Exploring the Issue in Evaluating Adult Learning

Introduction
The problem facing students in college is that many of them are not being educated as adults. There is a significant difference in the way an adult approaches education and the way a child approaches education (Forrest & Peterson, 2006). Adult learning is an important concept because it focuses on realizing that adults are not children and so they should not be taught the same way. This is a crucial concept for teachers to understand so that they can be more impactful with adult learners. The problem for university students is that they are not being evaluated in a way that is conducive to adult learning. This problem is significant because university students may be unnecessarily and unfairly struggling with classes because university teachers fail to use evaluations that are conducive to adult learning. The research question this paper poses is this: What are some ways to evaluate adult learning? This paper will describe the literature on this subject, discuss it, analyze the findings and identify the implications for practice.
Literature Review
As Forrest and Peterson (2006) point out, adult learning theory posits that adult learners are self-motivated, capable of self-direction, have a wealth of experience that they can draw upon to facilitate the learning process, and are generally active learners. This means that adult learners learn in much different ways from children, who often require guidance and a lot of direction. Adults on the other hand are there to learn something that they do not know about and want to know more about. They know the reason they are there. Children typically do not know why they are there but just accept that they are there for a good reason. Forrest and Peterson (2006) state: “Underpinning andragogy are four assumptions regarding learning: a self-directing self-concept; use of experience; a readiness to learn; and a performance-centered orientation to learning” (p. 113). In other words, self-direction is only one aspect of it. Another one that is important is the idea of performance-centered learning—i.e., active learning. Active learning is what separates adult learners from child learners the most. When evaluating adult learners, the evaluation should be based on the concept of active learning (Forrest & Peterson, 2006).
The article by Hase and Kenyon (2000) describes why adult educators should move away from andragogy to heutagogy, following the recommendation of Knowles, who promoted the idea of self-directed learning, which is what heutagogy is. Based on whether or not the adult learners have sufficient access to materials to facilitate the learning process and sufficient time to learn on their own, the idea of moving towards Heutagogy can be a good one. Adults on the other hand are burdened by myriad cares and responsibilities. They are not going to have the same level of resiliency that children have. They are going to want to learn information as quickly as possible and if they cannot easily achieve it on their own, self-directed learning is going to be more of a problem than a boon.
Knowles (1984) identified four principles that should be applied to adult learning and that the teacher should consider when evaluating students who are being taught in the classroom:
1. Adults should be involved in the planning and evaluation of their own instruction.
2. Experience (including mistakes) should be viewed as an opportunity for providing the basis of learning activities.
3. Adult learners want to learn about subjects that they think will have immediate relevance and impact on their lives, whether from an educational point of view or a professional point of view.
4. Adult learning should be problem-centered instead of content-centered so that adult learners are more actively engaged in acquiring and applying the knowledge rather than simply trying to memorize information for a test (Knowles, 1984).
These principles provided from Knowles show that when it comes to teaching adults at the university level, the instructor should be considering how to evaluate adult learners in a way that is conducive to what the learners expect. They expect to be active learners and they expect to be taught relevant information. Thus, evaluations should incorporate both active learning and relevancy of material.
Moss and Van Duzer (1998) show that project-based learning is an appropriate way for instructors to evaluate adult learners. They define project-based learning as “an instructional approach that contextualizes learning by presenting learners with problems to solve or products to develop” (Moss & Van Duzer, 1998, p. 1). Project-based learning allows for individual and group learning, trust and relationship building (which is an aspect adults tend to be interested in developing), self-evaluation, peer-evaluation, and active learning. Learners develop a variety of skills such as “skills to plan, organize, negotiate, make their points, and arrive at a consensus” (Moss & Van Duzer, 1998, p. 2). The process allows learners to acquire a deep down knowledge of the subject material because of an intimate and prolonged exposure to it and the fact that they have to implement what they learn throughout the duration of the project.
Howatt (1999) recommends journaling as a self-evaluation tool for adult learners, as an alternative form of evaluation, but instructors are likely to want a more objective evaluation tool. However, Fenwick and Parsons (2009) state that adult learners should be seen by instructors not as students but rather “as partners who come to the classroom with their own purposes and goals” (p. 2). The idea here is that “by using the learners’ own knowledge of self, instructors can build meaningful opportunities for self-assessment, peer assessment, and formative feedback, all of which then feed the learning process and provide specifics for students to address next and thereby improve further” (Fenwick & Parsons, 2009, p. 2). In other words, the more that adult learning focuses on the actual goals of the students and provides them opportunities to engage in self-evaluation the more likely the adult learners are to benefit. Thus, Fenwick and Parsons (2009) recommend that self-evaluation and peer-evaluation be used as evaluation tools by teachers engaged in instructing adult learners.
Findings
The most important find from the article by Forrest and Peterson (2006) is that the researchers explain the reasons for why adult educators in should stop referring to what they do as pedagogy (which describes teaching to children) and start referring to it as andragogy. The researchers explain that adult learners are much different from child learners and that there are a number of assumptions that adult educators utilize when teaching adult learners. These are, first and foremost, the assumption that the adult learner is self-motivated and ready to learn; secondly, the adult learner is capable of directing himself and his own learning experience and is not going to rely as heavily on the educator as the child learner will; thirdly, the adult learner will bring with him a great deal of experience that he can use to facilitate the learning process, whereas with children the experience factor is limited and typically minimal at best; fourthly, the adult learner is engaged and can be considered an active-learner—i.e., one who is performance-oriented. These assumptions are crucial to understanding why the adult educator should consider referring to what he does as andragogy: the reason is that it reshapes his whole orientation to the reality of the adult learner and highlights some of the advantageous elements or characteristics of that learner, which the educator can utilize to take advantage of the learning environment.
The recommendation by Hase and Kenyon (2000) may be a transition that makes sense because adult learners can be assumed to be highly motivated, self-actualizing, experienced, and ready to learn. They are going to likely need minimal direction and encouragement, depending on the complexity of the subject and the amount of knowledge the individuals already have. However, there is one problem with self-directed learning for adults and it is this: time is going to be a big factor for most adult learners, and for most adult learners the material that they are needing to learn is likely to be beyond their grasp as otherwise they would probably engage in self-directed learning all on their own and not require guidance from a teacher. For that reason, one shortcoming in this article is that self-directed learning as promoted by Knowles and recommended here by Hase and Kenyon (2000) makes more sense for children, who have more time and more resources to learn on their own simply by entering into the zone of proximal development, being around others, particularly older children, and having a natural curiosity and imagination to fortify themselves against obstacles.
Fenwick and Parsons (2009) along with Howatt (199) indicate that self- and peer-evaluation should be used by teachers. This would allow students to be more actively engaged in their own assessments and it could give them confidence to move forward and maintain their investment in their education. Its drawbacks are that it may not be objective enough for the instructor, but it could be complemented with the journal assessment recommended by Hase and Kenyon (2000) and by the end-of-term project evaluation recommended by Moss and Duzer (1998).
Discussion and Analysis
University-level educators should not look at their adult learners as though they were children, nor should they approach them in such a manner, which is insulting to the learner’s experience, knowledge, and ability to self-actualize. It also does not facilitate their ability to learn. The adult learner is there because he or she wants to be there, and the knowledge they seek is an active one. They want to be engaged rather than passive learners. An evaluation should thus be centered on the student as being responsible, accountable, and actively engaged. That is why self- and peer-evaluations make a lot of sense: they put the onus of responsibility on the adult learner, which is where the adult learner wants it.
With that said, however, it the instructor will want an objective evaluation as well, as this will help to show how far the learner has come since the start of the course. The project-based evaluation is a great way to facilitate that learning. It allows the student to engage with the material over the duration of the course and the student can acquire and use information that is relevant. It is vastly different from memorizing information for the purposes of taking an exam. The exam is a formal method of evaluation, but it does not actually measure whether the student has learned anything or whether the student can apply that knowledge in a working manner. All it really measures is whether the student can memorize data for an assessment. Adult learners are much more likely to appreciate a project-based evaluation because it is something that is tangible and meaningful to them, something they can apply themselves to over time and even use self-directed learning to guide the way. It allows the learner to draw on past experience and to take responsibility for the overall outcome.
The idea of self-evaluation and peer-evaluation along with journaling as a means of self-evaluation is also one that could facilitate the learning process. Self-evaluation is a good way to promote reflexivity and get the adult learner to reflect more on what has been learned and what areas require more work. It also facilitates the development of accountability and responsibility and allows the learner to be more pro-active in assessing himself. The use of peer-evaluation gives the adult learner the opportunity to put the critical focus on other students and assist them in their growth and development. This helps to build important communication skills, too, that have a real world application that adult learners will appreciate.
Thus, instructors at the university-level should be considering alternative evaluation methods so as to be more appealing to and supportive of adult learners, who are not children and thus should not be taught in the same manner or evaluated in the same manner. Children require more direction and formality because they lack experience and prior knowledge and the maturity to hold themselves accountable. Adult learners possess all those traits that children lack and they are there because they want to be there—no one is forcing them to be in school at the college level. The instructor should recognize this as a favorable characteristic of adult learners and allow them to participate more fully in the evaluation process.
Implications for Practice
Approaching university students as adult learners will necessarily change the way instructors approach the evaluation process. It means there will be more focus on giving the adult learners the reigns, so to speak, for evaluating themselves and their peers. This would allow students to be more active and more equal participants in the assessment process. The use of a project-based evaluation method would also allow the adult-learner to be more engaged over the duration of the course with the material presented by the instructor.
The implications for practice are that the instructor would elevate the adult learner to a more equal footing and step back to allow the adult learners to take more control of their own learning processes. The teacher should not disappear completely but should be there to support rather than direct the learning process. Applying these findings, the instructor would change the learning environment so that it is more student-directed and the main outcome would be the project, which the instructor could evaluate with the help of the student and the student’s peers. So long as the adult learner is demonstrating accountability and active engagement in the classroom, the instructor should not insist on formal evaluations, like the multiple choice exam, as these are superficial in nature and test memorization skills more than they evaluate whether the learner has acquired a deep down knowledge of the course material and developed the ability to apply the lessons in the real world.
References
Fenwick, T. J., & Parsons, J. (2009). The art of evaluation: A resource for educators and trainers. Thompson Educational Publishing.
Forrest III, S. P., & Peterson, T. O. (2006). It's called andragogy. Academy of management learning & education, 5(1), 113-122.
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. Ulti-BASE In-Site.
Howatt, W. A. (1999). Journaling to self-evaluation: A tool for adult learners. International Journal of Reality Therapy, 8(2), 32-34.
Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moss, D., & Van Duzer, C. (1998). Project-Based Learning for Adult English Language Learners. ERIC Digest.