Self-Advocacy and Self-Directed
Learning:
A Potential Confluence for Enhanced
Personal Empowerment
Roger
Hiemstra, Professor Emeritus
Adult Education
Syracuse University
A Paper Presented at the
SUNY Empire State College Conference
“Disabled, But Enabled and Empowered”
March 20, 1998
Rochester, New York
Introduction
I am delighted to be here this morning. I believe this
conference is a very important one and applaud the efforts of Dr. Nancy Gadbow,
Dr. David DuBois, and all the many people who have been involved in its
planning and implementation. I am confident that many of the exciting ideas,
achievements, and sharing that are part of this conference will result in
outcomes of tremendous potential value to both disabled learners and those
educators working with disabled learners. I also wish to put in a plug for
Nancy and David’s 1998 book, Adult
Learners with Special Needs: Strategies and Resources for Postsecondary
Education and Workplace Training. I believe it to be a very important
contribution to those working directly or indirectly with disabled adults, and
I hope for disabled adults, themselves.
I’m going to begin my presentation with a long caveat. Like
a lot of adult educators my age, I have not been specially trained to work with
disabled adult learners. Nor do I have extensive experience working with or
knowledge of how to work with disabled adults. However, like most people who have
taught adults for more than 30 years, I have had disabled people in my
classrooms, including some with cognitive disabilities, physical disabilities,
and sensory disabilities. I’ve worked with a couple of students in the past
that had multiple disabilities and several that have had temporary special
needs.
If you are a caring individual, you learn how to make what
I would call common sense accommodations for learners who experience
difficulties or who have limitations. Gadbow and DuBois (1998) point out a
common myth that some teachers and educational administrators believe the
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act
require accommodations that will be difficult to accomplish. In addition, I can
understand how learners with disabilities can feel a sense of educational
disadvantage (Preece, 1995). But I have found a simple common sense approach to
solving problems or listening to a disabled learner describe what is needed for
a successful experience goes a long way toward meeting needs. In addition, in
my own teaching I use a learning contract approach that enables each individual
learner to tailor learning activities to both personal needs and strengths. I
will talk more about my teaching and learning approach later in this
presentation.
Thus, because I do not have extensive experience related to
the topic of this conference, I approached the development of this presentation
like I do for most such efforts. I carried out some review of the literature
and, as I began outlining my presentation, I reflected on how aspects of what I
have been doing both practically as a teacher of adults and in my own
scholarship during the past 20 plus years supported what I could say. I’m
pleased to report that there appears to be a potential confluence or meeting
together of some streams of research or action that can support and build on
each other. In essence, I believe I have something to offer you today that can
at least stimulate some thought if not even ignite future collaborative
research and scholarship that will benefit disabled adult learners.
I know, too, that I have more material here than can be
covered during my allotted time. Thus, the full text of this presentation is
now on my web page. I also would be happy to send you a copy of my remarks
electronically as an email attachment.
The Potential Confluence
Gadbow and DuBois (1998) open their book with the following
statement:
Of the more than 49 million Americans
with disabilities (Bureau of Census, 1994), a large majority of those who are
adults under the age of 65 have the intellectual capability to learn at the
postsecondary level and the desire to be employed in meaningful work (Beziat,
1990). (p. 1)
They
continue by describing the reasons many such people have not participated in
educational programs, such as negative self-perceptions or various
institutional hurdles they face. Such students may also have had prior bad
experiences in certain educational institutions (Ashman & Elkins, 1990),
inadequate learning materials (Jacobowitz, 1990), or insufficient linguistic
skills (Whitman, 1990).
Fortunately, a few developments have
taken place to begin remedying some of these barriers. For example, the
self-advocacy movement that began in the 70’s has continued to grow until today
it encompasses more than 11,500 people in the United States and many more in
other countries. In essence, self-advocates are people with varying
disabilities who speak out on their own behalf concerning issues that directly
affect them.
As I read about the self-advocacy
movement and several related developments to provide background for this
presentation, increasingly I began to see areas of overlap with topics various
colleagues and I have studied over the past two or more decades. So for those
of you who like advanced organizers, here are two of those topics with which I
have been associated that I will address today:
¨
Self-direction in
Learning (in the literature most people refer to this as self-directed
learning)
¨
Individualizing
the Instructional Process
During
my discussion, I will suggest how a confluence of each topic with self-advocacy
as a vehicle for driving needed changes pertaining to the education of disabled
adults has potential value. I will conclude my presentation with some recommendations
for future action and invite any of you stimulated by my remarks to dialogue
with me electronically or via any other way.
However, before I dive into a
discussion of the first topic I wish to define a few terms to let you see my
level of awareness. This may help you better understand my later remarks. These
definitions are derived from my reading material in preparation for this
presentation. They are by no means intended to be definitive, as I may well
have missed important material.
The first of these, self-advocacy,
appears to stem primarily from a national organization devoted to enhancing
self-advocacy in the United States called SABE (Self-Advocates Becoming
Empowered). Perhaps some of you here today are involved with this organization.
I am not attempting here to talk about advocacy or the advocacy model that has
been developed in many ways through the social work field. Gadbow and DuBois
(1998) do discuss several related issues. However, in my view self-advocacy has
some very clear relationship to the concept of self-directed learning that I
will discuss in a few minutes.
¨
Self-advocacy –
the development of special skills and understandings that enable people to
explain their specific learning disabilities to others as a means of proactively
coping with prevailing attitudes (Lokerson, 1992).
This
concept of proactive assumption of responsibility is at the heart of much of
what we know about self-directed learning.
A separate but related concept is self-determination.
It appears primarily related to work of the Arc (formerly the Association for
Retarded Citizens of the United States). The stress of this group (again,
people involved with the Arc may be here today) is on the development of
self-determination for people with cognitive disabilities.
¨
Self-determination
– this refers to acting as the primary causal agent in one’s life and making
choices and decisions regarding one’s quality of life free from undue external
influence or interference (Wehmeyer, 1992).
It is
assumed here that people who are self-determined take control over and
participate in decisions that impact on their lives. Self-determined actions
reflect four essential characteristics: Autonomy, self-regulation,
psychological empowerment, and self-realization. All of these are related to
points I will make in describing self-directed learning and a process for
individualizing the instructional process.
One additional definition I’d like to handle here
deals with how each individual can be involved in the whole learning process.
In essence, my research during the past 25 years has convinced me that learning
how to learn is very important for any person (Smith & Associates, 1990). I
suspect this is especially important for any disabled adult who desires more
control over personal destiny.
¨
Metacognitive
learning – this involves competence in planning, monitoring, self-questioning,
and self-directing personal learning; in essence, this emphasizes actual
awareness of the cognitive processes that facilitate personal learning such as
self-determination or autonomy (Ashmore & Conway, 1993; Biggs & Moore,
1993 Lokerson, 1992).
The Center for People with Disabilities’ mission
statement expresses a belief that all people are entitled to the freedom to
make choices and the right to live independently (Center, 1997). This
humanistic view of personal empowerment and individual dignity, and I assume
this would extend to a concept like metacognitive learning, expresses an
optimistic perspective that celebrates each individual’s potential (Brockett,
1997).
Gadbow and DuBois (1998) eloquently talk about this
notion of individual potential:
Historically, the field of adult education has long
promoted the right of individuals to participate in educational programs “for
the sake of learning” itself as well as the right to participate in education
related to career and job needs. Not to encourage all adults who have the
capacity to learn to participate in learning activities that will help them
reach personal and professional goals goes against many of the basic
philosophical tenets long espoused by the field of adult and continuing
education. (p. 6)
As an adult and continuing educator, I truly believe
that the underlying philosophy of self-advocacy or self-determination is
consistent with what I know to be this prevailing adult education philosophy.
In essence, this provides an opportunity to apply adult learning theories and
what we know from practice to solving very real educational problems. In the
next two sections I shall offer some ideas on how such a confluence of views
and knowledge areas can enhance personal empowerment and the human potential of
everyone. I conclude with a section that contains several recommendations for
future action.
Self-Direction in Learning
I have been involved with
self-direction in learning in various ways for nearly 25 years. Personal
research and scholarship, supervising student research, and finding practical
ways of applying such research to adult teaching and learning are some of the
results. If you would like to read about much of this journey, I suggest
Brockett and Hiemstra (1991). Following is a brief description of the topic.
Most adults spend considerable time
acquiring information and learning new skills. The rapidity of change, the
continuous creation of new knowledge, and an ever-widening access to
information make such acquisitions necessary. Much of this learning takes place
at the learner's initiative, even if available through formal settings. A
common label given to such activity is self-directed learning. In essence,
self-directed learning is seen as any study form in which individuals have
primary responsibility for planning, implementing, and even evaluating the
effort. Most people, when asked, will proclaim a preference for assuming such
responsibility whenever possible.
Research, scholarship, and interest in
self-directed learning have literally exploded around the world in recent
years. Few topics, if any, have received more attention by adult educators than
self-directed learning. Related books, articles, monographs, conferences, and
symposia abound. In addition, numerous new programs, practices, and resources
for facilitating self-directed learning have been created. These include such
resources as learning contracts, self-help books, support groups,
open-university programs, electronic networking, and computer-assisted
learning.
Several things are known about
self-direction in learning: (a) individual learners can become empowered to
take increasingly more responsibility for various decisions associated with the
learning endeavor; (b) self-direction is best viewed as a continuum or
characteristic that exists to some degree in every person and learning
situation; (c) self-direction does not necessarily mean all learning will take
place in isolation from others; (d) self-directed learners appear able to
transfer learning, in terms of both knowledge and study skill, from one
situation to another; (e) self-directed study can involve various activities
and resources, such as self-guided reading, participation in study groups,
internships, electronic dialogues, and reflective writing activities; (f)
effective roles for teachers in self-directed learning are possible, such as
dialogue with learners, securing resources, evaluating outcomes, and promoting
critical thinking; (g) an increasing number of educational institutions are
finding ways to support self-directed study through open-learning programs,
individualized study options, non-traditional course offerings, distance
learning, and other innovative programs.
Self-directed learning has existed
even from classical antiquity. For example, self-study played an important part
in the lives of such Greek philosophers as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
Other historical examples of self-directed learners included Alexander the
Great, Caesar, Erasmus, and Descartes. Social conditions in Colonial America
and a corresponding lack of formal educational institutions necessitated that
many people learn on their own.
Early scholarly efforts to understand
self-directed learning took place some 150 years ago in the United States.
Craik (1840) documented and celebrated the self-education efforts of several
people. About this same time in Great Britain, Smiles (1859) published a book
entitled Self-Help, which applauded
the value of personal development.
However, it is during the last three
to four decades that self-directed learning has become a major research area.
Groundwork was laid through the observations of Houle (1961). He interviewed 22
adult learners and classified them into three categories based on reasons for
participation in learning: (a) goal-oriented people, who participate mainly to
achieve some end goal; (b) activity-oriented people, who participate for social
or fellowship reasons; and (c) learning-oriented people, who perceive of
learning as an end in itself. It is this latter group that resembles the
self-directed learner identified in subsequent research.
The first attempt to better understand
learning-oriented individuals was made by Tough, a Canadian researcher and one
of Houle's doctoral students. His dissertation effort to analyze self-directed
teaching activities and subsequent research in the early 1970’s with additional
subjects resulted in a book, The Adult's
Learning Projects (1979). This work has stimulated many similar studies
with various populations in various locations. One important finding among the
subjects studied has been the very large preference to control personal
learning and this led many educators of adults to talk about self-planned or
self-directed learning.
A
colleague and I (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991) synthesized many aspects of the
knowledge about the topic and conceptualized the PRO (Personal Responsibility
Orientation) model. This model recognizes both differences and similarities
between self-directed learning as an instructional method and learner
self-direction, which is based on personality characteristics. As can be seen
in Figure 1, the point of departure for understanding self-direction is
personal responsibility and empowerment. Personal responsibility refers to
individuals assuming ownership for their own thoughts and actions. This does
not necessarily mean control over all personal life circumstances or
environmental conditions, but it does mean people can control how they respond
to situations.
Self-directed
learning, the left side of the model, refers to the actual teaching and
learning transactions, or what we refer to as those factors external to the
adult learner. Learner self-direction, the right side, refers to the personal
orientation of individuals engaged in a learning process. This involves a
learner’s personality characteristics, or those factors internal to the
individual such as self-concept.
Figure 1 The Personal Responsibility
Orientation (PRO) Model
In
terms of learning, it is an ability or willingness of individuals to take
control that determines any potential for self-direction. This means that
learners have choices about the directions they pursue. Along with this goes
responsibility for accepting any consequences of one's thoughts and actions as
a learner.
Brockett
and I view the term self-directed learning as an instructional process
centering on such activities as assessing needs, securing learning resources,
implementing learning activities, and evaluating learning. Another colleague
and I (Hiemstra & Sisco, 1990) refer to this as individualizing
instruction, a process focusing on characteristics of the teaching-learning
transaction, itself. I will address this process in the next section.
The PRO
model's final component is represented by the circle in Figure 1 that
encompasses all other elements. While the individual's personality
characteristics and the teaching and learning process are starting points for
understanding self-direction, the social context provides an arena in which the
learning activity or results are created. To fully understand self-directed
learning activity, the interface existing between individual learners, any
facilitator or learning resource, and appropriate social dimensions must be
recognized. Thus, Brockett and I recommend that self-direction in learning be
used as an umbrella definition recognizing those external factors facilitating
adults taking primary responsibility for learning and those internal factors or
personality characteristics that incline one toward personal empowerment or
accepting such responsibility.
Several
researchers also have demonstrated that giving responsibility back to learners
in many instances is more beneficial than other approaches. For example, in the
workplace employees with busy schedules can learn necessary skills at their own
convenience through self-study. Some technical staff in organizations who must
constantly upgrade their knowledge can access new information through an
individualized resource center.
Perhaps
most important of all, self-directed learning works! Many adults succeed as self-directed learners
when they could not if personal responsibility for learning decisions were not
possible. Some will even thrive in ways never thought possible when they learn
how to take personal responsibility and empower themselves for success as
learners. It is here that I believe the confluence of self-direction in
learning with self-advocacy, self-determination, or metacognitive learning has
the most potential.
In
working with learners from varying levels or types of disabilities, it may not
be possible to give carte blanche responsibility to each person. However, I
contend that there are many aspects of the entire teaching and learning process
where a person can take control and reap the personal benefits of learner
self-direction. To that end I have broken the teaching and learning process
down into various components in which learners can make their own decisions.
Thus, if it is not possible to make decisions about the actual content or any
learning activity, for example, it may be possible to assume responsibility for
the pace of the learning, the type of instructional technique used, or the manner
in which the learning processes are evaluated.
I also
am in the process of developing a resource guide of various instructional
techniques, tools, and resources that the self-directed learner or instructor
of self-directed learners can use in a learning endeavor. I have only begun the
process so it should be considered a work in progress. Both these efforts are
contained in an appendix to this presentation paper and I welcome your dialogue
if you access this paper and have thoughts, suggestions, or ideas on additional
material that I should include or areas I should consider changing.
Individualizing the Instructional Process
Growing out of this research on
self-directed learning was my desire to find practical ways of using such
knowledge in the instructional process. Linking the instructional process with
learner inputs, involvement, and decision making is crucial. I believe the
potential of humans as learners is maximized when there is a deliberate effort
by instructors to provide opportunities for participants to make decisions
regarding the learning process. The individualized instructional process that I
and Burt Sisco developed (1990) builds on the notion of individual
decision-making, the need for instructors to help learners become more self-directed,
and respect for adults because they do have so much untapped potential for
personal empowerment.
This approach involves learners in
determining personal needs and building appropriate learning situations to meet
those needs. It does so without imposing too many external controls or
instructor-directed biases. Sometimes learner needs and subsequent goals are
known early or can be determined quickly. Other times, such needs and goals may
be preset by an employer, stem from a specific content area requirement such a
college credit course, or arise because of some personal situation such as
dealing with a disability or coping with some aspect of living. There also are
instances when the learner needs some time or some type of process before
specific learning needs and goals surface.
In essence, the individualizing
process is based on a belief expressed in the previous section that all people
are capable of self-directed involvement in, personal commitment to, and
responsibility for learning. This includes making choices regarding
instructional approaches, educational resources, and evaluation techniques.
For teachers of adults the experience of
adapting all or some portions of the individualizing process can be a wrenching
one. It may mean giving up some beliefs about instructor or trainer roles.
Personality and institutional constraints may need examination and change. It
may require some tough examination of what is remembered about former teacher
role models. Frequently, many of our role models were traditional instructors
who used an approach quite contrary to an individualizing process. Thus, time
may be required before a teacher feels comfortable with some of the changes. It
most certainly will mean a reexamination of a personal philosophy about instruction
(Hiemstra, 1988; Hiemstra & Brockett, 1994). It may even necessitate some
real soul searching on whether or not some of our underlying assumptions about
people, whether disabled or not, can be accepted.
Thus, we developed a six-step process
for individualizing instruction in a way that learner inputs, involvement, and
decision-making are facilitated: (one) preplanning activities prior to meeting
learners, (two) creating a positive learning environment, (three) developing
instructional plans, (four) identifying appropriate learning activities, (five)
implementing and monitoring the instructional plan, and (six) evaluating
individual learner outcomes (see Figure 2).
Figure 2.
Individualizing Instruction Model
Each step is sequential and designed to
help learners take increasing responsibility for their own learning. A key
ingredient of the model is the promotion of effective educational practice
through the creation of an instructional system that celebrates individual
differences, experiences, and learning needs. As Sisco (1997) notes,
By taking
advantage of the resident expertise so common in older, more mature learners,
the instructor can create optimum conditions for learning to occur. This is one
of the guiding principles in instructional design and certainly is a hallmark
of the Individualizing Instruction model. Understanding the instructional
process, being flexible and supportive when the need arises, helping learners
assume greater control of the learning process, and varying the instructional
methods and techniques so that active learning is emphasized all add up to
instructional success. (p. 399)
For
example, as I mentioned earlier, the process employs the learning contract
approach which enables a learner to design unique learning experiences to meet
personal needs with the guidance of a facilitator (Knowles, 1986). It also is
predicated on the notion that creating a positive learning environment takes
understanding and attention to adult needs (Hiemstra, 1991, 1997).
Success with the individualizing
instructional approach will depend on the attitude of anyone implementing it.
In other words, an instructor in a facilitator role will need to believe in the
overall potential of promoting self-direction in learning, accept learner
input, criticism, and independence, and seek a wide range of learning
resources. Learners, themselves, may need to overcome years of expectations
regarding the place or role of learners. This may require several efforts to
become more personally empowered. Changing approaches or attitudes toward
instruction or learning generally requires dedication, hard work, practice, and
time. However, I am convinced the effort is worth it and look forward to
dialogue with any of you on ways of applying the individualized instructional
process to adult learners with disabilities.
Recommendations
Following are a series of recommendations that come to
my mind after reflecting on the remarks I have made thus far. However, I
acknowledge that my insights are limited by my lack of experience and knowledge
about disabled adults. I invite further dialogue and suggested recommendations
from any of you.
1. I have suggested several ways self-direction in
learning and the individualized instructional process relate to aspects of
self-advocacy and self-determination. I further suggest there is potential in
the appendix material I presented for enhancing personal empowerment. However,
to determine their usefulness these ideas and materials should be scrutinized
by learners with disabilities and those educators who work with such learners.
2. The self-directed learning readiness and
metacognitive skills (learning to learn ability) of learners with disabilities
should be investigated and benchmarked to provide a baseline for further
development of the various ideas I presented (Boote, 1997).
3. Research should be conducted to determine the most
appropriate approaches to promoting learner self-direction for adults with
disabilities.
4. Research should be conducted to determine how best
to implement aspects of the individualized instructional process with adults
with disabilities.
5. Efforts should be made to find ways of increasing
the metacognitive (learning to learn) skills of adults with disabilities.
6. Programs of any sort designed to train educators
and trainers of adults should be better informed by researchers and
practitioners who have experience with disabled adults so that future research,
scholarship, and training efforts can be improved and made more inclusive in
nature.
7. A series of in-service training workshops should be
conducted with current teachers and trainers of adults to help them understand
the learning needs and potential of adults with disabilities. Information
emanating from conferences like this one can serve as a basis for such
training.
8. Research should be conducted to better understand
the potential and limitations of distance education technologies in reaching
adults with disabilities (Coombs, 1989; Rohfeld & Hiemstra, 1995; Willis,
1994).
9. Programs should be designed that will help disabled
adults enhance their ability to use self-directed learning techniques and
resources, such as learning contracts.
10. Scholars and practitioners working with
self-advocacy and self-determination efforts and those working with
self-direction in learning efforts should meet to discuss ways of working
together to meet the needs of disabled adults. We have much to learn from each
other.
Appendix
The following ideas and resource
materials are premised on ideas about empowering learners that have emanated
from some of the research on self‑directed learning. Much of this
research in North America during the past 25 years has demonstrated that most
adult learners prefer to take considerable responsibility for their own
learning. Yet, many traditional teaching and training situations limit
opportunities for such personal involvement because control over content or
process remains in the hands of experts, designers, or teachers who depend
primarily on didactic approaches.
One of the initial responses I made to
this apparent disparity between what such research has demonstrated and much of
current teaching or training practice was the development of the individualized
instructional process described above (Hiemstra & Sisco, 1990). In this
process it is suggested there are various ways learners can take responsibility
for their own learning without leading to anarchy in the learning setting.
Some of our critics suggest that the
process we advocate will not work with their particular teaching areas or
students because the content is controlled by organizational requirements, must
be taught in a particular sequence, or is too advanced for novice learners. We
contend that the process of providing opportunities for learners to assume some
control is equally as important, if not often more important, than the actual
content because of the ever declining half‑life of much of knowledge and
the value in helping learners learn how to learn.
What I have been wrestling with
recently is thinking through various ways that learners can assume increasing
control over certain aspects of their learning process, in other words become
more empowered. As noted earlier, I am in the process of developing two related
products. One is a framework for identifying various teaching and learning
process components in which learners can make their own decisions (Figure 3).
The following material outlines my thinking to date. The second product (Figure
4) is a resource guide of various techniques, tools, and resources that the
self-directed learner can use to plan personal learning efforts, enhance
personal skills, or obtain new knowledge. The framework represents a work in
progress, showing various techniques, tools, or resources displayed within six
categories. A few of them have initial descriptions to provide an idea of what
I hope to accomplish.
Thus far I have reviewed related
literature, talked to colleagues, reflected on my own teaching, and thought
about what such resources should look like if they are to be of value to
learners, themselves, or to those wishing to enhance the self-directed learning
skills of learners. This material most likely will not be very helpful to you
at this early point in its development, although it does give you an idea of
the kinds of resources that are possible. As you are one of the first groups of
people to see this evolving effort, I would very much appreciate any feedback
you care to give me. Does it make sense in the organizational scheme I am
suggesting? Are there some obvious things I am missing? Please feel free to
contact me with any of your feedback. I will be very grateful and your advice
will help me to make it a more useful resource.
Helping Learners Take Responsibility for Self-Directed
Activities
Roger Hiemstra
Research
has clearly demonstrated that adults prefer to assume some responsibility for
their own learning. However, some instructors and even some learners resist
this notion for various reasons. One of my current projects involves developing
a framework of teaching and learning process components to provide multiple
opportunities for learners to make their own decisions. The following
represents my work thus far. At each numbered item, a yes, no, or sometimes
question should be asked in terms of whether or not learners can assume
control.
1. Assessing Needs
1.1 Choice of individual techniques
1.2 Choice of group techniques
1.3 Controlling how needs information is
reported
1.4 Controlling how needs information is used
2. Setting goals
2.1 Specifying objectives
2.2 Determining the nature of the learning
2.2.1 Deciding on competency or mastery
learning -vs.- pleasure or interest learning
2.2.2 Deciding on the types of questions to be
asked and answered during learning efforts
2.2.3 Determining emphases to be placed on the
application of the knowledge or skill acquired
2.3 Changing ("evolution")
objectives over the period of a learning experience
2.4 Use of learning contracts
2.4.1 Making various learning choices or
selecting from various options
2.4.2 Decisions on how to achieve objectives
3. Specifying learning content
3.1 Decisions on adjusting levels of
difficulty
3.2 Controlling sequence of learning material
3.3 Choices on knowledge types (psychomotor,
cognition, affective)
3.4 Decision on theory -vs.- practice or
application
3.5 Deciding on level of competency
3.6 Decisions on actual content
3.6.1 Choices on financial or other costs
involved in the learning effort
3.6.2 Deciding on the help, resources, or
experiences required for the content
3.7 Prioritizing the learning content
3.8 Deciding on the major planning type, such
as self, other learners, experts, etc.
4. Pacing the learning
4.1 Amount of time devoted to teacher
presentations
4.2 Amount of time spent on teacher to learner
interactions
4.3 Amount of time spent on learner to learner
interactions
4.4 Amount of time spent on individualized
learning activities
4.5 Deciding on pace of movement through
learning experiences
4.6 Decisions on when to complete parts or all
of the activities
5. Choosing the instructional methods, techniques, and
devices
5.1 Selection of options for technological
support and instructional devices
5.2 Choice of instructional method or
technique
5.3 Type of learning resources to be used
5.4 Choice of learning modality (sight, sound,
touch, etc.) for determining how best to learn
5.5 Choices on opportunities for learners,
learner and teacher, small group, or large group discussion
6. Controlling the learning environment
6.1 Decision on manipulating
physical/environmental features
6.2 Deciding to deal with
emotional/psychological impediments
6.3 Choices on ways to confront
social/cultural barriers
6.4 Opportunities to match personal learning
style preferences with informational presentations
7. Promoting introspection, reflection, and critical
thinking
7.1 Deciding on means for interpreting theory
7.2 Choices on means for reporting/recording
critical reflections
7.3 Decision on use of reflective practitioner
techniques
7.4 Opportunities provided for practicing
decision-making, problem solving, and policy formulation
7.5 Making opportunities to seek clarity or to
clarify ideas available
7.6 Choices on practical ways to apply new
learnings
8. Instructor's/trainer's role
8.1 Choice of the role or nature of didactic
(lecturing) presentations
8.2 Choice of the role or nature of Socratic
(questioning) techniques to be used
8.3 Choice of the role or nature of
facilitative (guiding the learning process) procedures
9. Evaluating the learning
9.1 Choice on the use and type of testing
9.1.1 Deciding on the nature and use of any
reviewing
9.1.2 Opportunities for practice testing
available
9.1.3 Opportunities for retesting available
9.1.4 Opportunities available for choosing
type of testing, if any, to be used
9.1.5 Decisions on weight given to any test
results
9.2 Choices on type of feedback to be used
9.2.1 Deciding on type of instructor's
feedback to learner
9.2.2 Deciding on type of learner's feedback
to instructor
9.3 Choices on means for validating
achievements (learnings)
9.4 Deciding on nature of learning outcomes
9.4.1 Choosing type of final products
9.4.1.1 Deciding how evidence of learning is
reported or presented
9.4.1.2 Opportunities made available to revise
and resubmit final products
9.4.1.3 Decisions on the nature of any written
products
9.4.2 Decision on weight given to final
products
9.4.3 Deciding on level of practicality of
outcomes
9.4.3.1 Opportunities to relate learning to
employment/future employment
9.4.3.2 Opportunities to propose knowledge
application ideas
9.4.4 Deciding on nature of the benefits from
any learning
9.4.4.1 Opportunities to propose immediate
benefits versus long-term benefits
9.4.4.2 Opportunities to seek various types of
benefits or acquisition of new skills
9.5 Deciding on the nature of any follow-up
evaluation
9.5.1 Determining how knowledge can be
maintained over time
9.5.2 Determining how concepts are applied
9.5.3 Opportunities provided to review or redo
material
9.5.4 Follow-up or spin-off learning choices
9.6 Opportunities made available to exit
learning experience and return later if appropriate
9.7 Decision on the type of grading used or
completion rewards to be received
9.8 Choosing the nature of any evaluation of
instructor and learning experience
9.9 Choices on the use and/or type of learning
contracts
Figure 3. Aspects of the
Learning Process Where Learners Can Assume Some Control
A. Planning
Tools
A1. The Learning Contract
Plan/Learning Contract Design.
The learning contract is a device whereby you can plan and personalize any learning
experience. It can take on many shapes and forms ranging from audio tapes,
to outlines, to descriptive statements, to elaborate explanations of
process and product, to electronically submitted forms.
More examples can be found in O'Donnell, J. M., & Caffarella, R. S. (1990).
Learning contracts. In M. W. Galbraith (Ed.), Adult learning
methods: A guide for effective instruction (pp. 133-160). Malabar, FL: Krieger
Publishing Company. Most contracts contain information on your learning goals,
anticipated learning resources and strategies, a projected time line, and ideas
for how you will evaluate or validate your learning achievements.
A2. Self Diagnostic Form.
A self diagnostic form is an
instrument designed to assist you in assessing personal levels of competence
and need related to possible areas of study. Such information typically helps
in identifying and developing many of the professional competencies required to
understand a particular topic of interest or need and often is used as a precursor
to construction of a learning contract. Here is example one and example two from different graduate courses.
A3. Self Analysis as a Learner.
This involves you in carrying out
an analysis of yourself or others as a learner. It includes determining such
factors as the ways you learn best, developmental patterns or social roles
which impact on your learning efforts, subject areas which you like best, strengths
and weaknesses as a learner, and what, if any, you would change to improve your
learning performance. Several self-administered instruments are available for
your use if desired.
1. Competencies for performing life
roles
2. Self-directed learning skills
3. Competencies for carrying out
self-directed learning projects
A4. Self-Directed Learning Readiness
Scale.
A self-administered and
self-scored instrument entitled the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) is available for
comparison of yourself with normed information. An opportunity also is provided
for you to detail what the results means in terms of future learning approaches
and efforts.
A5.Self-Directed Learning Perception Scale (SDLPS).
A self-report instrument, to
monitor the support of a self-directed learning environment.
A6. Self Rating on Self-Directed
Learning Competencies.
A
self-administered and self-scored competency rating device is available for
obtaining information about self-directed learning abilities. An opportunity
also is provided for you to detail what the results means in terms of future
learning approaches and needed competency acquisitions.
This exercise
helps you gain an understanding of and practice with a self-diagnosis process.
A model of desired behaviors or required competencies pertaining to learning
about a particular topic is created and any gaps identified in current
competency levels becomes the basis for planning future learning.
A8. Analyzing Your Thinking Skills and
Intelligence Types.
You are introduced
to various thinking skill types and personal intelligence
types and the nature of the
information typically foundational to each type. A self-assessment of how your
thinking approaches and/or personal intelligence fit the various types is
determined and you can then determine some of the implications for your
future learning activities studied.
A9. Determining Your Learning Style.
Several
self-administered and self-scoring instruments are available to help identify your own learning
style. One or more of these can be completed and the resulting scores and
associated meanings used to think through implications and approaches for
subsequent learning efforts.
A10.
Determining Your Teaching Style.
The PALS ( Principles of Adult Learning Scale)
instrument is a device that measures the various things that a teacher or
trainer does when working with adult learners. You complete, self score the
instrument, and compare the results with some normed information to determine any
implications for future efforts to improve your teaching or training abilities.
Contact the instrument developer, Gary Conti, or you can find the
instrument and scoring information in Conti, G. J. (1990). Identifying your
teaching style. In M. W. Galbraith (Ed.), Adult learning
methods: A guide for effective instruction (pp. 79-96). Malabar, FL: Krieger
Publishing Company.
A11. Determining
Individual Change Styles.
The "Change
Styles Questionnaire" is an instrument developed to assess how an
individual's self-directed and problem solving approaches or preferences
coalesce to create various individual change styles. Knowledge about such styles
helps individuals and teachers or trainers find ways of dealing with learning
and changes in the workplace and other settings. See also a background paper on the instrument.
A11. Constructing
a Gantt Chart.
Critical Path
Analysis (CPA) and the creation of a Gantt Chart is a useful tool for planning,
scheduling, and managing various self-study activities. You are shown how to delineate
and sequence those activities necessary for carrying out a set of learning
objectives. The calendar dating of a CPA network and creation of a Gantt time
management chart are included in the process.
B. Individual
Study Techniques
B1. Mind Mapping/Concept Mapping.
Mind mapping is a
visually oriented technique designed to allow you to see or make connections
among widely disparate elements of some subject you are studying. You are shown
how to use interconnecting arrows, branching ideas, and personal patterns to expand
your knowledge about a particular topic. In this technique you also learn how
to develop mind or concept
mapsto pinpoint the various misconceptions or nuances of meaning that you
may hold so that your interpretation skills are increased.
Probes are ideas,
questions, and insights you develop while you are in the process of learning
something about a new topic or field. You learn how to use dialogue,
conversation, and questioning that turns learning something new from a passive
to an active process. Developing propositions and revised propositions become a
part of your learning repertory.
B3. Vee
Diagramming/Vee
Heuristic Technique.
The Vee
diagramming/heuristic technique is a problem solving aid in helping you see the
interplay between what you already know and knowledge you are producing or
attempting to understand. You learn how to use a Vee to point to events or
objects that serve as foundations for any knowledge being developed or learned.
B4. How
to Read a Journal/Magazine.
B5. Learning
from TV and Radio.
B6. Exercising.
An important means
for establishing your physiological state for individualized learning is to
carry out some brisk exercising. The World Wide Web has a multitude of sites
related to exercising.
B7. Self-education, Self-university.
B8. Analyzing Your Preferred Learning
Environment.
B9. Relaxation
Training.
B10. Memory
Enhancement Techniques.
Here is a related
site suggested by Jose, a middle school student: Memory
and the Human Brain.
B11. Learning with
Computers.
B12. Using
Self-Paced Modules.
B13. Using
Communication Technology.
B14.
Self-Directed Learning Modules.
B15. Learning from Your
Experiences.
B16. The Use of Penetrating
Questions.
B17. Designing
a Personal Learning Project.
B18. Walkabout.
B19. Developing
Lists of Resources.
B20. Using
Mediated Resources.
B21. Repertory
Grid-Based Technique.
B22.
Correspondence Study.
B23.
Constructing a Planning/Design Model.
B24. Improving Writing
Skills.
B25.
Individualized Learning within an Organizational Setting.
Increasingly, more
and more organizations are recognizing the value in providing resources and
opportunities for employees to "train" themselves through various
self-directed techniques.Guglielmino
and Guglielmino (1994) suggest
several resources that are being established in some organizations.
C. Personal
Reflection Tools
C1. Book/Article/Media Review
Techniques.
C2. Creating an Interactive Reading Log.
The interactive
reading log is a learning activity designed to give you a thoughtful exposure
to a broad area of subject matter. It is intended to place relatively greater
stress on reading and less stress on intensive writing related to a limited
topic. A log is not an outline nor a summary of your reading. Rather, it is
essentially a series of reactions to those elements in your readings that are
particularly meaningful and/or provocative.
C3. Creating a Media Log.
C4. Journal/Diary Writing Techniques.
The personalized
journal or diary is a tool to aid you in terms of personal growth, synthesis,
and/or reflection on any new knowledge that is acquired in learning efforts.
You are shown how a diary can be created and given examples of how others have
created one.
C5. Creating your Personal Philosophy
Statement.
The way one
teaches is tied to a personal philosophy of life. This activity helps you
understand more about various philosophical models or frameworks. You are shown
how to eclectically draw from various models in creating your own statement of philosophy. An
instrument developed by Lorraine M. Zinn, that demonstrates your preference for
various philosophical viewsis available or can be found in Zinn, L. M. (1990).
Identifying your philosophical orientation. In M. W. Galbraith (Ed.), Adult learning
methods: A guide for effective instruction (pp. 39-77). Malabar, FL: Krieger
Publishing Company
C6. Analyzing a
Theory.
C8. Reading a Book
Proactively.
C9. Using Human
Resources Proactively.
C10. Learning
Through Intuition and Dreams.
C11. Reflecting
on Learning at Home or the Workplace.
C12. Analyzing
Your Thinking Skills.
C13. Relaxation. Dealing with
stress.
C14. Imaginary
Dialogues.
C15. Analyzing Personal Ethics.
C16. Thinking
About Learning.
C17. Personal Inventories.
C18. Personality Measures.
D. Individual
Skill Development
D1. Skill
Practice Exercises.
D2. Portfolio
Development. Here is one good resource. Here is a second one.
D3. Improving
Your Writing Skills.
D4. Enhancing Your
Lecturing Skills.
D5. Enhancing
Your Discussing Skills.
D6. Enhancing
Your Questioning Skills.
D7. Enhancing
Your Coaching Skills.
D8. Enhancing
Your Understanding of Various Teaching Techniques.
D9. Effective
Use of Gaming Devices.
D10. Using a
Study Center/Learning Lab.
E. Group Study
Techniques
E2. Debates.
E3. Discussion
Groups or Discussion Networks.
E4. Quality Circles.
E5. Study Clubs/Study Circles.
F. Using The
Educative Community
F1. Community Study.
There are a
variety of resources existing in any community that can be used to meet various
of your education or training needs. You are shown how to better understand
this educative community notion by using various community study techniques.
You learn how to seek out that information important for your personal growth
and development.
F2. Using
Another Person as a Resource for Learning.
F3. Obtaining
Feedback from Others.
F4. Agency
Visit. Here is an interview schedule you could use to examine an agency and
determine its potential for self-directed learning. Here is a guide for analyzing the potential within an
agency for learner control.
F5. Mini-Internship.
F6. Interviewing Adult Learners.
It is assumed that
you can learn a great deal about your own learning from studying, observing,
and/or talking with other adult learners. You are shown how to interview adults
to determine what you can about their learning activities, approaches, and resource
preferences. You then are encouraged to derive a statement of personal
reflection and assessment in terms of your own learning needs and approaches.
F8. Obtaining
Feedback.
F9. Learning From Mentors. Thoughts on Mentoring.
F10. Learning
From a Resource.
F11. Career
Counseling.
F12. Organizational Audit.
F13. Power
Structure Analysis.
F14. Peer
Review.
F15. Peer Coaching.
F16. Using A Library
and the Web.
F17. Attending
a Conference.
F18. Using Museums/Art Galleries.
F19. Travel as
a Learning Event.
F20. Networks
and Networking.
F21. Study
Tours.
F22. Directed
Learning.
Figure 4. Techniques, Tools, and Resources for the
Self-Directed Learner
References
Ashman, A. F., & Conway, R. N. F. (1993). Cognitive strategies for special education.
New York: Routledge.
Ashman, A. F., & Elkins, J. (Eds.). (1990). Educating children with special needs.
New York: Prentice Hall.
Beziat, C. (1990). Educating America’s last minority:
Adult education’s role in the Americans with Disabilities Act. Adult Learning, 2(2), 21-23.
Biggs, J. B., & Moore, P. J. (1993). The process of learning. New York:
Prentice Hall.
Brockett, R. G. (1997). Humanism as an instructional
paradigm. In C. R. Dills & A. J. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Publications.
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning:
Perspectives on theory, research, and practice. New York: Routledge.
Bureau of Census. (1994). Americans with disabilities (Statistical
Brief, January, 1994). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic
and Statistics Administration.
Center for People With Disabilities. (1997).
Agency information. Boulder, CO:
Center for People With Disabilities. [On-line]. Available: http://bcn.boulder.co.us/human-social/cpwd/
Conti, G. J. (1979). Principles of
adult learning scale. Proceedings of the
Twentieth Annual Adult Education Research Conference. Ann Arbor, MI: Adult
Education Program, University of Michigan.
Coombs, N. (1989). Using distance
education technologies to overcome physical disabilities. In R. Mason & A.
Kaye (Eds.), Mindweave: Communication,
computers, and distance education. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Craik,
G. L. (1840). Pursuit of knowledge under
difficulties: Its pleasures and rewards New York: Harper & Brothers.
Gadbow, N. F., & DuBois, D. A.
(1998). Adult learners with special
needs: Strategies and resources for postsecondary education and workplace
training. Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.
Guglielmino, L. M. (1977). Development
of the self-directed learning readiness scale. (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Georgia, 1977). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 38, 6467A.
Hiemstra, R. (1988). Translating
personal values and philosophy into practical action. In R. G. Brockett (Ed.), Ethical issues in adult education. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Hiemstra,
R. (Ed.). (1991). Creating environments
for effective adult learning (New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, No. 50). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [On-line]. Available: http://roghiemstra.com/leindex.html
Hiemstra, R. (1997). Applying the individualizing
instruction model with adult learners. In C. R. Dills & A. J. Romiszowski
(Eds.), Instructional development
paradigms. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Hiemstra, R., & Brockett, R. G. (1994). From
behaviorism to humanism: Incorporating self-direction in learning concepts into
the instructional design process. In H. B. Long & Associates, New ideas about self-directed learning.
Norman, OK: Oklahoma Research Center for Continuing Professional and Higher
Education, University of Oklahoma.
Hiemstra,
R., & Sisco, B. (1990). Individualizing
instruction: Making learning personal, empowering, and successful. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [On-line]. Available: http://roghiemstra.com/iiindex.html
Houle,
C. O. (1961). The inquiring mind.
Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin, Press.
Jacobowitz,
T. (1990). AIM: A metacognitive strategy for constructing the main idea of
text. Journal of Reading, May,
620-624.
Knowles,
M. S. (1986). Using learning contracts:
Practical approaches to individualizing and structuring learning. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lokerson,
J. (1992). Learning disabilities:
Glossary of some important terms. (ERIC Digest #E517). Reston, VA: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children, Council for Exceptional
Children. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 352 780)
Preece,
J. (1995). Disability and adult education – the consumer view. Disability and Society, 10(1), 87-102.
Rohfeld,
R., & Hiemstra, R. (1995). Moderating discussions in the electronic
classroom. In Z. L. Burge & M. P.
Collins (Eds.), Computer-mediated
communications and the online classroom. Volume III: Distance Learning. Cresskill,
NJ: Hampton Press Inc. [On-line]. Available: http://roghiemstra.com/moderating.html
Sisco, B. (1997). The individualizing instruction
model for adult learners. In C. R. Dills & A. J. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Smiles,
S. (1859). Self help. London, UK:
John Murray.
Smith,
R. M., & Associates. (1990). Learning
to learn across the life span. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Tough,
A. (1979). The adult’s learning projects:
A fresh approach to theory and practice in adult learning (2nd
Edition). San Diego: CA: University Associates, Learning Concepts.
Wehmeyer,
M. L. (1992). Self-determination and the education of students with mental
retardation. Education and Training in
Mental Retardation, 27, 302-314.
Whitman,
T. (1990). Self-regulation and mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 94, 347-362.
Willis,
B. (Ed.). (1994). Distance education:
Strategies and tools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Publications.