The Political Construction of Adult Education

Ian Baptiste & Tom Heaney
National-Louis University

This paper both examines and exemplifies the process through which the field of adult ed ucation has been and is being constructed. The authors seek to meet the challenge set forth by Derek Briton in The Modern Practice of Adult Education: A Postmodern Critique to "embrace the tension between a refusal to close the field, to police it and, at the same time, a determination to stake out some positions within it and argue for them." (1996, pg. 117)

The Issue

Recently the question of how or whether adult education and learning is a separate and dis crete phenomenon from childhood education and learning has drawn considerable response on AEDNET, the on-line adult education listserv maintained by Nova University. In general the responses have suggested that children are as likely as adults to benefit from "androgogical" methods and that learning is, after all, lifelong--not transmutated into unique forms at a particular age. Androgogical procedures constructed by Knowles and others no longer distinguish adult education from k-12, but rather have become compatible with pedagogical reforms in school-based education.

The question being addressed here is "do adults learn differently from children?"--a question which locates the issue in a psychological frame of reference grounded in individualistic theories of learning and divorced from the social and political context in which learning occurs.

Implications of the Debate

With the professionalization of the field in the 30's and 40's, the net had been cast ever more widely until it encompassed such divergent forms of practice that definitions of "adult education" have become meaning less.

The recent conceptual debate over "adult learning" reflects the state of adult education practice--a practice that has come to resemble more and more the practice of schooling. Whether in workplace training, in store-front literacy programs, or in university class rooms, adults are returning to school in order to catch up or keep up with the knowledge and skills they are expected to acquire. In the transition, adult education has lost its original frame of reference--a vehicle for describing, defining, and addressing human concerns as political endeavors.

Ways of Constructing Adult Education/Adult Learning

The construction of "adult education" was an effort to distinguish a particular kind of learning in adulthood from other forms of learning--whether in childhood or even in adulthood. The value of any construction of reality lies in its precision and in its ability to illuminate. What is it precisely that we point to when we speak of "adult education?" And how does that phenomenon differ from other instances of education?

The concept has been constructed in a variety of ways. One construct emphasizes an individualistic and psychologistic perspective (androgogy vs pedagogy), while another em phasizes a construction of "adulthood" (rich in experience) which demands different approaches to education and learning. These constructs have, as we have noted, been increasingly challenged as inadequate.

In the following we begin to reconstruct the concept of "adult education" in the social and political context in which adult learning occurs. We begin with the premise that not all education or learning in adulthood is "adult education"--a premise wholly consistent with Lindeman's formulation in The Meaning of Adult Education. Understanding "adulthood" in terms of expectations of agency and participation in decisions affecting day-to-day life, we explore the implications for reaffirming "adult education" as a separate and discrete enterprise--one not shaped by chronological age, but by assumptions of power and social responsi bility.

Constructing the Field

In keeping with the democratic and constructivist spirit of this paper we thought it best to explore this topic by way of a dialogue addressing how we are constructing adult education as a field of practice. We invite readers to respond in their own way to the questions we pose, and to pose other questions of salience to their own construction of the field.

Do you refer to yourself as an "adult educator?"

IB: Yes and No. I do not refer to myself as an adult educator when I perceive that such usage might be interpreted as conferring upon me competencies, rights and privileges not accorded to others, simply because they have not engaged in certain rites of passage associated with becoming an "adult educator", for example obtaining an adult education degree. This situation is likely to obtain where persons equate professionalism with certification and credentialling rather than with performance and disposition. This is cause for concern. First, it disenfranchises and alienates equally competent persons who lack such certification. Second, it leads to what McKnight (1997) calls disabling help or iatrogenesis--a situation in which incompetent, but nevertheless certified individuals, escalate the very problems they were supposed to alleviate.

I refer to myself as an adult educator in situations in which it's important to draw attention to my ethical commitment. These situations arise where the term education is de-politicized--stripped of its ethical moorings and equated with such things as schooling, learning, or training.

TH: While no single role defines my life, I am nonetheless an adult educator. It is the ideal of an adult education practice that each participant be both learner and educator (one who supports and nurtures the learning of others). In this sense, everyone is an adult educator, everyone is a learner.

However, a person who occasionally writes letters to family and prepares memoranda at the office is not known as a writer. Rather, those considered to be writers spend a significant portion of their lives writing and publishing what they have written. So also the term "adult educator" is generally applied to those who con sciously and for a significant portion of their lives encourage, foment, support and engage in adult education. It is in this latter sense that I consider myself an adult educator.

The identification of a person by various roles that the person assumes in life (parent, politician, musician, adult educator) is, of course, always partial and to a large degree misrepresents both the nature of the work in which the person is en gaged and the reality of the person herself. The appellation "adult educator" of itself says little about practice nor does it convey any assumption of special competence or privilege. It is simply a marker--an indication that a person commits a significant portion of her or his life to the work of adult education.

What are the distinctive practices, institutions, organizations, purposes and predecessors of the enterprise you call adult education?

IB: Education is the pursuit of virtuous excellence. The prefix "adult" qualifies the educative process by emphasizing the virtues of criticality and social responsibility. In short, adult education seeks to provide persons with the tools and disposition that would increase the frequency with which they act critically and socially responsibly in their world.

Note that mine is a political, not a constitutive distinction. It is commonly claimed that self-direction and experiential learning are what constitutively distinguish adult education from other forms of education. But these claims have no historical, ontological, epistemological, anthropological, sociological or physiological basis. I am fond of saying that self-direction is neither possible nor desirable. It is not possible, because in some way, directly or indirectly, we are always influenced by our culture; and this holds true for all aspects of the educative process--from diagnosis of our learning needs to evaluation of our learning outcomes. The choices we make regarding why, where, when, how, and what we learn are entirely constrained by our cultural heritage. We may be able to look critically on our cultural heritage, but we cannot entirely transcend it. It is the substrate from which we grow or stagnate.

Self-direction is also not desirable. Social responsibility, a hallmark of the adult, demands that we subject our goals, intentions, and actions to the scrutiny of others, especially significant others. Embarking upon a significant learning enterprise without involving one's family, for instance, in the decision is irresponsibility and arrogance, not self-direction.

As for the claim that adults learn through experience, John Dewey has convincingly argued that education (whether of adults or non-adults) is "of, by, and for experience" (1938, p. 29). Those who ignore the experiences of non-adults in their education either lack a true understanding of the role of experience in the educative process, or believe that they have nothing to fear if they miseducate non-adults, since non-adults usually lack the political clout to effectively retaliate. Adults do.

TH: Lindeman states, "There is adult education, and there is education for adults." (1929, pgs. 31-32) He lamented the widespread intrusion of continued schooling, vocational training, and myriad other activities, each claiming to be forms of adult education. "This is not genuine adult educationÉ," according to Lindeman. "True adult education is social education." (1947, pg. 55).

For me, adult education is about the business of building democracy. It is the struggle--whether in the workplace, in community, or in society--to become informed and critical decision-makers in matters affecting our day-to-day lives. Its purpose is the democratic fulfillment of human potential for freedom through social means.

While there are organizations and institutions devoted specifically to this purpose, the struggle for democracy--and, therefore, adult education--is not limited to these special venues. Its distinctive practice, however, whether in the open spaces of schooling or training, or in the midst of a social movement, is always "social education for purposes of social change." (Lindeman 1945, pgs 116-7)

Give examples of counterfeits of adult education practice?

IB: Practices which claim political or ethical neutrality, or which promote consumer satisfaction over social accountability.

TH: Practices in which knowledge and skill are transferred, in which the assumed superior knowledge and skill of the educator dominate the learning environment, in which the task is to impart knowledge that is already given, and in which learning is assessed in relation to the normative expectations of others--organizations or self-defined leaders--are counterfeit adult education, even though they are instances of the education of adults.

However, even in instances of oppressive and hegemonic pedagogy, what is learned is always problematic in relation to what is taught. That is, adult education as a practice of resistance can and frequently does occur as a counter-hegemony in the midst of schooling.

Increasingly "adult learning" is being substituted for "adult education." What do you make of this substitution?

IB: Education is a normative enterprise, learning is not. I could learn to be a rapist, sexist, or psychopath, but none of these instances of learning would be an instance of education. The term education adds to learning a moral or ethical dimension. Those who would substitute adult learning for adult education are not necessarily a-moral. They have ethical goals. However, these goals are usually so tied to the status quo that they remain hidden, unstated, and unexamined--a recipe for benign hegemony.

TH: If we can lay claim to adult learning as our domain, subject to the professional ministrations of our professional services, we will have suc cessfully "colonized the lifeworld," in Habermas' phrase. The possibilities for domination are endless. Our identification with adult learning decontextualizes and depoliticizes our practice which is legitimized by the achievement of "learning outcomes," without regard for social outcomes.

The ascribed need for adult learning in our times is frequently described as "to catch up" with the future, not to create it; to adapt, rather than to transform; to consume knowledge, not understand its social construction. The role of the adult educator in relation to such an understanding of adult learning is neutral and serves only hegemonic interests.

If can be reasonably argued that the enterprise you described above will continue, whether or not the label "adult education" remains. Provide a rationale for continued use of the label or propose a more desirable alternative.

IB: As pointed out before, my affixing of the prefix "adult" to the educative process is merely a corrective to a distorted notion of education--one stripped of its ethical moorings. Regrettably, continued usage of this prefix perpetuates and legitimizes this distortion. I long for the day when this ethical dimension is restored. Should this occur I would have no more reason to use the prefix "adult." I will simply call myself "an educator."

TH: I agree with Lindeman that "perhaps we have all along been using the wrong word. Adult education is a prosaic term which seems to place emphasis upon genetics rather than upon educational aims." (1938, pg. 48) He goes on to indicate, however, that the real problem is not the term, but the underlying conflict which divides practice. The issue is one of politics, not language.

To define a term is to set borders, to delimit, to exclude--to clarify what a given reality is and is not. Since the formation of the American Association for Adult Education in 1926, the net for gathering adult educators has been cast ever more widely, excluding less and less until almost everything is adult education, encompassing educators of adults who work toward diametrically opposed social and political purposes. The term is applied to highly manipulative and participatory pedagogies alike, from courses designed to correct behavior which devi ates from dominant norms to workshops supporting the social change agendas of oppressed communities.

While work now considered to be adult education has undoubtedly been a critical element in human history since before history began, it is worthy of note that the identification of that work as a field of study and as "adult education" is astoundingly recent. Stubblefield and Keane place it in the 1920s in their history of the field, claiming the term gained momentum in the United States through a rapid sequence of publications and events which some later called an "adult education movement" (Stubblefield and Keane 1994).

That such discourse began in the 1920s evidenced a need at that point in United States history to distinguish adult education from other forms of educational work, even among adults. The need for a liberatory educational practice linked with a resolute effort to transform the social order has not diminished in the 1990s.

On the one hand, the term "adult education," despite the warnings of Lindeman and others, has been coopted by counterfeit practices. On the other hand, adult education is not merely a contested term, but a site of struggle within the practices which lay claim to the term. In the interests of engaging consciously in this struggle, I would defend the continued legitimate use of the term to refer to the practices I have described.

Implication of Issue for Practice

Our reflections on these questions--being two voices among so many--merely exemplify the discourse through which the field is being reconstructed. Our questions are an invitation to dialogue among students of adult education which makes possible both a critical assess ment of current practice and at the same time opens opportunities for informing practice with transformative elements consistent with a political construction of "adult education."

References

Briton, D. (1996) The Modern Practice of Adult Education: A Post-Modern Critique. New York: SUNY.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.

Lindeman, E.C. (1929) The Meaning of Adult Learning. In S. Brookfield (ed.), Learning Democracy: Eduard Lindeman on Adult Education and Social Change (pgs. 29-36). London: Croom Helm 1987.

-- (1938) Preparing Leaders in Adult Education. In S. Brookfield (ed.), Learning Democracy: Eduard Lindeman on Adult Education and Social Change (pgs. 48-52). London: Croom Helm 1987.

-- (1945) The Sociology of Adult Education. In S. Brookfield (ed.), Learning Democracy: Eduard Lindeman on Adult Education and Social Change (pgs. 113-121). London: Croom Helm 1987.

-- (1947) Methods of Democratic Adult Education. In S. Brookfield (ed.), Learning Democracy: Eduard Lindeman on Adult Education and Social Change (pgs. 53-59). London: Croom Helm 1987.

McKnight, J. (1977). Professionalized Service and Disabling Help. In Ivan Illich & Associates, Disabling Professions (pp. 69-91). London: Marion Boyars.

Stubblefield, H., and Keane, P. (1994) Adult Education in the American Experience: From the Colonial Period to the Present. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Presented at the Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education,
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Nebraska, October 17-19, 1996.

Contact: thea@chicago1.nl.edu
Entered: 21 October 1996