research 1

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

Vol. 1(2), pp. 1-12, December, 2014

Available online at http://www.partedres.com

ISSN: 2148-6123

http://dx.doi.org/(coming soon)

Learning How to Learn:

A Six Point Model for Increasing Student Engagement

Gail Caruth *

Adjunct Faculty, Department of Educational Leadership at Texas A&M University-

Commerce, USA

Article history

Received:

11.06.2014

Received in revised form: 23.06.2014

Accepted:

24.06.2014

Students in higher education are being taught pedagogically.

Moreover, pedagogy has long persisted as the basis for the entire

educational system. Education is, however, discovering that adults

learn differently than children learn even though they have been

taught as children were taught. Students tend to behave

dependently when they are in a structured, pedagogical educational

setting. This dependent behavior may be because these learners do

not know how to learn, they only know how to be taught. In

pedagogy, the instructor is in charge and held entirely responsible

for all learning: what is to be taught, how it is to be taught, when it

is to be taught, how it is to be measured, etc. Adult students need to

be taught how to learn in order to become life-long, autonomous

learners. Research demonstrates that adult students being taught

andragogically become engaged in the learning process. They are

ready for learning, learn more, experience more meaningful

learning, and enjoy learning. This paper presents a six point plan

for promoting engagement for students in the college classroom:

create a safe environment for learning; ask students what they need

to know; explain why students are learning certain concepts,

theories, skills, etc.; provide real-life learning opportunities; offer

opportunities for collegial collaboration; and have students evaluate

their own learning. Collaboration between educators on the six

points will also increase the likelihood of engaging students.

Student engagement leads to improved retention and ultimately to

student success.

Key words:

Andragogy, pedagogy, adult

learning, student engagement,

student retention, student

success

* Correspondence: 1876 Oak Bend Drive Rockwall, Texas 75087 972-771-2371 [email protected]

Learning How to Learn: A Six Point Model… G. Caruth

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-2-

Introduction

Getting a college education pays over a million dollars more over a lifetime as

opposed to not getting a college degree. Even though evidence demonstrates many additional

personal benefits for earning a college degree (Tinto, 2012), the graduation rates for students

seeking bachelor's or equivalent degrees equalled 38.6 % in four years, 54.3% in five years,

and 58.7% in six years in United Sates colleges and universities. The colleges and universities

included in these rates are Title IV institutions, those with a written agreement with the

Secretary of Education that allows the institution to participate in any of the Title IV federal

student financial assistance programs (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). If higher

education is to increase student graduate rates, the focus must be on student engagement in

the classroom. Student engagement leads to student retention and student success (Tinto,

2012). Vincent Tinto (2012), recognized for his work in the area of student success stated that

“The classroom is the building block upon which student retention is build and the pivot

around which institutional action for student retention must be organized” (p. 124).

Furthermore, Hu and Wolniak (2013) maintained that social and academic engagement

resulted in different effects on career earnings. Males on average, for example, were more

engaged academically than females and earned higher salaries.

Malcolm Knowles received the Delbert Clark Award from West Georgia College In 1967.

He was an educator of education at Boston University and a general consultant in adult

education. The Delbert Clark Award was highly regarded as a national honor in the field of

adult education. Knowles, credited with giving renewed meaning to adult education,

maintained during his address at the awards banquet that for society to endure continuous

learning into adulthood was necessary (Knowles, 1968).

Andragogy, as introduced by Knowles, was the science of teaching adult learners that focused

on adults’ characteristics of learning. The word andragogy was derived from the Greek word

andros, which means “man” or “grownups” (Knowles, 1968, p. 351) or agogus meaning

“leader of” (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2011, pp. 59-60), which translates to “the art and

science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1984, p. 6). As a result of this focus on the

characteristics of adult learners, adults should be taught andragogically (Beaman, 1998; Chan,

2010; Clemente, 2010; Clerk, 2012; Forrest & Peterson, 2006; Hadley, 1975; Hughes &

Berry, 2011; Kiener, 2010; Knight, 1999; Knowles et al., 2011; Martell, 2011; Tatum, 2010;

Taylor, 2010; Taylor & Ruetzler, 2010; Yow, 2010; Zhang, 2009) to facilitate effectively

learning.

Understanding Pedagogy and Andragogy

Schools for children were established in Europe to groom young boys for the

priesthood during the early 7th century. Educators were accountable for teaching the values

and ways of the church. This teaching became known as pedagogy, a word that is derived

from the stem “pediatrics” from the Greek word paeda which means “child” (Knowles, 1968,

p. 351). Ever since the 7 th

century, pedagogy has endured as the foundation for all education

(Knowles, 1990). As such, books on adult education reference the statement "the pedagogy

of adult education" still today (Knowles, 1976, p. 37).

Knowles alleged that education was however, experiencing a transition and realized that

adults learn in another way than children learn in spite of being educated as children were

educated. Knowles further alleged that the curriculum for adults was distinct from the

curriculum for children (1968).

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 1(2);1-12, 1 December, 2014

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-3-

Knowles made one important distinction between a pedagog and an andragog:

An ideological pedagog would want to keep me dependent on a teacher, whereas a true

andragog would want to do everything possible to provide me with whatever foundational

content I would need and then encourage me to take increasing initiative in the process of

further inquiry (as cited in Levitt, 1979, p. 53).

According to Knowles (1984), students are inclined to act dependently when in a more

structured educational setting. This dependency might be due to the idea that these learners

do not know how to learn and only know how to be taught. In pedagogy, the teacher is in

control and regarded as totally accountable for all learning: what is to be taught, how it is to

be taught, when it is to be taught, how it is to be measured, etc. Adult students need to be

taught how to learn in order to become continuous, autonomous learners. The main purpose

of education claimed Knowles, is to attain the capacity to inquire and to become life-long

learners.

Teaching college and university students andragogcially in the classrooms is not done in

higher education (Beder & Darkenwald, 1982; Brookfield, 2006; Gorham, 1985; Harper &

Ross, 2011; Knowles, 1968; Knowles, 1976; Hadley, 1975; J. Henschke, personal

communication, February 2, 2012; Rose, 2000) in spite of being encouraged to teach adult

students andragogically (Anderson, 2007; Beaman, 1998; Chan, 2010; Clerk, 2012; Finn,

2011; Hadley, 1975; Hughes & Berry, 2011; Minter, 2011: Kiener, 2010; Knight, 1999; Ritt,

2008; Tannehill, 2009; Tatum, 2010; Taylor & Kroth, 2009; Taylor & Ruetzler, 2010; Yow,

2010). Consequently, higher education is not fulfilling its purpose to teach adult learners

effectively (Brookfield, 2006; Harper & Ross, 2011; Knowles, 1968; Rose, 2000).

Dr. John Henschke, a student and colleague of Knowles (Henschke, 2011b) and chair of the

Andragogy Doctoral Emphasis Specialty at Lindenwood University, delivered the eulogy at

Knowles' memorial service (Henschke, Winter 97-98). Henschke alleged that hardly any of

the andragogical assumptions are being utilized in today’s colleges and universities. In fact,

much of what is delivered in classrooms is not consistent with the principles of andragogy.

Most attempts to employ andragogical principles are incompatible with the assumptions of

andragogy. What is being taught does not meet the needs of the learners. Moreover, what is

being taught favors higher education, is more in the nature of adult education, and is not in the

nature adult learning (J. Henschke, personal communication, February 2, 2012).

A key distinction between pedagogy and andragogy is the impression one has of oneself and

the acknowledgment of the characteristics of the learner. For example, children see

themselves as being dependent on adults until they begin to make their own decisions for

themselves and experience the fulfillment of making those independent decisions. As youth

grow into adulthood, they view themselves as independent and self-directed. Andragogy is

based on adults’ need to be regarded as self-directed adults (Knowles, 1968).

Knowles’ Andragogical Model

Before addressing andragogy and Knowles’ Andragogical Model (Knowles et al.,

2011, p. 63) it might be helpful to first reflect on the term adult. The term adult can be

defined as, (a) when one becomes biologically responsible--the point at which one is able to

reproduce; (b) when one becomes legally responsible--the point at which one is able to vote;

(c) when one becomes socially responsible--the point at which one can work and marry; or (d)

when one becomes psychologically responsible--the point at which one begins to feel

Learning How to Learn: A Six Point Model… G. Caruth

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-4-

responsible for his or her own life. Psychological independence is significant in adult

learning. This sense of independence is gaining self-awareness and self-directedness. This

sense of independence is something that develops over time as children mature into

adulthood. Research conducted on psychological characteristics of adulthood has centered on

internal processes and not the chronological age of adults. In other words, the focus has been

more about an ordered hierarchy of development (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner,

(2007).

Knowles’ Andragogical Model originally focused on four learning principles which over time

developed to six assumptions (Laird, Naquin, & Holton, 2003; Knowles et al., 2011; Merriam

et al., 2007). The six assumptions, different from theories of pedagogical methods, include

adults' need to know, self-concept, prior learning experience, readiness to learn, learning

orientation, and motivation to learn.

Adults Need to Know

Before learning can occur, adults have a desire to know why they need to know a

particular skill, ability, knowledge, etc. Accordingly, educators are encouraged to help

learners understand why they “need to know” what is being taught. Helping adults

understand why they “need to know” something being taught in the classroom results in

learning and strengthens the value of learning. This conscience awareness of the value of

learning guides learners in realizing for themselves the disparity between what they know and

what they should know (Knowles et al., 2011).

Self-Concept

Once adults accept the accountability for their decisions and actions, they have an

internal emotional need to be viewed and acknowledge as able to be self-directed. This self-

concept of being independent, once understood can introduce challenges for educators. For

example, adult learners resist and resent teachers imposing the perception that “learner equals

dependent” (p. 65). This perception of dependency and teachers’ handling adult learners as

dependent creates internal conflict for adults. A predictable reaction to this conflict is to

escape, which may account for the high dropout rates in higher education (Knowles et al.,

2011).

Prior Learning Experience

Educators are encouraged to remember that adults develop their identities from past

experiences, “it is who they are” (Knowles et al., 2011, p. 66). To devalue their experiences

would be akin to devaluing them. Personal experiences of adult learners, therefore, might

have an effect on education. Collaborative activities such as group discussions, problem

solving assignments, simulation exercises, and case studies where peers are helping peers can

be effective teaching methods.

Readiness to Learn

Adults are ready to learn what they need to know and do as the need arises in their

personal lives. Timing is critical as a result. To invest time in the classroom on learning

skills that adults do not think they need to know or can make use of is considered pointless.

Learning is more effective if it corresponds with a need to know (Knowles et al., 2011).

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 1(2);1-12, 1 December, 2014

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-5-

Learning Orientation

When it comes to learning adults are problem-centered and learn best in an

environment of realistic problems. The focus of problem-centered learning is to facilitate

effective problem-solving skills, self-directed learning, collaboration skills, flexibility, and

intrinsic motivation. Through collaborative activities and discussions, adults learn to

recognize what they already know, what they need to know, where to access new information,

how to resolve problems, etc. (Knowles et al., 2011).

Efforts to reduce illiteracy, for example, have been disappointing. The words that students

were learning were not the words they used daily. As a result, they were considered pointless

and learning them was a waste of time the minds of the learners. However, Knowles et al.

(2011) investigated courses offered through extension programs during the evenings that

corresponded to courses offered to students earlier in the day. The day courses were

Composition I, Composition II, and Composition III and the corresponding evening courses

were Writing Better Business Letters, Writing for Pleasure and Profit, and Improving Your

Professional Communications. Knowles discovered that students attending day classes

memorized the grammar rules while students attending evening classes began writing better

business letters and improving their grammar skills.

Motivation to Learn

Adults are motivated to learn externally and internally; however, educational barriers

can have a negative effect on motivation for learning (Knowles et al., 2011). Adults are

ultimately motivated to learn internally and more effective learning occurs when personal

goals, interests, attitudes, and beliefs come from learners rather than the instructor. Thus, the

learner is the self-motivator or internal teacher (Knowles, 1975).

Process Design Steps: Strategies for Teaching Andragogically

Knowles suggested approaches for adult learning (Merriam et al., 2007). These

approaches can be referred to as eight “process design steps” for creating effective learning.

The eight steps are:

(1) Prepare students by providing information, encouraging participation, developing realistic results, and thinking about course content.

(2) Create a climate that is beneficial for students to learn by demonstrating trust, support, collaboration, ability to relax, respect for one another, and pertinent information.

(3) Involve students in planning by shared planning between students and educator. (4) Involve students in identifying learning requirements and assessments between

students and educator.

(5) Involve students in developing learning objectives by mutual negotiation between students and educator.

(6) Involve students in establishing learning plans by joint planning between students and educator through learning contracts and learning activities according to the readiness

of students.

(7) Facilitate students in completing learning plans by experiential opportunities, inquiry projects that provide opportunities to use prior knowledge to investigate an issue, and

independent study.

(8) Involve students in the evaluation of their learning experiences by mutual planning after assessment information is collected.

Learning How to Learn: A Six Point Model… G. Caruth

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-6-

In essence, encouraging mutuality and reciprocity in the process design steps encourages

student ownership, which is often considered motivational. Once adults feel ownership for

their own learning, learning will take place (Laird et al., 2003).

Andragogy in higher education has been slow to come about. Colleges and universities do

not teach andragogy to aspiring and promising educators (Brookfield, 2006). There is little

empirical research that tests the validity on how much learning is actually gained in spite of

andragogy being the recognized method for adult learning, (Merriam et al., 2007; Stagnaro-

Green, 2004). Andragogy appears to be making its way gradually into American higher

education. Furthermore, evidence indicates a developing use of andragogical assumptions in

post-secondary education (Knowles et al., 2011).

Research on Andragogy

In spite of andragogy being considered the principal method of adult learning for over

40 years, there has been minimal empirical research completed on Knowles assumptions

(Merriam et al., 2007). Henschke (2011a) alleged that there are 330 published documents on

andragogy by different authors. Research on adult education has been not been about the

teaching of adults in higher education but in the practice of adult learning in business and

industry. What research there is has not been translated into higher education practice and

educators are not trained in adult education (Brookfield, 2006; Rose, 2000).

Ann Hartree (1984), a critic of Knowles’ assumptions of andragogy, challenged the lack of

clarity and general ambiguity. Hartree claimed that the link between adult and child learners

is blurred and the six assumptions are nebulous. She also claimed that andragogy’s

foundation on man’s “existence” (p. 208) explains the lack of clarity of whether andragogy is

about adult learning or about teaching adults.

It bears mentioning that Knowles (1976) himself acknowledged the need for empirical

research on andragogy. He proposed that “mutual inquiry” (p. 15) was needed to continue to

define the field of adult education. He further suggested that this mutual relationship of

inquiry was “pioneering” (p. 16). It requires cooperation, patience, and collaboration on the

part of researchers and that those who want “pat answers, neat categories, and proved theories

will be uncomfortable in the climate” (p. 16) of andragogy and adult education as it is.

Self-directed learning (SDL) has created the largest amount of attention, debate, and empirical

research within the field of adult education (Knowles et al., 2011; Merriam et al., 2007).

Knowles (1975) defined SDL as adults taking responsibility for defining their own learning

needs and satisfying those needs. SDL occurs in collaboration with others such as teachers

and peers. SDL requires an atmosphere of mutuality and reciprocity between self-directed

learners and others. According to Zang (2009), this relationship of mutuality and reciprocity

presents an opportunity and a challenge.

According to Henschke (2011a), conversations of andragogy in the future should surpass

Knowles' model of andragogy to integrate global viewpoints in the field and bond with other

adult learning theories. Continuous study will help to "establish andragogy as a scientific

academic discipline" (p. 36). The discipline of adult learning will continue to be questioned.

As the debates transpire progress is to be expected in the future research and practice in

andragogy (Knowles et al., 2011).

A few examples demonstrating student engagement when adragogical principles are applied

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 1(2);1-12, 1 December, 2014

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-7-

in higher education are presented below:

 Students at one university designed their own degree plans and as a result were better students, understood where learning was headed, experienced academic improvement,

and derived pleasure from education (Harper & Ross, 2011).

 Students attending the National Restaurant Association (NRA) Show hosted at four universities welcomed the opportunity to be active in defining their individual learning

objectives in a learning contract that was integrated with specific requirements to

enhance the educational experience (Taylor & Ruetzler, 2010).

 Law students in Idaho claimed that they became more self-directed, were more receptive to the traditional customs of practicing law when educators applied course

content to experiences, were aware of an increase in readiness, felt an orientation to

learn, were more motivated to learn, and were more willing to go through the learning

process when they were informed about what they would learn and the reasons for

learning (Taylor, 2010, p. 185).

 Management education in higher education is more effective for students when using: role-playing because its use of experience gives weight to knowledge; problem-based

learning because it allows adults to be self-directed; and service learning because it

allows students to express their self-image as civilians in real community problems.

Lectures can be an effective instructional method when educators ask students what

they need to know because students will be more interested in listening to a lecture on

creating a mission statement, for example, when they understand the importance of

mission statements to organizations (Forrest & Peterson, 2006).

 Law students felt that they learned more when experienced attorneys discussed practical experiences on the job (Taylor & Kroth, 2009) during lectures.

 Martell (2011) compared the effectiveness of a lecture-based to a discussion-based teaching philosophy in adult bible fellowships (ABFs) in Akron, Ohio. The group that

learned under the discussion-based method experienced greater learning, felt more

confident with the teaching method, and thought that the discussions were the most

memorable part of the lesson.

 According to Beder and Darkenwald (1982) data collected from 173 public school and college teachers indicated that accentuating responsive, learner-centered patterns and

de-accentuating power and rules engaged learners.

 Hughes and Berry (2011) claimed that students should be provided opportunities to be involved in making decisions for their own learning methods instead of being hand-

fed information. If this collaboration is initiated early in the process, students will

appreciate having control of their learning and will demonstrate the value of

education.

 Clemente (2010) found that the self-concept of learners moved from dependency to self-directing in multi-generational community college classrooms. As time

progressed during the semester, students overcame anxiety, became more at ease with

being students, took responsibility for managing their coursework, and found that

students’ readiness to learn reflected social constructivism, which suggests that

students construct more meaning in knowledge gained from personal experience than

from learning passively.

 Zhang (2009) claimed that learning is more meaningful if both the educator and the learner (a) shared the responsibility for the design of the learning goals and objectives,

(b) interacted with other members of the class, (c) promoted reflection on experiences,

Learning How to Learn: A Six Point Model… G. Caruth

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-8-

(d) related new examples that made sense to the learner, (e) maintained self-directed

learning, and (f) evaluated learning.

 Knight (1999) found that learning and confidence increased when learners are provided with hands-on computer learning opportunities. Allowing students to

maintain control of the mouse and the computer keyboard for example, increased

learning outcomes. Therefore, it is important that computer programs and manuals be

easy to work with and to understand.

 Korr, Derwin, Greene, and Sokoloff, (2012) maintained that students compare learning something new to past experiences to establish new information, consider

busy work offensive, separate new learning from their everyday lives, anticipate

individualized feedback from educators as opposed to just receiving a grade, and are

inspired by relevant problem-solving activities.

 Traditional grading methods need to change for college age students suggested Beaman (1998). Some alternative methods include peer evaluations, self-assessments,

praiseworthy grading (pointing out successes rather than failures), and checklists for

quality (measurements of the quality of an idea). Praiseworthy grading and checklists

for quality provide instructor feedback in a more facilitative manner than with

traditional grading approaches.

 Instructors can enhance learning by being available for questions and providing an environment that encourages questions free from criticism and disapproval (Knight,

1999).

 Once learning is internalized, the learner is ready to move on to the next learning experience. Therefore, it is important that educators communicate to learners the

impact, method, and implementation of learning and understand that learners have

different learning styles and preferences (Clerk, 2012).

In summary, the objective of learning is to permit learners to carry out their learning

according to what that learning represents for them. Consequently, learners are learning how

to learn. This practice of learning how to learn, over time, facilitates learners’ ability to form

their own awareness of their truths (Hadley, 1975). Learners begin to know themselves, their

capabilities, and their aspirations. This knowledge is immensely important (Knowles, 1984).

Educators are encouraged therefore to instigate discussions with colleagues on teaching and

sharing experiences. Unfortunately educators typically employ an assortment of learning

theory and practice and may not be cognizant of what method of learning they practice in

their classrooms. Educators’ teaching methods center on their individual ideas of what is

suitable without verifying whether research supports their teaching method (Minter, 2011).

Educators are also encouraged to take into account the needs of the student when designing

the curriculum (Knight, 1999). It is necessary to consider that many students experience at

least one educational barrier (responsibilities to family, responsibilities to work,

responsibilities to community, self-concepts, unattainable opportunities, etc.) in their lifetime

(Clerk, 2012; Finn, 2011; Ritt, 2008). As a result of these barriers, students are apt to leave

post-secondary education without earning a degree (Clerk, 2012; Tannehill, 2009). For that

reason, remembering how important an inviting educational environment (safe, successful,

interesting, etc.) is will make up for the challenges and will enhance the likelihood of

engaging students (Finn, 2011). According to Tinto (2012), removing barriers leads to success

in higher education.

In conclusion, Wasley (2006) maintained that student engagement customarily falls under the

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 1(2);1-12, 1 December, 2014

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-9-

responsibility of the college student affairs area. However, if the purpose for going to college

is to obtain an education (Hutchins, 1938) and the purpose of getting an education is to

encourage continuous learning (Knowles, 1984), then educators must engage the students in

the classroom in order to retain them in colleges and universities (Tinto, 2012). Kuh (2006)

claimed that student engagement has a positive effect on student retention. It is through the

process of retaining students in higher education that these same students will become

society’s life-long learners of the future, thereby insuring the very survival of civilization

(Knowles, 1968). By facilitating students’ ability to learn how to learn rather than by learning

how to be taught (Hadley, 1975), student engagement and retention can be accomplished

avoiding any reactions to flee the classrooms (Knowles et al., 2011). This learning how to

learn can be accomplished through the assumptions of the students' need to know, self-

concept, prior learning experience, readiness to learn, learning orientation, and motivation to

learn (Knowles et al., 2011).

Learning How to Learn: A Model for Student Engagement

(1) Create a safe environment for learning. Provide an environment that encourages questions free from criticism that is safe, successful, interesting, etc. for students.

(2) Ask students what they need to know. Probe students about what they need to know because they will be more interested in classroom activities and learning is more

effective if it coincides with a particular need to learn.

(3) Explain why students are learning certain concepts, theories, skills, etc. Help students learn about the value of learning to realize for themselves that there is a gap between

where they are and where they should be. To invest time on learning something that

they do not relate to or can make use of is considered pointless. Learning is more

effective if it coincides with a particular need to learn

(4) Provide real-life learning opportunities. Establish a learning environment with realistic problems because adults are problem-centered when it comes to learning.

(5) Offer opportunities for collegial collaboration. Introduce group activities and discussions, problem solving assignments, simulation exercises, case studies, etc. in

the classroom. Emphasis on peers helping peers on real-life problems enhances

students’ ability to identify what they already know, what they need to know, where to

access new information, how to resolve problems, etc.

Learning How to Learn: A Six Point Model… G. Caruth

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-10-

(6) Have students evaluate their own learning. Share the responsibility for evaluating learning and designing learning goals and objectives that make sense to students. Help

students to become self-directed learners.

Overall alignment of collaboration and cooperation in higher education is “key” (Tinto, 2012,

p. 112) for student engagement that ultimately leads to student retention and success in higher

education. From that one could assume a seventh point in the model and that is to initiate

faculty communication with other faculty through formal and informal meetings sharing

insights and experiences. Collaboration between educators on teaching and sharing

experiences regarding the six points for engaging students will result in enhancing the

likelihood of engaging students.

References

Anderson, J. M. (2007). A conceptual framework of a study in preferred learning styles:

Pedagogy or andragogy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Spalding University,

Louisville, Kentucky.

Beaman, R. (1998). The unquiet...even loud, andragogy! Alternative assessments for adult

learners. Innovative Higher Education, 23, 47-59. doi:10.1023/A:1022920513341

Beder, H. W., & Darkenwald, G. G. (1982). Differences between teaching adults and pre-

adults: Some propositions and findings. Adult Education, 32(3), 142-155.

doi:10.1177/074171368203200303

Brookfield, S. D. (2006). The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the

classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chan, S. (2010). Applications of andragogy in multi-disciplined teaching and learning.

Journal of Adult Education, 39(2), 25-35.

Clemente, K. A. (2010). Experiences of adult students in multi-generational community

college classrooms (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pennsylvania State

University, University Park, PA.

Clerk, K. (2010). Student perception and success: How adult learners at a two-year technical

institution perceive instruction and how their perceptions contribute to their overall

academic success (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oakland University, Rochester,

MI.

Finn, D. (2011). Principles of adult learning: An ESL context. Journal of Adult Education, 40,

34-39.

Forrest, S. P., & Peterson, T. O. (2006). It’s called andragogy. Academy of Management

Learning & Education, 5, 113-122.

Gorham, J. (1985). Differences between teaching adults and pre-adults: A closer look. Adult

Education Quarterly, 35(4), 194-209. doi:10.1177/0001848185035004002

Green, G., & Ballard, G. H. (2011). No substitute for experience: Transforming teacher

preparation with experiential and adult learning practices. SRATE Journal, 20, 12-20.

Hadley, H. N. (1975). Development of an instrument to determine adult educator’s orientation

as andragogical and pedagogical (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Boston

University School of Education, Boston, MA.

Harper, L., & Ross, J. (2011). An application of Knowles’ theories of adult education to an

undergraduate interdisciplinary studies degree program. The Journal of Continuing

Higher Education, 59, 161-166. doi:10.1080/07377363.2011.614887

Hartree, A. (1984). Malcolm Knowles' theory of andragogy: A critique. International Journal

of Lifelong Education, 3(3), 203-210. doi:10.1080/0260137840030304

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 1(2);1-12, 1 December, 2014

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-11-

Henschke, J. (Winter 97-98). In memoriam: Malcolm S. Knowles. Adult Learning, 10451595,

9(2).

Henschke, J. A. (2011a). Considerations regarding the future of andragogy. Adult Learning,

Futures Column, 22, 34-37. doi:10.1177/104515951102200109

Henschke, J. A. (2011b). Andragogy and its future, lifelong learning, my relationship with

Malcolm S. Knowles, connection between learning and performance, and my

commitment to andragogy. An Interview by Monica Fedeli from Italy with John A.

Henschke. Fedeli, M. Ph.D, Interviewer and Translator. Journal of the Italian

Association for Adult Education; Universita di Padova, Italy; Being Translated into

Italian by Monica Fedeli; (In Press). Retrieved from:

http://www.lindenwood.edu/education/andragogy/andragogyPublished.html

Hu, S. & Wolniak, G. C. (2013). College student engagement and early career earnings:

Differences by gender, race/ethnicity, and academic preparation. The Review of

Higher Education, 36(2), 211-233.

Hughes, B. J., & Berry, D. C. (2011). Self-directed learning and the millennial athletic

training student. Athletic Training Education Journal, 6, 46-50.

Hutchins, R. M. (1938). Why Go To College? Saturday Evening Post, 210(30), 16.

Kiener, M. (2010). Examining college teaching: A coaching perspective. Rehabilitation

Education, 24(1/2), 69-74.

Knight, K. J. (1999). Older adults and technology: A critical incident inquiry into learning

experiences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas A&M University-Commerce,

Commerce, TX.

Knowles, M. S. (1968). Andragogy, not pedagogy. Adult Leadership, 16(10), 350-352, 386.

Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York,

NY: Association Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1976). The modern practice of adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy.

New York, NY: Association Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult learning.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Knowles, M. S. (1990). The adult learner: A neglected species (4th ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2011). The adult learner: The definitive

classic in adult education and human resource development (7th ed.). Burlington, MA:

Butterworth-Heinemann.

Korr, J., Derwin, E. B., Greene, K., & Sokoloff, W. (2012). Transitioning an adult-serving

university to a blended learning model. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60,

2-11. doi:10.1080/07377363.2012.649123

Kuh, G. D. (2006). Underrepresented students benefit most from “engagement.” Retrieved

from https://tle.wisc.edu/forum/underrepresented-studentsbenefit-most-engagement

Laird, D., Naquin, S. S., & Holton, E. F. (2003). Approaches to training and development

(3rd. ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Levitt, L. (1979). Critique: Andragogy revisited II. Adult Education Quarterly, 30, 52-57.

doi:10.1177/074171367903000104

Martell, J. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of andragogical teaching in adult bible

fellowships at The Chapel, Akron, Ohio (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY.

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A

comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Minter, R. L. (2011). The learning theory jungle. Journal of College Teaching & Learning,

8(6), 7-15.

Learning How to Learn: A Six Point Model… G. Caruth

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-12-

Ritt, E. (2008). Redefining tradition: Adult learners and higher education. Adult Learning,

19(1/2), 12-16. doi:10.1177/104515950801900103

Rose, A. D. (2000). What is the state of adult education research today? Adult Learning,

11(4), 28-29. doi:10.1177/104515959901100410

Stagnaro-Green, A. (2004) Applying adult learning principles to medical education in the

United States. Medical Teacher, 26, 79-85.

Tannehill, D. B. (2009). Andragogy: How do post-secondary institutions educate and service

adult learners? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh,

Pittsburgh, PA.

Tatum, C.G. (2010). An explanatory mixed methods inquiry into the academic experience of

nontraditional community college students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas

A&M University-Commerce, Commerce, TX.

Taylor, B. F. (2010). Raising the bar: A qualitative study of adult learning theory and its

effectiveness of law school education in preparing new graduates to begin the practice

of law (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

Taylor, B. F., & Kroth, M. (2009). A single conversation with a wise man is better than ten

years of study: A model for testing methodologies for pedagogy or andragogy

[Electronic version]. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), 42-

56.

Taylor, J., & Ruetzler, T. (2010). A student-centered exploration of the national restaurant

association show: Developing a course for academic credit. Journal of Culinary

Science & Technology, 8, 1-13. doi:10.1080/15428052.2010.486412

Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college rethinking institutional action. Chicago, IL: The

University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Spring 2012, Graduation Rates

component (provisional data), table 121217. Extracted from the IPEDS Data Center

http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/ on 12/14/2012; revised on 12/17/2012.

Yow, A. (2010). Employers’ perceptions of basic technology skills needed for workplace

preparation in adult basic education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).Walden

University School of Education, Minneapolis, MN.

Wasley, P. (2006). Underrepresented students benefit most from engagement. The Chronicle

of Higher Education, 53, A39.

Zhang, J. (2009). Exploring education major focused adult learners' perspectives and practices

of Web-based distance education in sixteen universities (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM.