Chapter 8
SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING DISCOVERED
In the digital age, adults can no longer rely on their P–12 (mandatory) or college education to satisfy their learning needs for a lifetime. Similar to Rita in the scenario, scholars from education and corporate realms agree that in order to be successful, very different perspectives and concomitant learning actions must be adopted (Karakas & Manisaligil, 2012). For example, Rita needed to reach beyond her undergraduate education. Initially, she proposed to solely explore the new computer, but as she become more interested and adept with it, she branched out and used more books and conversations to enhance her learning. This experience resulted in her independent mastery of the knowledge and skills she desired.
It is likely that readers can relate to at least some aspects of Rita's story in their own life or that of friends, colleagues, or students. Specifically, readers have likely experienced times when formal instruction was insufficient. Rather than remain ill-equipped, the individuals seized control of the ship of learning and charted the course that would lead to their personal or professional goals. Certainly, Rita did not have her final goals in mind when she began her self-directed learning journey. However, very quickly her computer learning motivation shifted from extrinsic to intrinsic. She wanted to learn not just to provide income but also to discover and reach her greater potential and self-sufficiency.
As far back as 1967, Tough recognized that self-directed learning (SDL) was central to the field of adult learning. Adults who would continue to be successful throughout their life span must be adept at self-directed learning across many venues. Rather than confining the learning to formal contexts such as classes, schools, and programs, successful adults seized opportunities to learn through informal learning (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991); workplace mentoring and training (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991); health and wellness services (King, Leos, & Norstrand, 2016; Reeves, 2001); online communities (Freishtat & Sandlin, 2010); continuing medical education (Candy, 1995); and more. As recently as 2014, evidence found by Pew Research Center continued to demonstrate SDL's ever-increasing trend. Based on the extensive literature of the field, this chapter explains what self-direct learning is, how to cultivate it, and strategies for sustaining and applying it in the digital age.
Background of SDL
The evolution of self-directed learning has been a striking example of how educational researchers have gradually, individually, and collaboratively developed an understanding, models, strategies, and theories. In his original publications, Tough (1967, 1971) introduced the predominance of adults engaged in learning through their projects. Such learning was beyond the scope of institutional or organization demands. This premise was a significant departure from the body of literature focusing on formal, instructor-led learning. In SDL, adults were at the helm.
Knowles (1975) articulated definitions, examples, and applications of self-directed learning among adults. A widely referenced definition provided by Knowles in 1975 expressed SDL as “a process in which individuals take the initiative, with or without the help of others, in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating learning goals, identifying human and material resources for learning, choosing and implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning outcomes” (p. 18). His work, although certainly preliminary and rudimentary by today's standards, became the cornerstone for the advancement of SDL theory and research.
Many authors and researchers contributed clarifications to Knowles's initial definition in order to add or highlight specific or additional behaviors and dimensions:
- Recognizing individuals as a “unit” of learning rather than the customary focus on learning in institutions (Houle, 1972)
- Facilitating the development of self-directed learners (Mezirow, 1981)
- Testing Mezirow's concepts and research-based recommendations for supporting SDL development (Suanmali, 1981)
- Developing a detailed theoretical framework for SDL that recognized and incorporated the external characteristics (instructional planning and strategies) and internal characteristics (personality = assuming responsibility) for learning (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991)
- Developing broader and practical applications of SDL to diverse learning contexts (Candy, 1991)
- Understanding and delineating SDL's sociological (isolation versus group learning), pedagogical (procedures used), and psychological (learner autonomy) views (Long, 1994)
The following sections discuss many of these vital contributions in greater detail.
Among the first areas explored was that of strategies to guide adults in becoming more proficient as self-directed learners. In 1981, Mezirow outlined 12 core concepts to guide facilitation of self-directed learners' development:
- Gradually decrease the learner's dependency on the educator.
- Help the learner understand how to use learning resources and engage in peer learning.
- Assist the learner to define his or her learning needs.
- Assist learners to assume responsibility for defining, planning, and evaluating their learning.
- Scaffold learners' organization of learning goals based on personal needs and understanding.
- Foster learner decision making.
- Encourage greater inclusivity and differentiation in self-reflexive and integrative experiences.
- Develop a self-corrective reflexive approach to learning.
- Facilitate problem posing and problem-solving.
- Reinforce progressive mastery.
- Emphasize experiential and instructional methods, including learning contracts.
- Make the moral distinction between helping the learner understand versus encouraging the learner to make a specific choice (paraphrased from Mezirow, 1981, pp. 21–22).
In 1981, Suanmali, tested the core SDL concepts Mezirow had proposed. His results provided further advancement with a specific, research-based foundation to guide educators and others seeking to cultivate SDL skills. In summary, Suanmali's findings provided the following direction to assist instructors in planning and scaffolding SDL skills:
- Decrease learner dependency.
- Help learners use learning resources.
- Help learners define their learning needs.
- Help learners take responsibility for learning.
- Foster learner decision making and choices.
- Encourage learner judgment and integration.
- Facilitate problem posing and problem-solving.
- Provide a supportive learning climate (King, Leos, & Norstrand, 2016).
In the next few decades following Suanmali (1981), scholars turned toward theoretical development of SDL. However, other scholarly work and discussions continued to guide efforts to craft strategies that would better support adult learners in mastering SDL in many contexts and manners. Candy's 1991 publication provided significant progress for SDL being introduced and understood in the larger educational literature beyond adult learning. Candy challenged the field to consider the multiple definitions and related confusion about SDL. This 1991 publication was an update and documented many varied applications of SDL to broaden educators' understanding of its relevance. Continuing the practical orientation of the SDL literature, Candy also provided details regarding strategies, methods, and tips for learners in their self-study and for educators who were planning and facilitating SDL through individual or group instruction.
In 1997, Garrison presented a major contribution to the SDL field with a theoretical model. Specifically, he documented and analyzed the cognitive and motivational dimensions of SDL. Garrison's SDL model provided the basis for understanding how the following elements needed to be integrated to create a more meaningful theory:
- Self-management (contextual control)
- Self-monitoring (cognitive responsibility)
- Motivational (entering and task) dimensions
At the same time, Garrison recognized that SDL needed further research regarding its cognitive and motivational dimensions.
Bonk, Lee, Kou, Xu, and Sheu's (2015) research is among the most recent to continue this line of inquiry but within the very new realm of open educational resources (OERs are freely shared, not controlled or copyrighted, and most often distributed via technology). In this research, Bonk et al. revealed that the platform actively engaged groups of self-directed learners via technology and free resources. Indeed, in this context of SDL, learners pursued their efforts further because they were motivated for specific reasons. These reasons included the desire to advance their personal interests, enhance their careers, and support others in their learning needs.
The work of Candy, Garrison, and others has advanced the understanding and use of SDL in adult education, workplace learning, and higher education (Candy, 1991; Garrison, 1997; Silén & Uhlin, 2008). Many researchers continue to explore SDL in different contexts because of its many purposes in the digital age.
Strategies for Cultivating SDL
Some authors have published recommendations for facilitating SDL perspectives and skills (Bonk et al., 2015). This section provides an overview of several recommendations that can be used in different settings. A particular focus will be to consider technology and digital age connections to SDL.
Strategy 8.1: Create a Master Plan!
Two critical areas in which adults and formal learners of all ages struggle with learning tasks and assignments are project and time management. Learners and instructors at all levels can overcome these obstacles by using scaffolding activities that culminate in a final product or project. As part of this approach, learners and instructors must not only model and lead but also discuss learning experiences with expectations, objectives, steps, time lines, obstacles, strategies, and progress, which in effect is designing a master plan.
In each successive learning experience, more of the predesigned scaffolding is removed and greater independence is given for learner choice and responsibility in project planning, management, and implementation. Much like training a flowering bougainvillea or climbing ivy plant, the scaffold (trellis) helps provide support, but the learner (or plant) is the final product's valuable growth (or flower).
A straightforward classroom example may be identified in developing community-related policy analysis reports for a specific content area. The guide or independent learner needs to break down the project into its essential steps and select two to four milestones and dialogue points en route to completion. Initially, novices will need specific details to accomplish projects. Providing rubric evaluations for each stage also helps clarify expectations, objectives, relative merit of different attributes or elements, and ratings. This approach assists learners to better understand each stage.
In the process of completing such master plan assignments, adult learners not only develop essential SDL skills, including project and time management, but also may use a host of technology solutions. To provide a range of options, technology resources may be suggested or brainstormed through a community.
- Suggested technologies may include using online resources to identify topics, background history, related technical information, stakeholders, cases, policy, statutes, decisions, objections, exceptions, and persuasive strategies.
- In addition, learners may discuss and use different technology tools to track their resources, notes, project progress, and references.
- Online library resources may be used to learn about different types of government data, including demographics, census, economic, political, geographical, and so on, to facilitate the research of project topics and their history.
- Video or audio technologies may provide opportunities to access virtual data collections and interview stakeholders, constituents, and policy makers.
- Finally, track changes in word processing software (e.g., MS Word, Google Docs, etc.) or wikis may be employed to record and access feedback from instructors and peers.
Blending technology tools into the project explicitly locates such skills in the digital workplace and world. In these ways, transferability of skills to other technology-related contexts more likely can be advanced.
Strategy 8.2: Mini Policy Brief Project
In this assignment, learners identify a policy issue of interest. They will then conduct research and present the case for action in the form of a mini policy brief. Participants begin by identifying a local, regional, state, national, or international policy issue that relates to their area of study. They will then analyze and concisely report the problem, data, and potential policy options. The final mini policy brief will be a maximum of 2,000 words (approximately eight double-spaced pages), use at least two or three sources of data from the conducted research, and include the following items (there are several resources for developing policy briefs listed at the end of the assignment):
- Definition of the policy problem
- Identification of the importance of or need related to the policy problem
- The importance should be supported by data, publications, and so on, not opinion alone.
- Brief synthesis of findings related to the policy problem
- Include the original data in this section.
- Critique of policy options
- Benefits, limitations, pros and cons should be discussed.
- Call to action
- What action is the community or constituency asked to do?
- Sources
Possible applications of the assignment may be related to school board policy, institutional policy, human resource policies in an organization, human rights policy, economic policies, and so on. The scope of the issues and policies addressed may be local, national, or international. For example, UNESCO and UN reports and databases (available online) provide a great deal of data about international policies.
Strategy 8.3: Resource Proof “With Help From My Friends”
Previously in this book peer groups (or think tanks) were discussed as strategies for collaborative learning, peer learning, accountability, and so on. During project development, peer groups can be helpful when sharing resources, leads, progress, challenges, insights, and perspectives (Barber, King, & Buchanan, 2015; Topping, 2005). There are several valuable ways in which technology can be used to facilitate these productive peer consultations (Barber et al., 2015). The following strategies illustrate two of these methods:
- At about the midpoint in the project, learners identity a forum or small group in which they may share their individual project. They will develop a top-10 resource list for their individual project, which includes a rationale for each item.
- Participants might upload their resource proof list to an online discussion space for their peers to critique and provide additional recommendations and comments.
The purposes of this critique and dialogue activity are so that learners proactively research, explore, and evaluate their project resources. In the process, they need to critically reflect on the resources, origins, purposes, value, and limitations. Because the participants work independently of instructors and peers, this activity cultivates several essential skills needed to become successful self-directed learners.
Overall, the resource proof strategy combines intrinsic motivation to discover and develop the best resources to support their final project and extrinsic motivation to perform well in their small group. Because no one wants to be the member who needs the greatest assistance, peer pressure creates significant positive learning activities in order to prevent the embarrassment of underperformance. Most frequently, the extrinsic motivation becomes quite strong and learners produce better work compared to strictly independent work (Barber et al., 2015; Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 1999; Topping, 2005).
Strategy 8.4: Resource Critique: Author and Evaluator
The companion activity to the resource proof is the resource critique. In the next stage of the activity, adult learners serve as authors of their own proof and also as evaluators of a peer's work. Although these two roles include some similar applications of critical thinking and problem-solving, they also use some very different strategies (including cognition, metacognition, communication, negotiation, and responsibility).
Participating in both roles provides a robust, well-rounded experience. Moreover, when the process is repeated, it can build strong practices and competencies in critical thinking, planning for learning, resource identification, consultative learning, presentation, dissemination, communication, feedback, appraisal, and more.
- After participants upload their resource proof list to their small-group online discussion space, they must serve as
- Evaluator for a peer's resource proof list
- Author for their own (i.e., they will need to respond to their project's evaluation)
- Using a list with the names of the resource proof list projects identified, participants sign up to be the evaluator for two projects.
- The evaluators review the designated project alongside the requirements of the assignment, including the purpose, scope, comprehensiveness, accuracy, and depth of resources.
- Evaluators write brief comments regarding each characteristic.
- Evaluators also recommend additional resources or strategies that might improve the project.
- After reviewing their comments for respect for the author, constructiveness of feedback, and accuracy of content and language, the evaluators submit their comments to the author.
- Authors access the comments and identify how to address each of the comments.
- Authors draft a message to the evaluators thanking them for their feedback and asking for any needed clarifications.
- The revisions to the resource list are incorporated and project implementation commences.
Strategy 8.5: Guide by the Side
A major skill within SDL has been identified by Garrison (1997) and others as the development of the capacity for self-monitoring. When instructors, mentors, coaches, tutors, and others introduce adult learners to strategies and tools that assist in goal tracking and achievement, they cultivate invaluable learning experiences that can be translated into successful independent learning.
Mentoring is defined and named in many different ways based on the discipline, context, and relationship of participants (Hudson, 2013; Lipton, Wellman, & Hubbard, 2003). Drawing on just a few examples, consider the vast difference in formality, involvement, and focus: medical student's mentor, government assistance job placement mentor, doctoral student's dissertation mentor, and a fast-track entrepreneur's business mentor. Although the relationships and nature of mentoring vary greatly, in each case, the common element is an experienced person attempting to guide someone less experienced to achieve something! “Guide by the side” is a popular phrase, which despite having become somewhat overused is still simple and aptly descriptive for mentoring in many contexts.
In the different contexts in which we might serve as an instructor or team leader, we have many opportunities to reinvent our efforts by turning the tables. However, we must be willing to step down off the podium (physically or virtually), share power, and walk side by side with those we seek to guide toward their goals (Hudson, 2013).
Systems of instruction and guidance can be especially helpful in mentoring, in part because there are myriad possibilities in which mentees need shepherding. However, developing and introducing systems is a major vehicle that provides the means for mentors to share their thinking processes and discuss how they think (metacognition).
Rather than focusing on advice and assignments, which some mentors are predisposed to do, mentees indicate that among the most valuable experiences are time spent discussing strategies and learning to identify, clarify, reframe, dissect, reengineer, and track goals (Zachary, 2000).
- What are systems used in your field to identify, set, track, evaluate, revise, and achieve goals?
- How do you provide accountability for pursuing your goals?
- Have you modeled and shared any of those systems and strategies with your mentees?
- How do you use or can you use technology to facilitate, expedite, accelerate, or reveal new possibilities for identifying and tracking your goals?
- What new possibilities do convenient technology tools provide that could be adapted to assist you in achieving your goals?
- Within your field, what current conflicts provide opportunities for critical analysis of professional aspirations, ethics, values, goals, and time lines with your mentee?
- What technologies can assist in providing more frequent or emergency discussions and check-ins among mentor and mentee?
- If too many mentors would be needed for individual assignments, what would a scalable model of mentoring look like and need to include?
Conclusion
SDL provides a critical and powerful skill set for adult learners and professionals in the digital age and beyond. Researchers, professionals, and practitioners agree that self-directed learning skills are essential for now and into the future. Not only is our society's economic and political climate constantly shifting but also we experience exponential growth in innovation and knowledge. All of these factors contribute to the demand for adults to continually learn across the many vistas of their lives: personal, professional, and even entertainment. Although this chapter explored, discussed, and illustrated what self-directed learning is, how to cultivate it, and strategies for sustaining and applying it among adult learners, Chapter 9 will guide the way to understand the many dimensions of diversity that we must comprehend and embrace.