Philosophy and Ideology in Adult Education Program Planning
This paper examines how ideology and philosophy shape approaches to adult education program planning. It compares four major philosophical orientations — liberal, progressive, humanist, and radical liberatory — across key dimensions including the source of learning authority, the role of the learner, the role of the teacher, and the purpose of education. Drawing on Elias and Merriam's six-philosophy framework and Zinn's work on philosophical orientation, the paper analyzes how each tradition approaches educational intervention differently. A personal reflection section applies these frameworks to the writer's own assumptions about human nature, the learner's role, the teacher's role, and the broader purpose of adult education.
- Introduction: Philosophy and Program Planning: Overview of four philosophical approaches to planning
- Four Philosophical Orientations Compared: Liberal, progressive, humanist, and radical traditions compared
- Elias and Merriam's Framework for Adult Education: Six-philosophy taxonomy and education-for-work applications
- Roles of Learner and Teacher Across Philosophies: How each tradition defines learner and teacher roles
- Personal Philosophical Reflections on Adult Education: Writer's personal stance on adult education philosophy
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It systematically compares four distinct philosophical traditions using consistent analytical categories — source of authority, role of learner, role of teacher, and purpose — making contrast easy to follow.
- It grounds the comparison in a recognized academic framework (Elias and Merriam's six philosophies), lending credibility to the organizational structure.
- The two-part structure separates descriptive comparison from personal reflection, demonstrating the student's ability to both analyze theory and apply it to their own professional context.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative analysis across multiple theoretical frameworks. Rather than treating each philosophy in isolation, it maps them against shared dimensions (learner role, teacher role, societal purpose), allowing readers to see not just what each tradition believes but how those beliefs differ from one another in a structured, parallel way.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief overview of the four philosophies, then expands in Part II into a fuller treatment using Elias and Merriam's taxonomy, which adds behaviorist and analytic orientations to the original four. The latter half of Part II applies the framework to the specific question of "education-for-work" and concludes with the writer's personal philosophical stance. The bibliography cites two sources from the late 1990s adult education literature.
Introduction: Philosophy and Program Planning
This paper considers how ideology and philosophy impact approaches to program planning. It does so by examining the similarities and differences in approaches to educational intervention based on differing philosophical assumptions: (1) liberal; (2) progressive; (3) humanist; and (4) radical liberatory education ideologies. Part II expresses the writer's personal philosophical reflections on program planning in relation to basic assumptions about human nature, the learner's role, the teacher's role, and the purpose of adult education.
Four Philosophical Orientations Compared
The Liberal philosophy acknowledges the Western canon as the source of authority in adult learning. It holds that learning is pursued for its own sake and that this should take place through lectures, study groups, critical reading, and discussion.
In contrast, the Progressive school of thought holds that learning is derived from the experiences of the learner through problem-solving and ongoing inquiry. The Humanist school of thought views the learner as the source of their own learning and holds that learning takes place experientially. The Radical school of thought views the sources of learning as the socioeconomic and socio-political imbalances present in society, and holds that non-compulsory learning and autonomy combined with critical thinking skills are the optimal learning methods.
Elias and Merriam's Framework for Adult Education
Elias and Merriam (1980) identified six philosophies of adult education: (1) Behaviorist — behavior modification; (2) Liberal — organized knowledge for intellectual development; (3) Analytic — logical and scientific positivism; (4) Progressive — social reform; (5) Humanistic — personal growth; and (6) Radical — radical social change (Strom, 1996).
It was the belief of Elias and Merriam that adult education is influenced greatly by "progressive, humanistic and radical philosophies" and that "the purposes and contexts of specific fields of practice will often determine the philosophic influence" in adult education (Strom, 1996). They further held that the philosophy of adult education can assist adults in attaining "education-for-work," and that the progressive and humanistic philosophies of adult education "have been found to be useful in the design and implementation for certain learning situations, like diversity education and training in business and industry and the institutional classroom" (Strom, 1996).
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.