Week 6 Learning Journal

Points to Ponder

Are women learners really different from men?  Can gender be separated from class and race?

Ruminations

So, this week we are constructing knowledge by building wikis.  My group is studying Women's Ways of Knowing by Belenky, Clinchy, Tarule, and Goldberger (1986).  Their work in understanding women began as a collaborative effort in the 70's.  As graduate students they were bothered by the fact that women were not used as research subjects.  They proceeded to interview 135 women to determine if women know what they know differently than men.  They identified five ways of knowing: silence, received knowing, subjective knowing, procedural knowing, and constructed knowing.

Around the same time frame as Belenky et al (1986), Carol Gilligan was developing her theory explaining that men and women are different in their moral development (1982).  She claims that men approach morality with a justice orientation where women are more caring.  Although there is evidence to support her research, even Gilligan admits that men sometimes display the characteristics typically seen in women, which is why she titled her work, In a Different Voice. 

Both of these feminist works speak to me intuitively.  Yes, I think men and women are different and I think they approach the world differently.  However, do we learn differently?  I don't know.  How can one separate gender from culture, class, race, etc to determine gender is responsible for any one thing?  With research like Belenky and Gilligan that is based on interviews, I am a bit suspect that one can find almost anything one wants to look for.  Belenky et al (1986) characterizes the silent voice as mindless, obedient, and voiceless.  They say these women were mostly found in the social service agencies and were among "the youngest and most socially, economically, and educationally deprived (p. 23-24)."  Is that gender specific?  Are young men who have experienced poverty and abuse silenced?

Belenky, et al (1986) expand procedural knowing to include separate knowing and connected knowing.  In broad terms, connected knowers are more empathetic and receptive where separate knowers are critical and detached.  Although women typically score higher in connected knowing and men score higher in separate knowing, other research (Magdola, as cited in Khine and Hayes, 2010) states that these ways of knowing may be related to gender but not dictated by it.  Now, that makes sense!

Galloti (as cited in Khine and Hayes, 2010) found that although there was clear gender difference in preference of separate knowing and connected knowing, both genders are capable of both ways of knowing but may show a preference to one.  

I realize this review of research is by no means exhaustive, however, are these assumptions any different than claiming boys are more tactile and girls are more verbal?  I think educators must be very careful not to impose generalizations and stereotypes on their students.  I don't see where this research can be generalized or trusted, two necessary components to good research.  I, for one have often challenged the model of white, middle-age, red-headed women, and I intend to continue my trend!

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice. Harvard University Press

Khine, M. and Hays, B. (2010). Investigating Women's Ways of Knowing. Issues in Educational Research, vol 20, issue 2. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier20/khine.pdf on November 28, 2012.

Week 5 Learning Journal

Points to Ponder

Once again this week there has been conversation about learning styles.  I thought it was interesting that  after all this consideration, the Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007, p. 410) tell us that Kolb's Learning Style Inventory meet the minimum criteria for a psychometric instrument.  Why did we spend time on Kolb's LSI if it isn't valid?

So, what instruments are credible?   Is it just the instrument that is not credible, what about the theory?

Ruminations

Minimum standard for any instrument used for the purpose of pedagogy is internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct and predictive validity (Kanninen, 2008).

Kanninen (2008) identifies 71 learning style models, of which 60 have their own questionnaire.  Only three meet the criteria for redesign of pedagogy. Why do we have 71 different learning models??!! Coffield, Mosely, Hall and Ecclestone (2004) studied 13 most popular learning style models and determined that only three came close to showing validity:  

  

1. Allison and Hayes Cognitive Style Index

2. Apter's Motivational Style Profile

3. Vermunt's Inventory of Learning Styles

I found it interesting that Kolb has since developed the Adaptive Style Inventory (ASI) to measure how flexible a leaner is in adjusting a learning style depending on life situation and the Learning Skills Profile (LSP) to differentiate learning styles from learning skills (Coffield, et. al 2004).  Although the Experiential Learning Theory has merit and is widely used independently as well as a base for other developing theories, the LSI's reliability is disputed; the construct validity is questionable and the predictive validity is low (Ibid, 2004).

Of the three instruments listed above, Vermunt's Inventory is considered worthwhile in higher education to assess approaches to learning and for consideration in pedagogy (Kanninen, 2008).  One criticism  is the narrow focus of this model.  It only addresses higher education and may not be applicable to adult general education or vocational education (Coffield, et al 2004).  However, as a student of adult education, I would like to have more awareness of this assessment.  

Vermunt identifies 4 learning styles that make up a "coherent whole of learning activities that students usually employ" (Coffield, et al 2004): meaning-directed, application-directed, reproduction-directed, and undirected.  He does not believe that a learning style is fixed and is the result of an interplay between personal and contextual influences.  Within the framework, each of the 4 learning styles has distinguishing features in 5 areas which suggests each learning style links to behavioral, affective, conative, and metacognition characteristics (Ibid, 2004).  The focus is one the strategies a learner uses to process knowledge (Cassidy, 2004).  The research indicates that Vermunt uses Kolb's Experiential Theory (as well as others) as influence to his approach to assessment of learning styes (Ibid, 2004) 

The chart below explains how each learning style approaches learning (Coffield, et al 2004):

The following graphics offer the learners perspective on how they go about the process of learning (Ibid, 2004).

I can see why this is appealing to educators since it deals directly with how students approach academic learning.  I tried to find an instrument to take to determine my own learning style, but I couldn't find one.   I think I am more of an application-directed learner, but I have certainly engaged in learning from a meaning-directed focus.  Good thing Vermunt's model is fluid and not mutually exclusive (Coffield, et al 2004).  

Bottom line on learning preferences...as an educator, my intent is to offer content in a variety of modes to help students learn not only in their preferred style, but also in other styles so that they become better learners.  While it is a good idea for me to be aware of various learning styles, it should not dictate how knowledge in presented, but instead provide me with some guidelines and strategies to enable me to facilitate the learning process.  71 learning styles, really?

Cassidy, S., 2004.  Learning Styles: A Overview of Theories, Models, and Measures.  Educational Psychology, vol. 24, no 4.  Retrieved from http://www.acdowd-designs.com/sfsu_860_11/LS_OverView.pdf  on November 18, 2012.

Coffield, F.; Mosely, D.; Hall, E.; Ecclestone, K., 2004.  Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning.  Learning Skills and Research Centre.  Retrieved from http://www.leerbeleving.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/learning-styles.pdf on November 18, 2012.

Kanninen, E., 2008. Learning Styles and E-Learning.  Tampere University of Technology, Master's Degree Thesis.  Retrieved from http://hlab.ee.tut.fi/video/bme/evicab/astore/delivera/wp4style.pdf on November 18, 2012.  

Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R.M., Baumgartner, L.M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide, (3rd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Week 4 Learning Journal

Points to Ponder:

What do I know about older adult learners?

Ruminations:

This week we read about Nola Ochs, the oldest person to receive a bachelor's degree at the age of 95.  Our message board discussions were pretty disappointing to me.  Everyone pretty much said the same thing, focusing on a nature vs nurture argument.  Her social roles were considered as was her stage of life and the transition from wife to widow and active mothering to older children.  But, instead of considering that this woman might have been driven to learn and grow, it seems many think she kind of fell into education as a way to occupy her time.  There is some truth to this, but she could have done lots of other things.  Instead, she took on a huge intellectual challenge and even separated herself from her peers.  One of my classmates considered her story with a historical approach.  She has lived through some truly significant events that have to potential to influence her route to education late in life.  

Clearly, Nola is unique.  However, the discussion board posts seemed to take a pretty negative view of middle age adults and beyond with regards to their abilities.  In other words, my classmates seemed to spend more time focused on limitations and not advantages or increased abilities and motivations.  I don't mean to bash my classmates, just looking for a conversation about how dynamic this population is and how much life and learning is possible with older adults.  Even if they have physical challenges, why would we not address them the same way we address any student with challenges?

Rarely have I met a traditional student that is going to school for the sake of learning; they need a job and therefore, need education.  However, most of my middle age and older friends often include intrinsic motivation as explanation to their decision to go back to school.  Of course, many are looking for increased job opportunities, but even if that was the initial push for more education, it often takes a back seat to the learning journey.  Maybe I am making erroneous judgment.  So what do I know about older adult learners?

After doing a bit of research, it seems adult educators should pay close attention to this population of learners, age 55-79 or third age adults.  As their numbers are increasing in academic institutions, traditional student numbers are slightly decreasing (ACE 2nd report, 2008).  I decided to answer a few questions to gain more insight:

"We're aging, but we're not done yet!" - focus group member, age 81

Who are third aged adults learners from a demographic standpoint?

Like their younger counterparts, minorities, recent immigrants, displaced workers and rural dwellers are underrepresented among the third age cohorts on campus .  In addition, a strong indicator of continued education is past education.  Third age adults are more educated than in the past, however, as they age the levels of education decline.  Of course, that implies that as more adults reach third age, they will be very educated!  There is a definite gap along the racial lines with non-hispanic white being the most educated, followed by Asians.  Women are better educated than ever before and yet among the older population there are still many more men holding higher education degrees.  Although this age group is not typically rich, they are considerably more well off than their predecessors (ACE 1st Report, 2007).  So who will you see in the classroom?  Well, the reasoning goes something like this:  An educated white woman is more likely to go back to school than an uneducated black man.  An Hispanic man with money will be more likely to seek educated than a minimally educated woman.
  

"Don't put us off somewhere and tell us, 'That's all you can learn'." - focus group member, age 79

What do they want from education?

Third age adults want to learn in an intergenerational manner.  In addition, many want programs and instruction in "chunks." Instead of linear degree programs, they are looking for seminar or skill-building course designs and accelerated programs.  Prior knowledge is a hallmark of adult education.  Third age students want services that capture that experience and support them in their career management goals. Personal note here - I can totally relate to this one.  Educational institutions need to reevaluate their services to distance students as they relate to resume writing, interview process, and otherwise career planning.  Third age students would also benefit from some logistic support.  Increased transportation, outreach, technology support and social programming are some ideas (ACE 2nd Report, 2008).

“I’ve been asked, ‘How are you enjoying retirement’ —but I’m not retired. I’ve been operating on my own time, learning, growing.” - focus group member, age ?

What is their quality of life?

The negatives of aging are not secret.  Older adults have a higher incidence of chronic disease, eye sight and hearing deficiencies, as well as attention and memory challenges.  However, increased awareness and lifestyle changes contribute to extending quality of life and reducing or preventing health problems.  Psychologically, third age adults report high levels of identity, self-esteem, well-being, personality, and emotional regulation.  These positive traits of aging indicate self-worth, life satisfaction,  happiness, and emotional well-being are as good or better in third-age (Barnes, 2011).

Interesting statistics or facts:

• Half of college students age 50+ attend community college.
• Motivations for education: learning to learn, learning to connect, and learning to work.
• Tope 5 programs enrolling older adults: fine arts/humanities, business management and entrepreneurship, human services and counseling, teacher education, and health services. 
• They want to be called third age or lifelong learners, not seniors.
• Older adults often do not know or do not take advantage of tuition waivers offered to older students.
• Fastest growing online audience is adults over 50.
• Survey responses show that, while institutions offer classes to older adults via other venues, the main campus is still the primary location:
• Main Campus 95%
• Branch Campus 46%
• Online 39%
• Senior Citizen Center 15%
• Nursing Home or Assisted Living 10%

So, all in all, I feel my instincts are fairly on target.  Third age adults are a rich and dynamic population that for the most part engage in active learning and have the capacity to continue their growth.  Adult educators will do well to acknowledge the benefits of third age adults in their classrooms and yet be sensitive to their challenges.  Recruiting students, funding their journey, and supporting them as they navigate the learning process (mainly technology advances) is worthy of discussion.  Within the classroom and course design, encourage older students to share their life experiences, be conscientious of font and volume, and help relate new skills to real life problems.

References:
American Council on Education, 2007.  Reinvesting in the Third Age: Older Adults and Higher Education (First Report).  Framing New Terrain:  Older Education & Higher Education.  MetLife Foundation.  Retrieved from http://plus50.aacc.nche.edu/documents/Reinvestingfinal.pdf on November 11, 2012.

American Council on Education, 2008.  Reinvesting in the Third Age: Older Adults and Higher Education.  Mapping New Directions: Higher Education for Older Adults.  MetLife Foundation.  Retrieved from http://www.lifelonglearningaccounts.org/pdf/MapDirections.pdf on November 11, 2012.

Barnes, S., 2011.  Third Age - The Golden Years of Adulthood.  San Diego State University Interwork Institute.  Retrieved from http://calbooming.sdsu.edu/documents/TheThirdAge.pdf on November 11, 2012.

Week 3 Learning Journal

Points to Ponder:

I am a bit overwhelmed by all these theories concerning learning this week.  Some I am familiar with and some are new.  Our discussion this week focused on personal learning preferences, as if there is only one.  Just as there are multiple intelligences, I think there are multiple learning styles that one uses to accomplish the goal of processing information. 

Ruminations:

Wlodkawski (2008) asks us to understand intelligence as the ability to solve problems or create a product valued by one’s culture or community.  His point is that context has to be considered when discussing intellect.  Multiple intelligences make sense to me.  I have various intellects and I am smarter in some areas than others, yet I still have the ability to tap into particular areas of intellect to help me solve problems or gain understanding. 

The same must be true for learning styles.  I don’t have one preferred learning style; I have multiple learning styles.  Some work better for me than others and sometimes I choose a particular learning style because it is more appropriate or useful for the context.

Lujan and DiCarlo (2005) used the VARK questionnaire to determine student’s learning mode preference and found that 63% preferred multiple modes of delivery.  Only 1/3 of these students preferred one mode of learning.  So, does that mean most people have the ability to learn in multiple ways?  Solvie and Kloek (2007) did a study on using technology to engage students with multiple learning styles.  They used the constructivist learning theory and Kolb’s cognitive learning style model to design a course of instruction.  This is a fascinating article, but one of the most interesting finding has to do with achievement and learning styles:

  • Those in the high-achieving group had scores indicating that they did not have strong learning style preferences (mean scores = 3.316, 2.684, 3.737, 2.263,  respectively)

 • Those in the average achievement group had scores indicating that they had slight learning style preference

(mean scores = 4.750, 1.250, 4.625, 1.375, respectively)

 • Those in the low-achieving group had scores indicating that they had the strongest learning style preferences (mean scores = 5, 1, 5, 1, respectively)

(Solvie and Kloek, 2007)

This is significant.  High achieving people are able to learn in multiple ways, while low-achieving people are too rigid in their learning preference to excel!  This has huge implications on educators.  Jones,Reichard, and Mokhtari (2003) refer to this ability to learn in multiple styles as style-flexing based on research from Kolb’s four learning styles: diverger, converger, assimilator and accommodator.  They found that 81% of students studied use more than one learning style to process knowledge and were able to switch learning styles depending on the discipline.  Although their work does consider student achievement, they did not evaluate achievement based on ability to style-flex.

So, apparently, I am right.  People do have multiple learning styles.  This would be an interesting area to explore even more.  It would seem that adult educators would have a goal to help students learn to style-flex.  Or, is that teachable?  Is style-flexing innate ability?  Is there are relationship to intellect as indicated in the article by Slovie and Kloek (2007)?  All the more reason an instructor should incorporate strategies with various learning styles in mind, but not because it will appeal to different people, but because it will appeal to individual people who learn in multiple ways.

Jones, C. ; Reichard, C.; Mokhtari, K, (2003).  Are Student’s Learning Styles Specific?  Community College Journal of Research and Practice vol 27, pp.  363-375.  Retrieved from http://metawiki-onlinelearning-brockport.pbworks.com/f/jonesetal.pdf  on November 4, 2012.

Lujan, H. and DiCarlo, S. (2005).  First-year medical students prefer multiple learning styles.  Advances in Physiology Education, vol 30, no 1, pp. 13-16.  Retrieved from http://advan.physiology.org/content/30/1/13.full.pdf+html on November 4, 2012.

Solvie, P. & Kloek, M. (2007). Using Technology Tools to Engage Students with Multiple Learning Styles in a Constructivist Learning Environment. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(2), 7-27. AACE.  Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/f/22811 on November 4, 2012. 

Wlodkowski, R. 2008.  Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn.  Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.  Chapter 7.