Compare and contrast the different 'gogical' approaches
When would it be appropriate to employ different 'gogical' approaches in your practice?
How do the roles of educators differ when using these different 'gogical' approaches?
What advantages are there for learners with these different approaches to learning, what are the implications for learners?
As a learner in the MCE, what do you feel are the challenges and benefits in a heutagogical approach for your learning?
Overview
Pedagogy, andragogy and heutagogy are terms found in educational literature that denote different teaching and learning practices. Each term is often attributed to a particular age range of learners (eg child or adult) which have certain implications for education. In the considerations of future focussed education the term heutagogy is being used to suggest that the foundations of teaching and learning need to be adapted and changed. Heutagogy has been compared to the idea of education 3.0 where educators need to develop competencies in learners for the uncertain and changing futures of work.
‘People have different motives and motivations, they come from different perspectives, they ask different questions and every time they learn something the questions in their brains change’ (NTLT Conference Stewart Hase, 2013).
In this clip, Stewart Hase addresses the NTLT (National Tertiary Learning and Teaching) Conference in Invercargill in 2013 explaining heutagogy. The first 20-30 minutes are the most valuable.
The vision of lifelong learning, the education catch-cry of the 1990s, is now potentially achievable. Never before has the access to knowledge, skills, and competencies been easier. However, we are also in an age where competence is not enough, given the complex and rapidly changing world that we now inhabit. In addition to competency, people also need capability (Blaschke & Hase, 2016. p.26).
“Educators today are tasked with developing lifelong learners who can survive and thrive in a global knowledge economy – learners who have the capability to effectively and creatively apply skills and competencies to new situations in an ever-changing, complex world (The World Bank, 2003; Kuit & Fell, 2010). Pedagogical, even andragogical, educational methods are no longer fully sufficient in preparing learners for thriving in the workplace, and a more self-directed and self-determined approach is needed, one in which the learner reflects upon what is learned and how it is learned and in which educators teach learners how to teach themselves” (Blaschke, 2012, p.56). The Cynefin framework distinguishes between four work environments: simple, which requires best practice; complicated, which needs good practice; complex, which requires emergent practice; and chaotic, which demands novel practice. In the twenty-first century, we are mostly faced with complex and chaotic environments in which events are rapidly changing and where the relationship between cause and effect is difficult to establish. This means that normal planning and problem-solving are inadequate. We often have to act long before we have been able to fully understand what is happening. Complex and chaotic environments require a different style of learning, which is informal, driven by the experience of work, involves double-loop learning, is collaborative, and is cooperative. People in these environments need to know how to learn, and the organization needs to be adept at harnessing knowledge as it emerges. There is no time for formal training programs. Learning is “ just-in-time” and emergent (Blaschke, & Hayes 2016, p.29)
This concept of andragogy was first defined by Alexander Kapp in 1833 to describe the teaching style of Plato who formalized Socratic principles (Nottingham Andragogy Group, 1983). Merriam Webster Dictionary Online (2014) defines andragogy as “the art and science of teaching adults.” Andragogy was not used in North America until 1970 when the concept was published by Malcolm Knowles. Knowles (1970) defined it as the art and science of helping adults learn. While andragogy is student-centered or student-directed learning, heutagogy is self-directed learning (Halupa, M., p.1. 2015.)
Halupa, 2015, critiques these three gogical approaches in the following article Pedagogy, Andragogy and Heutagogy.
“The essence of heutagogy is that in some learning situations the focus should be on what and how the learner wants to learn, not on what is being taught” (Hase and Kenyon, 2013, p.7).
“A key concept in heutagogy is that of double-loop learning and self-reflection … In double loop learning learners consider the problem, and the resulting outcomes and actions, in addition to reflecting upon the problem-solving process and how it influences the learner’s own beliefs and actions” (Blaschke, 2012, p.59). My take on The Gogies:
Comments