Learners and Learning

Kurt Lewin articulated three essential ideas in the late 1930s and early 1940s that can be used today to improve distance education courses taught both by the Web and interactive television: (1) the significance of learners playing an active role in discovering knowledge for themselves; (2) the importance of a cohesive approach to instruction that includes cognitive, affective, and psychomotor activities to support permanent changes in attitudes, ideas, and behaviors; and (3 ) the powerful impact that the social environment of the learner has in supporting change. (Stahl, 1999, p. 1) 

The literature on adult teaching and learning is vast with current researchers like Collins (1999) highlighting the need to incorporate principles of adult education into the design and delivery of distance education programs. Typically, adult learners have been identified as those older than 24, with the 18- to 24-year-olds categorized as “traditional” students. However, with the mean age of college students continuing to rise and the push for distance education in undergraduate and graduate curriculum, applying adult education principles becomes ever more relevant. Knowles (1976) used the term “andragogy,” based on the Greek word for “man,” to describe the “art and science of helping adults learn” versus pedagogy, based on the Greek word for child (p. 37).

Caught up in what Ehrmann (1995) called the “Triple Challenge of outcomes, accessibility, and costs,” higher education institutions have turned to computers, video, and telecommunications. In fact, the heat to compete in on-line education with other institutions and for-profit companies was cited by U.S. News & World Report (June 12, 2000) as one reason “colleges are having a hard time recruiting good leaders these days” (p. 10). In this technological whirlwind, institutions often have charged technical support personnel, “techies,” with the primary responsibility for developing an active distance education program, regardless of their background in adult learning and program planning (Collins, 1999, p. 8). 

It is clear to me that knowing how educational technologies operate, especially computers in the desktop and mainframe iterations, is not, on its own, adequate preparation to work with adult learners in the classroom or the workplace, or with the faculty and trainers who teach those adults. (p. 10)

Collins noted that adults, students or teachers, react to new educational technologies with varied emotions, ranging from enthusiasm to disabling fear. Open computer labs may be uncomfortable for senior faculty, for example, because their inexperience with the technology may be obvious to others (Collins, 1999, p. 16). Such reactions are consonant with the concept of self-efficacy, the degree to which an individual feels capable of performing a particular activity (Bandura 1982, 1986, 1993). “An individual may have high self-efficacy for conversing in French, raising orchids, and doing advanced mathematics, but have low efficacy for selling used cars, making home repairs, and conducting a research study” (Bruning, 1995, p. 17). Self-efficacy becomes an important determinant in an individual’s decision not only to engage in an activity but also to persevere under conditions of failure. 

Adult learning can be structured to nurture self-efficacy, such as providing the reassurance and encouragement from a trusted peer. So for the scenario of a senior faculty member who may be an expert in his or her field but feels threatened in an open computer lab, Collins (1999) offered this possible solution based on adult education principles: 

A faculty developer who makes “house calls” and can work with faculty members in their own office, on their own equipment and, and with their own educational objectives can develop a peer relationship of trust and understanding that can foster further willingness to learn and take risks. (p. 13)

Technologists are typically enamored with the latest “bells and whistles” and want to share all the features—all at once. However, as Collins pointed out, adults learning a new technology neither want nor need all a system’s features, according to Collins. A technologist familiar with adult learning principles would begin with a subset of features that learners can immediately use and incorporate, knowing that once confident and comfortable, adults have more incentive to discover a system’s full range of capabilities (p. 15). 

Adults, already juggling the demands of a busy life, typically want to see rapid movement toward a goal, whether that goal is completing a degree, the acquisition of new skills, or the delivery of a class. “If the use of educational technologies can be shown as productive in the rapid attainment of these goals, an adult learner has the added incentive to weather the frustration inherent in the learning curve associated with any technology” (p. 14). 

Clearly, understanding time-tested principles of adult education can help prevent reinventing the proverbial wheel in distance education. McFerrin (1998) noted, the foundational theories of adult learning espoused by Cross (1981) and Knowles (1978, 1980) provide a substantial basis for designing and teaching distance education courses. Knowles (1980) identified conditions that facilitate adult learning, including learners feel a need to learn and the learning environment is characterized by physical comfort, mutual trust and respect, mutual helpfulness, freedom of expression, and acceptance of differences (cited in McFerrin, pp. 13-14).

Importantly, Knowles (1976) observed that adults tend to “avoid, resist, and resent situations in which they feel they are treated like children.” However, as Westmeyer (1980) noted, when adults find themselves in classroom-like learning situations, they are “likely to retrogress to their remembered school days and passively expect to be taught” (p. 33, cited in Collins, 1999, p. 13). Thus, a primary role for adult educators is to encourage self-sufficiency, understanding that adults have phases of growth, readiness to learn, and teachable moments. Knowles (1976) cited Havighurst’s description of these phases as early adulthood (ages 18-30), middle age (ages 30-55), and later maturity (55 and over).

People do not launch themselves into adulthood with the momentum of their childhood and youth and simply coast along to old age. . . . Adulthood has its transition points and its crises. It is a development period in almost as complete a sense as childhood and adolescence are developmental periods” (Havighurst & Orr, 1956, p. 1, cited in Knowles, 1976, p. 47). 

Cyrs (1997) described adults as “big kids in adult bodies. Give them an opportunity and they will go back to their childhood ways of play, drawing, building, manipulating, experiencing, creating, and involving themselves in the things they like most to do” (p. 11). His point was not that adults remain childish, but that learning experiences that bored them as children--a droning, lecturing teacher--will bore and frustrate them as adults.

Unlike a child’s dependence on a teacher to direct learning, learner autonomy or the concept of independence and self-directness has been a hallmark of adult education and an assumed characteristic of adult learners (Chen & Willts, 1999, p. 47). Wedemeyer, a distance education pioneer from the University of Wisconsin, considered the independence of the student as the essence of distance education, thus the term “independent study” (Keegan, 1986, cited in Simonson, Schlosser & Hanson, 1999, p. 62). However, according to Chen et al. (1999), the concept of interdependence may better reflect real world environments, which tend toward teamwork and collaboration. “Indeed, autonomy is itself a recognition and acceptance of interdependence” (p. 47). 

The concepts of collaboration and teamwork follow Knowles’ (1976) precept that adults learn more productively when they share responsibility for the learning process by actively participating in the planning and operation of the experience. Knowles also found that adults who can relate their personal experiences to their studies have a stronger personal commitment to learning. Endorsed by the American Psychological Association (1997), a constructivist approach encourages collaboration, with adults constructing knowledge through discussion and interaction with peers and experts (Kearsley, 1999; Harasim, 1989). 

Studying adult learning and teaching in computer-mediated conferencing, Robertson (2000) found students value a more democratic, less instructor-structured setting with a relatively free and open exchange of ideas. “When adults feel that they are non-voluntary learners they behave in the same way as children do in non-voluntary learning situations, demonstrating the same kinds of motivation and attendance problems along with disruptive behaviour” (Robertson, 2000, p. 11, citing Brundage & MacKeracher, 1980).

Knowles (1976) stated that ultimately the quality and amount of learning is determined by interaction between the learner and the “educative potency” of the learning environment (p. 51). Stahl (1999) stated that the opportunity exists in asynchronous and synchronous distance education to develop a community of learners who encourage group sharing, individual responsibility, and distributed learning. “As more dependable, high-quality desktop video conferencing equipment becomes available, additional options will develop. Through dialogue, students can negotiate and renegotiate meaning as a community of learners, attempting to reconcile conflicting perceptions and assumptions” (p. 4). Chen et al (1999) stated that the concepts of dialogue, structure, and learner autonomy, central to Moore’s Theory of Transactional Distance, are complex in the context of videoconferencing classes given the separation of instructor from students, groups in disparate locations, and the technology itself. Although the current videoconferencing systems offer both synchronous and asynchronous communication features, the researchers recommended that instructors augment the system with other forms of dialog, including face-to-face outside of class time and other electronic communications technologies, like the telephone and fax. 

Clearly, then, one of the critical functions of a distance education instructor is to create or help arrange a “rich” learning environment that promotes cooperation, collaboration, and shared experiences--no easy task. Moreover, as Cyrs (1997) stated, “There are only two professions that do not require any type of training—teaching at the college level and parenting” (p. 20). Dean (1994) in his Designing Instruction for Adult Learners cited Draves’ (1984) list of skills that characterize a good adult educator: effective listening skills, ability to help insecure learners, ability to handle situations involving incorrect learner actions, using supportive words and actions, and possessing a sense of humor (p. 15). 

Teaching at a distance adds to the list with demands for skills as an equipment handler, group facilitator, designer and provider of content tailored to the delivery system, and understanding of students’ characteristics and needs with little first-hand experience and limited, if any, face-to-face contact (Willis, 1995a). For instructors delivering real-time interactive courses, “the high potential for confusion, chaos or boredom” accentuates the need for faculty to have a host of well-practiced skills (Kearsley, 1995, p. 2). 

Adding to the complexity of teaching at a distance is the complexity and diversity of adult learners. Far from a homogenous group, adults come to learning situations with highly diverse life experiences, prior education, and reasons for being there. Some may be insecure in the absence of a teacher and apprehensive about course progress without quick and responsive feedback. When the “distance” in distance education becomes too impersonal for them, they are likely candidates to drop out. On the other hand, Kearsley (1995) found that professionals and executives prefer less interactivity. 

Understanding characteristics of individual adult learners, both personal and situational, is crucial for adult educators because a student’s physical, cognitive, and affective characteristics influence participation and performance (Dean, 1994). As Ehrmann (1995) succinctly phrased it: “Know thy students and what they are learning” (p. 11). 

May (1995) found that she came to know her “invisible” distance education students through the exchange of personal letters, not just perfunctory e-mails related to course work. “Letters also provide a vehicle for students to express themselves and to assess their unique experiences and viewpoints. . . . I see the area of reflection in adult learning as an extremely important and largely underrated aspect of many forms of distance learning” (p. 45).

McKee (1999) found student journals effective in bridging the loss of face-to-face contact, “the hallmark of the ‘great conversation’ that is the essence of higher education” (p. 62). By not grading journals, McKee stated she opened a non-threatening dialog for her students to comment and ask questions about content and course requirements. As a forum for questions, journals offered a chance for the “silent majority” to speak and for those who would otherwise dominate limited class time. UNCLEAR “Negative group opinion is rarely the result of authoritative information on the part of the group; instead, it often seems to be based on contempt for a student who asks frequent or probing questions, or impatience with questions not perceived as immediately useful” (p. 66). The journals also provided her with on-going course evaluations and feedback and a chance to clear up misunderstandings. 

However, instructors come to their students, that understanding is crucial. Students have diverse reactions and learning approaches based on their perceptions of a course’s pace, direction, objectives, and process (Johnston, 2000). For example, if the challenge of the content or task is perceived as too high or too low, a student may adopt a “surface level” approach, defined as seeing learning as a means to an end and doing only the amount of work required (Baird, 1992). Conversely, deep learning refers to a student who becomes personally involved in the task and seeks to obtain underlying meaning. Citing Ramsden (1995), Johnston (2000) stated that surface or shallow learning is not the sole province of weak students nor a deep approach adopted only by more competent students. 

In fact, Jegede et al (1999) found that significantly more low-achieving distance education students were employers or in responsible management positions, a result more of lack of time as opposed to lack of achievement motivation. UNCLEAR “By its nature, distance education relies heavily on individual students’ ability to manage and control their personal and situational circumstances in order to achieve” (p. ). The researchers did not find the literature affirmative regarding the relationship between achievement and locus of control. Studies by Riipinen, 1994; Phares, 1976; and Findley & Cooper, 1983. Ffound academic achievement correlates moderately with more internal beliefs. On the other hand, a study by Stipek & Weisz, 1981, found no correlation. 

Another variable that can affect motivation is an unresolved or unknown mismatch between an instructor’s teaching style and a student’s preferred learning approach. Such a mismatch can result in frustration, degraded learning, and a loss of mutual respect. For example, a harried student who wants a well-organized class and a comprehensive set of notes may become impatient with activities like role-playing, student presentations, or free form discussions. Only on-going instructor assessments from personal observation, from others who know the students, or from data-gathering techniques can help resolve teaching-learning conflicts (Dean, 1994, 0. 40).

Researchers have found common characteristics of successful students. Biner and Dean (1997) identified these characteristics of a successful telecourse student (pp. 3-4)
 

Resourceful, independent “high performers”(Students requiring “high degrees of coddling and direction may be ill-advised to take such courses.”)

 

Least compulsive (High compulsivity compounds the already stressful situation for nontraditional students taking such a course.)

 

High degree of expedience in daily lives (Busy adults take advantage of such courses to fit their already delicate balance of responsibilities.)

 

Satisfied with speed of exchange of course materials with instructor

 

Further along in college careers (academic experience)

The researchers did not find that age, gender, or socioeconomic status produced statistically significant differences. They did find that seasoned distance education students “come to expect more and become more critical and have expectations for quality” (p. 40).

Their findings correlate with findings from earlier studies summarized in Distance Education at a Glance Guide 10, compiled by the University of Idaho’s College of Engineering. Those factors included a willingness to initiate calls to instructors for assistance, possessing a serious attitude toward the course, employment in a field where advancement requires academic upgrading, and previous completion of a college degree. Additionally, the guide stated that learners “get more from courses when the instructor seems comfortable with the technology, maintains eye contact with the camera, repeats questions, and possesses a sense of humor” (p. 2).

Regardless of the educational context, the primary role of the student is to learn. This is a daunting task under the best of circumstances, requiring motivation, planning, and an ability to analyze and apply the instructional content being taught. When instruction is delivered at a distance, additional challenges result . . ." (Willis, 1995a, p. ) 

BACK to TOP