ (Group 1);
‘Exam concerns—help!’ (Group 3) and were accompanied by concerns about ‘not knowing
enough’ and a lack of notes or information. Additionally, all groups strongly expressed height-
ened emotional states and these were frequently linked to exams. The words used most fre-
quently at this stage were: worry, scared, frustration, fear, tearful, panic, concern, anxious,
unmotivated, bored.
Data from tutors, however, reflected a very different set of understandings and experiences. At
the beginning of the module tutor expectations were similar to those expressed by students and
could be characterized as nervous enthusiasm. Examples of their comments included: ‘concerned
as to whether students will adapt’; ‘will the new assignment be effective?’ At the mid-point of the
module, unlike the students, tutors levels of enthusiasm were maintained and, in one or two cases,
increased reflecting greater engagement with pedagogy:

I am thinking more of the audience and reflecting more carefully after each session so that it informs the
way I prepare for the next one.

Instead of thinking about content and then thinking about learning and teaching, the emphasis seems to
have changed and I am thinking about learning and teaching as well as content in a more interrelated way.

Tutors also reflected positively about student progress and the classroom environment:

Engagement levels are good and certainly higher than last year and the assignment shows more, better
work and less of a tail.

Therefore, divergence of experiences between students and tutors was apparent, especially at
the mid-point. Some positive points were made by students at the mid-point stage particularly by
members of Groups 2 and 3 such as: ‘allowed for “food for thought” rather than “memorizing”
what we were told’ (Group 2) and ‘active learning—we benefit when we are involved in a group’
(Group 3) but such positive observations were the minority. Tutors were pleased with the improved
achievement levels in the coursework assignment; felt energized by the experience-based pedagogy
and, perhaps, had not yet turned their minds to examination issues. Students, on the other hand,
were focusing ahead with trepidation to the end of unit summative assessment.
At the beginning of the second half of the module a planned change-over of tutors from within
the teaching team was implemented and differences of views between the student groups became

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 85

more pronounced. Although, at the mid-point review, all of the groups expressed concern about the
continuation of the experience-based learning, Group 1 was prepared to work with their new tutor
to maintain the approach, amending it where necessary to meet student needs. Group 2, however,
effectively rebelled and refused to participate demanding a return to more traditional pedagogy and
Group 3, which retained their tutor, strongly advocated a return to tutor-led sessions with many
students expressed their ‘unhappiness and resentment at having to take part in the [student-led]
exercises’, predicting that ‘commitment to the task; motivation and attendance levels’ would drop,
thus ‘making the sessions even less effective’.
Following an intervention with Group 2 by the course manager, an uneasy compromise was
initiated although in the following weeks some of the members of this group attempted, unsuccess-
fully, to generate discontent with students in Group 1. The antagonism towards the teaching and
learning approach in Group 2 also negatively affected student-tutor relationships and, as tutors
became aware of the difficulties, different labels began to be applied; the two classes that had been
more receptive to the experience-based approach were referred to as ‘good’ whilst their counter-
parts in the other class were characterized as being ‘joyless’ and ‘militant’ with one of the tutors
commenting that: ‘there was no joy of learning within that group’ and another observing that: ‘I
was really taken aback by that group’s militancy and the “if you continue with this approach, I am
not coming in” line’.
During this period, some students in the disaffected class established their own study groups
(something that was only revealed to tutors after the end of the module). The students involved
indicated that they had done this to circumvent any reliance on their tutor (with whom productive
relationships had broken down). After the module these study groups were characterized as having
being a helpful learning vehicle; something that might be interpreted as an expression of the
achievement of the group-regulated skills that the module had set out to develop. However the
students involved perceived the need to undertake this process as a criticism of the module, rather
than as a positive outcome.

End of module data: polarized responses

Once the teaching and assessment processes for the year were complete and the module results
(which were better than previous years) had been published, a final tutor focus group took place
and an individual questionnaire was administered to all students in addition to the standard end-of-
module questionnaire. Despite the difficulties witnessed in the second semester, focus group data
from tutors confirmed the belief of those involved that the new approach remained appropriate to
the subject domain:

The more positive group did some great sessions with great level of learning coming out of them and even
the more militant one did good work in relation to some theory/practice in organization presentations with
a good level of discussion.

Student concerns about the time-constraints involved were acknowledged and points made by
them about a lack of clear objectives and structure were, with the benefit of hindsight, also accepted.
All the tutors agreed that the assessment requirements were problematic; singling out the disjunc-
ture between experiential learning methods and the (required) summative assessment:

The exam assessment strategy at the end just doesn’t fit with what we’re trying to do in class and the 50
percent weighting is just wrong too.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

86 Management Learning 43(1)

Students’ perspectives at this point are harder to evaluate as the response rate to the final ques-
tionnaire was poor. However, the data indicate frustration that tutors had significantly underesti-
mated the strength of concern felt by students about the learning and teaching approach that had
been implemented. Questionnaire responses were anonymous with no indication of membership of
any of the groups. Selections of illustrative comments made are provided in Table 2 which sets out
some of the dominant themes emerging from the data which were expressed to different extents
and with different nuances by different individuals. For the illustrative purposes of Table 2 a selec-
tion of quotations from the responses of some, but not all, of the respondent group is provided.
Student data indicate a breadth of opinion; some responses described the learning approach as:
‘good’, ‘useful’, ‘the balance was nearly there—certainly semester one worked’, ‘I got a buzz from
seeing people learn’, and ‘I found it a very rewarding experience’. Such comments were in the
minority, however, and rather more students expressed more negative sentiments such as:

The teaching and learning approach…took too much time out of the hours outside of university which
could have been used more productively on reading etc.

The majority view was encapsulated by this comment:

Whilst experiential learning may help longer-term development, that wasn’t what we wanted to achieve;
we were there to learn how to pass an exam.

All but one of the questionnaire respondents commented on what they felt had been a loss of clarity
as a result of what was perceived as the self-taught nature of the module and this was felt to have
had an adverse effect on examination preparation:

Revision for this unit caused me a great deal of stress and anxiety. I struggled to know where to start and
what to revise.

The student data from this stage also suggest a depth of anxiety that was not appreciated by the
teaching team, leading to frustration being expressed concerning tutor unresponsiveness. In addi-
tion, stringent critiques were made about the teaching style of more than one of the tutors and the
breakdown in the students-tutor relationship, for example:

I became more dissatisfied as the semester went on…we had tried to give constructive feedback to improve
the service we were receiving (and paying for) from LTD. This feedback was largely dismissed by both
(the module tutor and co-ordinators). They took a critical parent role and ‘blamed’ the students for the
failings of the course rather than responding in an adult way and actively exploring how concerns could be
addressed.

Towards the end of the L&D unit, I took the approach I would at work...I joined a study group...remained
professional and refused to be held back.

Discussion
Our article highlights how the introduction of experiential learning was marked by a recognition
by some students as to its difference and newness, whilst others acknowledged previous connection
with it and saw value in the new approach. We would therefore argue that at the start of the module,
students generally experienced themselves as being sufficiently able to adapt to a new learning

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

 Table 2.  End-of-unit questionnaire—illustrative quotations
Student Response to student
concerns
D Disappointed and resentful
about not being listened to
... having provided feedback
... twice ... to continue
with the same approach
demonstrated not being
listened to or respected as
students.
F When the group attempted
to give constructive
feedback ... this was
disregarded and received
with a high degree of
hostility.
Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015
H It did feel like a battle ... I
feel that the compromise
was acceptable, although
could have been more
Tutor style/tutor relationship
Tutor’s style of teaching; subject to
inappropriate unhelpful comments
to contributions made ... Learning
approach changed with a change of
tutor and after students demanded
a different approach be taken ... I
was able to engage in debate and
constructive comments with [tutor
x] which enhanced the learning
experience all round.
Discussion and application were
actively discouraged ... I felt that
I was treated like a child during
lectures ... the teaching styles of
[tutor x] and [tutor y] are in direct
contrast with each other... the
group was described as ‘hostile’
by lecturers and this actively
discouraged an effective learning
environment.
An air of blame rather than
collaboration emerged ... My
feelings ranged from optimism,
disappointment, frustration,
Lack of clarity
Part-time students [need]
some degree of guidance and
‘feeding’... the learning approach
was self-taught with minimal
input and guidance ... very
loose structure and ambiguous
outcomes ... The unit would
benefit from more prescribed
reading with clear questions
... Semester 2 would benefit
from consideration as to how
to ‘download’ information
to students who are feeling
pressured.
I felt there was not clarity around
the subject matter and knowledge
that would be required in the
exam.
I wondered what real value the
presentations had in creating
genuine knowledge transfer/
development.
Overall reflections
The balance was nearly there—
certainly semester 1 worked ... The
group assignment was useful and
Gilmore and Anderson
worked really well.
I am an active contributor in class
who likes to question and debate.
I did not feel the styles used in
LTD were able to draw on any
contribution I could make. Once I
took control of my own learning and
disengaged from teaching in LTD
I feel my performance improved
significantly ... LTD did not create
a learning environment that could
then effectively expand and apply
...and develop our critical thinking.
It is not helpful to be asked to
prepare and deliver a presentation
... that is neither assessed nor
evaluated by the lecturer ... I did
experience learning and gained a
good pass mark.
87
 Table 2.  (Continued)
88

Student Response to student
concerns
H effective had a quicker
means to execute it
been found ... Felt very
disappointed that feedback
was not received and acted
upon in a positive manner.
K Issues that were raised
overshadowed the need for
learning and did not create
a comfortable learning
environment.
B Not being listened to
infuriates those taking part
and makes them feel that
they have wasted their
time.
Tutor style/tutor relationship Lack of clarity Overall reflections
resentment, anger and acceptance.
Having raised genuine concerns
regarding semester 2 ... our lecturer
failed to appreciate that our needs
were different from those of the full-
time group.
Although the self-led sessions I felt I hadn’t fully learned the The 1st semester session didn’t
weren’t my preferred way of aspect that I was trying to enhance my learning and what I
learning, it was much more successful inform the other students of ... learnt regarding each of the topics
than in the first semester. After our Our lecturer appeared ...‘wishy- was learnt during my own personal
presentations and exercises our washy’, which didn’t help me revision sessions.
lecturer re-capped on the session because I needed to be confident
to ensure we had met our learning about what I was going to do and
objectives and understood what we have clarity and direction.
were meant to have learned.
There was animosity from some Worried about how much we I feel that the unit itself and the
teachers about changing the approach were learning. learning from it was good.
to fit the groups. It was only through
the students ‘rebelling’ against the
teaching style that the valuable time
we have was used more wisely ...
once feedback was noted and the
style was amended the feelings and

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

M Angry that the situation
was not addressed sooner
and more head on.
emotions about this subsided and the
students were able to concentrate on
preparing for exams.
Hostile approach and confrontational
approach to start ... felt upset that
after having a good relationship with
all the lecturers ... one of them was
now being hostile ... changed over time
when a different lecturer took over.
Did not feel confident about
my revision and that I had the
information and guidance through
the year ... confusion and lack
of clarity manifested during the
exam and for the first time in my
I was successful in this unit and
exceeded my own expectations but
I don’t feel this was due to how the
unit was delivered.
Management Learning 43(1)

life I nearly walked out.

Gilmore and Anderson 89

mode but that some found the anxieties it came to generate too much to bear. Possible interpreta-
tions of our data might be that a change in pedagogy (any change) might evoke apprehension. The
data we gathered do indicate that concerns about the use of experiential learning were expressed at
the early stage of the process but these concerns focused on the impact that the new approach might
have on examination performance, particularly in relation to a lack of notes and not knowing the
kinds of right answers to get good marks because not enough might be concretely known about the
subject. Therefore, although some unease about a change of pedagogy was evident from the start
of the module, the data indicate that it was the anticipation of the looming summative assessment
that triggered heightened expressions of anxiety in relation to the experiential pedagogy.
As noted by Le Doux (1998), anxiety is an emotion that might be felt and expressed as a brood-
ing fear of what might happen. This may be interpreted within a psychoanalytic frame as a sense
of ‘danger to the self’ arising from internal, instinctual sources as well as the external world
(Freud, 1926) with those experiencing this emotion potentially linking these feelings to other,
earlier experiences of a fearful event (like examinations) which have become lodged in the uncon-
scious and thus have the ability to exert a long-term influence (Antonocopoulou and Gabriel,
2001). It is also more likely to be present when individuals, groups or organizations experience
change. The need for organizations to contain anxieties experienced at the primitive, personal or
work level is often at odds with the demands for change of an institution or a teaching team.
Should that requirement for containment fail to be recognized, as it often is, then even the best-
intentioned changes can become highly problematic because they dismantle the structures (such
as lectures and didactic pedagogy) which were erected in the first instance to defend against anxi-
ety (Obholzer and Roberts, 1994).
Our study highlights how, in spite of evidence of some support for experiential learning,
students increasingly articulated frustration with the approach and a preference for a pedagogic
approach that they felt would prepare them most clearly and effectively for the examination.
The desire to return to traditional methods was very strongly articulated and can be interpreted
as a phantasy of an escape from anxiety (Salzberger-Wittenberg et al., 1983). Additionally, our
article also illuminates how the potential benefits of being prepared for work roles and situa-
tions requiring a deep understanding of LTD issues were set aside by students as the more
immediate and pressing requirement to demonstrate sufficient expert knowledge to pass the
exam came to the fore, exacerbated by the relationship between accredited course success and
professional career potential.
The tensions described remained a constant feature of the module from the mid-point onwards.
Where tutors were perceived as being willing and able to adapt their pedagogic approach to take
account of student concerns, the levels of anxiety were diminished (but not expunged). However,
anger and frustration increased where students felt their tutor had not been able or willing to change
the approach, something that became perceived as a collective failure by the teaching team to rec-
ognize, acknowledge and act on anxieties when they were expressed. The ways by which these
anxieties were expressed by more disaffected students may be understood through the psychoana-
lytic concept of projective identification (Klein, 1946), a mental mechanism that may be used in
such situations whereby we try to get rid of the part of the personality which causes anxiety and
conflict. The mechanism of projective identification does not simply operate in phantasy but can
result in modes of behaviour and action (Bion, 1959). These impacts can be positive but, as anxie-
ties build, it is more likely that what is projected may be negative feelings that seem overwhelming
such as helplessness, confusion, panic, guilt or depression; all of which featured in our data from
the mid- and end points of the module.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

90 Management Learning 43(1)

Here it is possible to suggest that the behaviour and perceptions of the students at this stage
might be the result of group development processes (Bion, 1962; Tuckman, 1965) such that pent
up anxiety from a ‘confictual stage’ was projected onto the tutors and/or the experience-based
learning pedagogy. We acknowledge this point but highlight that our students were working with
colleagues with whom they had developed group relationships in the first year of their course, prior
to embarking on the LTD module. In addition, although many of our students found the experience
of anxiety to be threatening, for others it was strengthening, particularly where there was a corre-
sponding sense of ‘good enough’ support from the teaching and learning environment and espe-
cially from the tutors (Abram, 2007: 173). Gregory and Jones (2009) offer a typology of different
tutor orientations towards student groups ranging from ‘distancing’, ‘adapting’, ‘clarifying’ and
‘relating’ that is helpful in understanding the development of different approaches by members of
the tutorial team at the mid-point (Anderson and Gilmore, 2010) and our data indicate that the
provision of a predictable continuity of care and support as well as a degree of adaptation towards,
and clarifying of, student needs enabled some tutors and some students to make contact with the
teaching and learning setting creatively (Winnicott, 1960). In this way, in addition to ‘learning
inaction’ we also witnessed ‘learning-in-action’ occurring with some individuals who were able to
use their peers and tutor(s) for learning: working through conflicts, uncertainties and challenges
and anxiety (Vince, 2008: 100).
In our discussion we have been careful to consider competing explanations of the learning proc-
esses we have outlined and another potential explanation is that the challenges arose as a result of
poor module design, inappropriate tutor delivery or a combination of the two. During the post
module evaluation these issues were extensively considered. Changes have subsequently been
made to the sequencing of topics within the module and peer support processes have also been
established for tutors as well as students. However, the contradiction involved in offering an HRD
module that does not include some form of experiential learning practice, even in an accredited
context, suggests that the fundamental module design was appropriate. Vince (2010) highlights the
problematic issue of student perception of tutor intentions with a non-didactic pedagogy and in our
case, although productive relationships between one student group and one of their tutors did break
down, the data from students in smaller groups and in their individual questionnaire responses
indicate a far from simple characterization of tutor quality and different (and sometimes contradic-
tory) ascriptions are apparent in the data from different periods of the academic year.
Therefore, in this article, we argue that psychodynamic concepts are appropriate and helpful
ways of understanding the challenges and unconscious resistances to learning from experience and
the discomfort that may be involved in experience-based settings where professional accreditation
is also required. Our study has highlighted the extent to which classrooms (like organizations) are
emotional places for both students and tutors. Tutors, who were enlivened and invigorated by the
experience-based pedagogic approach and for whom assessment processes reflected comfortable
positions of power and knowledge authority, were unaware of the emotional consequences of
the pedagogic approach they were facilitating. They lacked the awareness to hear or recognize the
anxieties, tending to try to neutralize emotion and to evade it. This served to exacerbate an already
difficult situation where students were feeling increasingly anxious and powerless and, for most
(but not all) of the students, this served to inhibit learning rather than to enable it. As the end of the
year approached tutors came to feel increasingly uncomfortable, many of us felt uncertain and
vulnerable for much of the time. However, in a higher education environment dominated by a tacit
acceptance of the need to neutralize or suppress emotions (Levine, 2002; Vince, 2010) we, like our
students, had no clear way to surface, handle or hold such feelings.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 91

Conclusions
This article highlights the anxiety that may be involved in learning and the particular challenges
posed by an experiential pedagogy when applied in a professionally accredited education context. It
addresses two central questions: first, how did student and tutor expectations and responses to the
experience-based learning process change over the year-long duration of the module? Second, what
emotions were evident as the programme went on and what effect did they have on learning?
In relation to the first of our questions, our article illuminates the changing landscape of expec-
tations of the students and tutors over the duration of an academic year. In particular it highlights
the effects of summative assessment processes and the ways that these can be consequential for
expectations, particularly in a professionally accredited context where substantial emphasis is
placed upon the assessment of knowledge acquisition and its deployment. Our article considers a
situation where these challenges were also linked with an ongoing experience-based learning proc-
ess that required students to seek out, engage with, probe and digest experiences that might then
provide the foundations of knowing (Bion, 1962; Raab, 1997). In this context our study demon-
strates how, over time, the frustration and disappointment that can result from the expectations
associated with learning through experience may exacerbate students’ feelings of the loss of a
sense of clarity of knowledge acquisition associated with familiar, didactive pedagogic approaches
and their assessment. In our case, as the year progressed expectations changed profoundly and the
impact of this was differently experienced. We found that some students were able to tolerate anxi-
eties about not knowing until a meaningful pattern emerged and sense making relating to the learn-
ing, training and development subject area and its wider context was achieved. Most students,
however, whilst acknowledging the sound basis in using an experience-based approach for learn-
ing about learning and development, found the process to be too challenging and after the mid-
point of the academic year, sought to return to didactive approaches which were arguably associated
as being more suited to examination navigation and success. In practical terms our study draws
attention to the need for careful and intentional tutor responsiveness to changing student expecta-
tions. In our case tutors remained committed to the experiential methodology throughout the year
(in contrast to many of our students) but were unsure of the most appropriate method to flex the
way the experience-based approach was enacted in response to the changing expectations of stu-
dents. A clear implication for practice in similar situations is the requirement for an ongoing, sup-
portive and reflective discussion space to enable members of teaching teams in similar circumstances
to articulate pressure points and take forward an appropriate response to changing expectations that
does not lead inexorably to the abandonment of experiential learning with the consequent loss of
learning opportunities for both learners and teachers.
Our second question relates to the effect of these emotions on learning in experienced-based
learning and professional accreditation contexts. We show how the emotional features of learn-
ing can provide the basis for profound and enduring development at both a group and an indi-
vidual level. Indeed, without some emotional experiences individuals are unlikely to move
beyond a superficial level of knowledge acquisition. However, our article illustrates a feature
often overlooked in prescriptive approaches to pedagogic development: not all learning is pro-
ductive; conflicts and collaborations arise from attempts to organize and facilitate learning,
created from and reinforced by emotions expressed both individually and collectively (Vince
and Salem, 2004). Whilst we witnessed learning-in-action occurring we also witnessed learning
inaction with inaction being mobilized through anxieties and antagonisms that were sometimes
inadequately worked through or held (Vince, 2008). Our study illustrates the inhibiting effect
of tensions caused when the formation of occupational and professional identity associated

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

92 Management Learning 43(1)

with an accredited programme is perceived to be based upon the mastery and memorization of
knowledge as information rather than the less certain and less defined methods witnessed in
experiential learning. Those involved in learning and teaching, therefore need to be alert to the
frustrations for students that may be caused by this tension as it can lead to increasingly urgent
demands for a more short-term, tangible learning process perceived as being helpful in passing
examinations (Bradley, 2005) to the detriment of the achievement of learning processes that
foster critical individual and collective reflection incorporating growth, development and the
surfacing of tacit understanding. The emotional responses provoked by these learning-assessment-
professional accreditation tensions require an appropriately skilled helper (Bion, 1959;
Winnicott, 1965). Where these feelings and anxieties can be received by another and under-
stood, an opportunity can be provided for growth and development. Our article, therefore,
highlights the underestimated importance of the learning environment and specifically the fig-
ure of the tutor in such situations (Salzberger-Wittenberg et al., 1983; Winnicott, 1989). The
need for such responses raises significant challenges for tutors, for which they are rarely pre-
pared (James and Arroba, 2005). In our case we observed that more than one of the tutors, from
time to time, were overwhelmed by the negative emotions expressed and projected by students.
Although all members of the teaching team were confident in their subject and were experi-
enced in teaching in higher education, their professional formation left them mostly unprepared
to identify, hold and enable students to work through intense feelings and experiences that arose
as the module progressed.
There are important implications for those engaged in learning and teaching in a professionally
accredited context. First, there is a need for an acknowledgement and understanding of the emo-
tional consequences for students and tutors of bringing together dialogic and experiential learning
methods (appropriate to management and professional domains) with the expert knowledge
requirements of professional bodies. A more skilled reading of the emotionality of the classroom
learning environment by those involved in experiential learning in higher education is required if
improved levels of self-insight by both students and tutors is to be achieved, so that ego defensive
behaviour by both parties is reduced and the production of anxiety is used as an opportunity for
learning and working it through. Second, if the anxiety and emotions associated with experiential
learning are to stimulate meaningful and reflexive outcomes a more consistent holding environ-
ment is necessary to enable anxieties arising from experience-based learning and expert knowledge
demands to be appropriately held.
In the areas of management and professional education both experiential learning and the
requirement for additional accreditation are becoming increasingly prominent, particularly for
post-experience student programmes. Although the higher education learning environment tends to
see emotion as something to control, ignore or suppress in order to encourage rational argument
and objective thought our article highlights the emotional consequences that may result. A clear
implication of our analysis is the requirement for those involved in professionally accredited
domains, and those involved in the professional formation of educators, to recognize and attend to
the skills required by tutors to undertake this emotionally laden work, something that is currently
under-acknowledged and under-researched.

Funding
The authors acknowledge with thanks the support of a research honorarium awarded by the University Forum
for HRD (UFHRD) and the HEA Business, Management, Accountancy and Finance (BMAF) subject centre
associated with the project discussed in this article.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 93

References
Abram J (2007) The Language of Winnicott: A Dictionary of Winnicott’s Use of Words. London: Karnac.
Ahmad Y and Broussine M (2008) Pedagogic implications of anxiety and loss of agency in public services
managers and leaders. International Journal of Public Sector Management 21(4): 340–352.
Anderson V and Gilmore S (2010) Learning, experienced emotions, relationships and innovation in HRD.
Journal of European Industrial Training 34 (8/9): 753–771.
Antonocopoulou EP and Gabriel Y (2001) Emotion, learning and organizational change: Towards an integra-
tion of psychoanalytic and other perspectives. Journal of Organizational Change Management 14(5):
436–451.
Baker AC, Jensen PJ and Kolb DA (2005) Conversation as experiential learning. Management Learning
36(4): 411–427.
Barnett R and Coate K (2005) Engaging the Curriculum in Higher Education. Buckingham: SHRE and Open
University Press.
Bion WR (1959) Attacks on linking. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 40: 308–315.
Bion, WR (1962) Learning from Experience. London: Karnac.
Boud D and Falchicov N (2006) Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education 31(4): 399–413.
Boud D and Walker D (1999) Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context. Studies
in Higher Education 23(2): 191–206.
Boud D, Keogh R and Walker D (eds) (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience Into Learning. London: Kogan
Page.
Boud D, Rooney D and Solomon N (2009) Talking up learning at work: Cautionary tales in co-opting every-
day life. International Journal of Lifelong Education 28(3): 323–334.
Bradley B (2005) Psychology and Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron KS, Dutton JE and Quinn RE (2003) Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New
Discipline. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (2010a) HR’s Profession Map. Available at: http://www.
cipd.co.uk/hr-profession-map/about.htm.
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (2010b) About the CIPD. Available at: http://www.cipd.
co.uk/about?area=hs.
Cheetham G and Chivers G (2001) How professionals learn in practice: An investigation of informal learning
amongst people working in professions. Journal of European Industrial Training 25(5): 248–292.
Coghlan D (2007) Insider action research: Opportunities and challenges. Management Research News 30(5):
335–343.
Elliott C (2008) Emancipating assessment: Assessment assumptions and critical alternatives in an experience-
based programme. Management Learning 39(3): 271–293.
French RB (1997) The Teacher as container of anxiety: Psychoanalysis and the role of the teacher. Journal of
Management Education 21(4): 483–495.
French R and Vince R (1999) Group Relations, Management, and Organization. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Freud S (1926) Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety. SE 20. London: Hogarth.
Gilmore S and Williams S (2007) Conceptualising the ‘Personnel Professional’: Acritical analysis of the
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development’s professional qualification scheme. Personnel Review
36(3): 398–414.
Gregory J and Jones R (2009) Maintaining competence: A grounded theory typology of approaches to teach-
ing in higher education. Higher Education 57 (6): 769–785.
Griffiths DS, Winstanley D and Gabriel Y (2005) Learning shock: The trauma of return to formal learning.
Management Learning 36(3): 275–297.
Haggis T (2004) Meaning, identity and ‘motivation’: Expanding what matters in understanding learning in
higher education? Studies in Higher Education 29(3): 335–352.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

94 Management Learning 43(1)

Huang HB (2010) What is good action research? Why the resurgent interest? Action Research 8(1): 93–109.
James KT and Arroba T (2005) Reading and carrying: aframework for learning about emotion and emotional-
ity in organizational systems as a core aspect of leadership development. Management Learning 36(3):
299–316.
Kayes D (2002) Experiential learning and its critics: Preserving the role of experience in management learn-
ing and education. Academy of Management Learning & Education 1(2): 137–149.
Kember D (2000) Action Learning and Action Research: Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning.
London: Kogan Page.
Kember D and Kwan KP (2000) Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of
good teaching. Instructional Science 28(5): 469–490.
Klein M (1946) Notes on some schizoid mechanisms. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 27: 99–110.
Kuchinke KP (2007) Birds of a feather: The critique of the North American business school and its implica-
tions for educating HRD practitioners. Human Resource Development Review 6(2): 111–126.
Larson MS (1977) The Rise and Fall of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis. London: University of
California Press.
LeDoux J (1998) The Emotional Brain. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Levine DP (2002) Thinking about doing: On learning from experience and the flight from thinking. Human
Relations 55(10): 1251–1268.
Macdonald R (1995) The Sociology of the Professions. London: Sage.
Maclellan E (2004) How convincing is alternative assessment for use in higher education? Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education 29(3): 311–321.
Miettinen R (1998) About the legacy of experiential learning. Lifelong Learning in Europe 3(3): 165–171.
Moore S and Kuol N (2007) Matters of the heart: Exploring the emotional dimensions of educational expe-
rience in recollected accounts of excellent teaching. International Journal for Academic Development
12(2): 87–98.
Obholzer A and Roberts VZ (1994) The Unconscious at Work. London: Routledge.
Prosser M, Ramsden P and Trigwell K (2003) Dissonance in experience of teaching and its relationship to the
quality of student learning. Studies in Higher Education 28(1): 37–48.
Raab N (1997) Becoming an expert in not knowing: Reframing teacher as consultant. Management Learning
28(2): 161–175.
Revans R (1971) Developing Effective Managers: A New Approach to Business Education. Harlow: Longman.
Reynolds M (1999) Critical reflection and management education: Rehabilitating less hierarchical approaches.
Journal of Management Education 23(5): 537–553.
Reynolds M (2009) Wild frontiers: Reflections on experiential learning. Management Learning 40(4): 387–392.
Rigg C and Trehan K (2004) Reflections on learning with critical action learning. Action Learning Research
and Practice 1(2): 151–167.
Rigg C and Trehan K (2008) Critical reflection in the workplace: Is it just too difficult? Journal of European
Industrial Training 32(5): 374–384.
Salzberger-Wittenberg I, Williams G and Osborne E (1983) The Emotional Experience of Teaching and
Learning. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Schön D (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Temple Smith.
Senge PM, Kleiner A, Ross R, Roth G and Smith B (1999) The Dance of Change. New York: Doubleday.
Stein M (2004) Theories of experiential learning and the unconscious. In: Miller EJ, Gould LJ, Stapley L,
Stein M (eds) Experiential Learning in Organizations: Applications of the Tavistock Group. London:
Karnac, 19–36.
Struyven K, Dochy F and Janssens S(2005) Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher
education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30 (4): 331–347.
Tuckman BW (1965) Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 63(6): 384–399.
Valentin C (2007) How can i teach critical management in this place? In Rigg C, Stewart J, Trehan K (eds)
Critical Human Resource Development: Beyond Orthodoxy. Harlow: FT Prentice Hall, 169–196.
Vince R (1998) Behind and beyond Kolb’s learning cycle. Journal of Management Education 22(3): 304–319.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015

Gilmore and Anderson 95

Vince R (2001) Power and emotion in organizational learning. Human Relations 54(10): 1325–1351.
Vince R (2002) Organizing reflection. Management Learning 33(1): 63–78.
Vince R (2008) Learning-in-action and learning inaction: Advancing the theory and practice of critical action
learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice 5(2): 93–104.
Vince R (2010) Anxiety, politics and critical management education. British Journal of Management 21
(Supplement s1): s26–s39.
Vince R and Reynolds M (2004) Critical management education and action-based learning: Synergies and
contradictions. Academy of Management Learning and Education 3(4): 442–458.
Vince R and Saleem T (2004) The impact of caution and blame on organizational learning. Management
Learning 35(2): 131–152.
Wang GG and Sun JY (2009) Clarifying the boundaries of human resource development. Human Resource
Development International 12(1): 93–103.
Wilson JP and Beard C (2003) The learning combination lock - an experiential approach to learning design.
Journal of European Industrial Training 27(2): 88–97.
Winnicott DW (1960) The theory of the parent-infant relationship. International Journal of Psychoanalysis
41: 585–595.
Winnicott DW (1965) The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment: Studies in the Theory
of Emotional Development. London: Hogarth.
Winnicott DW (1989) Holding and Interpretation: Fragment of an Analysis. London: Karnac.
Yorke M (2003) Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of
pedagogic practice. Higher Education 45(4): 477–501.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Ulster Library on May 13, 2015