I furthered my research of learning cycles by looking at ones that were a little more complex, that is to say, they have more stages to them. In practicality they didn't go much higher than Kolb's four-stage cycle without becoming overburdened with information, or in many cases the programs had been specifically developed for learning an individual concept or procedure: this is seen most often in computer programming and coding where a very different understanding and mindset is needed to achieve the required results.
What appeared most prevalent was a variety of five and six-stage models that included in their cycles a certain level of judgement as to the success of previous experience. Priest & Gass (1997) actually developed a six-stage model called 'The Experiential Learning and Judgement Paradigm' which consisted of a cycle that went like this;
Experience→Induce→Generalise→Deduce→Apply→Evaluate
I like this set-up, as it encourages a lot of outside thought. Some may consider it too 'scientific' or too strict in how an experience might be approached. I find, however, that the inclusion of Inducement and therefore the use of other knowledge that has been gained in order to refine a skill or technique fills a big hole that always disgruntled me when discussing Kolb's four-stage approach. Why shouldn't an artist have such a methodical approach that involves other knowledges and experiences that they have had to develop a general understanding of a recent experience that they can subsequently refine using Deduction in order to progress their understanding of their latest work. If anything, this approach is the closest thing to the Associated Learning idea I've considered before. Who's to say that a third party could not be included in order to provide an objective perspective at stages 2, possibly 3 and certainly 4? In fact, when considered in light of this Paradigm, it is possible to see any conversation with a tutor, mentor or teacher as a practical application of these stages as progressive guidance allows us to consider what we do in a more panoramic fashion before bringing it back down and form it into information we further use.
All that being said, one of the models that caught my eye and that I thought offered the most comprehensive idea of an ELC, insofar as they can be universally applied, was this one by Exeter (2001). It is simply a variation on Kolb's original theory but with the inclusion of a 'Transfer of Learning' stage. It is still only four stages as the 'Transfer of Learning' is added outside of the cycle itself – and that is what works for me. I found Kolb's design inhibitive and exclusive of a more integrated idea of learning.
As you can see, the 'Transfer of Learning' allows for the potential of applying anything learnt from any given experience into another field, be it directly affiliated or only mildly associated. This is an important potential for any artist; a dancer does not learn plie exercises independently of learning to jette – one informs the other. Without these connections a fluid understanding of any artistic medium would be impossible.