The theory of transformation and transformative learning are presented in this thesis as the theoretical framework on which this research is underpinned. The theory has been presented in a positive fashion, highlighting its appropriateness and application to this research. There are, however, alternate voices who question some of the tenets of transformative learning and the theory of transformation. Recently Newman (2012) in an article in the Adult Education Quarterly called transformative learning into question and created much debate and response. Whilst it is not the focus of this research, for the purpose of balance I am presenting here a representative view of the main critiques of transformation theory, these are, that the theory:
Is too cognitive, relying on rationality (Taylor 2000), that it needs to include the importance of feelings and emotions (Kucukaydin & Cranton 2012).
Is too individualistic and should have a greater social dimension (Collard and Law (1989).
Does not give adequate place to contextual issues such as social context, class, ethnicity, culture (Taylor 2000), and, that it is a very white- middle-class- male (Clark and Wilson 1991).
Is too subjective, that transformational learning can only be recognised retrospectively and verified only by the learner (Newman 2012).
140
Focuses on a linear/stage process whereas in reality the process is more recursive (Taylor 2000). For example there is not one ‘trigger event’ but usually an accumulative affect from experiences.
Is not explicit enough in clarifying that not all adult learning, or that the presence of critical reflection, equate to transformative learning (Brookfield 2000)
Keegan (2000) offers the following observations as to aspects of transformational learning which in his opinion need further consideration to make them more ‘explicit’ (47).
1. Transformational kinds of learning need to be more clearly distinguished from informational kinds of learning, and each needs to be recognised as valuable in any learning activity, discipline, or field.
2. The form that is undergoing transformation needs to be better understood; if there is no form there is no transformation.
3. At the heart of a form is a way of knowing (what Mezirow calls a “frame of reference”); thus genuinely transformational learning is always to some extent an epistemological change rather than merely a change in behavioural repertoire or an increase in the quantity or fund of knowledge
4. Even as the concept of transformational learning needs to be narrowed by focusing more explicitly on the epistemological, it needs to be broadened to include the whole life span; transformational learning is not the province of adulthood or adult education alone.
5. Adult educators with an interest in transformational learning may need a better understanding of their students’ current epistemologies so as not to create learning designs that unwittingly presuppose the very capacities in the students their designs might seek to promote.
6. Adult educators may better discern the nature of learners’ particular needs for transformational learning by better understanding not only their students’ present epistemologies
141
by the epistemological complexity of the present learning challenges they face in their lives.
(2000 pp47-48)
In response to critique over the years, Mezirow (1991, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2000), has replied and developed his theory, acknowledging, that the theory of transformation is a theory in progress. He addresses issues of cultural, historical and biographical context, acknowledges the place of feelings and is clear that his ten stages of transformation are not a rigid linear process. He appreciates that learning is a continuous process, needing revision and re- interpretation.
Learning is understood as the process of using a prior interpretation to construe a new or revised interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience as a guide to future action…Transformative learning refers to the process by which we transform our taken-for-granted frames of reference (meaning perspectives, habits of mind, mind-sets) to make them more inclusive, discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change and reflective so that they may generate beliefs and pinions that will prove more true or justified to guide action (2000:5-8).
Accepting that transformation theory and transformative learning has its critics; it is, even amongst them, the leading theoretical approach within the field of adult higher education. It is fair to say that the theory of transformation and transformative learning is developing and ongoing. It is with this understanding that this theory is used as the theoretical approach within this research.
142
3.6 Conclusion
This chapter set out to investigate the nature of transformation and transformative learning along with the central role of critical reflection. Within the area of transformation it set out to provide a working knowledge of the theory of transformation. This was achieved by using Mezirow’s understanding and presentation of the components of transformation, most notably: the ten points of transformation; Meaning Perspective/Frame of Reference; Habits of Mind; Points of View/Meaning Schemes. The next section of this chapter focused on ‘Critical Reflection’. It did so because critical reflection is considered to be central to transformation. Finally the key area of transformational learning and the processes involved were analysed and presented.
Each section of this chapter will have a future significance later in the research. This is particularly so when it comes to the analysis of the data. Recalling that the purpose of this research is to look for evidence of transformation and transformative learning under the various headings explored in this chapter, it will be an essential tool in the data analysis and findings.
In preparation of reaching the discussion concerning findings, the research will first set out the context in which the research takes place. Chapter four sets out for us the situational context of the research and chapter five will present the methodological approach undertaken.
143