The Victorians viewed children as ‘little adults’ - which justified sending them to work at the age of 8; expecting them to be silent in the presence of their betters (’older’ adults) and to deal with a complex world with little emotion. As we celebrate learners having more ‘voice’ and involvement in authoring educational experiences, are we at risk of requiring young people to take on too much responsibility for their learning at too young an age?

The term pedagogy has been in use since the early 16^th century to describe ‘the art and science of teaching’ (amongst other definitions) particularly focusing upon the teacher’s role in a young person’s learning. More recently of course, it has formed part of the ongoing cry ‘it’s not the technology, it’s the pedagogy…’ which is raised at every conference, at every turn.

Andragogy, on the other hand, only became well used in 1913 after Malcolm Knowles developed a theory of it to describe adult learning - specifically focusing upon how children and adults learn differently (and as such require different forms of teaching).
One of the key differences is the description of the learner. Traditionally, pedagogy views the learner as novice, as being introduced to knowledge, to training and to the world. Conversely, andragogy is largely based upon Knowles’ (1977) four principles which describe the adult learner - and their needs - differently:

The first principle suggests that conditions in andragogical approaches should motivate the learners to want to learn, with learners taking responsibility for their own learning and becoming more self-directed in their learning. Galbraith (1990, p10) describes this principle:

“Learners and facilitators are involved in continual process of activity, reflection upon activity, collaborative analysis of activity, new activity, further reflection, and collaborative analysis, and so on”.

The second principle states that within andragogy, learners can be a resource for their own, and other’s learning. This reflects learners collaborating; being seen as experts, and a recognition of their ‘non-traditional life experiences and awareness of self’ (Uehling, 1996).

The third principle portrays learning as an ongoing process, rather than defined by set stages and short term goals. The description here is of ‘learning to learn’; of enabling learners to embrace change and to live in a changing world, and that within andragogy, “assessment [is] not just for evaluation, but also for motivation and feedback. Assessment for adult learners can also be empowering and can lead to a richer, deeper learning experience” (Beaman, 1998 p58). This principle reflects the recognition that adults’ relationship with the educational institution is one of greater equity than younger learners have with the adult construct.

The final principle is that learning should have immediate application to the real world: that andragogical approaches should “bring ‘real world’ opportunities into the classroom through simulations, cases, technology, and collaborative learning opportunities between educational institutions and business”. (Wankel and DeFillipp (2003) in Thompson and Deis (2004).)

The principles of andragogy are of learner centredness and learner responsibility – echoed so loudly by the current calls for learner voice, participation and co-construction of learning experiences. Indeed, Cervero and Wilson (2001, p.5) state that “the highest professional and moral principle for adult educators, then, is to involve learners in identifying their needs”.

If you had time to re-read everything written above but removed the word adult and changed the word andragogy to pedagogy, would promoters of learner voice and student participation whole-heartedly agree with these principles as the basis of new approaches to teaching and learning?

There are certainly sets of principles that underpin good practice in supporting learner voice - not least in Futurelab’s Learner Voice publication. There is also a need to be explicit about the guidelines that highlight the adults’ role in these approaches.

There are many strong reasons for increasing learners’ role in shaping their educational experiences: from theories that view learning as building on previous experiences, through democratic values of participation and voice, to recognising young people’s cultures, world views and life experiences (to name but a few).

So why the opening remarks about Victorian views of childhood? It was written to question the risks of using teaching approaches designed for adults (andragogy) with much younger learners. There are psychological, biological and social differences between children and adults, so what are the differences in their requirements in the way in which they learn and are taught?

Should we now be calling ‘it’s not the technology, it’s the andragogy… for kids’ – or should we be amending pedagogical approaches to learn from its older relative? If so, what elements should we leave and what should be challenged? What parts of andragogical approaches are not appropriate for younger learners? Is it that we don’t see a difference between adult learners and younger learners – in their reasons to learn, their approaches to learning or their needs from teachers? Or is it that our understanding of children’s capabilities have changed dramatically?

Are we at risk of asking young people to take on too much responsibility for their own learning and development, or if not, are we clear about where the accountability lies in learning activities where students have greater involvement? Adults are aware of their accountability for their choices – hopefully informed by an awareness of a range of possibilities – but are younger learners?
Are we, in any way, shirking our responsibility of care for young people in taking on board learner voice and learner participation uncritically?

If the answer is yes – or even a small whining ‘possibly’ to any of these questions – what needs to be done to ensure that progressions in learner voice are done sensitively and appropriately?

Answers on slate can be handed in just before the penny soup is served.

Trackback

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 16th, 2008 at 12:35 pm and is filed under children, learner voice, personalisation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.