DATOS PERSONALES Y PROFESIONALES HENRY ÁLVAREZ

Taylor (2008) describes Mezirow’s perspective on transformative learning as being the most dominant over the past 35 years. However, over time, new perspectives have emerged particularly in response to new research and criticisms that the original perspective was too individually centred without enough focus on social transformation (Cranton 2006). Taylor (2008) states that a neurobiological perspective of transformative learning theory is one of the most recent to emerge.

A prevailing criticism of transformative learning theory has been that almost all research carried out around it has been qualitative (Taylor cited in Brock, 2010, p. 122). However findings enabled through MRI scanning seem to support that the adult human brain is capable of transformative learning and the learning processes occurring in the brain match those described in transformative learning theory.

These new discoveries show the brain has been “shaped by evolution to adapt and readapt to an ever changing world” (Cozolino and Sprokay, 2006). This suggests that people are able to reinterpret their habits of mind in response to new experiences throughout their lifetimes. Taylor says “there is no age of finality for any learning” (2006, p. 7). Neuroscience has shown that learning is change

54 | P a g e

since the brain structure physically changes while people learn (Cozolino and Sprokay, p. 9). In a study whereby adults learned to juggle, MRI scanning showed that “the brain changes physically as we learn” (Zull, 2006, p. 4) and changes again as people forget some of their newfound skills. This very much fits with the view in transformative learning that constant change challenges people to reinterpret their understandings, beliefs and knowledge.

Neuroscience also confirms the transformative learning contention that humans learn best with others – theirs is a ‘social brain’ (Cozolino and Sprokay, 2006). This supports the idea that transformative learning is “grounded in human communication” (Taylor, 2008, p. 5) and that dialogue is central to critical reflection. Cranton (2006) states that transformative learning is helped when it takes place in a “good, warm and helpful group” (2006, p. 179). She explains that having a “connectedness with others, experiencing oneself as part of something larger, contributing one’s voice to a collective endeavour, and recognising that collective awareness and thinking transform the sum of their parts” (p. 179). This is very much in line with neuroscience findings that people learn best when they are able to observe each other and dialogue and reflect together (Cozolino and Sprokay, 2006).

Cranton (2006) also notes the importance of continuing supportive social networks within and outside of groups because the process of transforming ones learning and habits of mind can be difficult and painful so “people may need ongoing support to retain these changes” (p. 179).

MRI scanning has shown where in the brain learning occurs and the brain processes used. From these findings Zull (2006) describes four “fundamental pillars of learning” which correspond to the four neurobiological processes. These are (Zull, 2006):

1. Gathering data: Data is gathered through use of the brain’s sensory processes. Zull describes gathering data as “essential for learning” although it does not immediately lead to understanding (p. 5).

2. Reflection: Zull describes this neurobiological process where data flows toward the association regions in the back of the brain and as it occurs “data are merged into combinations that begin to produce a larger, more meaningful image” (2006, p. 5). During this process people label and categorize the data and make relationships and associations. Zull describes this process as

55 | P a g e

comprehending new information by assembling the “images in the back association cortex” and using them as “tools in thought” (2006, p. 6).

3. Creating: Meanings and data from the “back association cortex” flows to the “front association cortex” where it becomes the “basis for conscious thought and planning” – what is described as working memory. “Such plans, theories, and abstractions consist of a combination of images and language. It involves intent, recall, feelings, decisions, and judgements. They are all required for development of deep understanding.” (Zull, 2006, p. 6).

4. Testing: Zull says this “must be active; it must use the motor brain” (p. 7). Action completes the learning process to “discover how understanding matches reality” (p. 7). Writing and talking are forms of active testing.

These brain processes appear to align to Mezirow’s three levels of reflective thinking (content, process and premise) and the transformative learning processes as described by Jackson (2008).

Figure 4: Relationship of Jackson's (2008) transformative learning process (p. 35) and Zull's (2006) neurobiological learning pillars

Figure 4: Relationship of Jackson's (2008) transformative learning process (p. 35) and Zull's (2006) neurobiological learning pillars shows how the two concepts might align. Gathering data can trigger the beginning of the transformative learning process. The data remains ‘only the facts’ until the

Pillar 1: Gathering data Pillar 2: Reflection Pillar 3: Creating meanings Pillar 4: Testing

56 | P a g e

brain allows these new experiences to flow to the association areas where it can be compared with past experiences. This reflection includes weighing it against past habits of mind. Constructing alternative views and theories matches the third pillar which finally tests these new strategies, beliefs and theories.

A recent study by Brock (2010) showed learners were more likely to report experiencing transformative learning and following this up with changed behaviour if they had progressed through many of the steps shown in Jackson’s diagram.

Zull (2006) points out that it is impossible to separate emotions from the learning process. He describes how the brain’s neurons secrete emotion to all regions of the brain and these “chemicals of emotion act by modifying the strength and contribution of each part of the learning cycle” (p. 7).

It is worth noting that people may choose not to embark on this self-reflective process if they believe the journey may be too painful or disruptive to their lives (Cranton, 2006; Jackson, 2008).