Find the original Textbook (PDF) in the link below:

CLICK HERE
 Contents

Notes on the authors List of figures List of tables

Preface PART 1 Adult learning 1 Introduction to
adult learning 2 Exploring the world of learning
theory 3 Andragogy: a theory of adult learning 4 The
andragogical process model for learning 5
Andragogy in practice: expanding the usefulness of
the andragogical model PART 2 The backdrop of
learning and teaching theories 6 Theories of learning
7 Theories of teaching 8 Adult learning within human
resource development PART 3 Advancements in
adult learning 9 New perspectives on andragogy 10
Beyond andragogy 11 Information technology and
learning 12 Neuroscience and andragogy PART 4
Practices in adult learning 13 Whole–Part–Whole
Learning Model 14 Facilitating learning 15
Guidelines for using learning contracts 16 Core
Competency Diagnostic and Planning Guide 17
Personal Adult Learning Style inventory 18 Effective
technology-based adult learning PART 5
International and future perspectives on adult
learning 8 19 European perspectives on adult
learning (contributed by John A. Henschke and Mary
Cooper) 20 Andragogy: international history,
meaning, context, and function (contributed by Jost
Reischmann) 21 The future of andragogy
Bibliography Index

Introduction to Adult Learning

When andragogy and the concept that adults and

children learn differently was first introduced in the
United States by Malcolm Knowles in the early
1970s, the idea was groundbreaking and sparked a
great deal of research and controversy. Since the
earliest days, adult educators have debated the
essence of andragogy. Spurred in large part by the
need for a defining theory within the field of adult
education (AE), andragogy has been extensively
analyzed and critiqued. It has been alternately
described as a set of guidelines (Merriam, 1993), a
philosophy (Pratt, 1993), a set of assumptions
(Brookfield, 1986), and a theory (Knowles, 1989b).
The disparity of these positions is indicative of the
complex nature of adult learning. Regardless of what
it is called, “andragogy is an honest attempt to focus
on the learner. In this sense, it does provide an
alternative to the methodology-centered instructional
design perspective” (Feur and Gerber, 1988).
Merriam, in explaining the complexity and present
condition of adult learning theory, offers the
following: Attempts at codifying differences between
adults and children as a set of principles, a model or
even a theory of adult learning have been, and
continue to be, pursued by adult educators.
However, just as there is no single theory that
explains all of human learning, there is no single
theory of adult learning. Instead, we have a number
of frameworks, or models, each of which contributes
something to our understanding of adults as learner.
The best known of these efforts is andragogy.
(Merriam et al., 2007, p. 83) Despite years of
critique, debate, and challenge, the core principles
of adult learning advanced by andragogy have
endured (Davenport and Davenport, 1985; Hartree,
1984; Pratt, 1988). Few adult learning scholars
would disagree with the observation that Knowles’
ideas sparked a revolution in AE and workplace
learning (Feur and Gerber, 1988). Brookfield (1986),
positing a similar view, asserts that andragogy is the
“single most popular idea in the education and
training of adults.” Adult educators, particularly
beginning ones, find these core principles invaluable
in the practical challenge of shaping the learning
process for adults. It is beyond the scope of this
introductory book to address all the dimensions of
the theoretical debate raised in academic circles.
Our position is that andragogy presents core
principles of adult learning that in turn enable those
designing and conducting adult learning to build
more effective learning processes for adults. It is a
transactional model that speaks to the
characteristics of the learning transaction, not to the
esoteric goals and aims of that transaction. Thus,
andragogy is applicable to any adult learning
transaction, from community education to human
resource development (HRD) in organizations. Care
must be taken to avoid confusing core principles of
the adult learning transaction with the goals and
purposes for which the learning event is being
conducted. They are 16 conceptually distinct, though
as a practical matter may at times overlap. Critiques
of andragogy point to missing elements that keep it
from being a defining theory of the discipline of adult
education (Davenport and Davenport, 1985; Grace,
1996; Hartree, 1984), not of adult learning. Grace,
for example, criticizes andragogy for focusing solely
on the individual, and not operating from a critical
social agenda or debating the relationship of AE to
society. This criticism reflects the goals and
purposes of the discipline of AE. Human resource
development in organizations has a different set of
goals and purposes, which andragogy also does not
embrace. Community health educators have yet
another set of goals and purposes that are not
embraced. We see the strength of andragogy as a
set of core adult learning principles that apply to all
adult learning situations. The goals and purposes for
which the learning is offered are a separate issue.
Adult education professionals should develop and
debate models of adult learning separately from
models of the goals and purposes of their respective
fields that foster adult learning. Human resource
development, for example, embraces organizational
performance as one of its core goals; whereas AE
focuses more on individual growth. It is important to
note that these core principles are incomplete in
terms of learning decisions. Figure 1.1 graphically
shows that andragogy is a core set of adult learning
principles. The six principles of andragogy are (1)
the learner’s need to know, (2) self-concept of the
learner, (3) prior experience of the learner, (4)
readiness to learn, (5) orientation to learning, and (6)
motivation to learn. These principles are listed in the
center of the model. As you will see in this and
subsequent chapters, there are a variety of other
factors that affect adult learning in any particular
situation, and may cause adults to behave more or
less closely to the core principles. Shown in the two
outer rings of the model, they include individual
learner and situational differences, and goals and
purposes for learning. Andragogy works best in
practice when it is adapted to fit the uniqueness of
the learners and the learning situation. We see this
not as a weakness of the principles, but as a
strength. Their strength is that these core principles
apply to all adult learning situations, as long as they
are considered in concert with other factors that are
present in the situation. This eighth edition of The
Adult Learner provides a journey from theory to
practice in adult learning. Figure 1.1 provides a
snapshot summary of considerations within the
journey in displaying the six core adult learning
principles surrounded by the context of individual
and situational differences, and the goals and
purposes of learning. The following chapters will
reveal the substance and subtleties of this holistic
model of andragogy in practice. Plan for the Book
The first part of the book, Adult Learning (Chapters
1–5), presents the introduction to the book and adult
learning (Chapters 1 and 2), the andragogical
perspective on adult learning (Chapters 3 and 4),
and the presentation of the andragogy in practice
model (Chapter 5). Part 2, The Backdrop of Learning
and Teaching Theories (Chapters 6–8), devotes
Chapter 6 to exploring the realm of learning theory,
presents theories of teaching in Chapter 7, and adult
17 learning within human resource development in
Chapter 8. Part 3, Advancements in Adult Learning
(Chapters 9–12), extends the boundaries to include
new perspectives on andragogy (Chapter 9), beyond
andragogy (Chapter 10), information technology and
learning (Chapter 11), and neuroscience and
andragogy (Chapter 12). Part 4, Practices in Adult
Learning (Chapters 13–18), covers the Whole–Part–
Whole Learning Model (Chapter 13), facilitating
learning (Chapter 14), guidelines for using learning
contracts (Chapter 15), Core Competency
Diagnostic and Planning Guide (Chapter 16),
Personal Adult Learning Style inventory (Chapter
17), and effective technology-based adult learning
(Chapter 18). Part 5, International and Future
Perspectives on Adult Learning (Chapters 19–21),
looks beyond the boundaries of geography, context,
culture, and time. Specific topics include: European
perspectives on adult learning (Chapter 19),
andragogy: international history, meaning, context,
and function (Chapter 20), and the future of
andragogy (Chapter 21). Figure 1.1 Andragogy in
practice Source: Knowles et al. (1998) 18 Reflection
Questions 1.1 What are your general thoughts on
how humans learn? 1.2 Based on personal
experience, what key factors are related to adult
learning? 1.3 Why is andragogy in practice (Figure
1.1) presented as a holistic learning model? 1.4 If
you understood more about how adults learn, how
would you use this information in your day-to-day
life? 1.5 If you understood more about how adults
learn, how would you use this information in your
work as an educator/teacher/trainer?

Exploring The World of Learning Theory

Introduction While there still remains a

great deal of mystery as to how human
beings learn and the brain functions, we do
know a great deal about this realm.
Throughout history, there have been events
and movements that have punctuated the
knowledge base. Political enlightenment,
world wars, and advance technology are
just a few. Influential scholars and
practitioners have led the way. Why Explore
Learning Theory? This is a good question.
Perhaps you shouldn’t. If you have no
questions about the quality of learning in
your organization, or if you are sure it’s the
best it can be, we suggest that you cancel
your purchase of this book and get a
refund. However, if you’re a policy-level
leader, a change agent, a learning
specialist, or a consultant, you should
seriously consider exploring learning
theory. Doing so will increase your
understanding of the range of learning
theories, and your chances for achieving
your desired results. Policy-level leaders
may have such questions as: Are our
Human Resource Development (HRD)
interventions based on assumptions about
human nature and organizational life that
are congruent with the assumptions on
which our management policies are based?
Are our human resource decisions
contributing to long-run gains in our human
capital, or only shortrun cost reduction?
Why do our HRD personnel make the
decisions that they do concerning priorities,
activities, methods and techniques,
materials, and the use of outside resources
(consultants, package programs, hardware,
software, and university courses)? Are
these the best decisions? How can I assess
whether or not, or to what degree, the
program is producing the results I want?
Managers may have all of these questions
plus others, such as: Which learning theory
is most appropriate for which kind of
required learning, or should our entire
program be faithful to a single learning
theory? How do I find out what learning
theories are being followed by the various
consultants, off-the-shelf programs, and
other outside learning resources that are
available to us? What difference might their
theoretical orientation make in our
program? What are the implications of the
various learning theories for our program
development, selection and training of
instructional personnel, administrative
policies and practices, facilities, and
program evaluation? 20 Learning
specialists (instructors, curriculum builders,
and methods, materials, and media
developers) may have some of the previous
questions in addition to the following: How
can I increase my effectiveness as a
learning specialist? Which techniques will
be most effective for particular situations?
Which learning theories are most congruent
with my own view of human nature and the
purpose of education? What are the
implications of the various learning theories
for my own role and performance?
Consultants (change agents, experts, and
advocates) may have some of these saved
questions plus others, such as: Which
learning theory should I advocate under
what circumstances? How shall I explain
the nature and consequences of the various
learning theories to my clients? What are
the implications of the various learning
theories for total organizational
development? Which learning theory is
most consistent with my conception of the
role of consultant? A good theory should
provide explanations of phenomena as well
as guidelines for action. But theories about
human behavior also carry with them
assumptions about human nature, the
purpose of education, and desirable values.
Understandably, then, a better
understanding of the various learning
theories will result in better decisions
regarding learning experiences, more
predictable outcomes, and more desirable
results. What is a Theory? It seems that
most adult learning authors do not define
the term theory, but expect their readers to
derive its meaning from their use of the
term. “A theory simply explains what a
phenomenon is and how it works” (Torraco,
1997, p. 115). “Applied disciplines are
realms of study and practice that are fully
understood through their use in the
functioning world” (Swanson and
Chermack, 2013, p. 14). Adult learning is
an applied discipline. Webster’s Seventh
New Intercollegiate Dictionary gives five
definitions: (1) the analysis of a set of facts
in their relation to one another; (2) the
general or abstract principles of a body of
fact, a science, or an art; (3) a plausible or
scientifically acceptable general principle or
body of principles offered to explain
phenomena; (4) a hypothesis assumed for
the sake of argument or investigation; (5)
abstract thought. Learning theorists use all
five of these definitions in one way or
another, but with wide variations in their
usage: Here, for example, are some
definitions by usage in context. The
research worker needs a set of
assumptions as a starting point to guide
what he/she does, to be tested by
experiment, or to serve as a check on
observations and insights. Without any
theory, researcher activities may be as
aimless and as wasteful as the early
wanderings of the explorers in North
America . . . knowledge of theory always
aids practice. (Kidd, 1959, pp. 134–135) A
scientist, with the desire to satisfy his/her
curiosity about the facts of nature, has a
predilection for ordering his/her facts into
systems of laws and theories. He/she is
interested not only in verified facts and
relationships, but in neat and parsimonious
ways of summarizing these facts. 21
(Hilgard and Bower, 1966, pp. 1–2) Every
managerial act rests on assumptions,
generalizations, and hypotheses—that is to
say, on theory. (McGregor, 1960, p. 6) Few
people, other than theorists, ever get
excited about theories. Theories, like
vegetables and televised golf tournaments,
don’t trigger provocative reactions from
people. Most theories, except those that are
truly revolutionary, such as the
contributions of Newton, Einstein, and
Darwin, just do their jobs quietly behind the
scenes. They may increase our
understanding of a real-world event or
behavior or they may help us predict what
will happen in a given situation. But they do
so without a lot of fanfare. (Torraco, 1997,
p. 114) From these excerpts and
perspectives we can see that a theory can
be a guiding set of assumptions (Kidd), an
ordering system that neatly summarizes the
facts (Hilgard and Bower), and/or
assumptions, generalizations, and
hypotheses (McGregor). Also, as Torraco
points out, theories can be tacit. Yet, we
must examine another important
perspective: the fact that there are some
psychologists who don’t believe in theories
at all. For example, Skinner objects to
theories on the score that the hypothesis-
formulation-and-testing procedures they
generate are wasteful and misleading.
“They usually send the investigator down
the wrong paths, and even if the scientific
logic makes them self-correcting, the paths
back are strewn with discarded theories”
(Hilgard and Bower, 1966, p. 143). Skinner
believes that the end result of scientific
investigation is a “described functional
relationship demonstrated in the data.” After
reviewing the classical theories, he comes
to the conclusion that “such theories are
now of historical interest only, and
unfortunately, much of the work which was
done to support them is also of little current
value. We may turn instead to a more
adequate analysis of the changes which
take place as a student learns” (Skinner,
1968, p. 8). Similarly, Gagné (1965) writes,
“I do not think learning is a phenomenon
which can be explained by simple theories,
despite the admitted intellectual appeal that
such theories have” (p. v). He goes on to
explain, however, that a number of useful
generalizations can be made about classes
of performance change, which he describes
as conditions of learning. Where does all
this leave us in answering the question,
“What is a theory?” As a practical matter it
is important to determine the theoretical
view of each author to understand their
particular perspective. Perhaps the only
realistic answer is that a theory is what a
given author says it is. So here is our
definition: A theory is a comprehensive,
coherent, and internally consistent system
of ideas about a set of phenomena. What is
Learning? The simple definition of learning
is “the acquisition of knowledge or skills
through experience, study, or by being
taught” (New Oxford Dictionary, 2010). Any
deeper discussion of a definition of learning
should be prefaced with an important and
frequently made distinction between what is
education and what is learning. Education
is an activity undertaken or initiated by one
or more agents that is designed to 22 effect
changes in the knowledge, skill, and
attitudes of individuals, groups, or
communities. The term emphasizes the
educator, the agent of change who
presents stimuli and reinforcement for
learning and designs activities to induce
change. The term learning, by contrast,
emphasizes the person in whom the
change occurs or is expected to occur.
Learning is the act or process by which
behavioral change, knowledge, skills, and
attitudes are acquired. (Boyd et al., 1980,
pp. 100–101) Having made this distinction,
defining learning can still prove to be
complicated. Some learning theorists assert
that defining learning is difficult, while still
others maintain that there is no basic
disagreement about the definition of
learning between the theories. Smith (1982,
p. 34) summarizes the challenge of defining
learning in these words: It has been
suggested that the term learning defies
precise definition because it is put to
multiple uses. Learning is used to refer to
(1) the acquisition and mastery of what is
already known about something, (2) the
extension and clarification of meaning of
one’s experience, or (3) an organized,
intentional process of testing ideas relevant
to problems. In other words, it is used to
describe a product, a process, or a function.
In contrast, Ernest Hilgard, an interpreter of
learning theory, concludes that the debate
centers on interpretation and not definition:
While it is extremely difficult to formulate a
satisfactory definition of learning so as to
include all the activities and processes
which we wish to include and eliminate all
those which we wish to exclude, the
difficulty does not prove to be embarrassing
because it is not a source of controversy as
between theories. The controversy is over
fact and interpretation, not over definition.
(Hilgard and Bower, 1966, p. 6) This
generalization appears to hold with regard
to those learning theorists who dominated
the field until recently, although there are
striking variations in the degree of precision
among them. Let’s start with three historic
definitions by different authors as presented
in Readings in Human Learning (Crow and
Crow, 1963): Learning involves change. It is
concerned with the acquisition of habits,
knowledge, and attitudes. It enables the
individual to make both personal and social
adjustments. Since the concept of change
is inherent in the concept of learning, any
change in behavior implies that learning is
taking place or has taken place. Learning
that occurs during the process of change
can be referred to as the learning process.
(Crow and Crow, 1963, p. 1) Learning is a
change in the individual, due to the
interaction of that individual, and his
environment, which fills a need and makes
him more capable of dealing adequately
with his environment. (Burton, 1963, p. 7)
There is a remarkable agreement upon the
definition of learning as being reflected in a
change in behavior as the result of
experience. (Haggard, 1963, p. 20) The last
notion implies that we don’t directly know
what learning is, but can only infer what it
is. This idea is supported by Cronbach
(1963), who stated, “Learning is shown by a
change in behavior as a result of
experience” (p. 71). Harris and Schwahn
(1961) go back to “Learning is essentially
change due to experience.” They go on to
distinguish between learning as 23 product,
which emphasizes the end result or
outcome of the learning experience from
learning as a process. Learning as a
process emphasizes what happens during
the course of a learning experience in
attaining a given learning product or
outcome. Learning as function emphasizes
certain critical aspects of learning, such as
motivation, retention, and transfer, which
presumably make behavioral changes in
human learning possible (pp. 1–2). Others
take care to distinguish between planned
learning and natural growth: Learning is a
change in human disposition or capability,
which can be retained, and which is not
simply ascribable to the process of growth.
(Gagné, 1965, p. 5) Learning is the process
by which an activity originates or is
changed through reacting to an
encountered situation, provided that the
characteristics of the change in activity
cannot be explained on the basis of native
response tendencies, maturation, or
temporary states of the organism (e.g.,
fatigue, drugs, etc.). (Hilgard and Bower,
1966, p. 2) The concepts of control and
shaping lie at the heart of Skinner’s (1968)
treatment of learning: (1) “Learning is
essentially change due to experience”
[control]; and (2) “Once we have arranged
the particular type of consequence called a
reinforcement, our techniques permit us to
shape the behavior of an organism almost
at will” (p. 10). Clearly, these learning
theorists (and most of their precursors and
many of their contemporaries) see learning
as a process by which behavior is changed,
shaped, or controlled. Other theorists prefer
to define learning in terms of growth,
development of competencies, and
fulfillment of potential. Jerome Bruner
(1966), for example, observes, “It is easy
enough to use one’s chosen theory for
explaining modifications in behavior as an
instrument for describing growth; there are
so many aspects of growth that any theory
can find something that it can explain well.”
He then lists the following “benchmarks
about the nature of intellectual growth
against which to measure one’s efforts at
explanation” (pp. 4–6): 1. Growth is
characterized by increasing independence
of response from the immediate nature of
the stimulus. 2. Growth depends upon
internalizing events into a “storage system”
that corresponds to the environment. 3.
Intellectual growth involves an increasing
capacity to say to oneself and others, by
means of words or symbols, what one has
done or what one will do. 4. Intellectual
development depends upon a systematic
and contingent interaction between a tutor
and a learner. 5. Teaching is vastly
facilitated by the medium of language,
which ends by being not only the medium
for exchange but the instrument that the
learner can then use himself in bringing
order into the environment. 6. Intellectual
development is marked by increasing
capacity to deal with several alternatives
simultaneously, to tend to several
sequences during the same period of time,
and to allocate time and attention in a
manner appropriate to these multiple
demands. Still other theorists feel that even
this emphasis on growth, with its focus on
cognitive 24 development, is too narrow to
explain what learning is really about. For
instance, Jones (1968) objects to Bruner’s
under-emphasis on emotional skills, his
exclusive attention to extra-psychic stimuli,
the equating of symbolism with verbalism,
and his preoccupation with the processes of
concept attainment to the seeming
exclusion of the processes of concept
formation or invention (pp. 97–104).
Nevertheless, Bruner is moving away from
the perception of learning as a process of
controlling, changing, or shaping behavior
and putting it more in the context of
competency development. One of the most
dynamic and prolific developments in the
field of psychology, humanistic psychology,
had recently exploded on the scene (the
Association of Humanistic Psychology was
founded in 1963) and carried this trend of
thought much further. Carl Rogers is one of
its exponents. The elements of humanistic
psychology, according to Rogers (1969, p.
5), include: 1. Personal involvement. The
whole person, including his or her feelings
and cognitive aspects, is involved in the
learning event. 2. Self-initiation. Even when
the impetus or stimulus comes from the
outside, the sense of discovery, of reaching
out, of grasping and comprehending,
comes from within. 3. Pervasiveness.
Learning makes a difference in the
behavior, attitudes, perhaps even the
personality of the learner. 4. Evaluation by
the learner. The learner knows whether the
learning meets personal need, whether it
leads toward what the individual wants to
know, whether it illuminates the dark area
of ignorance the individual is experiencing.
The locus of evaluation, we might say,
resides definitely in the learner. 5. Its
essence is meaning. When such learning
takes place, the element of meaning to the
learner is built into the whole experience.
Maslow (1970) sees the goal of learning to
be self-actualization: “the full use of talents,
capacities, potentialities, etc.” (p. 150). He
conceives of growth toward this goal as
being determined by the relationship of two
sets of forces operating within each
individual: One set clings to safety and
defensiveness out of fear, tending to
regress backward, hanging on to the
past. . . . The other set of forces impels him
forward toward wholeness to Self and
uniqueness of Self, toward full functioning
of all his capacities. . . . We grow forward
when the delights of growth and anxieties of
safety are greater than the anxieties of
growth and the delights of safety. (1972, pp.
44–45) Building on the notion that “insights
from the behavioral sciences have
expanded the perception of human
potential, through a re-casting of the image
of man from a passive, reactive recipient, to
an active, seeking, autonomous, and
reflective being,” Sidney Jourard (1972)
develops the concept of independent
learning: That independent learning is
problematic is most peculiar, because man
always and only learns by himself. . . .
Learning is not a task or problem; it is a
way to be in the world. Man learns as he
pursues goals and projects that have
meaning for him. He is always learning
something. Perhaps the key to the problem
of independent learning lies in the phrase
“the learner has the need and the capacity
to assume responsibility for his own
continuing learning.” (Jourard, 1972, p. 66)
25 Other educational psychologists
question the proposition that learning can
be defined as a single process. For
example, Gagné (1972, pp. 3–41) identifies
five domains of the learning process, each
with its own approach: 1. Motor skills, which
are developed through practice. 2. Verbal
information, the major requirement for
learning being its presentation within an
organized, meaningful context. 3.
Intellectual skills, the learning of which
appears to require prior learning of
prerequisite skills. 4. Cognitive strategies,
the learning of which requires repeated
occasions in which challenges to thinking
are presented. 5. Attitudes, which are
learned most effectively through the use of
human models and “vicarious
reinforcement.” Tolman distinguished six
types of “connections or relations” to be
learned: (1) cathexes; (2) equivalence
beliefs; (3) field expectancies; (4) field-
cognition modes; (5) drive discriminations;
and (6) motor patterns (Hilgard and Bower,
1966, pp. 211–213). The significance of
Tolman’s work is his effort to integrate rival
definitions and theories. Bloom and his
associates (1956, p. 7) identified three
domains of educational objectives: (1)
cognitive, “which deal with the recall or
recognition of knowledge and the
development of intellectual abilities and
skills”; (2) affective, “which describe
changes in interest, attitudes, and values,
and the development of appreciations and
adequate adjustment”; and (3)
psychomotor. Later scholars expanded on
the psychomotor domain to include all the
human senses and their dimensions. With
major advances in neuroscience and
information technology the definitions,
theories, and methods of adult learning
continued to be challenged. These
challenges are presented in later chapters.

Find the original Textbook (PDF) in the link below:

CLICK HERE