MDDE612+Readings+for+Assignment+2

Review #2 Articles in the Reader, (Value 15%)

Choose five only of the following readings to review. This review should be approximately 5,000 words in length.

Articles,
 * 1) Boyd, R. D. & Myers, J. G. (1988). Transformative education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 7(4), 261-284.
 * 2) Fenwick, T. J. (2000). Expanding conceptions of experiential learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 50 (4), 243-272.
 * 3) Hunt, D. E. (1985). Demystifying learning style. Orbit, 16(1), 1-6.
 * 4) Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 * 5) Miller, M. R. & Daloz, L. A. (1989). Assessment of prior learning: Good practices assure congruity between work and education. Equity, and Excellence. 24(3), 30-34. Published by Greenwood Publishing Group inc.
 * 6) Peruniak, G. (1993). The promise of experiential learning and challenges to its integrity by prior learning assessment. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, X1X(1), 7-29.
 * 7) Spectre, P. H. (1993)). Lance Lee: Building self-reliance, character, and boats. Wooden Boat, October, No. 114, 52- 63. Published by Jossey-Bass Inc.
 * 8) Sternberg, R. J., Wagner, R. K., Williams, W. M., & Horvath, J. A. (1995). Testing common sense. American Psychologist, 50(11), 912-927.
 * 9) Weil, S. W. & McGill, I. (1989). A framework for making sense of experiential learning. In S. W. Weil & I. McGill (Eds.), Making sense of experiential learning: Diversity in theory and practice (pp. 3-24). Milton Keyes: Open University Press.
 * 10) Wiessner, C. A. & Mezirow. J. (2000). Theory building and the search for common ground. In J. Mezirow & Associates, Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 343-358). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Spectre, P. H. (1993)). Lance Lee: Building self-reliance, character, and boats. Wooden Boat, October, No. 114, 52- 63. Published by Jossey-Bass Inc.

http://www.atlanticchallenge.com/community/history.shtm

http://www.maineboats.com/online/boat-features/lance-lee-tremolino

http://www.thewoodenboatshow.com/tribute.php

Peruniak, G. (1993). **The promise of experiential learning and challenges to its integrity by prior learning assessment**. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, X1X(1), 7-29.
 * 1) Outline the main issues and obstacles in arriving at a definition of experiential learning.
 * 2) Explain your own view on whether or not experiential learning is a distinct type of learning.
 * 3) Define prior learning assessment and trace its development in the past 25 years.
 * 4) Explain the relationship between competency-based education and prior learning assessment.
 * 5) Describe the challenges to experiential learning described by Peruniak.
 * 6) Explain the relationship between experiential learning and prior learning assessment.
 * 7) State the implications of prior learning assessment for education and work.

Getting a grip on some aspects of experiential learning is a lot like trying to catch poplar fluff on a windy day. The ERIC data base lists no fewer than 58 terms related to experiential learning. Can such a nebulous, slippery term have any integrity? [okay, so this may be difficult.]

In early societies, it is likely that "apprenticeships" of one kind or another played a large role in the learning and development of its members. Houle (1976) described five systems of advanced learning in medieval Europe including the Of these, apprenticeships and chivalry depended for most of their effectiveness on experiential learning.
 * universities;
 * apprenticeship training carried out by the craft guilds;
 * chivalry training;
 * private learning in the nunneries, monasteries, and courts;
 * the "calling" of people to roles through divine intervention.

CAEL has been the main agency spearheading the rationalization and dissemination of the assessment of experiential learning throughout the world. Indeed, in these circles the term "experiential learning" in the last several years has been almost entirely replaced by, or become synonymous with, "prior learning assessment."

**experiential learning~prior learning assessment**

A number of factors have contributed to the increasing interest in prior learning assessment including
 * more interest in the adult education "market" and
 * increasing pressure on educational establishments to recognize certain kinds of industrial training for credit purposes.

(p. 122)
 * Measures for Research**
 * program success
 * satisfaction of learners
 * number of credits awarded by PLA,
 * number of candidates petitioning for awards,
 * cost effectiveness,
 * success of graduates
 * ideal measure: to help in achieving a "successful life" in the eyes of the person and his or her communities

Results Show
 * effectiveness of the learning process for participants,
 * the demand for such aservice,
 * the new routes of accessibility this option offers,
 * the success of graduates of these programs
 * the difficulties in developing suchprograms within the mainstream of educational activities, as programs likethese require intensive faculty involvement and support.

Challenges of PLA > responsible under PLA procedures. >> happens while going through PLA procedures is in the personal and professional reflective process, which is NOT part of the credit award.
 * 1) implicit assumption that the means of learning are unimportant as long as the outcomes are reached
 * PLA programs tend to separate out the process of learning from the outcomes of learning. "It doesn't matter how you learned these things as long as you know them" is the underlying attitude.
 * This assertion implies that the process of learning, often at the heart of experiential learning, is unexamined and thereby devalued unless it relates directly to a set of predefined learning outcomes.
 * Yet many times the "process outcomes" cannot be defined, if ever, until after the learning experience. This suggests that those responsible for the setting of learning outcomes should be informed by the variety of experiential learning flowing through the assessment process.
 * The value of the independence assumption is that it recognizes that there are many routes to any one destination. The means and the ends of learning merge in an interdependent dynamic and the challenge is to arrive at an appropriate balance.
 * 1) the limitation that derives from the competence-based framework within which PLA operates
 * CBE is the main framework associated with PLA.
 * Competence-based education (CBE): expected to be able to do by the end of the course. The learning outcomes are usually a set of 12 to 15 statements that are more detailed than a calendar course description but not as specific as course unit objectives.
 * Competence-based education (CBE) frameworks oriented toward learning outcomes provide the most straightforward means of comparing what someone has learned informally to what is required in the formal curriculum.
 * Advantages: explicitness, measurability, and accountability.
 * Disadvantages: it suffers from its own rigidity because at any one point in time it can only define a subset of the possible forms of outcomes and it leaves implicit a great many assumptions, including the relationship of these outcomes to other outcomes
 * For instance, an instructor who is constructing a challenge examination based on a set of learning outcomes in an introductory counseling course might wish to take account of the variety of counseling courses across the discipline and not limit the examination to his or her own particular textbook. But even in writing the outcomes at this level of generality, alternative conceptions of counseling are precluded, for example, those built around one's experience with the whole notion of power in a social service agency. No one system can capture the variety of learning that is possible from life experience
 * 1) PLA procedures are framed by the curriculum of the institution from which credit is being petitioned. The same faculty who assess in the traditional accreditation system are
 * PLA does not provide a better way of conceptualizing credit. It tries to slot informal learning experiences into existing formal credit requirements. There is rarely any challenge to the existing credit system. In assessing one particularly impressive portfolio (Peruniak, 1989), I began to wonder how the university stacked up against this person's learning experience rather than the other way around.
 * Experiential learning does not conform to such arbitrary standardizations any more than does life. What has often occurred is that the substantive learning that
 * When the side effects of a PLA process are seen as more valuable than the credit awarded for the main event, then it is a clue to rethink what we are doing with our credit system.
 * 1) the adoption by agencies outside of the education sector
 * Governments and accreditation units have appreciated the CBE framework of accountability and measurability upon which PLA programs rest
 * In the 1970s, most experiential educators examined alternative methods of assessment because they believed in the worth and validity of the adult learner's experience and prior learning. In meetings with these individuals, there was high energy, high commitment to the ideals of extending educational opportunities, and a mutual sharing of resources and ideas.
 * However, we now have the situation where governments such as in Britain, and possibly to a lesser extent in Quebec and British Columbia, have expropriated PLA procedures as a tool for solving economic and manpower problems.
 * low-energy, unquestioning, generally unresponsive group with their educational counterparts
 * the reluctance to share information from commissioned research studies, presumably to keep the competitive edge, flies in the face of educational notions of public knowledge.
 * The mindless application of competence-based formulae could become just as oppressive as the flood of behavioural objectives to which our curriculum was subjected a decade ago.
 * the substance of the qualitative element is abandoned for the shadow of easy measurement.
 * Quality performance based on experiential learning cannot always be reflected on paper or captured by checklists in contrived demonstrations.
 * Furthermore, these devices must not be allowed to replace or mask the role of sensitive human judgment

Benefits of PLA: (link)
 * It provides formal, external recognition for an individual's accomplishments which can be important for self esteem and for the credibility of the employing organization.
 * Time may be saved - it can be quicker to gain a qualification using PLA, though this is not always the case.
 * On a formal course of study individuals are sometimes required to cover ground with which they are already familiar. This can be avoided.
 * The process can itself can be beneficial to the individual, by helping to develop a reflective approach to practice. This has been identified as the most important benefit of PLA in higher education.
 * It can help with widening access to education and training.

Disadvantages of PLA: (same link as above)
 * Since it is relatively new, the process of PLA is generally unfamiliar and can be difficult to grasp. For those used to the more traditional methods of assessment, adjusting to the requirement to identify and articulate `learning outcomes' for which credit is to be claimed, then selecting the evidence and method of presentation to support a claim for learning can prove challenging.
 * It is not only the individuals wishing to claim credit who are likely to be unfamiliar with the process. Educators, trainers and work-based supervisors supporting and assessing those wishing to claim credit may lack experience of PLA and may have to `learn alongside' their candidates. This can, of course, result in a positive experience for all concerned - but may not.
 * Training support has been identified as critical for PLA . The process is likely to require time, personal effort and perseverance.
 * By its very nature, PLA requires a high level of organizational skill and self-direction on the part of those claiming credit. If such skills and qualities are absent, the individual may flounder.
 * There is also invariably a financial cost which will vary according to the accrediting body and the type of qualification sought.
 * Lastly, the process can clearly discriminate against people who have experienced unemployment or who have been away from employment for long periods.

Fenwick, T. J. (2000). **Expanding conceptions of experiential learning**. Adult Education Quarterly, 50 (4), 243-272.

Experiential Learning
 * used both to distinguish this ongoing meaning making from theoretical knowledge and nondirected informal life experience from formal education
 * educators have used the term for
 * kinesthetic-directed instructional activities in the classroom to special workplace projects interspersed with critical dialogue led by a facilitator,
 * to learning generated through social action movements,
 * team-building adventures in the wilderness.
 * Definitional problems continue when one tries to disentangle the notion of experiential learning from experiences commonly associated with formal education such as class discussions, reading and analysis, and reflection
 * As Alheit (1998) has pointed out, the appropriation of human life experience as a pedagogical project to be managed by educators is highly suspicious.

Fenwick seems to think that the colonization impulse of 'experiential learning' by a predominant idea, in much educational theory and practice of experiential learning, that experiential learning is reflective construction of meaning, with an emphasis on critical reflection and dialogue.

Learning (p. 244) Implicit
 * reflection-action (or mind-body and individual-context) binary: recalling and analyzing lived experience to create mental knowledge structures.
 * a process of privatizing, objectifying, ordering, and disciplining experience, a process that inserts governance as a matter of course and naturalizes hierarchies of knowledge and skill

The resulting appropriation and compartmentalization by educators of fluid spaces of human meaning making reifies, essentializes, and narrativizes experience as a **knowable resource** to be **exploited** in the service of rationalistic and utilitarian notions of knowledge, splits rational consciousness from messy matters of the body, regulates subjects through technologies such as critical reflection and accreditation of prior learning experience, and often ignores issues of identity, politics, and discursive [relating to knowledge obtained by reason and argument rather than intuition] complexities of human experience (and the problematic of its knowability) unfolding amid what Spivak has called "fractured semiotic (relating to signs and symbols, esp spoken or written signs) fields." [big sentence! Separating learning from experience is a big no no, p. 26]

In a time when an understanding of managed experiential learning is ascending as a primary animator of lifelong learning, the need to disrupt and resist reductionist, binary, individualized notions of experiential learning and pose alternate conceptions becomes urgent. (p. 26)

Fenwick's Definition of Experiential Learning >> contexts.
 * a process of human cognition.
 * The root of the word cognition in fact means "to learn," and thus the two terms are used interchangeably following standard usage within each perspective.
 * I do not believe that the dimension of experience, broadly understood, is defensible as a classificatory signifier in cognition:
 * What manner of learning can be conceived that is not experiential, whether the context be clearly educational or not?
 * Experience embraces reflective as well as kinesthetic activity, conscious and unconscious dynamics, and all manner of interactions among subjects, texts, and

Five Perspectives
 * reflection (a constructivist perspective),
 * interference (a psychoanalytic perspective rooted in Freudian tradition),
 * participation (from perspectives of situated cognition),
 * resistance (a critical cultural perspective),
 * co-emergence (from the enactivist perspective emanating from neuroscience and evolutionary theory).

(p. 267/8) (constructivist) || Inference (psychoanalytic) || Participation (situative) || Resistance (critical cultural) || Co-emergence (enactivist) || Process || Through reflection on experience learner constructs personal understanding of relevant structures of meaning derived from action in the world || Unlearning old strategies of survival. Working through dilemmas to explore one's desires, attachments, self, and resistance to knowing. || Becoming more attuned with constraints and affordances of particular situations. Learner progresses along trajectories of participation and growth of identity. || Naming repress of cultural practices and discourses. Recovering lost subject positions and voice. || One's behaviour changes as one learns to cope with new situations and conditions. As one's actions change, so does one's world in one sense of the world. ||
 * Perspective || Reflective
 * Focus and Key Questions || Individuals construct meanings from their experiences to produce knowledge. || The self: how it is crafted, repressed, recovered, and understood. || Practices in which individuals have learned to participate. What constitutes meaningful action for a particular individual in a given context? How do people learn adaptively in situations in which they are engaging in activities? || How does power circulate to repress or enhanced experience and learning? How is identity limited or liberated by prevailing cultural codes? || Co-emergence of systems (learner, setting). How do cognition and environment becomes simultaneously enacted? ||
 * Questions Schemata || Process and structures of perception, memory, belief structures, and interpretation. Reflective analysis of personal assumptions. Process of belief transformation || Unconscious desires and insights. Egos self-protective defenses. “Vicissitudes of love and hate in learning.” Internal conflicts. || Interactive systems, including individuals as participants. Properties of social practices: collaborative work, distribution of accountability and authority, information sources, and characteristics of interaction. || Cultural practices, cultural capital and discourses; the regulation and distribution of authority and resources. Experience is shaped by the circulation of power, the interests of dominant groups, and the resistance of other groups. || Dense interconnections at subsystem levels. Internal coherence in intricate patterns. Self-organizing, emergent, expansive. ||
 * View of Knowledge || Individual mind: asset of mental constructs that can be represented, expressed, and transferred to new situations. || Passionate tensions of love and hate. You've urge and civil conflicts. Dynamic Psychical events. || Participation with increasing effectiveness. Knowledge is not judged by what is true or erroneous but by what is relevant here, what is worth knowing and doing, what is convenient for who, and next in this. || Knowledge is emancipation from passive acceptance of received identities and dominant cultural structures. Knowledge is expressed through resistance (in voice, action, or silence). || Cognition is embodied in action --- I. history of structural coupling that brings forth a world. ||
 * Relation of Learner to Object/Context of Knowing || Learner inquires and experiments, guided by personal intention. Situation presents possibilities from which learner selects objects of knowing. || One's internal conflicts are new versions of old cultural conflicts. Internal world is attached to the outside (social) through matters of love and hate. Insight-outside encounters produce the conflicts, which are learning. || Social and individual skills and activities are inseparable. Knowing does not exist apart from the tools, community, and activity of that particular situation. || Learner's positionality is political. Power relations determine the learner's relation to situation an object of knowing. || Systems of the learner(Nero, immune, visual, etc.) are embedded in networks of the context. All of the learner's perceptions are experiential and enacted. ||
 * Nature of Power in Learning
 * Outcomes || More inclusive, integrative, discriminating mental constructs that can be applied to enable individual successes in new situations || Coming to tolerate the demands of the self and the social. Coming to accept and understand (recovered) selves. || Improve participation in interactive systems, the social practices valued most by the letter and the community. Participation becomes more meaningful personally and socially. || Social reconstruction: make explicit the politics and constraints of cultural practices, communicate and understand differences in human experience, and build coalitions among differences. || In educational applications, and activism seeks to help describe and analyze learning in systems. ||
 * Experience and Knowing || May repress individuals own personal constructs and alienate learner from value of own experiences || Inference must occur within the learner. Pedagogy viewed as repressive and intolerant of complex processes of psychic “workings through.” Conflicts at the point in which learners meet the force of their cultural history stimulate interference. || Learner moves from peripheral participation in a community to more central positionality with competence. || The wave power flows in a particular relationship and culture determines knowledge. Power determines what is considered knowable and worth knowing, who is a recognizable knower, and what experience means. || Power is understood in terms of system dynamics as energy. Continuous, generative. ||
 * Educator’s Role || Educators encourage reflective process and pose challenges to individuals assumptions they also validate knowledge acquired through personal construction || Educator must accept own psychic dilemmas of love and hate. Honour the difficulty, time, and limits of learning as working through psychic conflicts. Clear spaces for people to learn. Attend with compassion. Avoid rescue fantasies. || Educators may arrange sequences activities and conditions in complex social situations that help learners best practice the kinds of participation they desire. || Educators can make explicit the ideologies, practices, and positioning that construct experience in particular ways. Open spaces for and support resistance. Help seek beyond current struggles to craft social alternatives. || Assist participants to continue in the name and rename changing nuances outside and inside them and to unlock the grasp of old categories that do not fit new situations. Educators must be clear about their own entanglement in the emerging systems of thought and action. ||

Weil, S. W. & McGill, I. (1989). **A framework for making sense of experiential learning**. In S. W. Weil & I. McGill (Eds.), Making sense of experiential learning: Diversity in theory and practice (pp. 3-24). Milton Keyes: Open University Press.

Questions, 1. Illustrate and characterize each of four approaches (“villages”) of experiential learning; highlighting its key assumptions, influences, and challenges, according to Weil and McGill. 2. Evaluate the usefulness of the Village model.


 * Village 1: The assessment and accreditation of 'prior' experiential learning**


 * Village 2: Experiential learning and change in Post-school education and training**


 * Village 3: Experiential learning and social change**


 * Village 4: Personal growth and development**

Sternberg, R. J., Wagner, R. K., Williams, W. M., & Horvath, J. A. (1995). **Testing common sense**. American Psychologist, 50(11), 912-927.

Questions, 1. Explain the three main distinctions that the authors make between academic and practical intelligence. 2. What do the authors suggest be done to make academic tests more predictive of practical knowledge? 3. The authors indicate that tacit knowledge is the hallmark of practical intelligence. Discuss the implications of tacit knowledge in the assessment of experiential learning.

Fluid Intelligence (link)
 * Cattell defined fluid intelligence as "…the ability to perceive relationships independent of previous specific practice or instruction concerning those relationships." Fluid intelligence is the ability to think and reason abstractly and solve problems. This ability is considered independent of learning, experience, and education. Examples of the use of fluid intelligence include solving puzzles and coming up with problem-solving strategies.

Crystallized Intelligence
 * Crystallized intelligence is learning from past experiences and learning. Situations that require crystallized intelligence include reading comprehension and vocabulary exams. This type of intelligence is based upon facts and rooted in experiences. This type of intelligence becomes stronger as we age and accumulate new knowledge and understanding.

Fluid vs. Crystallized Intelligence
 * According to Knox (1977), ". . . they constitute the global capacity to learn, reason and solve problems that most people refer to as intelligence. Fluid and crystallized intelligence are complementary in that some learning tasks can be mastered mainly by exercising either fluid or crystallized intelligence" (p. 420).

Fluid and Crystallized Intelligence Throughout Life
 * Both types of intelligence increase throughout childhood and adolescence.
 * Fluid intelligence peaks in adolescence and begins to decline progressively beginning around age 30 or 40.
 * Crystallized intelligence continues to grow throughout adulthood.

Boyd, R. D. & Myers, J. G. (1988). **Transformative education**. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 7(4), 261-284.

Questions,
 * 1) Compare and contrast Mezirow's perspective transformation with Boyd and Myers' transformative education on
 * basic assumptions,
 * the role of the unconscious,
 * overall goals,
 * structural viewpoint,
 * the role of the educator.
 * 1) Comment on how well the differences identified by these authors hold up under the Mezirow et al. (2000) formulation of transformation theory. For instance, explain your interpretation of the relationship between critical reflection and discernment.
 * 2) Identify and discuss limitations to the Jungian approach to transformation advocate by these authors.

.