Teaching for Transformation by Patricia Cranton - Article Example

The text seems to be culturally skewed toward a more liberal education in that it is somewhat disparaging of the concept of a rote curriculum with hard and fast answers. It presents emancipatory knowledge as being the highest level of knowledge as it involves self-awareness, critical thinking and freedom from constraints while utilizing other forms of knowledge, informational and communicative, as tools to achieve the transformational experience presented as the greatest desired outcome. For example, informational knowledge is presented as requiring the least amount of thought as it is the recitation and regurgitation of facts, figures and established processes. Communicative knowledge requires more intellectual investment as it introduces shades of grey into the conversation and requires individuals to talk to each other in order to establish the agreed upon assumptions and abstracts they perceive in their world. Transformational knowledge is then described as using these other forms of knowledge to evaluate and critically analyze the information that is known to understand how it came to be known, what part is abstract, what part is concrete and how this knowledge functions to direct everyday behavior, among other things. This presentation immediately sets up a liberal approach to education that fosters the concepts of self-learning and negates the importance of facts and concrete knowledge. Throughout the article, Cranston blends the descriptive, evidence of her ideas as they occur in real life, and prescriptive, ways in which these modes of thought might be encouraged. However, these do not seem to be irresponsible or inaccurate as these descriptive passages are intended to illustrate the complex concepts she is discussing and paint a picture of how various forms of thought occur. Her initial argument is based on only two studies, one of which states that transformational learning is the primary goal of adult education (64) and the other which outlines the three basic types of knowledge in such a way as to rank them in order of importance or intellectual investment. Much of the rest of her argument is based upon the findings of the same researcher who identified transformational learning as the ideal goal with some criticism brought forward briefly by other researchers and further support offered by the authors own previous studies. While the presentation of the various elements of transformative learning is given – i.e. steps that an individual engages in as they are encountering a transforming experience – and a suggestion is made that numerous studies have been made into this process with a variety of results that have been summarized in this report, no indication is made of where these other studies might be found or who might have conducted them. Empirical evidence is defined as “Scientifically-based research from fields such as psychology, sociology, economics and neuroscience, and especially from research in educational settings” (2002). In her lack of citing any evidence of this type, or a limited number and very poor range of this type of evidence, the article is poorly based on empirical evidence. This text is intended to benefit the adult educator yet serves to benefit the individual students as it is emphasized again and again that there is no one correct way of instructing adults. In this presentation, it is hoped that the reader, presumably the adult educator, will realize that there is only one true goal in teaching adults and that is for their students to have a transformative experience regarding their philosophies on teaching. In this way, it seems to be bolstering the concept that the power of learning is in the hands and the minds of the students themselves, taking much of the responsibility for learning off of the shoulders of the teacher who emerges as a guide and sympathetic sounding board rather than the keeper and distributor of all knowledge and perspective. Although the concept of transformational learning is described as being a learned experience that can be taught in the classroom, it is also presented as being a process that only the student can find their way through. The author indicates at the very beginning that one of her students, learning to become an adult educator, was looking for the one right way to teach and, despite tremendous effort on his part, a great deal of discussion within the classroom and private conversations between herself and the student, he remained frustrated in his studies until he suddenly understood what they were talking about. How he came to this understanding was not known or explained, therefore it is presented as a natural experience that has no outer control. This example and concept are carried through the rest of the article, emphasizing the idea that it is an individual experience that can be triggered through numerous yet unidentifiable means making it a reified experience. It is suggested that this is the ideal form of adult education, allowing the student to come to their own conclusions in their own ways, yet forcing them to consider ideas and approaches that they had not previously considered. Collectivism is described as an idea or means of organizing that “treats society as if it were a super-organism existing over and above its individual members, and which takes the collective in some form (e.g. tribe, race or state) to be the primary unit of value” (Miller, 2005). The entire system presented in this article refutes this concept as it highlights the importance of the individual to the process of achieving transformational learning. Indeed, the individual is essential if this type of learning is to be acquired at all. While suggestions are made of strategies teachers might use to trigger transformative experiences, essentially keeping the roles defined by indicating the instructor is the director of events and the accidental catalyst of thought through her efforts to expose students to new ideas and perspectives, these strategies are continuously referred to as suggestions and possibilities that may induce transformational thought rather than concrete prescriptives that will bring about change. The careful application of studied technique emerges as being the primary factor differentiating the field from the learners as it is the teacher that understands the reasons for choosing specific reading material or other presented material, challenges the students with critical questions that are scientifically designed to challenge long-held assumptions. However, the line is blurred by the suggestion that in order to be an effective transformational teacher, one must engage in the processes of transformational thought as well. If the teacher wishes to encourage others to explore their assumptions and critically think about what they have believed to be true, the teacher must also be willing to challenge their own beliefs on a consistent basis. One of the major problems with this form of teaching emerges through the article as being a problem of evaluation and assessment. Because the process that occurs is an internal one without predefined objectives or goals and because the means of going through this process remains mysterious and unique to each individual, there is no true way in which a student might be assessed for their ability or inability to achieve the goals outlined. Various activities might assist the instructor in evaluating the student’s participation in the classroom. These include the evidence of thought processes as they are exposed in assigned journals, discussion groups, discourse, debates or other classroom activities, but little can be done to actually monitor the student’s progress. Another challenge to assessment is the concept that much of the actual transformational thought that is brought about as a result of things done in class actually occurs outside of the classroom. According to Cranston, what is done in the classroom is only the warm-up exercise while the moment of truth typically occurs on the drive home, in discussions of what occurred during the day with family or in other moments of free thought. In the article, Cranston even states explicitly, “We cannot teach transformation. We often cannot even identify how or why it happens” (70). However, it is also suggested that students experiencing transformative thought processes are typically anxious to discuss their new ideas and explore more of what they have learned. In this way, the normative processes of education are challenged, moving away from the strict recording of grades and of strictly defined academic goals and into a more abstract and perhaps more productive means of educating the mind to think intelligently and critically, to analyze and evaluate and come to conclusions that are based on personal experience, information, consideration of alternate perspectives and focused upon understanding and accepting differences rather than refuting them. While political impediments to education are not explicitly addressed in this article, there is an undercurrent of suggestion that the old forms of teaching and learning are no longer considered valid, beneficial or even useful. Instead of attempting to fit each student into a predefined norm of behavior, thought and process, the article suggests teachers’ goals should be focused upon developing the individual, encouraging individual thought and expanding that thought to understand and appreciate diversity and conflict as a means of furthering knowledge and experience rather than as a threat to a status quo that can no longer stand in an increasingly globalized world. While the article has significant problems in terms of empirical support and evidence, it nevertheless makes a bid for a greater freedom in education for the student while shifting the weight of responsibility from the teacher to the student. References Cranton, Patricia. (Spring 2002). “Teaching for Transformation.” New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. N. 93, Wiley Publications. Miller, Fred. (2005). “Foundations Study Guide: Political Philosophy.” The Atlas Society and its Objectivist Center. Washington D.C.: The Objectivist Center. “What is Empirical Evidence?” (October 2002). Evidence-Based Education. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Student Achievement and School Accountability Conference. Read More