“In a classroom, the instructor is often the ‘sage on the stage.’ Online, the instructor is more like the ‘sage on the page.’”
—Susan Ko & Steve Rossen
E-learning and online education is defined as “conducting a course partially or entirely through the internet” (Ko & Rossen, 2017, p. 3), and has been around for approximately two decades. Knowles in the 1970s popularized ‘andragogy’ and defined that term as ‘the art and science of helping adults learn’ (Darlo, 2016; Stavredes, 2011; Taylor & Kroth, 2009). Yet, many people—from those for whom life online is second nature to those who struggle to stay abreast with the constantly evolving and dizzying pace of new Web 2.0 technologies—still do not fully grasp the underlying assumptions and principles upon which the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ of online instruction are predicated (Ko & Rossen, 2017). Perhaps, this is attributed to the rapid growth of online education. In fact, reliable and effective training for instructors have been scarce, and those that are available tend to be inconsistent and inadequate (Ko & Rossen, 2017). To make matters worse, these trainings too often are offered in a traditional classroom or computer lab setting rather than in real-life teaching situation—i.e., alone at the instructor’s own computer (Stavredes, 2011). The point I am making: “Online education is no longer a novelty” (Ko & Rossen, 2017, p. 5), but its assumptions and principles are for many instructors, both online and face-to-face (F2F).
As the preceding alluded, many questions concerning the theoretical framework as well as the underlying assumptions and principles still befuddle and perplex instructors. Such basic questions are:
- What is the best approach to teaching online?
- What are the techniques fundamental to teaching online?
- Which new/emerging technologies are best suited to meet online/adult learners’ needs?
- Which teaching and learning activities best stimulate and motivate online/adult learners?
- How are online/adult learners best assessed?
- What is the most appropriate role of the instructor if students are not being seen F2F?
- Need to know: Adults are goal-oriented;
- Self-concept: Adult learners like to be respected;
- Experience: Adults bring life experiences and knowledge to learning experiences;
- Readiness to learn: Adults are practical;
- Orientation to learning: Adults are relevancy-oriented; and
- Motivation to learn: Adults are internally motivated and self-directed. (Darlo, 2016; Stavredes, 2011)
| Left: A review of six general principles to keep in mind when teaching adult students. Below: A whiteboard animation about how adults learn and what you need to do to make training more engaging. |
Knowlesian assumptions, when grasped andragogically, serve to provide a context for online teaching as it exists today and lays out the parameters expected of instructors for online learning. However, such assumptions and theory of andragogy as a whole are not without criticism (Taylor & Kroth, 2009). For example, the assumption that adult learners are self-directed in their learning does not always apply (Stavredes, 2011; Taylor & Kroth, 2009). Subsequently, Grow (1996) posited a need for reconsidering the assumption that ‘all adult learners are self-directed’ on the grounds that self-directedness is situational. Hence, we need to examine the notion of “self-concept”—i.e., moving toward self-directedness—as an attribute of adult learners. Grow (1996) suggested a four-stage model—referred to as Staged Self-Directed Learning (SSDL)—that shows a range from dependent learner to self-directed learner with the interested learner and the involved learner in between those extremes. Though I agree with the idea of multiple types of adult learners, as suggested in the SSDL model, I believe that a learner’s disposition is not static, but conditional and contextual. As Knowles (1992) suggested, adult learning moves from dependency to self-directed learning, but such movement is fluid and not necessarily incremental. Adult learning, as Grow (1996) pointed out, is situationally induced and driven. In other words, a learner’s development should be viewed as a horizontal continuum, if not it should be conceived in terms of vertical growth and, as such, layered (but not necessarily staged) as hierarchical classification of self-directedness (i.e., the level of support needed). For instance, I operated as a dependent learner when I commenced my pursuit of educational technology but have since transitioned (passed being interested and involved) to be more of a self-directed learner in this area of study as my knowledge and skills increased with experience. However, if I am thrust again into an unfamiliar, unexpected, or undesirable situation I may resort back to a type of learner that is not so self-directed. As illustrated, these stages of learning are dependent on:
The implication being instructors should provide support and individualized attention as needed; for example, engaging students in a questions-and-answers online discussion or scaffolding lessons and performance tasks to degrees that commensurate with students’ needs, which are reflected in Grow’s (1996) graduated categories of learners. Grow’s (1996) SSDL model, regardless of any conceptual flaw, is representative of the types of learners that an instructor would encounter in a typical online course (Stavredes, 2011). Helping students persist—in their learning goals and development of competency, whether skills and/or knowledge acquisition—requires intentionality and purposiveness. However, designing and developing an online course, with the requisite inbuilt flexibility to provide the necessary affordances, is a multifaceted and ‘complex endeavor’ (Caplan & Graham, 2004). Making the task more overwhelming and challenging is the fact that new technologies, primarily the evolution of Web 2.0 tools, are constantly emerging. For example, many tools for instructors to produce audiovisual content are now more widespread than ever before. However, Ko and Rossen (2017) pointed out, neophyte instructors and newcomers to online teaching are more “likely to exaggerate the computer and overall technical expertise required” (p. 17). Yet, through it all, one constant remains—people’s desire to send and receive information efficiently in order to learn and communicate with each other (Ko & Rossen, 2017). ‘How do the—adult learners—learn best from others in the online educational environment?’ is the key question I hope I have addressed apropos.
- a learner’s readiness to learn given the learner’s willingness and comfort level which is shaped by experience and prior knowledge, or
- growing familiarity as the learner progresses through unfamiliar content to master a skill or perform a task.
The implication being instructors should provide support and individualized attention as needed; for example, engaging students in a questions-and-answers online discussion or scaffolding lessons and performance tasks to degrees that commensurate with students’ needs, which are reflected in Grow’s (1996) graduated categories of learners. Grow’s (1996) SSDL model, regardless of any conceptual flaw, is representative of the types of learners that an instructor would encounter in a typical online course (Stavredes, 2011). Helping students persist—in their learning goals and development of competency, whether skills and/or knowledge acquisition—requires intentionality and purposiveness. However, designing and developing an online course, with the requisite inbuilt flexibility to provide the necessary affordances, is a multifaceted and ‘complex endeavor’ (Caplan & Graham, 2004). Making the task more overwhelming and challenging is the fact that new technologies, primarily the evolution of Web 2.0 tools, are constantly emerging. For example, many tools for instructors to produce audiovisual content are now more widespread than ever before. However, Ko and Rossen (2017) pointed out, neophyte instructors and newcomers to online teaching are more “likely to exaggerate the computer and overall technical expertise required” (p. 17). Yet, through it all, one constant remains—people’s desire to send and receive information efficiently in order to learn and communicate with each other (Ko & Rossen, 2017). ‘How do the—adult learners—learn best from others in the online educational environment?’ is the key question I hope I have addressed apropos.
| In this video entitled Creating Online Courses: How Adults Learn (Andragogy vs Pedagogy), Sarah Cordiner—a trainer of trainers in adult learning—briefly explains why we need to know that adults learn differently as compare to children and how this impacts our planning, content, delivery, and more importantly, our learner experience. |
So, are you ready to take on the challenges of online teaching? Maybe? Not sure. What’s holding you back? Anxiety and trepidation about technology? Don’t be! You not need be a techie to be successful at facilitating online courses (Ko & Rossen, 2017). Simply, to be an effective online instructor of adult learners, you need to believe this: “An interest in teaching should come first, technology second” (Ko & Rossen, 2017, p. 19). Be aware that affirming this maxim—or understanding the underlying assumptions and principles of online and adult learners discussed earlier—may not necessarily guarantee success in e-learning or online courses. However, it will inform an instructor’s approach, praxis and modus operandi—whether it’s referred to as ‘pedagogy’ for traditional K-12 instructors or ‘andragogy’ for facilitators of adult learners—to help all students persist in achieving their learning goals and development (Stavredes, 2011).
References
Caplan, D. & Graham, R. (2004). Chapter 7. The development of online courses. Theory and
Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca, Canada: Athabasca University Press. Retrieved May 12, 2017, from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch2.html
Darlo. (2016, November 3). Malcolm Knowles’ 6 Adult Learning Principles. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from http://www.darlo.com/news/malcolmknowles6adultlearningprinciples/#
Grow, G. O. (1996). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from http://longleaf.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SSDL.pdf
Knowles, M. (1992). Applying principles of adult learning in conference presentations. Adult Learning, 4(1), 11-14.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2017). Teaching online: A practical guide (4th edition). New York, NY: Routledge.
Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective online teaching: Foundations and strategies for student success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
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), p. 1-11.
Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca, Canada: Athabasca University Press. Retrieved May 12, 2017, from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch2.html
Darlo. (2016, November 3). Malcolm Knowles’ 6 Adult Learning Principles. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from http://www.darlo.com/news/malcolmknowles6adultlearningprinciples/#
Grow, G. O. (1996). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from http://longleaf.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SSDL.pdf
Knowles, M. (1992). Applying principles of adult learning in conference presentations. Adult Learning, 4(1), 11-14.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2017). Teaching online: A practical guide (4th edition). New York, NY: Routledge.
Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective online teaching: Foundations and strategies for student success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
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), p. 1-11.