Spencer & Mezirow Spencer and

Spencer & Mezirow Spencer and Mezirow What position do you take in this debate? My assessment of the debate about transformational learning leans towards the views put forward by Jack Mezirow. In brief, this refers to the view that while transformational theory can differ in terms of individual and social learning and transformation, there is a connection and continuity between the individual and social transformational learning.

This stance is also based on the view that that transformation in the individual and transformation in the larger cultural and social context can be viewed as different and not necessarily coterminous with social or cultural transformation. This debate is in essence related to a much wider discourse that has concerned the social sciences for many years; namely, the relationship between the individual and society. This relates to the view as well that the society can transform without the necessary transformation of the individual.

On the other hand credence must also be given to the views of other theorists who suggest a more socially oriented view of the process of transformational learning. However, in my assessment, many of these theorists tend to discount the reality of individual identity and place a great amount of emphasis on the socially constructed individual.

I would tend towards the view that there should be a greater balance between these two aspects and that, as Mezirow implies, there is a complex relationship and continuity between transformation in the context of the individual and society. In the first instance it should be noted tat Mezirow is a constructivist in his theoretical stance. " Learning is defined as the social process of construing and appropriating a new or revised interpretation of the meaning of one's experience as a guide to action.

" (Mezirow, 1994) This refers to the essential view of transformative learning which basically states that through experience the individual becomes cognizant of various disparities or limitation in his view of realty or life and this in turn results in criticism and the interrogation of certain aspects of that individual's life. This view is extended to the idea of social change. "We are confronted with the disorienting dilemma, which serves as a trigger for reflection.

Reflection involves a critique of assumptions..." (Mezirow, 1994) Other theories such as Myles Horton tend to view this theory of transformation as not being a true transformational theory, as it tends to be focused on individual change and development. Change and transformation are considered be transformation in a more social context. However, as has been suggested, this view tends to reduce the significance if individual transformation.

It is this bias in the trajectory of the argument put forward by Horton and others that makes Mezirow's stance inclusive and, in my view, more theoretically significant. 2. Is the transformation of an individual always connected to the transformation of society? Why or why not? This is an extremity difficult issue to address adequately in a short space. There are two aspects to the answer. In the first instance, as Mezirow states, the individual is connected in the context of transformational learning and education to the larger society.

There are many examples of this connection, such as social norms and ideals that affect the issue of individual transformation. As referred to above, learning takes place in a social environment, which implies an intimate link between the individual and society. However, at the same time it can be argued that individual transformation is personal in nature and has little in essence to do with transformation in the larger society. This refers to the psychological process of internal cognizance and awareness within the individual.

As Mezirow states of personal transformation, "...personalized transformation does not guarantee social action." (Mezirow, 1994) This in essence exemplifies the difference between individual and social transformation. In this light, Spenser also distinguishes between critical theory and critical thinking.

He states that, the most important differences between the two is in their focus of study: critical thinking explores a world of objects from the perspective of the individual subject; that is, from the viewpoint of a human being as a self-conscious, autonomous, rational agent." Bruce Spencer: Education for Transformation) And that, "...unlike critical thinking, critical theory maintains that social norms and conventions distort the understanding of individual subjects..." (Bruce Spencer: Education for Transformation) In other words, this implies that while theoretical and critical views may differ, there is such a thing as the individual separate and distinguishable from the society.

Therefore, the individual is not.