IFETS Co-ordinator (ifets-info@gmd.de)
Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:39:16 +0100
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:39:16 +0100 From: IFETS Co-ordinator <ifets-info@gmd.de> Subject: [ifets] Final summary: Adult Learner Behaviors in Workplace vs. Educatio=
nal Environments
Sender: owner-ifets
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ifets@gmd.de
Summary of Discussion: Adult Learner Behaviors in Workplace vs. Education=
al Environments
Moderator: Nora Carrol
Summarizers: Mary Harrsch and Karen Kaminski
Discussion of this topic began Monday, January 11, 1999. Nora Carrol, dis=
cussion moderator,
asked us to consider the following:
* differences that may emanate from motivation (i.e., what motivates some=
one to attend
formal courses may or may not be the same as what motivates them to learn=
at work)
* differences between voluntary and involuntary participation in learning
* differences between learning that is tangibly rewarded via credit, CEU'=
s or certification,
and learning that is not tangibly rewarded
* differences that result from the learning evaluation and measuring meth=
ods used
* differences that result from the instructional delivery systems, physic=
al and virtual
** Adult Learner Characteristics **
A common thread that has been raised by a number of those posting comment=
s centers on the
recognition that adult learners bring a variety of experiences, cultural =
differences,
personality types, attitudes towards the learning experience, technical l=
iteracy, and
motivations to the learning environment. All of these variables impact th=
eir preferred
learning style and the learning modalities that need to be considered by =
the instructors.
John Eklund recalled a student who experienced frustration because she co=
uld not connect
a demonstration to a prior experience. I really had difficulty trying to =
convince some of
[the] students in the class that the best way to achieve a satisfactory o=
utcome in the
course was by thinking from the top down.
Adult learners are defined by the roles that they play. Adults return to =
education because
of a need that they have identified. These needs can vary widely. Adults =
have more years
of experience than the traditional student does, that they bring to the e=
ducational
setting. They also bring more specific expectations.
** Intelligent Tutoring with Variety **
Chris Eliot pointed out one of the primary assumptions of the intelligent=
tutoring community
is that there are great differences among individual students. "It is als=
o the reason why
computer scientists think that effective tutoring systems require complex=
reasoning
mechanisms: you have to have multiple ways of teaching the same thing, an=
d you need to
=91diagnose=92 what kind of student you are working with, and you must th=
en select the best
available way of teaching to match each individual student," he stated.
Jack Ring reminded us of Ashby=92s principle of =91requisite variety=92 t=
hat tells us that any
=91learning environment=92 must exhibit an even greater spectrum of learn=
ing modalities. He
also mentioned that learning styles are very significant as put forth by =
Isachsen and
Behrens in =91Working Together=92 in which they correlate Meyers-Briggs p=
ersonality styles
and individual learning styles to show that some people like to learn by =
isolated study
but others need to be in group with high interaction. Jack thinks that wh=
en the
challenge is to learn how to do, adults learn more, faster from peers and=
power figures
who are directly involved in the activity than they do from teachers, men=
tors, coaches,
and researchers. When the challenge is to learn what a student does not k=
now then
=91the guru is necessary=92.
Tom said there needs to be a wider reference to the characteristics of th=
e individual.
He points out that educational institutions structure learning environmen=
ts as a means
to regulate and manage the instructional and learning experience. "In the=
work place,"
he says, "you can institutionalize learning through professional and voca=
tional
qualifications." But, he asks, "How do you enhance such learning and iden=
tify
common problems, create effective learning resources and support individu=
al learning
needs?" He reports that he is working on a project to help people in smal=
l and medium
sized enterprises improve their performance by examining their order fulf=
illment
processes. "The uniqueness of individual experience, the business charact=
eristics,
and the markets they serve make prescriptive instruction almost impossibl=
e," he states.
"Under these circumstances the assumptions of educators and designers nee=
d a radical
rethink about the purpose and approach to learning."
Jack Ring suggests presenting the material in multiple ways and let the s=
tudent select
the mix that they like. Chris Eliot agrees with this alternative when it =
works. He
warns us of 'hidden problems'. "You are assuming that the student can und=
erstand the
choices and know enough about their own learning style to make the right =
choice,"
Eliot observes. He feels you can only give students a small number of cho=
ices which
are completely distinct.
Bob Leamnson tells us that the problem with learning styles is that once =
we know what
they are, we don't know what to do with the information. There is no cons=
ensus to how
many learning styles there are. To which Abdul-Karim replies that in defi=
nition,
learning styles go beyond audio, visual, and kinesthetic. He refers us to=
Kolb's
model of experiential learning. Learn through doing, through watching, th=
rough
thinking, and through trying. Each preference has strengths associated wi=
th them.
In Karen Kaminiski=92s experience with teaching adults, she has found tha=
t they don't
need to be tested to determine their learning style. "Although they may n=
ot understand
what learning styles are, most adults know whether they would prefer to r=
ead a book,
watch a video, listen to a tape, work one-on-one with someone, work alone=
, work in
groups, etc.," she states. She proposes that we should not always allow p=
eople to
learn the way they do best but to challenge them to learn in various mode=
s.
"Certainly, you can provide alternatives but in 'real life' there may not=
be
alternatives. How can we prepare adult learners for better jobs, new skil=
ls, and
the like if we do not challenge them?" she asks.
Martin Owen agrees with the value of Kolb's model of experiential learnin=
g to an
extent but points out that the assumption that professional communities c=
onstitute a
"reified" body of professional practice into which one can become inducte=
d is a
weakness. He states that an "individualist" approach places too much emph=
asis on
individual "learning styles". "We need to emphasize learning as a collabo=
rative goal,"
he says. He points out that the advantage of 'collaborative/group' learni=
ng is that
each learner type contributes to the discussion and the discussion is enr=
iched by
each strength.
John Bottomley pointed out that there is little hard evidence supporting =
the view
that taking student learning styles into account leads to positive learni=
ng outcomes.
He mentioned a counter view discussed by David Brooks in his text 'Web Te=
aching: A
Guide to Designing Interactive Teaching for the World Wide Web'. Brooks s=
ays the best
outcome for students is to expose them to many kinds of learning experien=
ces
ultimately enabling students to learn under a wide range of situations an=
d
circumstances.
Chris O'Hagan raised the issue that students should be enabled to see "br=
oader
horizons and why certain learning activities are important." He described=
a
successful experience in which a colleague prepared videotapes of a lectu=
re on
'Learning To Learn' which were offered to first year students. The tapes =
were
very successful because they created an environment where the instructors=
had to
engage the topic and learned as much about how students learn as the stud=
ents did.
He also mentioned a personal experience that illustrated the difficulty o=
f trying
to adapt a large system to individual learning styles. As a faculty membe=
r of a
tutorial college where he tutored six different students per hour he disc=
overed
that a single textbook did not provide explanations that were successful =
with
every student. "I suspect that even with the level of knowledge of have t=
oday,
I still would not have been able to predict which explanation would work =
with a
particular student." From his own experience, he supports providing a lot=
of
different ways to learn the same thing, support for students who are have=
real
difficulty, and in larger institutions particularly, educating students i=
n
learning "so they *know* when they are having difficulty and have the con=
fidence
to admit ignorance and ask."
As a personal reflection on points made by Karen Kaminski in her previous=
summary,
Mary Harrsch said we should distinguish between the "media" and the "mess=
age".
"Whether an adult prefers a book, a video, or a group project is not as i=
mportant
as whether the desired instructional message is being delivered in a way =
that is
clearly understood by the majority of students," she points out. "A proce=
ss
animation can often demonstrate a concept visually that is very difficult=
to
grasp using words. A simulation in which the interactive forces are clear=
ly
defined can result in understanding cause and effect as each variable is
manipulated by the student. A dramatic reading accompanied by images and =
music
of the period may reveal social differences that may have influenced the =
author
of the piece. Hyperlinks to word definitions or graphics provide "just in=
time"
knowledge to students attempting to understand a complex discourse. These
strategies would be as successful with adult learners as with younger stu=
dents.
The key difference with adult learners is that they usually have enough l=
ife
experience and self esteem to question the results rather than accept the=
m at
face value. Instructors must be willing to explore alternatives and, like=
Chris
O'Hagan observed, they may find they learn as much as the students."
Chris O=92Hagan emphasized his point that teachers should know a lot more=
about how
students learn and different styles. He is concerned that an instrumental=
approach
to identifying a student's learning style may hinder student development =
and that
it is much better to help them adopt a range of different approaches.
Karen Kaminiski expressed her belief that most educators are aware of dif=
ferent
learning styles. "What they don't have is the skills to incorporate strat=
egies
targeted to different learning styles into their content delivery. She al=
so suspects
that part of this is a time and comfort issue. "How many people teach the=
way they
are most comfortable learning themselves?" she asks.
Chris continued, reminding us that variety is the spice of life. This is =
why he thinks
'engaged' is a useful word for describing the mental activity taking plac=
e. He goes on
to differentiate between being engaged and being interactive when learnin=
g with a
computer. Karen agrees, "We can all remember having conversations where w=
e were
interacting with the other party while our minds were engaged with other =
matters. "
She also agrees with Mary Harrsch=92s observations. "The technology used =
is just the
medium to deliver the message. It is the relevance of the message that wi=
ll engage
the students in the learning process," Karen states.
Nora Carrol remarked that education-as-regurgitation may still exist in p=
rimary learning
but is certainly not dominant in adult learning. "Adult learners are the =
'market' that
has pushed both institutional and workplace learning toward an applicatio=
ns focus," Nora
said. Martin Owen pointed out engagement does not come from the computer =
"... but from
the individual and the social group."
"One of the advantages of learning in a traditional classroom is the soci=
al contact with
fellow students, " Martin continued. "Distance programs using cohort grou=
ps are showing
more success than those that offer open registration to randomly sequence=
d courses."
** Cultural Differences **
Mary Harrsch pointed out that cultural differences may influence particul=
ar adults or
groups to approach distance education differently. Elaine Winters agreed =
referencing
her articles that focus on Gardner=92s work with learning styles:
http://www.bena.com/ewinters/articles.html
"Some societies, specifically those characterized as high context, place =
great emphasis
on ambience, decorum, status of the participants, and manner of delivery;=
low context
cultures ignore these events--emphasizing content in a communication - so=
metimes
expressed as 'cut to the chase'."
Martin Owen just returned from a conference where Nonaka Ikujiro delivere=
d a
presentation on "Knowledge Creating Companies" and the concept of physica=
l, virtual
and mental spaces for knowledge interchange referred to as "Ba". Martin s=
ays ICT can
make a clear contribution to this activity by facilitating knowledge acqu=
isition
through sharing information with fellow professionals and mutual problem =
solving.
However, he also mentions that there has been some discussion of discrepa=
ncy between
Asian and North American cultures. Nonaka San suggested that in creating =
Ba there is
a need for humor, including irony. "This may be problematic for some," No=
naka
acknowledges.
David Bird disagrees with the Western approach of setting the teacher abo=
ve the
student stating that on the contrary it is eastern cultures that set a re=
spectful
tone for the notion of a 'teacher'. He uses Sensei in Japan as an example=
. Instead
David suggests we distinguish between pedagogical learning based around t=
he ideas of
reinforcement, and adult learning which is based around notions of adults=
identifying
their own needs.
Bob Leamnson also acknowledged the impact of student diversity. "We still=
don=92t know
quite what to do with that fact. It is a situation that is not restricted=
to adult
groups, or groups of mixed ethnic/cultural background."
Raymond Lewis tells us that he believes that the significant difference b=
etween Asian
learners is not culture but learning styles and the climate created in th=
e classroom.
The key issue is for the educator to meet the needs of the learners in th=
eir classroom
by providing a variety of approaches. Technology may be a useful tool to =
achieve this.
Martin Owen expresses his opinion that the characterization of Asian stud=
ents as
passive and unquestioning does not square with the dynamic and reflective=
ways in which
workplaces have developed in some Asian economies. Clearly there are area=
s within the
cultures of Asian workplaces where active, mutual dialogical learning tak=
es place.
He suggests it may be a more Western approach to place the teacher "above=
" the students
that revokes the "respectful" response from the Asian students.
------
End
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://zeus.gmd.de/ifets/
Email address for sending message to everyone on the list ifets@gmd.de
Forum's contact person ifets-info@gmd.de
Join/Leave Digest or Normal List http://zeus.gmd.de/ifets/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue 26 Jan 1999 - 13:54:03 MET