Literature Review

The Environment and Context in Adult Learning

Angela Shafer

Ball State University

 

Abstract

By the mid-twentieth century, three foundational theories had emerged in the field of adult education: andragogy (Knowles, 1968), self-directed learning (Tough, 1971), and transformational learning (Mezirow, 1978).  However, all three theories have been criticized for not acknowledging how the context and environment where the learning occurs impacts the learning process (Merriam and Clark, 2006 p. 29). The context in which learning takes place is crucial to the learning process.

This includes the tools in the setting and the social interaction with others during the learning process. This review investigates the physical environment, the cultural environment, the power environment, the knowledge environment, and the ‘real-life’ environment, and how each of these contexts plays a role in shaping learning (MacKeracher 2004 p. 186).

The Environment and Context in Adult Learning

Environment and Behavior

                        Even though early studies in adult education theories focused more on the individual and less on the environment in learning, recent research has shifted toward the environment within which learning occurs (MacKeracher 2004 pg. 186).  Hunt and Sullivan (1974) advocate the use of the behavior-person-environment (BPE) model in learning facilitation.  This model includes the context, or environment in which learning takes place as equivalent to the person and the behavior.  The (BPE) model shows that behavior is a function of the interaction between the person and the environment (MacKeracher 2004 p. 50). The environment is a key component to this model.  According to Hunt and Sullivan (1974), the environment in the BPE model can include any factor within the learning situation or context that might affect learning.  Hunt and Sullivan (1974) go on to mention that this can include facilitator behaviors, the quality of the physical environment, the nature of the learning resources, and even technologies. 

                        MacKeracher (2004) observes that students tend to ignore the environment and context when learning until they present barriers to the process. Therefore, it is important to think critically about our learning environments and contexts before they become problematic (MacKeracher, 2004 p. 186).  In fact, the goal in focusing on the environment and context in learning is to create a set of learning and facilitating principles to help all adults be more effective learners regardless of their background and circumstances (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner 2007). Researching and determining best practices in setting up appropriate learning contexts and environments should only enhance the learning process for adult learners. 

The Physical Environment

                        The physical environment in the learning process includes the ergonomics of the classroom as well as the hardware or technologies used in learning and facilitating activities (MacKeracher 2004 p. 187).   According to Lawson (2009), a safe, positive environment is critical to a successful learning experience and the first area to focus on is the physical setting.  

                        It is important for a student to be physically comfortable when learning.  As most students can relate, it can be very distracting to sit in an awkwardly arranged room or an uncomfortable chair.  Taking this concept a step further, recent studies show that facilitators can actually choose the seating configuration conducive to the desired outcome (Lawson 2009 p. 155). Depending on the trainer’s intent, furniture and visuals can be arranged to emphasize small-group work, encourage group participation, allow for two-way communication, arrange for the trainer to be part of the group, encourage a high degree of trainer control, and many other variations (Lawson 2009 p. 159).

                        In addition to physical comfort, other aspects of the classroom can affect the learning environment as well.  Visual qualities are important to learners because they can also be distracting.  Sometimes lighting even makes noise that is distracting.  Facilitators should check the lighting, the sound quality and the air quality prior to using the space (MacKeracher 2004 p. 190).             The quality of technology and the type of technology used is a huge factor in learning and facilitation.  Facilitators must know how to work the equipment in the classroom like smart boards, projectors, and multimedia (MacKeracher 2004 p. 190).  In addition, for online learning environments, students will have a more successful experience when facilitators check to make sure links are working and the learning management system used is set up correctly for discussions and other classroom activities.

                        The University of Minnesota is piloting what they call Active Learning Classrooms (ALCs).  These ALCs attempt to create a prime learning atmosphere for students (Brooks 2011).  Brooks (2011) described the ALCs as being designed featuring large, round tables that accommodate up to nine students each, switchable laptop technology that allows students to project content onto flat panel display screens linked to their respective tables, an instructor station from which content is displayed to two large projector screens and feeds to the student display screens are controlled and wall-mounted glass marker boards around the perimeter of the room.

The results of the pilot evaluation of the ALCs were overwhelmingly positive (Brooks 2011).  Brooks (2011) noted that both facilitators and students agreed that the room set up encouraged collaboration and classroom participation. The round tables were credited for this increase in collaboration and student centered learning activities (University of Minnesota Active Learning Classrooms Pilot Evaluation Team, 2008; Whiteside & Fitzgerald, 2009). In addition to encouraging collaboration and participation, students in the pilot ALCs program exceeded expectations in ACT scores and outperformed their peers in the traditional classroom earning an average of 29.81 more points than expected (Brooks 2011).

Overall, more research needs to be done to demonstrate empirically the impact of the physical learning environment on student learning outcomes; however, it is evident that the physical environment plays an important role in adult learning environments.

The Cultural Environment

            As MacKeracher (2004) notes, culture is never neutral.  It pervades the teaching-learning environment brought there by both learners and facilitators.  Cultural difference is many times very subtle.  In fact, it sometimes goes unnoticed unless it is “packaged in different colored skin, ethnic dress, or foreign speech cadences,” as described by Noble (1999).  However, cultural differences include many additional areas.  Noble (1999) indicates cultural differences can be inclusive of rural and urban values and lifestyles, the survival skills learned in economic disadvantage or a refugee camp, the challenges of raising a child with special needs, coming to terms with one's sexual orientation, or trying to sustain a livelihood in an emergent and little-known occupation as just a few areas that might easily fall outside our normal definition of cultural difference.  MacKeracher (2004) indicated that culture is a system of learned beliefs, values, assumptions, customs, language, meanings, and behaviors shared with groups of individuals.   Cultural differences in the classroom can be obvious or invisible; however, all of these differences play a significant role in adult learning.

 Similar to the physical environment, the cultural environment can have a positive or negative effect on learning.  As MacKeracher (2004) notes, once students have invested time and energy in creating and externalizing culture, they may feel compelled to defend it, export it, or become agitated when others use it unfavorably.  MacKeracher (2004) goes on to include that we must all work to avoid developing stereotypes as they can lead to not only ethnocentrism, but racism as well.  This type of environment is not positive for learners or facilitators.  Having a diverse cultural environment can also enhance the learning experience by bringing new perspectives and diverse ideas into the learning environment (Noble 1999).  Recognizing and moving beyond our own deeply rooted assumptions can provide an opportunity for transformative learning Mezirow (1978).   This can be a very stressful process. However, as Noble (1999) noted in describing this transforming process, “…chances are very good that some of the views along the route will be quite breathtaking (Noble 1999)”.

The Power Environment

            “Power, its sources and uses, are crucial elements in learning (MacKeracher 2004 p. 186)”.  Just as students bring their culture with all their assumptions, values and beliefs into the learning environment, they also bring power interactions.  Some students may be more submissive, while others pull out their perceived power and use it as a platform (MacKeracher 2004).  From an individual perspective, students express power more as their skills and knowledge increase and they are able to incorporate the knowledge they receive from others into their own (Tisdell 1999).  Tisdell (1999) believes it is important for facilitators to provide an environment that encourages learners to find and then express this power in a supportive and save atmosphere. Providing this environment can be complicated based on the interactions of the class and points to another reason that the power environment plays an important role in the context of learning. 

The structural perspective is different from the individual perspective because it points to individual behavior as being influenced by power, privilege, and oppressions (Tisdell 1999).  MacKeracher (2004) observed that power is a constantly shifting matrix of interactions involving race, gender, and class.  Similar to observations by Tisdell (1999), Merriam, Caffarella & Baumgartner (2007) believe that both the individual and the structural perspective on the power environment should be integrated to create an inclusive and supportive learning environment. We have all experienced interactions where the non-use and the abuse of power in learning environments caused negative results.  It is interesting to see how proper facilitator engagement and providing safe environments (Tisdell 1999) for students can create a positive experience surrounding power as well.

The Knowledge Environment

            As indicated by MacKeracher (2004), students bring their favored epistemology with them when they participate in learning groups.  Similar to culture and power in learning environments, the context of knowledge can cause conflicts to emerge between students who have differing epistemologies.    Once again, we see reoccurring themes as we analyze the context of power, culture, and knowledge in a learning environment.  Students bring habits, attitudes, and beliefs with them into the learning environment, and their choice on epistemology is no different (Noble 1999). 

            In North American culture, the most common epistemology was defined by the European upper class (MacKeracher 2004 p. 199).  Today, that epistemology is being challenged by a more diverse set of theories that includes newer knowledge from women, poverty groups, unemployed, multiple cultures, etc. (MacKeracher 2004).  Students need to be cognoscente of their potential bias derived from their epistemology just as facilitators need to create a safe environment based on these potential conflicts or potential learning experiences.

Situated Cognition and the ‘Real-Life’ Environment

                        Situated cognition, or contextual learning is learning through the interaction of people in a particular situation with particular tools or technology (Lave 1988). We are finding a common theme that the context in which learning takes place is crucial to the nature of the learning, just like the physical environment and the social interaction with others.  In situated cognition, human cognition must be examined in situations of authentic activity in which actual cognitive processes are required, rather than the simulated ones typical of school (Lave 1988).  MacKeracher (2004) uses a good example of situated cognition, or the real life environment, when describing how prenatal classes are not always helpful in preparing mothers for childbirth because the learning process cannot simulate reality.  However, classes for new parents learning to feed their infants can be very helpful because they can actually actively perform the process and learn through this context. 

                        According to Farrell & Fenwick (2007), knowledge gained in school is not enough to make a reflective practitioner.  Students must engage in the actual practice as well.  There are ways to combine this ‘real-life’ experience with school by using apprenticeships, internships, practicums, and even computer simulations where one can learn through modeling, coaching, and trial and error (Merriam & Clark (2006).

Conclusion

                         Even though early studies in adult education theories focused more on the individual and less on the environment in learning, recent research has shifted toward the environment and context within which learning occurs.  Reviewing the environment and context in learning has pushed forward some significant reoccurring themes.  The most dominant theme is that the physical, power, knowledge, real life, and cultural environments in learning play a very important role in the adult learning process.  These contexts can be positive or negative for the learner and the facilitator.  Finally, it is crucial for the facilitator and the learners to be aware of potential biases and work to create a safe, positive, encouraging learning environment. 

 

References

Brooks, C.D., (2011 September). Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 42, Issue 5

Farrell, L. and Fenwick, T. (2007). “Educating the Global Workforce?” In L. Farrell and T. Fenwick (eds.), Education the Global Workforce. London: Rutledge

Hunt, D.E., & Sullivan, E.V. (1974). Between psychology and education. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press.

Lave, J. (1988), Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lawson, K. (2009). The Trainer’s Handbook. (3^rd Updated ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer; Wiley Press.

MacKeracher, D. (2004). Making Sense of Adult Learning. (2^nd ed.). Toronto, Canada. University of Toronto Press.

Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R.S., & Baumgartner, L.M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood, 3^rd edn. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S.B. and Clark, M.C. (2006). Learning and development: The connection in adulthood, in Hoare, C. (ed.) Handbook of Adult Development and Learning. Pp 27-51. London: Oxford University Press.

Noble, M. R., (1999). Learning to Lead from the Middle: An Apprenticeship in Diversity. Adult Learning, Vol. 11, Issue 1. 

Tisdell, E.J. (1999). The spiritual dimension of adult development. In S.B. Merriam (Ed.). An update on adult development theory. New Direction for Adults and Continuing Education, no. 84 (pp. 87-95). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.