Transformative Learning in the Context of Children and Youth Education - Essay Example

Topic: Educational Communication Introduction The study of transformational learning originated from work associated with Jack Mezirow and it is defined as a form of learning that prompts comprehensive changes in the learner compared to other forms of learning particularly the learning experiences that shape the learner, creating a considerable effect or paradigm shift, which affects the ensuing experiences of the learner. Various scholars have published papers touching on different facets of transformational learning, and they have been able to acknowledge the factors, which result in transformational learning for the adult students. Mezirow, who was the earliest writer to address transformational learning, came up with the idea of meaning perspectives, an individual’s perception of the entire world and meaning schemes, which are smaller parts that comprise of particular knowledge, values and beliefs concerning an individual’s experiences. Several meaning schemes come together to create a person’s perspective with this meaning perspectives being attained inertly in the process of childhood and youth, with the individual being the target of the transformation that takes place through adulthood experiences. The function as perceptual sifts that regulate the manner in which an individual will bring together and deduce the meanings of his or her life’s experience. Transformative learning in the context of children and youth education Regardless of whether transformational learning is considered in terms of Mezirow’s definition or in relation to identity, it is not the form of learning that is associated with children concerning the timeframe of compulsory schooling. This means that there is no point of directing transformative learning at this section of the population, as it will be meaningless. Nonetheless, a particular short-term identity formation that later turn out to be the foundation of the more lasting development and thus also of transformative learning in regard to meaning perspectives, frames of reference together with other factors of identity, occurs at this age. The most critical point is that the short-term identity formation entails self-perception and self-understanding of the child along with the child’s appreciation of his or her own position in relation to other children. It is evident that the circumstances for the development of these aspects during the later years have developed to become more and more problematic and complex as a consequence of socialization that occurs in institutions (Illeris, 2014). Initially, children used to cultivate their self-perception based on their family, particular at the time when daily life and a significant part of the societal work functions occurred in this setting. On the other hand, the schools have adopted gradually socialization thus influencing the process through the settings comprised of professional child-bearers who deal with numerous children simultaneously in different groups. This therefore suggests a significant increase in difficulty in all the experiences the children go through including all the differences between the home setting and setting at their institutions. It also signifies a demand towards functioning and growing up as part of a crowd of children in the context of large institutions and an increasing degree of learning demands and observations of conduct of every single child with specific reference to a probable early intervention in regard to propensities of social, learning or other critical issues. The more instantaneous and expected socialization has been substituted by complex, outside directed and in some instances estranging systems. Most of the identity formation takes place during the youthful years meaning that the vital developments that provide a basis for transformative learning activities that occur at the same time and are in one way or another incorporated in the youth education. However, this is not the case in terms of educational plan, understanding and designing, instead the point of departure determined by the knowledge and skills which the authorities have decided to teach the young generation while preparing for later participation in social and working lives. In youth education o an academic nature, there is always a particular propensity for conservatism and a methodology that is in favor of the more comprehensive regulations of educational contents, while practice seems to have focused backwards rather than in the forward direction. In vocational education of the youth, the tangible needs of working life appear to have the most conclusive influences and designs, and the content has been structured based on this (Illeris, 2014). Mezirow’s theory in personal learning experience According to Mezirow’s theory of transformational learning, the educator becomes the facilitator when the main objective for learners is the construction of knowledge concerning themselves, other learners as well as social norms (Cranton, 2006). Accordingly, the learner will play a vital role in the learning setup and process and he must come up with norms in the classroom such as courtesy, veneration and responsibility, in terms of assisting each other in the learning process. Learners must be open to diversity in the learning setup while aiming for peer teamwork (Jarvis, 1987). The learners are also supposed to have a critical awareness of their suppositions so that they can change their unchallenged state of reference. Communicative learning requires that learners analytically reflect on the suppositions that trigger intents, morals, philosophies and outlooks (Daloz, 1988). The learners take part in impartial re-framing of their states of reference when they reflect on the suppositions of other learners. Conversely, subjective reframing takes place when the learners develop a critical assessment of their suppositions. The role of the learner is to take part in discourse aggressively, as through discourse, they are able to confirm what has been communicated to them. This discourse develops an opportunity to assess critically evidence, debates and different perspectives that are important in fostering collaborative learning (Merriam & Heuer, 1996). Similarities and differences between Freire and Mezirow’s theories Mezirow and Freire are academics and writers who have undertaken a close examination and exploration of adult learning approaches, concepts and best practices. The banking concept that was developed by Freire states that teachers are responsible for supplying information to their students who are mere containers that hold and commit to memory this information until when they are required to repeat it (Freire, 1993). Freire provides explanations to a number of issues that affect adult education while putting emphasis on the fact that banking education hinders ingenuity while breaking the purposes of awareness. On the other hand, Mezirow does not dwell on the issues affecting adult education; instead, he dwells on the probable solutions to these issues. He focuses on transformative learning while explaining the significance of changing the frame of reference. Even though Freire and Mezirow address the problems associated with adult education, they have different perceptions on the solutions to these problems. Nevertheless, they agree that a form of education that poses a problem is the most favorable type of learning. Freire’s theory states that the current adult education system is trying to educate people through the provision of historical facts as well as concepts so that they can be committed to memory (Monchinski, 2008). He further disagrees with this form of education and the propositions that adult education is supposed to be founded on posing problems. He continues to state that banking education numbs and hinders creative abilities while education that is characterized by problem solving entails a continued presentation of reality (Freire, 1993). Through this, Freire explains that memorization of facts does not create individuals with an ability to think critically in the same a setting that poses problems would (Roberts, 2000). Conversely, Mezirow dwell on the significance on familiarity with a person’s own predetermined beliefs. He also dwells on the significance of critically assessing information he states that people must learn to make their own interpretations instead of acting on purposes as the feelings of other people. In his entire writing, Mezirow contends the significance of coming up with personal viewpoints and critically assessing information from every source. Both theorists explain the significance of self-reflection and problem-posing education. According to Freire, the problem-posing theory and practice takes the historicity of the people as its beginning, and while Mezirow agrees with this idea, he expresses it in a different manner. He has the belief that problem-posing education should entail a critical analysis of situations notwithstanding the past, culture or other experiences in life. It is thus obvious that the two concur that the examination of history is an integral part of learning and adult education. The two authors examine adult educational problems in different ways where Mezirow clearly establishes the significance of a frame of reference as well as source synthesis while also examining a number of other supporting topics. To support his perception of adult education, he assesses various different forms of learning, independent thinking and fundamentals. This is in contrast to the approach adopted by Freire as he dwells closely on his banking theory while contrasting it with his perceptions in terms of problem-posing education. In supporting his ideas, he conducts a comprehensive analysis of his experiences and observations instead of depending on the studies and research done by others. Even though Freire addresses several topics, he does this in a different way when compared to Mezirow as he does not provide the same level of elaboration on his topics or provide comprehensive analysis the way Mezirow provides. Even though the two authors address the same topics, they do it in a unique way and both concur that the prevailing adult education system fails to produce adults that can be able to think critically. Freire is of the opinion that the banking concept is responsible, while Mezirow merely asserts that a problem-posing form of education is required. Mezirow and Freire analyze and deliver their thoughts on adult education effectively while offering solid solutions to the prevailing problem. Presently, adult education is going through numerous changes and is not yet perfect. Therefore, it is hoped that more people will critically address adult education and challenge the status quo so that this form of education can become better the same way that Mezirow and Freire have done. References Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Daloz, L. (1988). Beyond Tribalism: Renaming The Good, The True, and The Beautiful. Adult Education Quarterly, 38(4), 234-241. doi:10.1177/0001848188038004005 Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin Books. Illeris, K. (2014). Transformative Learning and Identity. New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group. Jarvis, P. (1987). Meaningful and Meaningless Experience: Towards an Analysis of Learning From Life. Adult Education Quarterly, 37(3), 164-172. doi:10.1177/0001848187037003004 Merriam, S., & Heuer, B. (1996). Meaning-making, adult learning and development: a model with implications for practice. Int. J. Of Lifelong Educ., 15(4), 243-255. doi:10.1080/0260137960150402 Monchinski, T. (2008). Critical pedagogy and the everyday classroom. Dordrecht: Springer. Roberts, P. (2000). Education, literacy, and humanization. Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey. Read More