Adult Education Theory and Practice at the College Level - Article Example

Running Head: Education Adult Education Theory and Practice at the College Level IntroductionWithout appropriate paradigms of useful strategy for teaching and learning in adult education, universities and colleges will keep on facing difficulties. One of the major challenges to higher education is dealing with the stereotypes about adult learners. The rationale for these stereotypes is fully embedded. Nevertheless, to the extent that they have a major justification, it appears to fall roughly along the subsequent assumptions: adult learners do not have up to date formal education; as a result, they may lack the necessary study or learning skills. Consequently, they will have a tendency to use less useful techniques of learning in college. In addition, they may show heightened learning difficulties and deficits as an outcome of age-specific weaknesses in intellectual capacities. This paper aims to challenge all of these stereotypes about adult learners and come up with an appropriate approach to adult education at the college level. Adult Development: Cognitive and Intellectual Factors It is possible to develop a unifying model of intelligence that takes into consideration the factors of traditional process, but a broader range of cognitive factors, alongside areas of interest and personality. The below diagram illustrates one paradigm, referred to as PPIK- for ‘intelligence-as-process, personality, interest, and intelligence-as-knowledge’ (Smith & Pourchot, 1998, 151). According to Ackerman (1996), this paradigm merges these four roots of individual-differences variation to produce individual differences in stages of work-related and academic knowledge. This paradigm not merely describes a transition from process to knowledge, but describes as well the possible interconnection between knowledge acquisition and interests and personality. Figure 1. Ackerman’s PPIK diagram (Smith & Pourchot, 1998, 152) For adults, however, this paradigm presents a way for connecting traditional intelligence measures with correct intellectual skills and knowledge measures. Specifically, even though measures of traditional intelligence may somewhat explain adult learning, an appropriate evaluation of adult knowledge necessitates evaluation of adult intellect (Rubenson, 2011). Several knowledge components can be sufficiently assessed using current rankings of occupational competence and college-level proficiency, yet these rankings only start to recognize adult intelligence (Ackerman, 1996). Nevertheless, by employing an integrated assessment method that allows for traditionally evaluated interests, personality, and intellect, a more inclusive assessment of adult intelligence could be achievable. Furthermore, one can also integrate features of motivational abilities into the developmental paradigm (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007) since they affect the relationship between knowledge acquisition and interest. There are three particular uses of intellectual evaluation for the purposes of adult education, that is, selection, categorization, and teaching. The PPIK model proposes a number of capable uses all over these three application domains. Selection. The PPIK model of adult intelligence, to begin with, indicates that assessment of adult academic achievement will be enhanced when evaluations are performed on individual differences in important knowledge components, instead of the conventional college admission tests. Because of knowledge acquisition’s developmental evolution, according to Smith and Pourchot (1998), older adults may be predicted to score higher than younger adults on intelligence exams, an outcome that is in agreement with the findings that older adults are predisposed to achieve higher in postsecondary classes than younger adults with the same scores on usual college admission exams, like the American College Testing (ACT). Categorization. The mission of locating the most favorable area of interest for adults going back to school presently needs ability. The PPIK model presents an explanation for locating, particularly, the existing knowledge of adult learners. An outline of knowledge structures for potential adult students may be applied to select a field of study that most favorably utilizes the knowledge of each student (Sheared, Sissel, & Cunningham, 2001). Since adults are prone to exhibit inferior performance in process-related intellect, an evaluation of these areas could support methodically established ‘complement’ between area of interest and the student’s strong points. Teaching. Optimal instructional settings go well with the instruction’s content and complexity and the individual student’s process skills. Nevertheless, for adult students, it may be particularly crucial to keep in mind age-specific weaknesses in process-related intellect and improvements in knowledge-specific intellect (Merriam, 2001). Proper instructional modifications would try to lessen, for instance, memorization, which necessitates process skills, and increase the level to which new material and content are developed from earlier knowledge structures (Merriam, 2001). In any case, the major point is that with the associated changes to the intelligence structure with adult learning, instruction should be transformed from the existing process-oriented method to a knowledge-oriented model. The Theory and Application of Andragogical Model Zmeyov (1998 as cited in Chan, 2010) argues that the vigorous growth of adult education altered its image within the field of education. There is now a need for an educational model that takes into consideration the needs of adult learners. The andragogical model, introduced comprehensively by Malcolm Knowles, is a highly recognized answer to these needs. Forrest and Peterson (2006 as cited in Chan, 2010) argue that the andragogical model is important in management courses to assist students in preparing for their occupational life. Forrest and Peterson also argue, “Modern management requires practical implementation of skills learned, not regulation of principles. Without implementation, students cannot adapt to the ever-changing workplace” (Chan, 2010, 26). Employing the premises of andragogy, the teacher can modify the instructional material and content to satisfy learner interest by engaging the learners in preparing the learning goals and tasks and working out actual problems. As stated by Robinson (2002), the familiarity of andragogy fosters the participation of students in their learning experiences and determines the bounds of these experiences. Robinson (2002) further argues, “andragogy not only captures the beginning of the adult education movement, but its perspective is timeless and applies to adult education in a multicultural world” (as cited in Kroth & Taylor, 2009, 1). As remarked by Merriam (2001), the andragogical model adds to the knowledge on adult learning styles, process, and context. Furthermore, andragogy is a way to differentiate adult education from other educational fields. Davenport and Davenport (1985) explain that andragogy is regarded “as a theory of adult education, theory of adult learning, theory of technology of adult learning, method of adult education, technique of adult education, and a set of assumptions” (as cited in Rubenson, 2011, 89). The andragogical model has also influenced criminology, business administration, and other fields of study. Zmeyov headed a team of scholars to develop an andragogical training code. The code enumerates qualities, skills, knowledge, and training qualifications that are needed to become adult instructors (Rubenson, 2011). According to Chan (2010), derived from the code, the andragogical training courses were established in several colleges and universities in Russia, particularly in the Moscow State Open Pedagogical University. Some have interpreted and treated the andragogical model as a theory of adult education, while others perceive it as a strategy, a set of premise, or a rule for educational teaching and learning. Irrespective of the description, the andragogical model contributes greatly to the understanding of the needs of adult learners, and, generally, to adult education. Applying Adult Learning Theories to Higher Adult Education When choices about techniques and courses are made by educators indifferent to or uninformed of the nature of adult learners’ needs, or their learning styles and processes, the outcomes can be detrimental. Hence, it becomes important to use adult learning theories in preparing instructional materials and content for adult education. Given that adults often learn in unconventional settings like the workplace, it seems right that teachers try hard to take apart any obstacles between the adult students and themselves. In courses for adult students, the average age of graduating pupils can be almost forty (Richardson, 1998). Hence, instructors and students are more directly similar in maturity and age. As learning theory has shown that adults better acquire knowledge from their peers, the educator can take on a learning facilitator role. Aside from breaking down the actual hierarchical obstacle, the adult instructor can promote small group tasks to cultivate learning harmonization among learners (Dinmore, 1997). Learning becomes a mutual or joint task valuing and consolidating the knowledge, skills, and life experience of all members, plus the instructor, in contrast to the isolated, usually aggressive tasks of pre-adult students. Authority and learning is mutual. As commented by Halliburton (1979 as cited in Dinmore, 1997), an unforeseen advantage of adults educating other adults, is that the educators themselves could acquire useful ideas from the actual experiences of their adult learners. Adults acquire knowledge in various ways. Irrespective of whether their knowledge is gained in an informal or formal environment, the way in which they acquire knowledge is directly related with their varied life experiences. Theoreticians and practitioners have emphasized the inclination of adult students to put together those experiences in an effort to give importance to them. These experiences make adult learners more apt to gain from interdisciplinary programs, and from the participatory, synergistic, and interactive techniques that often utilized in those courses (Ritt, 2008). Possibly, this is supported by the reality that the integrative processes of adults for dealing with the everyday realities of life make them poorly skilled at the ins and outs of disciplinary procedures, which to them seem to be outside their worldview. A vital aspect in numerous adult learners’ assessment of instructional success is whether their educator has been successful in putting together their field of interest, course material and content, and their own experience. Conclusions At present, most education systems and their faculty are not adequately prepared to deal with the varied requirements and demands of their adult learners. Adult students have distinct experiences and needs that shape their responses to and relations with their own colleges or universities. In order to better cater to the adult student population, educators should: make sure that addressing the needs of adult students is integrated into the general mission of the education institution; ensure that comprehensive adult college courses are useful, practical, adaptable, and accessible; adopt practices that value the experiences of adult students; and value the diversity of social class, racial affinity, gender, and age embodied by adult learners. References Ackerman, P.L. (1996). A theory of adult intellectual development: process, personality, interests, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22, 227-57. Chan, S. (2010). Applications of Andragogy in Multi-Disciplined Teaching and Learning. Journal of Adult Education, 39(2), 25+ Dinmore, I. (1997). Interdisciplinarity and Integrative Learning: An Imperative for Adult Education. Education, 117(3), 452+ Merriam, S. (2001). The New Update on Adult Learning Theory: New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood: a comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Richardson, J. (1998). Adult Students in Higher Education: Burden or Boon? Journal of Higher Education, 69(1), 65+ Ritt, E. (2008). Redefining Tradition: Adult Learners and Higher Education. Adult Learning, 19(1-2), 12+ Rubenson, K. (2011). Adult Learning and Education. Vancouver, Canada: Academic Press. Sheared, V., Sissel, P.A., & Cunningham, P.M. (2001). Making Space: Merging Theory and Practice in Adult Education. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey. Smith, M.C. & Pourchot, T. (1998). Adult Learning and Development: Perspectives from Educational Psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Taylor, B. & Kroth, M. (2009). Andragogy’s Transition into the Future: Meta-Analysis of Andragogy and Its Search for a Measurable Instrument. Journal of Adult Education, 38(1), 1+ Read More