Andragogy Revisited:
Theory for the 21st Century Myths and Realities No. 19
by Ralf St. Clair
ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, 2002
Malcolm Knowles' theory of andragogy is almost certainly
the best known concept in adult education, and it often appears to gain
uncritical acceptance based on name recognition rather than careful consideration
of its propositions. Since Knowles introduced his theory in the mid-1960s,
many concerns have been raised about how the claims of andragogy are grounded.
Like any theoretical perspective, andragogy reflects both the context
of its conception and the convictions of its creator. Illuminating this
background can help educators to engage with andragogy more fully. This
Myths and Realities examines the viability of andragogy in the 21st century
by considering this background and asking which aspects of the theory
are still useful more than 30 years later.
Andragogy: All about Learning?
Since the language of andragogy was introduced to North American adult
educators by Malcolm Knowles, there have been continual debates about
whether it is an adult learning theory, a teaching method, a philosophical
statement, or all of the above. It is useful to take the development of
andragogy into account when considering this question.
When Knowles began writing about andragogy, he was already a well-respected
figure in the adult education establishment. He had participated in the
creation of the Black Book (Jensen, Liveright, and Hallenbeck 1964), a
collection of writing setting out to define adult education as a discipline.
Establishing adult education as a discrete area of academic study was
an important aim for Knowles and many of his contemporaries (Damer 2000).
As early as 1962, Knowles wrote that "the adult educational field
is in the process of developing a distinctive curriculum and methodology"
(Knowles 1962, p. 255)--a process in which he played a central role. The
development of andragogy was an important component of broader efforts
to position adult education as a profession and academic field.
Knowles (1980) claimed that andragogy was "the art and science of
teaching adults," and set out four key assumptions:
-
Teachers have a responsibility to help adults in the normal movement
from dependency toward increasing self-directedness.
-
Adults have an ever-increasing reservoir of experience that is a
rich resource for learning.
-
People are ready to learn something when it will help them to cope
with real-life tasks or problems.
-
Learners see education as a means to develop increased competence.
Two additional assumptions were later added (Knowles, Holton, and
Swanson 1998):
-
Adults need to know the reason to learn something.
-
The most potent motivators for adult learning are internal, such
as self-esteem.
From these assumptions flows everything else that makes up andragogy,
from seating plans to evaluation methods. One key concept is learning
contracts, a process in which learner and educator together negotiate
what the outcome of the learning/teaching transaction will be and how
it will be recognized. The notion of adults working together to design
the educational process encapsulates the core values of andragogy in many
ways. However, andragogy is not all about learning--the assumptions demonstrate
how the theory lays out a humanist view of learners and their potential
for growth, with implications for teaching, social philosophy, and human
relationships. Andragogy can be considered an approach to the education
and development of adults strongly rooted in the disciplinary needs of
adult education in the 1960s, but providing little insight into learning
other than a set of assumptions about learners.
Does Andragogy Work for Everybody?
Knowles initially positioned his work as universally applicable, arguing
that "in the world of the future we must define the mission of education
as to produce competent people" (Knowles 1980, pp. 18-19), and he
put andragogy forward as the means to this end. It is unclear whether
he maintained this position. In the late 1990s he wrote of his conviction
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 in that it
speaks to the characteristics of the learning transaction, not to the
goals and aims of that transaction. As such, it is applicable to any
adult learning transaction. (Knowles, Holton, and Swanson 1998, p. 2)
It is hard to know whether this statement argues for andragogy as a theory
of learning, an approach to teaching adults, or simply a useful set of
assumptions. If it is a claim for andragogy as a universal adult learning
theory Knowles was not acknowledging significant concerns expressed about
his work. Probably the most influential critique was written by Pratt
(1993), who argued that Knowles assumed all adult learners were willing
to engage in a highly participatory and democratic teaching/learning transaction
grounded in a Western male concept of individuality. This overarching
assumption is a significant weakness of Knowles' portrayal of andragogy,
and it has been criticized by feminists for overlooking gendered structures
of power in education (Tisdell 1998) and by critical theorists for putting
forward an oversimplified view of individual freedom (Grace 1996). There
are also concerns about whether the six assumptions are based in sound
evidence and how widely varying their interpretation can be (Rachal 2002).
Finally, contemporary learning theories such as "communities of practice"
(Wenger 1998) directly challenge Knowles' approach by deemphasizing individual
learners. Despite Knowles' claim that the framework could be applied to
any adult learning setting, the critiques make it essential to recognize
that andragogy only addresses certain types of learning at certain times.
Does Andragogy Define Adult Education?
It is interesting to consider the extent to which andragogy can be claimed
as the distinguishing feature of adult education as a field. Though he
moved from a belief in andragogy as the antithesis of education for children
toward the idea of a continuum, Knowles presented andragogy as "very
anti-schooling, seeing as an important part of its mission...'liberating'
adult learners from its unhappy consequences" (Usher, Bryant, and
Johnston 2002, p. 81). This suggests that the boundary between the education
of children and that of adults is very significant for andragogues. Yet
some of the most fertile ground for andragogy has been K-12 education
and the closely linked arena of the community college (Guffey and Rampp
1997; Robles 1998). Although it can be argued that within a highly formal
educational setting andragogy must inevitably be watered down (for example,
it is daunting to imagine learner control of evaluation in medical school),
the line between the practices of child and adult education are sufficiently
blurred to make andragogy almost useless as a way to define what is adult
about adult education.
It is also claimed that andragogy marks the boundary between adult education
and human resource development (HRD)--as some would claim, between the
education and the training of adults (Galusha 1998). Adult educators often
take the moral high ground here and argue that their work is dedicated
to the development of people rather than the profit of organizations.
Once again this distinction proves to be illusory. In recent years adult
educators have accepted increasing degrees of control over their work
and accountability on measures that would have been unpalatable in the
1980s. For example, U.S. adult literacy funding now comes from money allocated
for work force development, meaning that all literacy provision must show
vocational outcomes. Although adult education programs have become more
instrumental and employment focused, training and development in the business
world have increasingly emphasized the holistic development of workers,
the effect being to move the two fields closer together. This convergence
is further underlined by the way HRD practitioners have worked to address
the shortcomings of the andragogical model by remodeling it to recognize
contextual factors more fully (Holton and Swanson 1999). The andragogical
approach does not provide a clear delineation between what can be considered
adult education and what cannot.
Is Andragogy a Theory for the 21st Century?
Addressing this question involves considering three uses of ndragogy--as
a learning theory, as a guide to teaching, and as a foundational theory
of adult education. In the first case, there appears to be general consensus
that andragogy does not perform any of the functions of an adult learning
theory in terms of explaining how and why people learn. It is almost certain
that andragogy has been both undermined and superceded as a learning theory.
As a guide to teaching adults, andragogy has a great deal more to offer
when it is approached, as Knowles originally suggested, as a set of assumptions.
Educators of adults wishing to turn away from instrumental approaches
toward a more humanist understanding will likely use andragogy as a starting
point and touchstone of good practice for the foreseeable future.
The political project of adult education as a discipline is currently
less compelling than at any time since the early 20th century. Andragogy
did contribute to widening interest in adult education during the 1980s,
but was weakened by growing recognition of diversity and the need for
a multiplicity of practical and theoretical approaches in adult education.
In the future andragogy will maintain its role as a necessary component
of the field's shared knowledge, but it is highly unlikely to be viewed
as sufficient to explain or shape the education of adults.
References
Damer, E. J. "The Study of Adult Education at the University of
British Columbia 1957-1985." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University
of British Columbia, 2000.
Galusha, J. M. "Principles of Training and of Adult Education: A
Comparison." 1998. (ED 416 378)
Grace, A. "Striking a Critical Pose: Andragogy-Missing Links, Missing
Values." International Journal of Lifelong Education 15, no. 5 (September-October
1996): 382-392.
Guffey, J., and Rampp, L. C. "Learning in 21st Century Public Schools:
Andragogy as a Catalyst for Praxis." 1997. (ED 417 189)
Holton, E. F., and Swanson, R. A. "Reframing the Andragogical Model
of Learning." In Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) Conference
Proceedings, Arlington, Virginia, March 3-7, 1999, edited by K. P. Kuchinke.
Baton Rouge, LA: AHRD, 1999. (ED 431 931)
Jensen, G.; Liveright, A. A.; and Hallenbeck, W., eds. Adult Education:
Outlines of an Emerging Field of University Study. Adult Education Association
of the USA, 1964.
Knowles, M. S. The Adult Education Movement in the United States. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962.
Knowles, M. S. The Modern Practice of Adult Education. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1980.
Knowles, M. S.; Holton, E. F.; and Swanson, R. A. The Adult Learner:
the Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development.
Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing, 1998.
Pratt, D. "Andragogy after Twenty-five Years." In An Update
on Adult Learning Theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education
no. 57, edited by S. B. Merriam, pp. 15-24. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1993.
Rachal, J. R. "Andragogy's Detectives: A Critique of the Present
and a Proposal for the Future." Adult Education Quarterly 52, no.
3 (Spring 2002): 210-227.
Robles, H. J. "Andragogy, the Adult Learner and Faculty as Learners."
1998. (ED 426 740)
Tisdell, E. J. "Poststructural Feminist Pedagogies: The Possibilities
and Limitations of Feminist Emancipatory Adult Learning Theory and Practice."
Adult Education Quarterly 48, no. 3 (Spring 1998): 139-156.
Usher, R.; Bryant, I.; and Johnston, R. "Self and Experience in
Adult Learning." In Supporting Lifelong Learning, edited by R. Harrison,
F. Reeve, A. Hanson, and J. Clarke, pp. 78-90. London: Routledge-Falmer/Open
University, 2002.
Wenger, E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Ralf St. Clair is Director of the Texas Center for Adult Literacy and
Learning, Texas A&M University. This project has been funded at least
in part with Federal funds from the U.S. Department of Education under
Contract No. ED-99-CO-0013. The content of this publication does not necessarily
reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Education nor
does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply
endorsement by the U.S. Government. Myths and Realities may be freely
reproduced and are available at <http://ericacve.org/mr.asp>.
Judy Wagner / wagner.6@osu.edu / ericacve.org/ ERIC Clearinghouse on
Adult, Career, and Vocational Education 1900 Kenny Road / Columbus OH
43210-1090 USA 614/292-8625; 800/848-4815 (ext 2-8625); FAX: 614/292-1260
TTY/TDD: 614/688-8734
|