The Changing Landscape of Adult Learning Key Points Part 1
The Changing Landscape of Adult Learning Key Points Part 1


Welcome to our presentation on Merriam
and Grace’s part four Changing Landscape of Adult Learning. This presentation was
created by Comfort, Katie and Edison for EDD 810 BL Communication in Adult
Learning Settings. Part 4 encompasses two different sections about adult learning.
The first three chapters cover “About Learning” and discuss The Nature of
Reflection, Social Learning and Transformative Learning. The second three
chapters cover some “Aspects of Learning” to consider and discuss The Role of
Emotions, Mass Media and Learning and Non-Western Perspectives on Learning and
Knowing. Key points from chapter 20 Reflection Disempowered by Michael
Newman. Newman points out that over the past 20 years and I quote page 315
“Reflection has been accorded an increasingly important place in adult
learning.” and educators incorporate teaching
learning to reflect as part of their adult education. Educators teach learners
to reflect on experiences in a variety of ways including journaling and small
group work. Historically, there have been different theories around reflection.
Traditionally, liberal educators had you think about what was read or lectured
and these thoughts were supposed to increase your understanding in a one
time discrete activity. No action was taken from this time to ponder or think
about your learning. As the 1960s were approaching, reflection was
“injected with the charge of high emotion from the field of psychotherapy exponential techniques were encouraged
an emotional response. In the 70’s and 80’s, Paulo Freire, politicized reflection.
“Reflection and action are in praxis” and are inseparable.
“Freire was working with people whose consciousness he perceived as
naive or constructed by others who lived in conditions of oppression. Praxis
was a process of action reflection by which you began liberating themselves from the
false consciousness and from their oppression.”
In contrast, Schon’s no longer contends a connection between reflection and action
and focuses on actions that allow professionals to “think on their
feet.” Whereby, behavior is linked to identifying the judgments and
thought process in creating roles from the reflection. Newman continues on to
discuss Boud, Keogh and Walker’s further separation from action. Experience
comes first, than the reflective process, then the outcomes in chronological order
in discrete periods of time” On page 318, the last paragraph
in our text,”In Freire, reflection is part of a political process, part of
learning for liberation. In Schon, reflection has a political color too in
that it is presented as a mode of monitoring practice that will help the
practitioner work more effectively within the corporate professional and
political structures of a capitalist culture. In Boud, Keogh, and Walker
reflection is an aid to experiential learning with the political context of
the learning and the social condition of the learners unspecified.” Peter
Jarvis introduces the concept of the fluidity of reflection and how reasoning
and reflecting intertwine. Hagar goes on to include the critical thinking that
can come from reflection. We no longer think reflection is pondering but
incorporates aspects of critical thinking, reasoning, questioning, analyzing
problems and exercising judgment. The chapter concludes with Harts phenomena
that has current American training have gut the traditional liberal education.
Hart has given a name to the process at the end of our chapter on page 320 “turning the activities of the intellect into utilitarian
competencies. She notes that, in the training of people for business careers
in recent years in the United States, ‘liberal learning skills’
such as questioning analyzing problems and exercising judgment have been
separated out and taught without reference to their traditional liberal
arts content or context. It is a phenomenon she describes as ‘the gutting
of liberal education.’ Key points in chapter 21 A Theory in Progress
Patricia Cranton. Cranton summarizes the theories and issues around Mezirow’s
Theory of Transformative Learning, including a discussion of the early
critics of Mezirow’s theories and the directions in which transformative
learning theory are grouped. Cranton appreciates Dirkx’s four lens approach to
understanding this theory and they are found on page 321 and I quote “Dirkx’s four
lens approach to understanding the directions in which transformative
learning theory has moved. One lens has Feire’s 1970 perspective as its
foundation, that is transformative learning can be seen as having
liberation from oppression as its goal and social justice as its orientation.
The second lens is Mezirow (2000) concentration on rational thought and
reflection, as central to a process of responding to a disorienting dilemma,
questioning or revisiting assumptions, engaging in discourse and acting on a
new perspective. The third lens is a developmental approach to transformative
learning (Daloz, 1999). Here the process is intuitive, holistic and contextually
based, it is a transitional journey that takes place within a social environment.
“And finally, the fourth lens through which transformative learning can be
viewed, is one in which learning is linked to spirituality. Dirkx’s (2001a,
2001b, Tisdell and Tolliver 2001). Dirkx”s describes transformative learning as soul work.
Other writers link it to a specific practice such as Buddhist meditation and
yoga” Cranton goes on to talk about the directions of transformative
learning they are: Connected Knowing, Social Change, Groups and Organizations,
Ecological View, and Extrarational Approach. Connected Knowing the question
is whether “learning is connected and relational or independent and
autonomous.” Traditional Learning Theory focuses on
how an individual person learns. For instance, historically aptitude and
intelligence tests have always focused on the individual. Western culture
emphasizes the individual what do you do when people are working in groups. As
theorists, Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake (1996) introduced multiple intelligences,
interpersonal intelligence for example, and Goleman (1998), Emotional Intelligence, thus a shift in our collective perspective. Cranton goes on to discuss
feminist writers and theorists interested in gender differences in learning and emphasizing relational or connected learning. They argue that women
learn definitely through relationships with others via nurturing and caring and
by connecting with each other (Belenky and Stanton, 2000). Caution is encouraged when
describing women’s learning different than men, which could have serious implications for women. Belenki and Stanton, also identify six developmental
stages of knowing for women, silenced, received knowers, subjective knowers,
separate knowers, and connected knowers. Connected Knowers are growth mindset,
looking for strengths “the more connected knowers
disagree with another person, the harder they will try to understand
how that person could imagine such a thing,
using empathy, imagination and storytelling as tools for entering into
another’s frame of mind.” An example of transformative learning based
on connected knowing is when a doctoral cohort, through relationships and
collaboration, lead to the transformation of a group. Social Change. Freire and
Habermas, have a central goal of social change.
Unlike Mezirow “clearly believes that individual transformation precedes
social transformation.” Friere leads the charge in transformative learning
based on social change. One goal of social change is
transformative learning is for educators to support learners and indentifying
their own ideologies how they acquire their ideologies and how to use social
change to shift their or solidify their beliefs. Groups and
organizations. Yorks and Marsick focus transformation via collaboration and
action learning among peers. This group approach allows teams to transform
together through action research and reflection. Critics of transformation via
groups and organization is contrasted with the hope that groups can transform
together as well as individually. Ecological View- O’Sullivan presents a
unique view of transformative theory, where people are part of a whole
and this interconnected web within the world. Simultaneously, a similar approach
to transformative theory is being researched in Sweden. Extrarational
Approach- This approach involves a level of personal individuation, which involves
an individual looking inward, at how we have learned ways of our families,
communities and cultures and transforming both inside and out, how
we interact in groups. The chapter concludes with ongoing research and
discusses the International Conference of Transformative Learning and the
Journal of Transformative Education and how these have provided an avenue for
accessible research on Transformative Learning. Researchers and theorists have
developed themes of Transformative Learning and additional areas of future
research. In conclusion, Transformative Learning Theory is a theory in progress. Chapter 22 key points on Social Learning
for/in Adult Education: A Discursive Review of What it Means to be Learning
to be Social by kim Naomi and Arthur Wilson. Social Learning isn’t a new
concept. The chapter talks about Social Learning and its importance in
understanding relationships. Social Learning also is viewed as a problem in
those relationships “calls for solutions.” “Social Learning is an important
perspective for understanding and problematizing relationships between
learning as a social process and social context and adult learning.”
Social Learning defined “A particular tradition or more like a
discourse of learning that is framed by the relation of power that constitutes
its formation.” The relationships being referred to is
between learning as a social process and social context in adult learning. The
chapter also reveals that even with a wide range of literature available to
address the social aspects and circumstances that adults learn, there is
still very limited conceptual framework to clarify this. Consequently
reproduction and individualism has been promoted. Several educationists have
shed light on the social learning as a social phenomenon
is constituted by social behavior. experiences activity, mediation,
personality, and context. Thus social learning is not a particularly tradition
but more of a discourse that is framed by relations of power and knowledge.
Through mapping the discourse of “Social Learning,” Niewolney and Wilson outline
two discursive positions. In conclusion, the authors are hopeful this literature
review will shed light on the social on social learning and the need for
additional in-depth research of the topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *