Transformational Learning: Theory and Practice

Transformational Learning: Theory and Practice. A Literature Review.

By Angela Brandt

Definitions and Critiques

What is Transformational Learning? Jack Mezirow, considered the founder of the transformational learning theory, defines transformational learning as “learning that transforms problematic frames of reference – sets of fixed assumptions and expectations (habits of mind, meaning perspectives, mindsets) to make them more inclusive, discriminating, open, reflective, and emotionally able to change.”1 The definition is a mouthful; however, Mezirow gives us a better idea of frames of reference to include interpersonal relationships, political orientations, cultural biases, ideologies, schemata, stereotypical attitudes and practices, occupational habits of mind, religious doctrine, moral-ethical norms, psychological preferences and schema, paradigms in mathematics, linguistics and social sciences, and aesthetic values and standards.2 Hobbson and Welbourne in their (((year))) define adult development from a transformative perspective, saying that it is a “qualitative change in how one views the world; involves tension and struggle that are productive of a new conscious.”3In summary, transformational learning transforms the way you view your world.

Despite the theory of transformational learning being present in the adult education field for over twenty-five years, the theory of transformational learning continues to be one of the most researched and discussed theories in adult education.4 Originally, Professor Jack Mezirow's research was focused on the way individuals understood their world and how that perspective can effect social change. Branching out of these interests into a more practical education perspective, his interests became more focused on providing a way for adult educators to understand how we can make meaning out of our experiences in order to provide grounds for action.5

Like all theories, transformational learning has not been undisputed and without its' critiques. Many authors have not felt that transformational learning as a theory of adult education has enough strength to stand on its own. Collard & Law (#5) claim that Jack Mezirow has followed Habermans' social philosophy too closely, to the point of shifting the focus of his investigations with Habermans' and “depends increasingly on Habermans' theory of communicative competence”.6 Collard & Law also state that Mezirow's claim to have an educational theory at all is premature, and, at best, he presents mere fragments of a theory of adult learning or self-directed learning.

A less harsher view of Mezirow's theory gives Mezirow credit for the work on transformational learning and to its' contributions to the field of adult education, but claim that a major flaw in the theory is the failure to account for context (Clark & Wilson, 1991). Specifically, the critique argues that Mezirow fails to “maintain the essential link between the meaning of experience and the context in which it arises and by which it is interpreted (#5, 76).

Group Transformation: How has it been used?

Scott, in 2003, completed a qualitative study in which she interviewed ten Industrial Areas Foundation national community organizers about their experiences in relationship-based organization. IAF is an organization that is focused on social and economic change and “constitutes a forum for citizens to learn about people different from themselves and to forge a deeper conception of the common ground.” 7 The relationship-building that occurs in maintaining IAF organizations are founded by members telling their personal stories about others who have inspired or mentored them and how that person(s) assisted them to re-think their lives to affect social change.

Another closely related research study was done by Lange in 2004, that focused on a university extension course that helped those who were experiencing anxiety about downsizing and restructuring in Alberta, Canada. The course was designed to be a story-sharing and writing course that allowed them to reflect on alternative ways of living and being, and to identify an action plan that might help them integrate these differing ways into their own lives. These individuals were feeling the impact of downsizing – longer work hours, more workplace stress – but were striving to make a difference in their communities and achieve more work/life balance.

Within the IAF, it is not just the individual that is transformed, but the group as a whole. The group “critically examines the issues to be laid out on the table, so to speak, for all to peruse and decide if they are worth keeping.” 8 In her study, Scott shows that transformation is not just an individual process, but can be a collective one and have larger gains for our society.

Within the University extension course, the findings were similar. Storytelling as a means of changing the initiating the transformative process and critical reflection were the key ingredients to allowing transformational learning to take place. Many of the participants talked about returning back to their inner core, and using the course action plan to make change. Lange concludes that “ The dialectic of transformative and restorative learning is vital, for it affirms that transformation is not just an epistemological process involving a change in world view and habits of thinking; it is also an ontological process where participants experience a change in their being in the world including their forms of relatedness.”9

Feminism and Transformation

Cooley, in 2007, completed a study on women's enclaves and how a third-wave feminism consciousness is obtained. As in the two previous studies mentioned in this article, storytelling becomes a way for transformational learning to occur and for relationships to be solidified. Finding women that were part of at least one womens' group, Cooley interviewed seven women about their experiences in womens' groups and found that significant transformational learning occurred when context and communication were present during the learning process.10 Although the sample size was small, the idea of context as an important piece of transformational learning made me look again at Mezirow's original theory and give some credibility to the critique that Clark and Wilson mentioned (Clark & Wilson, 1991). Many of the participants spoke about being free to speak in an open and safe environment, and having the communication style be positive and non-threatening. Feminist style was not necessarily third-wave by the participants; yet, all the participants in the study had internalized some feminist thought from their participation in the womens' enclaves.

How Can we Use Transformational Learning? My Thoughts

Mezirow states in his article about transformational learning as discourse (2003) that in order for transformational learning to take place, certain conditions have to be present; “having an open mind, learning to listen empathetically, “bracketing” premature judgment, and seeking common ground. Qualities of emotional

intelligence are obvious assets for developing the ability of adults to assess alternative beliefs and participate fully and freely in critical-dialectical discourse.”11 The learner also has to have critical self-reflection and reflective judgment. A learner who is “Hungry, desperate, homeless, sick, destitute, and intimidated people obviously

cannot participate fully and freely in discourse”12

To think about how to put transformational learning into practice, we need to ask ourselves “what sticks?”. Not having been a researcher in this field, I can only consider my own experience. In a classroom environment, I have experienced transformational learning internally in classes that were feminist in nature, such as “Introduction to Women's Studies” and “Gender and Communication”. What distinguished these courses from other topics is the facilitators ability to allow the course to have an open dialog, and to consider all points of view during class conversations.

What also helped me have a topic transform my values, attitudes and frames of reference was the application of the topic to a situation that I have experienced in my everyday life. For example, when speaking about sociological perspectives on class, I was able to make meaning out of theories about why people were poor because I have lived that life. Or, learning about communication styles between men and women, I was able to put the communication styles between men and women into examining the actual relationships that I have held with those of the opposite sex.

I chose the topic of transformational learning because the idea of a learning process that is so profound that it changes your attitudes, values and beliefs is fascinating to me. There is so much power in attitudinal change, and with the theory we can do powerful things: change political beliefs, convert others into religions, educate about social change. As an avid feminist, I consider feminist education for our society and, especially young women, to be a transformative educational process. My sociological background also played a role in my choosing the topics of social organization and how transformational learning can play a part in that. In conclusion, I will look to the theory of transformational learning when teaching adults and feel that I at least have some of the key tools on how that can take place within a classroom environment.

1Mezirow, J. (1997) Transformative Learning: Theory to Practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5-12

2Mezirow, J. (1997) Transformative Learning: Theory to Practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5-12

3Hobson, P., & Welbourne, L. (1998). Adult Development and Transformative Learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 17, 2, 72-86

4Taylor, E. (2007). An Update of Transformative Learning Theory: A Critical Review of the Empirical Research (1998-2005). International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26, 2, 173–191

5Clark, M., & Wilson, A. (1991). Context and Rationality in Mezirow's Theory of Transformational Learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 41, 2, 75-91

6Collard, S., & Law, M. (1989). The Limits of Perspective Transformation: A Critique of Mezirow's Theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 39, 2, 99-107

7Scott, S. (2003). The Social Construction of Transformation. Journal of Transformative Education, 1, 3, 264-284

8Scott, S. (2003). The Social Construction of Transformation. Journal of Transformative Education, 1, 3, 264-284

9Lange, E. (2004). Transformative and Restorative Learning: A Vital Dialectic for Sustainable Societies. Adult Education Quarterly, 54, 2, 121-139

10Cooley, LuAnn (2007). Transformational Learning and Third-Wave Feminism as Potential Outcomes of Participation in Women's Enclaves. Journal of Transformative Education, 5, 4, 304-316

11Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative Learning as Discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1, 1, 58-63

12Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative Learning as Discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1, 1, 58-63