Questions After Reading “Transformative Learning Theory,” by Edward W. Taylor, in Third Update on Adult Learning Theory

Questions After Reading “Transformative Learning Theory,” by Edward W. Taylor, in Third Update on Adult Learning Theory

     My understanding of transformative language is still very sketchy. It will take more reading, more discussion, and more time before I can create a three-dimensional concept of it that I can truly own. As I go down that path, and while reading Edward Taylor’s chapter entitled “Transformative Learning Theory” in Third Update on Adult Learning Theory, I have been chewing on a couple of very basic questions.

     The first is to question why transformative learning is “uniquely adult” (5). One of its key premises (as I vaguely understand it now) is that learning is a process of a revising frames of reference to come to a new understanding (perspective transformation). Why wouldn’t a child come to the learning experience with well-formed frames of reference, based as they might be on more basic needs and drives and on comparatively little life experience, and why wouldn’t that learning experience challenge and transform the child’s understanding of the world just as it does an adult’s. Doesn’t the child engage in some kind of critical experience as he or she undergoes a shift in learning? My own observation is that even small children question. Yes, the process for a child may be mostly unconscious, but they act on it, too. Is consciousness the single most important feature of transformative learning--does the adult have to be clearly conscious of how their understanding is changing? And if so, what does it mean for that adult to be “conscious”—does he or she have to be able to articulate it in words? To me, that seems to be the same verbal bias that seems to prevail in all scholarship, no matter the subject. Does transformative learning embrace alternative expressions?

     My second big question has to do with the connection between the transformative learning process and particular learning content. Is transformative learning a kind of “meta” experience occurring on top of, and possibly separate from, information that a person might be or want to be learning, a lens with which to look at the process? I was taken aback to read at the end of Taylor’s chapter that “there is little known about the impact of fostering transformative learning on learner outcomes (grades, test scores).” (13) Really? I would never suggest that all learning can be judged by tests or grades. But how can there have been decades of research and, I assume, practice using transformative educational philosophy without any curiosity about whether or not adults are actually learning more or better because of it? Is it transformation for transformation’s sake? Yes, life is constant change and we all want to understand more about our lives and be better at what we do, but doesn’t research have some responsibility to assess whether that’s actually happening with this approach to learning?

   I am hoping that reading some of the original texts on this subject and discussing it more in class will help answer some of my questions.

Comments on Selected Passages from "Adult Learners in Focus 2008"

“Over 26 million adults in the U.S. currently have no high school diploma, more than 3 million have not attended college and are earning less than a living wage, and over 8 million have not attended college and speak little or no English.” (7)

     The millions of adults in America who have no high school diploma, who have no college and are earning less than a  minimum wage, and those who speak little or no English gives some idea of the enormous pool of people who likely have untapped skills. These are the people who might be reached by adult education, if the issues that have blocked their access to it in the past are identified and addressed. Providing them with functional skills and a living wage would benefit them and the society as a whole.

     My biggest question to all of these issues: how did we as a society allow education to drift so far from the needs of individuals and the work force itself, and how fast can we change it.

“The good news is that adults are making up an ever larger share of the total enrollment in postsecondary institutions. By 2004, adults made up approximately 43 percent of total enrollment at community colleges (includes full-time and part-time).” (7)

Response:

     This is indeed good news. Adults who have identified their need for higher educational achievement or for better skills are already striving toward a better life. Though the obstacles are many (time, money, accessibility), by the very act of enrollment they become more open to new experiences, to critical reflection, and to transformative learning. And if they have children in their lives, they show them, too, that education is worth struggling for.

“Nontraditional students—for example,  those who have  delayed enrollment in postsecondary education, work full-time while enrolled, or have dependents other than a spouse—were more likely than traditional students both to participate in distance education and to be in programs available entirely through distance education” (8)

Response:

    Technology is providing new and unprecedented opportunities for adults to pursue higher educational achievement. Because distance (online) courses can be pursued on a flexible schedule in one’s own home or place of business, they may help overcome some of the obstacles non-traditional students face. MOOC’s (Massive Open Online Courses) are in their infancy, and may reach more people as these programs become better researched and more effective and as computer literacy and computer teleconferencing spread. Where possible, however, even MOOC’s should also include a social component, either face-to-face or collaborative work through the technology, as the interpersonal and social dimension adds an important dimension to learning. 

“States vary significantly in their success in moving students through this traditional educational pipeline. . . . But reliance on and attention to the traditional educational pipeline alone will not be enough.” (22)

Response:

      According to the report, only nine states are on track to meet the benchmark for international competitiveness:  55 percent of adults with college degrees. “Thirty-two states will be unable to reach a level of international competitiveness even if they could match the best state performance with traditional college-age students at each stage of the educational pipeline” (p.23). Therefore, that international benchmark can only be met by educating adults. The conclusion is that states must accept that they develop policies that educate adults—by helping them complete high school or to finish college if they’ve started. States should collaborate and cooperate in collecting and sharing data and best-practices strategies. Regional/state differences in the kinds of skills workers need will likely diminish as jobs are increasingly automated, computerized, and designed to require high-order skills.

“The issue of declining numbers of high school graduates, projected in a recent study by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (208), is yet another reason why a focus on the education of younger populations will not be sufficient.” (23)

AND

“.  .  . 13.3 percent of the adult population (26,455,554 individuals) . . . never completed high school. Many of these adults may face basic literacy challenges as well. One way to help this population is to address skills shortfalls through Adult Basic Education (ABE), gain a high school credential by completing a GED, then enter postsecondary study.” (24)

Response: 

         The decline in high school graduation statistics is perhaps the most troubling statistic. Adults who don’t finish high school are much less likely to pursue education in the future. Addressing the core issues at the heart of this statistic is vital—poverty, unsafe schools, lack of guidance at school, educational programs that don’t connect to students’ lives. But re-thinking what skills are important and how to deliver them is also vital.  The report suggests multiple paths and on-and-off ramps, interconnected networks of opportunities among institutions (military, business, school), education that is career-oriented...plus more apprenticeships, and financial aid.

My Quote: A second driver of economic vitality has been the nation’s ability to replace old, nonproductive industries with new ones through the process of “creative destruction.” But doing this requires a different kind of worker—flexible and adaptable, with an array of higher-order competencies and information-gathering skills that support rapid retraining. High wage, fast growth occupations require higher levels of education. (19)

                As the report goes on to say, the US economy is transitioning from an old corporate mass-production model to a new entrepreneurial one. This earlier system was established for a work force that required a large percentage of manual laborers, and few with higher order skills. The jobs of the future will require educating a work force that can be creative, can solve problems in a variety of ways, and can learn and work socially, in collaborative groups. We have to find new ways of assessing these strengths as well. And we have to embrace new technologies at every step. (See Sir Ken Robinson address “Changing Paradigms” (http:www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCbdS4hSa0s; shorter version here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=youtu.be).

Thoughts on "Brief Guide for Teaching Adult Learners" - 2/11/14

Many of the theories about adult learners that "Brief Guide for Teaching Adult Learners" (Fleming & Garner) details are familiar to me from my children's education. Their elementary school was founded on the principles of John Dewey and on constructivism, where the student is at the center. I watched my children learn through hands-on exercises, self-directed and group projects, and with lots of in-class discussion about what and why they were learning.

Student-centered learning seems to be very respectful of the student, treating him or her as more than a passive child. So it surprised me to read that these notions were so new to adult education. But from the little I have learned so far, the academic field of adult learning itself is fairly new and under-researched. Another reason more progressive notions have taken a while to take hold in adult education is that teachers of adults may tend to use the methods that those students might already be familiar with--the more traditional teacher-centered ones. While group work and non-traditional activities (small group discussion, writing a TV commercial, a poem etc.) may be more lively and engaging in the long run, they may also be off-putting to and devalued by an adult with no experience in them.

While I am familiar with constructivist practices from my children's education, it is new to my own. Reflecting on my own learning, I see that I still enjoy traditional exercises like lectures, power-point presentations, and so on, and that writing mediates my best learning. The traditional methods of my own early education are partly responsible, but it is also likely due to the role writing has always played in my life. So I look forward to the group projects in this class and in my Second Language Learner class as an opportunity to move out of my comfort zone and to learn in a new way.