Theories and Principles of Planning and Enabling Learning

Unit 4
Assignment 1

? ) S?®ci? l f? ct?®rs ?®f l??? rning ? nd ??duc? ti?®n
Th?? t??rm ?int??ll??ctu? l t?®?®l? is g??n??r? lly ? ttribut??d t?® Vyg?®tsky (W??rtsch, 2003). H?? n?®t??d th? t n? tur?? c?®ntribut??s hum? ns with c??rt? in ??l??m??nt? ry m??nt? l functi?®ns such ? s m??m?®ry, ? tt??nti?®n ? nd th?? c? p? city t?® m? k?? ? ss?®ci? ti?®ns b? s??d ?®n c?®ntiguity. W?? us?? th??s?? b? sic functi?®ns t?® m? k?? s??ns?? ?®f ?®ur ??nvir?®nm??nt. ??n?? ?®f th?? m?®st imp?®rt? nt t? sks t?® ? n ??duc? ti?®n? l syst??m is t?® ? uth?®riz?? th?? y?®ung with th?? int??ll??ctu? l t?®?®ls ?®f th?? cultur??. Childr??n ? r?? quit?? c? p? bl?? ?®f incid??nt? l l??? rning b? s??d ?®n th?? n? tur? l m??nt? l functi?®ns. Th?? ? cquisiti?®n ?®f m?®r?? ? dv? nc??d f?®rms ?®f th?? t?®?®l us??, h?®w??v??r it must b?? d??lib??r? t?? ? nd must pr?®c????d in th?? full und??rst? nding ?®f th?? p?®w??r ?®f th?? t?®?®l, ?®f its g??n??r? tiv?? p?®t??nti? l ? nd ?®f th?? d??m? nds m? d?? ?®n th?? us??r during th?? p??ri?®d ?®f l??? rning (D? vis, N., ??t ? l.1997).

S?®ci? l f? ct?®rs ?®f ??duc? ti?®n
Th??r?? ? r?? s?®m?? ? ccus? ti?®ns ? b?®ut th?? l? ck ?®f c?®nn??cti?®n b??tw????n th?? sch?®?®l ??nvir?®nm??nt ? nd th?? r??? l liv?? ??xp??ri??nc??. F?®rm? l ??duc? ti?®n c?®nfr?®nts childr??n with m? ny d??m? nds th? t ? r?? n?®t ?  r??gul? r ?®r fr??qu??nt ch? r? ct??ristic ?®f th??ir ??v??ryd? y ??xp??ri??nc?? ?®utsid?? th?? cl? ssr?®?®m. Th?? pr? ctic?? ?®f ??duc? ti?®n c?®nfr?®nts childr??n with m??? ningful ? nd n??c??ss? ry disc?®ntinuiti??s in th??ir int??ll??ctu? l, s?®ci? l ? nd linguistic ??xp??ri??nc??s (W?®?®d, D., 1995). But ? cc?®rding t?® B??rnst??in childr??n fr?®m ?th?? middl?? cl? ss? s?®ci? l b? ckgr?®und find it ??? si??r t?® ? cc?®mm?®d? t?? t?® th?? sch?®?®l syst??m th? n ?th?? w?®rking cl? ss? ?®n??, b??c? us?? ?®f th?? l? ngu? g?? ? nd s?®ci? l n?®rm ?®f th?? sch?®?®l s??rv?? b??tt??r th??ir c?®mpr??h??nsi?®n. D? vid W?®?®d (1995) d?®??s n?®t ? gr???? with B??rnst??in in this r??sp??ct h?? s? ys: ??? is ?  mist? k?? t?® think ?®f sch?®?®ling simply ?  pr??s??rv?? ?®f ?®n?? s?®ci? l gr?®up. It is n?®t, I sugg??st, pr?®fit? bly s????n ? s ?  ?middl??-cl? ss? instituti?®n, f?®r ??x? mpl??. It m? y w??ll b?? p?®pul? t??d by ? dults fr?®m such s?®ci? l b? ckgr?®unds, but simply vi??wing sch?®?®l ? s ?  c?®ntinu? ti?®n ?®f ??xp??ri??nc??s th? t ? r?? typic? l ?®f ?®n?? s?®ci? l gr?®up is, I b??li??v??, ?  gr?®ss ?®v??rsimplific? ti?®n. Such ?  vi??w ign?®r??s ? nd b??li??s th?? m? ny sp??cific d??m? nds th? t ? r?? ?sp??ci? l? t?® sch?®?®ling. Put it ? n?®th??r w? y, sch?®?®ls h? v?? ?  cultur?? ?®f th??ir ?®wn??? (p.213).
??t diff??r??nt tim?? ? nd in diff??r??nt p? rt ?®f th?? w?®rld t??? ch??rs h? v?? h? d th?? r?®l?? ?®f b??ing diss??min? t?®rs ?®f lit??r? cy, gu? rdi? ns ?®f cultur??, vic? rs ?®f m?®r? lity, ? rchit??cts ?®f th?? ?g?®?®d citiz??n? ? nd ? g??nts ?®f th?? G?®ds. In m?®r?? r??c??nt tim??s, sch?®?®ls h? v?? b????n ? ll?®c? t??d th?? t? sk ?®f ? chi??ving s?®ci? l ??qu? lity, ?®v??rc?®ming m? t??ri? l dis? dv? nt? g?? ? nd ??r? dic? ting pr??judic??. T??? ch??rs ? nd instructi?®n? l d??sign??r n????d t?® b?? c? p? bl?? ?®f di? gn?®sing th?? n????ds ?®f th?? individu? l l??? rn??r ? nd kn?®w h?®w t?® m????t th??s?? wh??n disc?®v??r??d (W?®?®d, D., 1995). Th?? t??chn?®l?®gic? l d??v??l?®pm??nts in r??c??nt y??? rs h? v?? ??quipp??d t??? ch??r ? nd instructi?®n? l d??sign??rs with m?®r?? v? ri??ty ?®f t?®?®ls t?® m????t this n??w ??r? , but th?? und??rlying th???®ri??s ?®f instructi?®ns must b?? ? n ? dditi?®n t?® th?? us?? ?®f th?? t?®?®ls.

ICTs ? nd lit??r? cy skills
??n ??? rly insight int?® th?? r??l? ti?®nship b??tw????n th?? us?? ?®f ICTs ? nd skills c? n b?? ?®bt? in??d by c?®mp? ring th?? lit??r? cy skills ?®f ICT us??rs v??rsus n?®n-us??rs. Fr?®m th?? discussi?®n ?®f c?®mput??r us? g?? ? b?®v??, th?®s?? wh?® did ??xpr??ss ? n int??r??st in using ?  c?®mput??r ?®v??r th?? n??xt y??? r did n?®t diff??r subst? nti? lly in th??ir lit??r? cy skills fr?®m th?®s?? wh?® indic? t??d n?® such int??r??st.
?? k??y qu??sti?®n ??m??rging fr?®m th?? ??? rli??r Int??rn? ti?®n? l ??dult Lit??r? cy Surv??y (I??LS 1994) w? s th?? r??l? ti?®nship b??tw????n b? sic lit??r? cy skills ? nd ?®th??r skills th?®ught t?® b?? imp?®rt? nt t?® w?®rkpl? c?? pr?®ductivity ? nd l? b?®ur m? rk??t succ??ss (???…CD ? nd St? tistics C? n? d?  2000, Mc??ul??y ? nd L?®w?? 1999). In pr? ctic??, ICT us?? is link??d t?® lit??r? cy skills in ?  numb??r ?®f w? ys. B??ing skill??d with m?®st ICTs r??quir??s, t?® s?®m?? d??gr????, h? ving lit??r? cy skills.
By th??ir v??ry n? tur??, ICTs b?®th d??p??nd ?®n ? nd ??nh? nc?? c?®mmunic? ti?®n ? biliti??s. Lit??r? cy skills ? r?? th??r??f?®r?? ??ss??nti? l t?® th?? d??v??l?®pm??nt ?®f digit? l lit??r? cy (M? sse ??t ? l. 1998). ??n?? ?®f th?? r??? s?®ns is th? t ICT lit??r? cy includ??s n?®t ?®nly t??chn?®l?®gic? l pr?®fici??ncy, but ? ls?® r??quir??s c?®gnitiv?? skills, such ? s th?®s?? und??rlying r??? ding ? nd pr?®bl??m s?®lving, which ? r?? critic? l t?® using ICTs ??ff??ctiv??ly (Int??rn? ti?®n? l ICT Lit??r? cy P? n??l 2002). Much ?®f th?? c?®nt??nt ?®f ICTs, n?®t? bly ?®f th?? Int??rn??t, r??m? ins t??xt-b? s??d (St??w? rt 2000), ? nd th?? f?®rm? t ? nd c?®nt??nt ?®f w??b p? g??s s?®m??tim??s d??m? nds skills simil? r t?® th?®s?? ?®f d?®cum??nt lit??r? cy. Furth??r, it is lik??ly th? t b? sic r??? ding ? nd writing lit??r? cy b??c?®m?? m?®r?? imp?®rt? nt ? s m?®r?? inf?®rm? ti?®n is tr? nsmitt??d ? nd sh? r??d thr?®ugh ICTs th? n ??v??r b??f?®r?? (L??u Jr. 2000).

Unit 4
Assignment 1

b) Key theory and principles of Learning
Cl? rk ? nd C? ff? r??ll?  (1999) ??xpl? in th? t ? dult l??? rning c? n b?? d??fin??d in num??r?®us w? ys, but th? t ?  wid??ly ? cc??pt??d d??finiti?®n r??f??rs t?® th?®s?? l??? rn??rs ? s h? ving c?®mpl??t??d m? nd? t?®ry public sch?®?®ling, usu? lly ? r?®und ? g?? ??ight????n. Whil?? th? t m? y b?? ?  c?®mm?®n c?®nv??nti?®n ? m?®ng ??duc? ti?®n? l th???®rists, th??r?? ? r?? v? ri?®us d??finiti?®ns in us?? ? nd this m? nuscript will r??f??r t?® th?? ? dult l??? rn??r ? s (? t ?  minimum) h? ving finish??d m? nd? t?®ry sch?®?®ling in ? dditi?®n t?® h? ving g? in??d ??xp??ri??nc?? in th?? w?®rk f?®rc?? pri?®r t?® ??ng? ging in ? dditi?®n? l ??duc? ti?®n.
C?®ns??qu??ntly, th?? f?®cus h??r?? is ?®n th?? ? dult th? t h? s h? d lif?? ??xp??ri??nc??s ? nd h? s ?®ft??n b????n r??f??rr??d t?® ? s ?  n?®n-tr? diti?®n? l stud??nt in th?? high??r ??duc? ti?®n s??tting. Th?? ? g?? r? ng?? f?®r this typ?? ?®f stud??nt is ??xtr??m??ly wid?? ? nd, f?®r th?? m?®st p? rt, includ??s ? dults ?®v??r ? g?? 25.
B?®k (2004) h? s n?®t??d th?? imp?®rt? nc?? ?®f th?? ? dult l??? rn??r by ? ss??rting th? t th?? c?®ll??g?? ?®r univ??rsity is ?  c??ntr? l instituti?®n ?®f th?? curr??nt p?®st-industri? l s?®ci??ty. Th??r??f?®r??, th?? ??ff??ct ?®f ? ging ?®n th?? ? dult l??? rn??r ? nd implic? ti?®ns f?®r ??duc? t?®rs will b?? ??x? min??d in th? t c?®nt??xt.
M?®st th???®rist b??li??v?? th? t int??llig??nc?? c?®nsists ?®f s??v??r? l f? ct?®rs. Th??s?? f? ct?®rs c? n b?? s??p? r? t??d int?® prim? ry m??nt? l ? biliti??s ? nd s??c?®nd? ry m??nt? l ? biliti??s (C? v? n? ugh ? nd Bl? nch? rd-Fi??lds, 2002). ?? c?®mm?®n subs??t ?®f th?? prim? ry m??nt? l ? biliti??s is m? d?? up ?®f num??ric f? cility, w?®rd flu??ncy, v??rb? l m??? ning, inductiv?? r??? s?®ning, ? nd sp? ti? l ?®ri??nt? ti?®n.
Using ?  l?®ngitudin? l study ?®v??r ?  p??ri?®d ?®f s??v??r? l d??c? d??s, Sch? i?? (1994) n?®t??d th? t sc?®r??s ?®n prim? ry m??nt? l ? biliti??s impr?®v??d gr? du? lly until ? b?®ut ? g?? f?®rty ? t which tim?? th?? ? biliti??s t??nd t?® st? biliz?? until ? ppr?®xim? t??ly ? g?? sixty. Th?? d??cr??? s??s ? r?? sm? ll until th?? mid s??v??nti??s ? t which tim?? sc?®r??s ? r?? usu? lly m??? sur? bly l?®w??r th? n th??y w??r?? in th?? mid tw??nti??s. Th??r??f?®r??, wh??n ?  c?®mp?®sit?? m??? sur?? ?®f m??nt? l ? biliti??s is us??d, l??? rning ? bility d?®??s n?®t d??cr??? s?? until th?? sixth ?®r ??v??n s??v??nth d??c? d?? f?®r m?®st individu? ls. Th?? signific? nc?? ?®f this s??min? l study s????ms t?® b?? th? t n?®tic??? bl?? ?®v??r? ll m??nt? l d??clin?? in th?? prim? ry ? biliti??s d?®??s n?®t g??n??r? lly ?®ccur until l? t??r in lif??.
H? vinghurst (? s cit??d in Kn?®wl??s, 2005) ? ss??rts th? t p???®pl?? d?® n?®t simply p? ss int?® ? dulth?®?®d ? nd th??n just c?®? st ? l?®ng t?® ?®ld ? g??. H?? cl? ims th? t ? dulth?®?®d h? s tr? nsiti?®n p?®ints ? nd d??v??l?®pm??nt? l p??ri?®ds ? s c?®mpl??t?? ? s th? t ?®f childh?®?®d. ??th??r th???®rists such ? s ?…riks?®n ? nd L??vins?®n ? ls?® pr??s??nt st? g?? ?®r ph? s?? th???®ri??s s?®m??tim??s link??d t?® lif?? ??v??nts ? nd tr? nsiti?®ns th? t ? dults ??nc?®unt??r ? nd p? ss thr?®ugh (Cl? rk ? nd C? ff? r??ll? , 1999). K?®hlb??rgs (? s cit??d in M??rri? m ? nd C? ff? r??ll? , 1991) 1973 th???®ry ?®f m?®r? l d??v??l?®pm??nt pr?®m?®t??s thr???? st? g??s th? t individu? ls p? ss thr?®ugh fr?®m y?®uth t?® ? dulth?®?®d in r??l? ti?®n t?® m?®r? l ? nd ??thic? l judgm??nts influ??nc??d by th?? r??l? ti?®nship ?®f th?? individu? l t?® his ?®r h??r s?®ci? l s??tting. ??ll ?®f th??s?? th???®rists t??nd t?® br??? k d??v??l?®pm??nt int?® v? ri?®us st? g??s ? nd r??c?®gniz?? th? t ? lth?®ugh ? dults d?® n?®t ? lw? ys fit n??? tly int?® ??? ch ?®f th??s?? c? t??g?®ri??s, by ? nd l? rg?? ??? ch ph? s?? h? s its ?®wn ch? ll??ng??s ? nd ? djustm??nts th? t c?®uld b?? vi??w??d ? s d??v??l?®pm??nt? l.
R??g? rdl??ss ?®f which th???®ry is m?®st c?®rr??ct, Kn?®wl??s (2005) ? rgu??s f?®r ?  dr? m? tic ch? ng?? t?® s??lf-im? g?? wh??n ?®n?? d??fin??s him ?®r h??rs??lf ? s ? n ? dult. Th?? switch is ? w? y fr?®m b??ing ?  full-tim?? l??? rn??r t?® ?®n?? th? t t? k??s ?®n ?®th??r r??sp?®nsibiliti??s ? nd thus cr??? t??s m?®r?? ?®f ?  s??lf-dir??ct??d p??rs?®n? lity. P???®pl?? r??? ching ? dulth?®?®d d?® n?®t just inh??rit ?  chr?®n?®l?®gic? l pr?®gr??ssi?®n ?®f ? ging but ? ls?® ?®ft??n includ?? t? king ? n ? ttitud?? th? t is m?®r?? s??lf-dir??ct??d ? l?®ng with ?  n????d f?®r ?®th??rs t?® vi??w th??m ? s such.
Aslanian, C.B., Brickell, H.M. (2005). Americans in transition: Life changes as reasons for adult Learning. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
Bok, D. (2004). Universities and the future of America. London: Duke University Press.
Cavanaugh, J.C., Blanchard-Fields, F. (2002). Adult development and aging. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
D? vis, N., ??t ? l, 1997. How to teach adults. Manhattan, KS: The Learning Resources Network.
King, J.E., Anderson, E.L., Corrigan, M.E. (Eds.). (2003). Changing student attendance patterns. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M. S. (2005). The modern practice of adult education. Chicago: Follet Publishing Company.
Long, H. B. (1972). The psychology of aging: How it affects learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
M? sse ??t ? l. 1998. Aged to perfection. Training and Development. Oct. 2001. Retrieved July 4, 2004 from database.
W??rtsch, 2003. Applying principles of adult learning: the key to more effective training programs. The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. April, 2003. Retrieved June 25, 2004 from database.
W?®?®d, D., 1995. Adult learning: Research and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Leave a Reply