134 Family Relations

Education for Self-Support: Evaluating Outcomes UsingTransformative Learning Theory*

Suzanne Christopher,** Tim Dunnagan, Stephen F. Duncan, and Lynn Paul

This paper describes the use of transformative learning theory to evaluate a family-empowerment project focusing on life skills. Theproject was designed in response to welfare reform in Montana. Open-ended interviews were conducted with 34 participants. Resultsrevealed evidence of transformative learning outcomes such as an empowered sense of self and new connectedness with others.Respondents also spoke of factors built into the program designed to foster transformative learning. Implications are presented.

With the passage of the Personal Responsibility andWork Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Amer-ica’s welfare system was transformed from one pro-

viding open-ended entitlements to one providing time-limited as-sistance in exchange for work. Prior to federal initiatives, severalstates established their own approaches to welfare reform to helppublic-assistance families become self-supporting. One of thesestates was Montana, where families on public assistance wererequired to obtain employment in exchange for cash grants (1994Senate Bill 209). Families were also required to participate inlife skills–focused educational programs designed to help themmanage family resources to move toward a more self-supportinglifestyle.

The purpose of this article is twofold. The first purpose isto recount the application of transformative learning theory tothe educational programs. The second purpose is to describe anevaluation that measured whether transformative learning out-comes occurred through the educational efforts. This articleshould be useful to those designing, implementing, and evalu-ating life-skills education programs for families on public assis-tance or for families facing barriers to self-support. We beginwith a discussion of transformative learning theory and then abrief description of the life-skills program Educating Families toAchieve Independence in Montana (EDUFAIM). We then pre-sent an overview of study methods and results and conclude withimplications of the findings.

Transformative Learning

The ultimate goal of transformative learning is to assistlearners in assessing their current perspectives and approachesto life and, through education, to provide an opportunity tochange these perspectives and approaches (Mezirow, 1991).Transformative learning theory is based on the assumption thata learner’s current perspective and consequent approach to lifederive from his or her experiences, thoughts, values, knowledge,and skills (Taylor, 1997). Transformative learning processes oc-

This project was supported in part by a State Strengthening grant from the Children,Youth, and Families (CYFAR) initiative of the cooperative State Research, Education, andExtension Service.

Address correspondence to: Suzanne Christopher, Ph.D., Department of Health andHuman Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-3360; (406) 994-6321; FAX (406) 994-6314; e-mail: suzanne@montana.edu

Key Words: family empowerment, program evaluation, transformative learning, wel-fare reform.

(Family Relations, 2001, 50, 134–142)

cur when learners critically reassess their current perspective andexamine whether their present approach to doing things is rightfor them. This critical self-reflection helps them look at thingsin fundamentally new and different ways, examine actions theycan take to change their lives in essential ways, and take actionbased on new assumptions when making important decisions.

Educational programs that result in transformative learningcreate significant life changes in participants, a ‘‘conversion’’ toa way of doing things that is better for them. As Clark (1993)states, transformative learning ‘‘produces [more] far-reachingchanges in the learner than does learning in general, and . . .these changes have a significant impact on the learner’s subse-quent experiences. In short, transformative learning shapes peo-ple; they’re different afterward, in ways both they and others canrecognize’’ (p. 47). For example, a program participant reflectedon how she felt upon entering an EDUFAIM nutrition class,stating, ‘‘I didn’t care about my health.’’ This was a limitingperspective, and it affected how she cared for herself and herchild. After taking the class, the client adopted a new perspective(‘‘I think about getting healthy and staying healthy’’) and hadgained the knowledge and skills necessary to adopt behaviorsthat supported the new perspective. She reported her behaviorchange: ‘‘Before I would spend food stamps and buy junk food.Now I know how to make it go a long way and buy good food.I look for the best buys I can get. I started buying fruit and goodthings.’’

Transformative learning theory emerged from the work ofprominent adult educators Paulo Freire (1970) and Jack Mezirow(1991) as they strove to create social change for oppressed pop-ulations through education (Courtney, Merriam, & Reeves, 1998;Sokol & Cranton, 1998). The traditional educational approachwas described by Freire as the ‘‘banking’’ model of education.The goal of this approach is to assist learners in gaining knowl-edge, and it views teachers as experts who exclusively possessknowledge. Students are viewed as passive objects, empty re-ceptacles that teachers fill with knowledge. The transfer ofknowledge usually occurs in a static exchange with little discus-sion. Freire believed that ‘‘banking’’ education contributed tomaintaining oppressed conditions, because the approach is bothpaternalistic and individualistic in nature. Because it treatsknowledge as a gift bestowed by those who are knowledgeableto those who are not, it is paternalistic. Banking education isindividualistic in nature because it seldom recognizes students’uniqueness in terms of their personal characteristics and contextof living. Freire and Mezirow believed that new educational the-ories—such as transformative learning, which promoted in-creased self-awareness and freedom from constraints—were nec-

2001, Vol. 50, No. 2 135

essary to help create social equity for the oppressed and for reallearning to occur.

Transformative learning is understood as a three-step pro-cess. During the initial step, learners become critically aware ofhow and why their assumptions have come to constrain the waythey perceive, understand, and feel about their world. During thesecond step, a revision of belief systems occurs as learnerschange structures of habitual expectation to make possible amore inclusive, discriminating, and integrative perspective. Dur-ing the third step, learners adopt behaviors more consistent withtheir renewed perspective (Taylor, 1997). Transformative learn-ing can be fostered by including (a) teachers who are empathetic,caring, authentic, and sincere and who demonstrate a high degreeof integrity; (b) learning conditions that promote a sense of safe-ty, openness, and trust; and (c) instructional methods that supporta learner-centered approach that promotes student autonomy,participation, reflection, and collaboration (Robertson, 1996).

Outcomes of transformative learning reported in the litera-ture include an empowered sense of self and an increase in self-confidence in new roles and relationships, fundamental changesin the way learners see themselves and their life assumptions,more functional strategies and resources for taking action andgaining control over their lives, compassion for others, and newconnectedness with others (Courtney et al., 1998; Taylor, 1997).Other less common outcomes mentioned in the literature includeenhanced spirituality and an involvement in ways of knowingother than the rational. These ways of knowing include learningthrough relationships, affective learning, and intuition. Theoristsand researchers state that all of these outcomes often occurthrough social processes where learners gain a new understand-ing of how social relationships and culture have shaped theirbeliefs and feelings.

EDUFAIM: The Program

In 1994, Montana became one of the first states to reformwelfare, by creating the Families Achieving Independence inMontana (FAIM) program. FAIM has three components: the JobSupplement Program, the Community Services Program, and thePathways Program. Working in partnership with the MontanaDepartment of Public Health and Human Services, Montana Ex-tension developed EDUFAIM, or Educating Families to AchieveIndependence in Montana. EDUFAIM is offered through thePathways Program, which was designed to provide families witheducational opportunities leading to permanent public-assistancealternatives. This program currently serves 12 of Montana’s 56counties.

There were three main assumptions guiding the develop-ment of EDUFAIM. The first was that public-assistance familiesneed more than a job to move from welfare dependence to aself-supporting lifestyle. Life skills such as nutrition, job readi-ness, and family resource management are also needed. The sec-ond assumption was that the goal of a more self-supporting life-style could be effectively met if clients became more empoweredthrough acquiring the skills, knowledge, and behaviors necessaryfor self-support. The third was that the skills, knowledge, andbehavioral change needed for a self-supporting lifestyle couldoccur through an education-based program.

In addition, EDUFAIM program development was guidedby a programming framework designed by the Cooperative Ex-tension System (1991) for reaching limited-resource audiences.Limited-resource audiences are defined as those individuals and

families with limited income, education, or both who are at riskfor not meeting basic needs. From the perspective of this frame-work, there are limiting factors at different levels of the socialecology that impede individuals’ and families’ access to basicresources, such as housing, transportation, education, employ-ment, nutrition, child care, and medical services. These limitingfactors are found at the individual/household level, the com-munity services level, and the community characteristics level.For instance, at the individual/household level, limiting factorsinclude lack of practical knowledge and associated life skills andlack of a positive view of the future. These factors make it dif-ficult for individuals and families to secure and sustain a mod-erate quality of life. At the community services level, there maybe a lack of employment opportunities; at the community char-acteristics level, community leaders may lack vision and direc-tion. The EDUFAIM program concentrates at the individual/household level, helping participants to acquire needed knowl-edge and skills through focused education programs. These pro-grams reflect a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach tohelping individuals and families function effectively in the com-munity context (Cooperative Extension System, 1991).

Upon entering the Pathways Program, participants developa Family Investment Agreement in which they indicate the ED-UFAIM courses they need to help them move toward a moreself-supporting lifestyle. Specific educational program content isdetermined by the needs identified and prioritized by individualfamilies and communities. Program areas may include, but arenot limited to, nutrition and health (e.g., preventive health edu-cation, maternal and infant nutrition, food preparation, shoppingand food safety); individual and family development (e.g., parenteducation, building family strengths, balancing work and family,building self-efficacy and positive expectations, managingstress); resource management (e.g., time management, moneymanagement, consumer skills); community development (e.g.,small business development); and housing (e.g., housing afford-ability and availability, protection of housing investment, health-related environmental issues).

EDUFAIM uses methods designed to foster transformativelearning in participants, beginning with staffing patterns. EDU-FAIM staff includes professional family educators with master’sdegrees who have substantial experience working with limited-resource families. Paraprofessional program aides, who are in-digenous to the low-income population and who have real-lifeexperience on public assistance, assist the professional educators.This combination of professional and real-life experience is like-ly to form the basis of strong, empathetic, and caring associationsbetween educators and participants (Giblin, 1989).

Additionally, participants choose the educational offeringsthey believe they need to move toward a more self-supportinglifestyle. Once EDUFAIM courses are selected, however, partic-ipants are mandated to attend or to face sanctions from the statewelfare agency. Such a policy might make it difficult for staffto create the atmosphere needed for transformative learning. Tohelp neutralize the effects of the threat of sanctions, EDUFAIMinstructors relate with participants in ways that foster opennessand trust. For instance, instructors openly acknowledge at thebeginning of a course that they know some of the participantsdo not want to be there and emphasize the positive outcomesparticipants are likely to gain from full participation. Outside ofclass, EDUFAIM instructors encourage participants to drop bythe EDUFAIM office to talk, use the Internet, or address otherneeds.

136 Family Relations

Table 1Interview Questions

1. What is the first thing or things that comes to mind when you think aboutthe EDUFAIM program?

2. Can you give me an example of a time when you talked about the EDU-FAIM program to someone? What did you talk about?

3. If you could change some part of the EDUFAIM program, what would youchange?

4. Let me ask you some questions about your feelings about the program. Whatare some of the things you have really liked about the program?

5. What are some of the things that you don’t like about the program?6. Describe any changes that have taken place in your life that you have dis-

cussed with a friend or a relative as a result of the EDUFAIM program.7. If another person was about to enter the EDUFAIM program, what would

you tell him or her?8. I’m now interested in finding out the impact this program has had on your

life; specifically, how is your life different after participating in the EDU-FAIM program?

9. What about the EDUFAIM program has made your life easier?10. What about the EDUFAIM program has made your life more difficult?

Instructional methods used in EDUFAIM follow a learner-centered approach that fosters transformational learning. Classesare offered in small groups or one on one, as needed, to allowfor individualized attention, and educational materials are adapt-ed to meet individual needs. Many of the educational methodswere chosen because of their effectiveness with visual and au-ditory learners, because many EDUFAIM participants have low-er academic skills. These methods aid in the quick transfer ofthe educational material to personal application. Several specificmethods and content examples include hands-on activities (e.g.,food preparation, simple household repairs, household cleaningproblems); videotaping (e.g., videotape mock job interviews andoffer positive feedback and suggestions for improvement); groupactivities (e.g., in-class family meetings to identify strengths andset family goals); group games (e.g., 5-A-Day Bingo, DairyJeopardy, Money Bingo); role-playing (e.g., role-play negativeand positive scenarios for dealing with anger in parent–childrelationships); and narrative (e.g., telling real-life stories to il-lustrate principles of effective parenting). Participants are en-couraged to help each other learn during EDUFAIM class timeand outside of class as an informal support group. A listing ofthe major program materials used in EDUFAIM are found in theAppendix.

An evaluation focused on identifying client perceptions oftheir growth (transformative learning) was included as part ofthe overall EDUFAIM evaluation effort. The next section detailsthe methods and results of the transformative learning evalua-tion.

Methods

In the fall of 1997, the EDUFAIM director, an evaluationspecialist, site coordinators, and their staff met to design open-ended questions to gather information that could not be ade-quately collected through non–open-ended questions. Questiondevelopment was guided by previous efforts of First and Way(1995). Questions were piloted at the two EDUFAIM sites usinga convenience sample of EDUFAIM participants (n 5 10).Based on these interviews, site coordinators provided feedbackto the evaluation specialist, who made final modifications (finalquestions appear as Table 1).

Interview TrainingBecause of the response bias that could occur if EDUFAIM

staff conducted participant interviews, nonstaff interviewerswere recruited for the two EDUFAIM sites. Prior to interviewingparticipants, interviewers completed a 3-hr training session. Thesession reviewed interviewing methods, including asking ques-tions, probing, maintaining neutrality, being impartial, preparingfor interviews, techniques for maintaining confidentiality, han-dling interviewee questions and concerns, and providing feed-back. Interviewers role-played and practiced techniques underthe supervision of the evaluation specialist. Training informationwas summarized in a handout that was given to each interviewer,site coordinator, and program director.

Audio recordings of the first interview series were reviewedby the evaluation specialist, who provided feedback to the in-terviewers regarding strengths and weaknesses. The evaluationspecialist made periodic checks during the interview period as aquality-control measure.

Data CollectionData were collected from 34 EDUFAIM participants (18

from one site and 16 from another site) between February andMay 1998. The mean age of participants was 34.35 years (SD5 13.03), mean years of education was 11.94 (SD 5 2.04), andthe participants ranged from 1 to 180 months on welfare withan average of 26.43 months (SD 5 43.47). Of the 34 partici-pants, 29 were women and 5 were men, and they had an averageof 1.74 dependents (SD 5 1.28). Almost 18% were employed.

Interviewers were instructed to ask every other client whohad participated in the program for 3 months if he or she wouldparticipate in the EDUFAIM interview process. Participation wasvoluntary; however, clients were offered $10.00 to encourageparticipation. One person refused to take part in the study. In-terviews were audiotaped after the client gave informed consent.Interviews lasted 15–30 min and were conducted within a privatesetting at each EDUFAIM site. A graduate student trained inqualitative research techniques transcribed the data verbatim.

AnalysisNUD*IST (Nonnumerical, Unstructured, Data-Indexing,

Searching Theorizing; Sage Publications Software, 1996) quali-tative software was used for data analysis. Inductive analysis wasconducted based on methods described by Strauss and Corbin(1990, 1994), Patton (1987, 1990), and Bogdan and Biklen(1992). Specifically, the investigators conducted cross-case anal-ysis, in which data were analyzed across the case, or individual;themes and patterns were then identified in the data (Huberman& Miles, 1994). Specifically, a variable-oriented strategy to thecross-case analysis was used. In this strategy, themes that cutacross cases were identified. To facilitate this process, all authorsindependently read through hard copies of the transcripts to geta general understanding of the data. Second, each author inde-pendently conducted open coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Open coding is the part of analysis that pertains specificallyto the naming and categorizing of phenomena through closeexamination of the data. . . . During open coding the dataare broken down into discrete parts, closely examined, com-pared for similarities and differences, and questions areasked about the phenomena as reflected in the data. (p. 62)

This method is similar to Patton’s (1987, 1990) description of

2001, Vol. 50, No. 2 137

Table 2Themes and Subthemes Found in the Evaluation of the EDUFAIM Project

1. Life skillsa. Budgeting and money manage-

mentb. Job-readiness skillsc. Nutritiond. Family skills and parenting

2. Empowermenta. Empowered to try skills they

learned in classb. Empowered to teach other peo-

ple skills they learnedc. A sense of self-respect and hoped. Feelings of confidencee. Taking better care of themselves

3. Social benefitsa. Decreased isolationb. Getting to talk about issuesc. People with similar situationsd. Meeting new people and making

friends

4. Program value

5. Facilitating learninga. Learning environmentb. Instructorsc. Educational strategies

6. Program weaknessa. Rules and regulationsb. Content dislikesc. Inconvenience of the program

7. Just do it

the first steps in content analysis. To do this, each author readthe transcripts and decided on labels for the phenomena identi-fied. Coding was conducted inductively, meaning that ‘‘patterns,themes and categories of analysis come from the data; theyemerge out of the data rather than being decided prior to datacollection and analysis’’ (Patton, 1987, p. 150). Coding was fo-cused on the respondent’s answers to the 10 open-ended ques-tions. At this point, a single response might have one code orseveral codes. The endpoint of open coding is a list of concepts(also called indices, labels, codes, categories). In any analysis,there might be hundreds of concepts at this point.

Third, all authors convened to discuss the results of theirseparate coding. Transcripts were reviewed, and a discussion onhow and why responses were coded ensued. Discussion contin-ued until consensus was reached on the code for each response.

The fourth step of coding was a variation on Strauss andCorbin’s (1990, 1994) axial coding. As they explain, ‘‘open cod-ing fractures the data and allows one to identify some categories.. . . Axial coding puts those data back together in new ways bymaking connections between a category and its subcategories’’(p. 97). After the group open coding session, the authors dis-bursed and conducted axial coding individually. At this point,the coding was separated across the 10 questions. All identifiedthemes cut across the 10 questions, so a decision was made torecode the data based on common themes across the 10 questionsinstead of keeping the codes for the 10 questions separate. Thiswas the fifth and final step of the coding process.

Results

Analyses resulted in 7 themes and multiple subthemes.Themes and subthemes are shown in Table 2 and described be-low.

Life SkillsResponses subsumed under this theme related to information

and skills respondents learned in areas of money management,job-readiness skills, family skills and parenting, and nutrition.The information and skills that respondents discussed learningrelated directly to the content offered in four of the five coreeducational classes; the one class not mentioned was housingimprovement. One assumption underlying the EDUFAIM pro-gram is that families coming off welfare need skills to move

them toward a more self-supporting lifestyle, and EDUFAIM’svision is to help families develop skills, knowledge, and com-petencies necessary for managing family resources and progress-ing toward a self-supporting lifestyle. It is clear from the re-sponses that skills and knowledge were being gained. Manycomments related to two of the previously identified transfor-mative learning outcomes: having more functional strategies andresources for taking action and an increase in self-confidence innew roles.

Money management. Many respondents revealed informa-tion and skills they learned related to budgeting and money man-agement. They also discussed the direct application of theseskills to their everyday life.

They helped me a lot on managing my money and payingmy bills on time. I was behind on paying my rent a lot ofthe time. I have gotten it to where I can make payments onit. My food bill has gotten a lot easier. Even at the end ofthe month I have groceries.

I don’t have to worry about stretching my food stamps tothe limit. I know how to do it better now. I know how todo it easier. So I know I have got enough to last me. I havefood in my freezer to last through the whole month. Insteadof worrying where the next meal is coming from and howI am going to get it on the table. Not worried if the kids aregoing to get sick or something because I did not do it right.

Job-readiness skills. The EDUFAIM program stresses thedevelopment of job-readiness skills in the education classes. Re-spondents frequently made comments regarding the job-readi-ness skills they developed in the classes. For example,

It would just be I have more confidence in seeking a job.That is mainly what I learned, how to get a job, resume,and interviewing.

It has made me think more about what kind of position Iwant for a job. It has allowed me to build a resume, orupdate it. It has given me ideas about the future of my life.

Nutrition. Another focus of the EDUFAIM education classesis nutrition. The participants seemed not only to learn nutrition-related skills, but to directly apply these skills in their everydaylives. For example,

When I go to the store to buy groceries, I look at the aislesdifferently. I look at the products differently. I do more com-parison shopping than I did before. I make sure it is healthyfor the family. I don’t buy as much junk food as I used to.I learned I can make snacks cheaper than I can by buyingthem. It has helped a lot there.

Family skills and parenting. The last skill area was in familyskills and parenting. This content was taught in the classes, andagain it was apparent that the participants applied the content totheir daily activities. For example,

Parenting skills, I have used some of that. I didn’t knowwhat to do with her running around and getting into every-thing, but I used some of the discipline skills I learned here.I asked a lot of questions.

EmpowermentIn addition to learning life skills, respondents made changes

in their lives that we categorized as empowerment. Israel, Chec-

138 Family Relations

koway, Schultz, and Zimmerman (1994) defined empowermentas ‘‘the ability of people to gain understanding and control overpersonal, social, economic, and political forces in order to takeaction to improve their life situations’’ (p. 152). Responses underempowerment related to changes respondents made in the waythey saw themselves and in the way they interacted with theworld. Issues under empowerment were separated into five areas:(a) empowered to try skills they learned in class, (b) empoweredto teach other people skills they learned, (c) having a sense ofself-respect and hope, (d) having feelings of confidence, and (e)taking better care of themselves. The respondents talked aboutfundamental changes in the way they saw themselves in theirpersonal life context, an overall empowered sense of self, anincrease in self-confidence in new roles and relationships, andinvolvement in ways of knowing other than rational. These out-comes led to more functional strategies and resources for takingaction and gaining control over their lives. All of these outcomeshave been previously identified as outcomes of transformativelearning.

Empowered to try skills they learned in class. Participantswere empowered to try the skills they learned in the educationclasses. In particular, many discussed directly applying these newskills:

They teach you a lot about how to cook, and I made aresume. I probably never would have made [one] because Ididn’t know that I could.

Empowered to teach other people skills they learned. Feel-ing empowered to teach skills to other people was another ac-tivity mentioned:

I talk to my kids, my aunt. I told them they better get usedto me taking this class. For about 6 weeks we have beendoing food and health. Showed them a better way to preparefood, what not to do and what to do and how to preventgetting sick by bacteria. How to keep things clean so theydon’t get that way. And the first part when we first started,they showed us how to make out applications, resumes forjobs. I went over that with them, because they were goingout trying to find jobs. I showed them how to do it theproper way, so it looks more impressive when they go toshow it to future employers.

A sense of self-respect and hope. Participants referred to anew sense of self-respect and hope. This change was best statedin the following quote:

I respect myself more and have more hope for the future.Because before I was always depressed and always mad.Now I have something to look forward to every week, be-cause it is really hard to find jobs around here. They justkeep my hopes up; before I was really depressed and nowI have more to look forward to.

Feelings of confidence. Similar to the sense of self-respectand hope were new feelings of confidence. These new feelingsare important precedents to making positive changes in the par-ticipants’ lives.

I’d have to say I am more confident about myself. I spendmore time doing things with my children, that I didn’t dobefore. I have better communication with my whole family.

I seem to have more confidence in myself than I did. Myboyfriend and I were having a lot of problems. I didn’t care

about having a job or a home. Now I love my job and myhome. I have a lot more confidence.Taking better care of themselves. Respondents discussed us-

ing the information they learned to take better care of themselvesand their families:

I was reckless before buying food. I buy better food now. Iwant to live really healthy. Changed my ways about buyingjunk food.

Social BenefitsOne benefit of the program discussed by most clients was

the social rewards they received from their involvement. Includ-ed under social benefits were responses related to benefits re-ceived by participants that came from being less isolated, gettingto talk about issues, being around other people with similar sit-uations, and meeting new people and making friends. Althoughrespondents made negative comments about the inconvenienceof the program on their daily life (see ‘‘Program Weakness’’),the preponderance of comments related to changes in daily lifewere positive. Transformative learning outcomes of increasedcompassion for others, new connectedness with others, and waysof knowing other than rational are apparent under this theme.

Decreased isolation. Included under social benefits was thedecreased isolation associated with being involved in the pro-gram.

I guess by making more friends. I don’t feel so completelyalone.

I even like to just get out of the house, it is hard to stay athome all the time.

Getting to talk about issues. Another social benefit men-tioned often by participants was being able to talk with othersabout issues in their lives. The majority of comments in this areadid not reflect being able to talk about specific issues, but justbeing able to talk.

You have the right to voice your opinions. You get to meetand talk to new people. If you have stress problems youhave someone to talk to.

I liked that it was a place you talk freely or discuss yourproblems and listen to others’ problems. It was a place toshare.

People with similar situations. Becoming aware that thereare other people with similar situations was a social benefit dis-cussed by participants. It seemed important to be able to talk to,be around, and learn from people who were facing comparablelife events.

It makes me feel that I’m not forgotten. They pull me infrom out there and start educating me. Usually I can stayhome and look for work, now they got me reporting overhere and come to these classes it’s mandatory. I come hereand meet people. I realize these people have the same prob-lems I do. I’m learning from them as well as EDUFAIM.

One response under this area came when a client was asked howEDUFAIM made life easier:

Knowing I am not alone. I can talk to these people.

Meeting new people and making friends. Several partici-pants mentioned being new to their community and said they

2001, Vol. 50, No. 2 139

derived benefit from meeting new people through the program.Other participants who did not mention being new to the com-munity also mentioned similar benefits.

Made life easier: I guess by making more friends. I don’tfeel so completely alone.

That we can trust each other in there. Just there is a lot oftrust and friendship in there.

Program ValueMany respondents had positive comments about the value

of the EDUFAIM program. Under the theme of program value,clients expressed general comments about the positive aspects ofthe program. This theme was not divided into subthemes, andechoes of previously mentioned outcomes of transformativelearning can be seen in the comments. Clients described programvalue in this manner:

It educates you for getting a job. How to help your familyout more, how to take care of your family and yourself. Ithelps to educate, get an education. If you don’t have aneducation it can help you get one by going for the GED.You can get the equivalency of the high school diploma ifyou don’t have one, which will help get a better job lateron.

It has been a lot easier, there has been a lot of difference inour life, and in our children’s lives. There is a lot of newthings to try out.

When asked what they would change about the program, oneclient described the program’s value in this way:

I don’t think I would change anything. It just seems thateverything is in place. I just wouldn’t change it.

Facilitating LearningUnder this category were responses related to the content of

the classes, the learning environment, instructors, and education-al strategies used in educational sessions. The responses reportedin this section are all positive. Included under the section ‘‘Pro-gram Weakness’’ are negative comments related to learning. Re-sults reflect how transformative learning is fostered versus out-comes of transformative learning. As discussed earlier, transfor-mative learning is fostered by positive characteristics of teachers,learning conditions, and instructional methods, and these char-acteristics are apparent in the following responses.

Learning environment. Participants responded favorably tothe learning environment of the EDUFAIM program, stating thatclasses were fun and that they enjoyed themselves. The use oflearning methods that support a learner-centered approach wasone method for fostering transformative learning that was re-ferred to by the participants.

I didn’t want to be there, but they make you feel comfortableenough to open up. I have got some good ideas: videos wewatched, handouts on nutrition and budget.

One comment already listed under social benefits is also an ex-ample of the learning environment, so it is repeated here.

It makes me feel that I’m not forgotten. They pull me infrom out there and start educating me. Usually I can stayhome and look for work, now they got me reporting overhere and come to these classes it’s mandatory. I come here

and meet people. I realize these people have the same prob-lems I do. I’m learning from them as well as EDUFAIM.

Instructors. The instructors were mentioned frequently byparticipants, and the comments were unanimously favorable.

The instructors are nice. They help you out a lot. If you’rehaving problems with something you can talk to them aboutit.

The ladies for one that work for EDUFAIM and anotherthey are teaching me things I never knew. Like I said howto fill out a resume. The ladies give me hope.

Educational strategies. Participants mentioned enjoying avariety of educational strategies from hands-on to games to vid-eos and movies to handouts. The last comment in this sectionrelates to when participants were videotaped for mock job inter-views.

They make it fun and interesting to want to come here allthe time. You sit there and listen to them and participate inwhat they are doing.

The resumes. The tape on the interviews. We saw ourselvesand that seemed to help. After the embarrassment it wasOK. I did a better job than I thought I would.

Program WeaknessIncluded under program weakness were responses related to

rules and regulations respondents had to follow, content dislikesof the classes, and the inconvenience of the program. Most re-sponses under the questions ‘‘What are some of the things youreally don’t like about the program’’ and ‘‘What about the ED-UFAIM program has made your life more difficult’’ were actu-ally positive responses. The information below reflected com-ments from a small minority of the participants. Responses gaveevaluators insight for identifying aspects of the programmingthat may need to be changed.

Rules and regulations. Responses in this area focused onhaving to follow the rules of the program, the stress related tofollowing the rules, and the sanctions that were imposed if ruleswere not followed. For example, absence from multiple classesresults in a reduction in cash grants.

It is stressful following the rules and regulations. I misseda class one time and I got sanctioned, because I went on ajob interview. I made a decision, should I go to class andnot get sanctioned, should I go to a job interview and pos-sibly get hired. I went to the interview, got sanctioned anddid not get hired. They sanctioned me for 30 days, see thatis what I mean by being strict. I made a wrong decision,but I thought it was right at the time. I told them I went fora job interview and that is why I missed a class.

Content dislikes. Content dislikes focused on having to takeclasses or learn information that respondents felt was not rele-vant to their lives or that gave information they already knew.Although respondents chose the broad class topics, some contentunder the topics did not relate to everyone who took the class.

I don’t like to listen to them talk about feeding babies. Mykids are already raised and I don’t want to have to listen tothese things. It doesn’t pertain to me.

Inconvenience of the program. Respondents commented on

140 Family Relations

having to get up early in the day for EDUFAIM classes, havingto drive long distances, and having to find child care.

Traveling the distances. I go 50 miles each time.Some comments in this section helped us to make adjustmentsin the program. One woman spoke of taking classes more thanonce.

Repetition in class . . . I would not like to take stuff overagain. I have double of everything. I wish kind of whenthings start to get repetitious, she could give me some home-work to do in class. Rather than to listen and participate.. . . If I had something to read up on, stuff the others arenot at yet.

We discovered that people cycle into and out of the welfareprogram depending on length of employment. When cyclingback in, some program participants are put back into classes theyhave already taken.

Just Do ItIn response to the question, ‘‘If another person was about

to enter the EDUFAIM program, what would you tell him orher?’’ respondents made clear the benefit they derived from theprogram. The majority of the respondents made comments aboutgetting as involved as possible, taking advantage of what is of-fered, and using the information provided. The clients may serveas our best public relations workers in the communities. Thefollowing comments are characteristic of all comments from therespondents.

I would tell them to take the program for all it is worth anduse it. Don’t feel intimidated or anything.

To go to the classes every week. Not to miss any cause ifyou do you miss out on something new, something differentthat could help you out.

Discussion

The primary goal of current welfare reform is to move fam-ilies from dependence on cash grants to permanent economicself-support through employment and more functional life skills.Achieving this goal requires significant and complex changes formany individuals and families. Educational processes guided bytransformative learning theory were an appropriate frameworkfor assisting families to develop knowledge and skills needed tobe self-supporting.

Did transformative learning outcomes occur as a result ofthe educational efforts? Participant responses to the open-endedquestions provide evidence that transformative learning did takeplace. According to the literature, outcomes of transformativelearning include an empowered sense of self, fundamentalchanges in the way learners see themselves in their personal lifecontext based on social relationships, more functional strategiesand resources for taking action and gaining control over theirlives, compassion for others, new connectedness with others, en-hanced spirituality, and involvement in ways of knowing otherthan rational. Other than enhanced spirituality, all of the out-comes identified in the literature were evident in participant re-sponses. In particular, a strong sense of empowerment was evi-dent. We predict that this sense of empowerment will foster morefunctional actions, resulting in improved self-supporting life-styles.

Another significant aspect of transformative learning is achanged perspective as a result of a better understanding of theself based on relationships and cultural influences. A changedperspective based on social benefits of the EDUFAIM programwas evident in the themes of getting to talk about issues, becom-ing aware of people with similar situations, and decreased iso-lation and feelings of being so ‘‘completely alone.’’

Factors put into place to foster transformative learning werementioned by participants including positive characteristics ofthe teachers, optimal learning conditions, and effective instruc-tional methods. In particular, the overall positive comments re-garding the instructors provide some assurance that learner-cen-tered methods and a positive learning environment brought aboutthe nonthreatening conditions needed for developing improvedself-supporting life skills.

Additional findings not subsumed under transformativelearning were seen under the theme of program weakness. Thesefindings point to ways that the program might be improved andare information that would not have been brought to lightthrough the quantitative evaluation methods. Helping clients toavoid taking classes over and avoiding exposure to irrelevantclass content are two examples of improvements that can bemade.

There are several limitations to this study that deserve men-tion. First, participants may have given socially desirable re-sponses considering the perceived ramifications of criticizing aprogram partnered with a state agency that could impose eco-nomic sanctions. Steps were taken in the interview process soparticipants would not fear repercussions, so data were probablynot unduly affected.

Second, determining if the EDUFAIM program was respon-sible for participants’ reported positive changes cannot be defin-itively answered by this research design. Participant reports in-dicated that the knowledge and skills gained were directly relatedto EDUFAIM class content; however, these changes representclient perceptions of change and reported change versus directobservation of change.

Conducting direct observations of change or developing achecklist of predetermined transformative outcomes and askingrespondents to answer if they had any of the desired outcomesare two other evaluation methods that could be used in the fu-ture. These are deductive evaluation approaches. Our methodsfor this evaluation were based on an inductive approach. Wepurposively asked the respondents broad questions to see whatwould arise without directed prompts or predetermined catego-ries in which to place responses. Huberman and Miles (1994)stated that starting with specified analytic categories ‘‘(deduc-tively) or getting gradually to them (inductively) are both legit-imate and useful paths’’ (p. 431). Additionally, triangulation ofmethods could be used to offer more definitive conclusions re-lated to transformative changes.

The third limitation is that participants were assessed 3months into their participation in the program. Although the ev-idence suggests that transformative learning outcomes were seen,it may be difficult to believe that the complex changes associatedwith this type of learning could have occurred in this short time.

Despite these limitations, conclusions can be drawn to helpprofessionals interested in life-skills education for families mak-ing the transition from public assistance to greater self-support.We believe that a transformative learning theory perspective toassessing participant growth in programs brought about by thedemands of welfare reform is an effective, meaningful frame-

2001, Vol. 50, No. 2 141

work for evaluation. The framework leads program designers,implementers, and evaluators to attend to important educationalelements in family-empowerment programs that might otherwisebe overlooked.

In addition, it appears that life-skills educational programssuch as EDUFAIM that use methodologies derived from a trans-formative learning perspective may be effective in assisting fam-ilies to make the challenging changes toward self-support im-posed by welfare reform, regardless of the intent of the policyor whether or not program developers agree with the policy. Theevidence presented here suggests that the synergy of a supportivecollaboration; participant involvement in course offerings; andknowledgeable, caring instructors who facilitate a nonthreateninglearning environment that attends to individual needs can fosterthe growth and development of participants toward a greatersense of empowerment and a more self-supporting lifestyle, atleast as perceived by participants.

Further, the use of qualitative research methods can be ef-fective in identifying transformative change related to self-sup-port. Consequently, the analysis proved to be important in an-swering a key question in any program evaluation: ‘‘Is the in-tervention doing what it was designed to do?’’ We encourageother evaluators to build on the techniques outlined in this articleto enhance the science and innovation associated with this eval-uation process and to partner qualitative and quantitative eval-uation techniques. For example, the EDUFAIM program usesquantitative measures of the participant’s mental health, globallife satisfaction, job seeking intent and activities, utilization ofwelfare-related resources, and individual class evaluations.

Lastly, the results of the interviews were used as a sum-mative evaluation of one of the program goals. However, thistype of analysis has obvious applications on a formative basis.Specifically, results can help practitioners make decisions aboutmaintaining, modifying, or deleting program components.

References

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: Anintroduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Clark, C. (1993). Transformation learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), An updateon adult learning theory: New directions for adult and continuing education(Vol. 57, pp. 47–56). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cooperative Extension System. (1991). Reaching limited resource audiences.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Courtney, B., Merriam, S., & Reeves, P. (1998). The centrality of meaning-making in transformational learning: How HIV-positive adults make sense oftheir lives. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(2), 65–84.

First, J. A., & Way, W. L. (1995). Parent education outcomes: Insights intotransformative learning. Family Relations, 44, 104–109.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.Giblin, P. (1989). Effective utilization and evaluation of indigenous health care

workers. Public Health Reports, 104, 361–367.Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis meth-

ods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research(pp. 428–444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Israel, B. A., Checkoway, B., Schultz, A., & Zimmerman, M. (1994). Healtheducation and community empowerment: Conceptualizing and measuring per-ceptions of individual, organizational, and community control. Health Edu-cation Quarterly, 21(2), 149–170.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. NewburyPark, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.).Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Robertson, D. L. (1996). Facilitating transformative learning: Attending to thedynamics of the educational helping relationship. Adult Education Quarterly,47(1), 41–53.

Sage Publications Software. (1996). NUD*IST [Qualitative computer software].Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sokol, A., & Cranton, P. (1998). Transforming, not training. Adult Learning,9(3), 14–16.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theoryprocedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview.In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research(pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Taylor, E. (1997). Building upon the theoretical debate: A critical review of theempirical studies of Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Adult Educa-tion Quarterly, 48(1), 34–59.

Suzanne Christopher is Assistant Professor in the Department ofHealth and Human Development at Montana State University,Bozeman, MT.

Tim Dunnagan is Associate Professor in the Department ofHealth and Human Development at Montana State University,Bozeman, MT.

Stephen F. Duncan is Professor in the School of Family Life atBrigham Young University, Provo, UT.

Lynn Paul is Associate Professor in the Department of Healthand Human Development at Montana State University, Boze-man, MT.

Received 9-7-99Second Revise & Resubmit 4-17-00Third Revise & Resubmit 9-26-00Revised & Resubmitted 11-14-00Accepted 11-17-00

142 Family Relations

Appendix

EDUFAIM Program Materials and Contact Information

Program Area and Materials Contact Information

Nutrition and health Team specialists: Lynn Paul and Phyllis Dennee, Department of HHD, Montana State Uni-versity, Bozeman, MT 89717; (406) 994-5702; FAX (406) 994-6314; e-mail: lpaul@montana.edu and pdennee@montana.edu

Eating Right Is Basic Program (3rd ed.), Lessons 1–16 Michigan State University Extension, (517) 353-9102Family Nutrition Program Montana State University Extension, (406) 994-5702Three Jeopardy games (Milk Jeopardy, Fruit Jeopardy,

Vegetable Jeopardy)Western Dairy Council, (303) 451-7711

Tickle Your Appetite, WIC/TEAM Nutrition Educator’sKit for Children

NFSMI, 1 (800) 321-3054

Individual and family development Team specialist: Stephen F. Duncan (former project leader), School of Family Life, 350ESWKT, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602; (801) 378-1796; FAX (801) 378-4385; e-mail sduncan@byu.edu

Charting a Positive Future for Teen Parents University of Florida Extension, (352) 392-2411Common Sense Parenting Boys Town, 1 (800) 282-6657Empowerment Skills for Family Workers Cornell Cooperative Extension, (607) 255-2237FAIM Job Search Handbook, Trainer’s Guide and Partici-

pant NotebookMontana Department of Health and Human Services, (406) 444-5900

Making Families Stronger Montana State University Extension; contact the developer at (801) 378-1796Parent Education Program Alabama Cooperative Extension, (334) 844-5690

Housing Team specialist: Mike Vogel, Department of Agriculture and Technology Education, Mon-tana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717; (406) 994-3451; FAX (406) 994-5417;e-mail acxmv@montana.edu

A Clean and Healthy Home Oregon State University Extension, (541) 737-2513EDUFAIM Training Materials, Housing and Home Envi-

ronment; Health Indoor Air for America’s HomesMontana State University Extension, (406) 994-3451

Community development Team specialist: Dave Sharpe, P.O. Box 173580, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT59717; (406) 994-2962; FAX (406) 994-5417; e-mail: acxds@montana.edu

From Job Seeker to Job Keeper Center for Continuing Education, Yonkers Public Schools, (914) 376-8000

Resource Management Team specialist: Marsha Goetting, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics,Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717; (406) 994-5695; FAX (406) 994-4838;e-mail iaemg@montana.edu

Bucs Cornell Cooperative Extension, (607) 255-2237Getting More for Your Money, Managing Between Jobs,

Planning to Stay AheadUniversity of Wisconsin Extension, (608) 262-3346

Individual Learning Packets: Setting Spending Priorities,Ways to Track Expenses, Getting More From YourMoney, Credit Control, PowerPay, and Debt Free

Montana State University Extension, (406) 994-5695

Keys to Successful Money Management Oklahoma State University Extension, (405) 744-4065Life Skills for Single Parents North Dakota Extension, (701) 231-7882Put Your Money to Work Kentucky State University Cooperative Extension, (502) 597-6866Money Management Advisors Washington State University Extension, 1 (800) 723-1763Money Matters University of Illinois Extension, (217) 333-5900Take Control of Your Spending Iowa State University Extension, (515) 294-5247

InterdisciplinaryBalancing Work and Family Montana State University Extension, (406) 994-5702Planning Ahead, Staying Ahead University of New Hampshire Extension, (603) 862-2346