Five Developmental Pathways
Five interacting pathways for learners and educators are embodied in Process Education, all of which lead to the empowerment of the learner. The first three pathways address learner development and focus on the growth of knowledge (Learning), learning skills (Learner), and self-development abilities (Self-Grower). The fourth and fifth pathways address roles unique to the educator. They include professional development of faculty leading to the creation of new pedagogic knowledge along with contribution to institutional development. All pathways involve quality assessment and evaluation of outcomes, undertaken in the context of learning communities and an enriched learning environment.
1. Growth of Knowledge (of Learner)
A process educator facilitates and requires the growth of disciplinary knowledge both in the learner and in the process educator (2.2.1 Bloom’s Taxonomy—Expanding its Meaning). An important consideration associated with this pathway is that learning requires both the construction of new knowledge as well as the deconstruction of misconceptions (Gaines, 1994) (2.1.1 Overview of Learning Theory). Well-constructed knowledge is characterized by meaningful linkages between concepts and experiences that lead to comprehension, working expertise, and transferability to new situations (Larochelle, 1998).
2. Growth of Learning Skills (of Learner)
A process educator focuses on the development of student skills as well as knowledge and continually develops students’ ability to cope with increasingly high demands and accelerates the construction of knowledge (2.3.3 Classification of Learning Skills). The development of the affective domain helps students visualize and become committed to learning goals and to overcome emotional barriers to learning. The development of the psychomotor and cognitive domains provides students with ever-increasing confidence that they are capable of achieving more and more ambitious learning goals. The development of the social domain provides a network of support, both for the learning process and for achieving the goal itself.
3. Self-Development (of Learner)
When learners (students, faculty and administrators) focus on becoming Self-Growers, growth of knowledge and learning skills is accelerated through the use of critical reflection, metacognition, self-assessment, and methodologies (4.3.4 The Accelerator Model). A Self-Grower is defined as one who has developed intrinsic motivation to surmount the limitations and biases that arise from tacit assumptions, beliefs, and perspectives and has acquired the necessary skills, especially in the affective domain, to grow independently (4.2.2 Becoming a Self-Grower). As a result of its focus on self-development, Process Education engenders transformative growth (Mezirow, 1991). As people climb through the levels of knowledge, performance, and empowerment, qualitative changes occur that enable them to see the world—and themselves—in a different way.
4. Professional Development (of Faculty)
Faculty in higher education are expected to be inter-disciplinary in the sense that they pursue fundamentals of education or other institutionally and professionally relevant disciplines as energetically as they pursue development of their discipline of training. An annual goal-directed professional development plan provides both a systematic and strategic approach to synthesize what we know about teaching and learning in a way that continually improves educational practices, learning processes and knowledge. Throughout the process there are means available to strengthen knowledge and performance skills in learning, teaching, mentoring, instructional design, assessment and educational research. Education in the 21st century accepts no excuse for faculty not to embrace and work at interdisciplinary. Many institutions are now formalizing annual faculty development programs for critical performance areas through Centers of Excellence in Teaching and Learning as well as through disciplinary venues (2.3.7 Learning Processes through the Use of Methodologies, 2.3.8 Learning Process Methodology, 4.1.4 Assessment Methodology, 3.2.3 Facilitation Methodology, 2.4.8 Methodology for Course Design, and 2.4.6 Methodology for Program Design). Process Education provides a goal-directed, community-centered, and strategic framework with which to synthesize what we know about teaching and learning in a way that continually improves educational practices, learning processes, and knowledge (Nelson, 1986).
5. Institutional Development
In their Change Magazine editorial, Robert Barr and John Tagg (1995) noted “A paradigm shift is taking hold in American higher education. In its briefest form, the paradigm that has governed our colleges is this: A college is an institution that exists to provide instruction. Subtly but profoundly we are shifting to a new paradigm: A college is an institution that exists to produce learning. This shift changes everything. It is both needed and wanted.” This new paradigm requires educators and institutions to develop evidence that learning has, in fact, happened (1.5.2 Methodology for Designing a Program Assessment System). A learning-centered paradigm lies at the heart of the Process Education philosophy as can be seen from the centrality of assessment (that provides feedback for growth), learning communities and enriched learning environments (that use an array of continuous quality improvement approaches) and outcome evaluation (that informs future quality improvement efforts). Educators are now expected to have the knowledge and skills to successfully participate in activities such as strategic planning, institutional assessment, program design and assessment (1.2.3 New Faculty Roles for Institutional Effectiveness).
Central Themes and Shared Language
Learning Communities
Teaching and learning is a social process that involves interaction within a community (Wenger, 1998). It is the bringing together of many minds with a focus on refining professional, interpersonal, and personal thinking processes that makes Process Education particularly robust. Learning tools and curricula are constructed collaboratively, faculty collaborate to peer-mentor each other’s growth as teachers, and students often learn together in groups (3.1.2 Introduction to Learning Communities). Documented results of this approach to learning include improved academic achievement, improved behavior and attendance, increased self-confidence and motivation, and increased liking of school and classmates (Johnson, Johnson, & Holubec, 1993).
Enriched Learning Environments
In Process Education, an enriched learning environment is founded on three principles: honoring and respecting a learner’s current knowledge, needs, abilities, and attitudes; sustaining high expectations for ongoing growth and attainment (3.1.3 Methodology For Creating A Quality Learning Environment); and taking actions to ensure systematic improvement in educational outcomes using assessment. These actions include learning and applying new theories (from psychology, sociology, education, management, and other disciplines), collaborating in the refinement of skills and methods to improve teaching, learning, and research, and aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
Educator as Mentor
Two purposes of education are to increase the depth and breadth of knowledge at a student’s current level of autonomy and responsibility, and to increase a student’s autonomy, responsibility and reflective practice (1.4.5 Performance Levels for Learners and Self-Growers). Teaching is directed to the first purpose, and mentoring aims for the second (3.2.1 Overview of Facilitation and 4.2.1 Overview of Mentoring). While instruction increases knowledge and skill, mentoring facilitates the personal development of the mentee by balancing nurturing and affirmation with risk and challenge. Mentoring destabilizes the current ways of practice and being and reinforces deeper, more comprehensive paradigms. Both facilitation and mentoring are most effective when they respond to student needs in real-time. Chances for successful learning and quality interventions are improved if one has a repertoire of teaching techniques and learning tools. 3.2.5 Creating a Facilitation Plan and 3.2.8 Constructive Intervention Techniques offer guidance in this area.
Assessment
Assessment is central to Process Education because it is this process that provides the information required to make rational, strategic changes (4.1.1 Overview of Assessment). In essence, assessment is the CQI engine for the Process Education framework (4.1.3 Mindset for Assessment). It is through self-assessment and metacognition (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000) that individuals can be taught to regulate their behaviors using strategies such as predicting outcomes, planning ahead, apportioning one’s time, explaining to one’s self in order to improve understanding, noting failures to comprehend, and activating background knowledge (4.1.9 SII Method for Assessment Reporting and 4.1.10 Assessing Assessments).
Evaluation of Outcomes
Evaluation determines the quality of the outcomes (1.4.6 Overview of Evaluation and 4.1.2 Distinctions Between Assessment and Evaluation). The outcomes of each of the five paths—knowledge, learning ability, self-growth ability, faculty knowledge and performance and institutional achievement—are evaluated to determine the extent to which educational goals and institutional mission are achieved. Evaluation assures the accountability of higher educators and communicates achievement to stakeholders while providing information for ongoing change and improvement (1.4.8 Mindset for Evaluation).
Integrating the Five Pathways
Table 1 lists the five developmental pathways associated with Process Education and includes the concepts and language previously described. The pathways can be followed by moving vertically through the “Concept Map for Process Educators” (Figure 1). Unique features of each pathway are shown in bold.
|
Growth of Knowledge |
“Mentors use assessment guided by quality measures to lead learning communities that create enriched learning environments supporting learner development to facilitate the construction/deconstruction of know-ledge validated by evaluation of outcomes leading to empowerment.” |
|
Growth of Skills |
“Mentors use assessment guided by quality measures to lead learning communities that create enriched learning environments supporting learner development to facilitate the growth of learning skills/processes validated by evaluation of outcomes leading to empowerment.” |
|
Self Development |
“Mentors use assessment guided by quality measures to lead learning communities that create enriched learning environments supporting learner development to facilitate the development of Self-Growers validated by evaluation of outcomes leading to empowerment.” |
|
Professional Development of Faculty |
“Mentors use assessment guided by quality measures to lead learning communities that create enriched learning environments supporting professional development of faculty who use instructional design grounded in educational research and learning theory validated by evaluation of outcomes leading to empowerment.” |
|
Institutional Development |
“Mentors use assessment guided by quality measures to lead learning communities that create enriched learning environments supporting institutional development aligned with learner-centered education validated by evaluation of outcomes leading to empowerment.” |
Concluding Thoughts
In The Learning Paradigm College, John Tagg (2003) challenges us to reconstruct higher education so that its focus is on learning, rather than instruction. Such a reconstruction requires rethinking every aspect of the educational system. Although he clearly discusses the criteria for such an institution, he consciously avoids prescribing a solution, leaving that up to the reader. Process Education, centered on learning and empowerment, represents a comprehensive solution to this educational problem. The Framework for Process Education presented here and the supporting sections in the Faculty Guidebook offer a road map for short-term transformation of teaching/learning and long-term realization of a learning paradigm college.
References
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995) From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27 (6), 13-25.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Gaines, B. R. (1994). The collective stance in modeling expertise in individuals and organizations. Journal of Expert Systems, 7 (1), 21-51.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction.
Larochelle M., Bednarz, N., & Garrison, J. (1998). Constructivism and education. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nelson, K. (1986). Event knowledge and cognitive development In Event knowledge: Structure and function in development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tagg, J. (2003). The learning paradigm college. Bolton: Anker.