Transformative Learning &

Subject Matter Experts(Proposed Research)

Prepared for

the

Hawaii International Conference on Education

Jan. 4-7, 2011Full text to be published with HICE conference proceedings

Rosemary VogtUniversity of Manitoba

Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada

This presentation explores the potential transformative learning

experiences of subject matter experts (SME’s) collaborating with instructional designers during e-learning course development.

Research Questions

• Does the subject matter expert experience a disorienting dilemma in the instructional design process as a catalyst for shaping transformation in future practice?

• If so, what does it look like?

There is a growing momentum on education mediated by computer technology – e-learning service delivery

• Instructional Designer (ID) and Subject Matter Experts (SME’s) collaborate in this process

• ID analyzes goals, needs & characteristics of learners

• SME provides content area expertise• Importance of optimizing SME and ID time

SME’s are content area specialists in their field

• May be an academic or trades and industry professional

• SME provides accurate subject area content during design process

• ID shapes the content for the audience• SME participation is a major factor in success

or failure of the project

Review of the Literature

• Largely dominated by Keppel (1997, 2000, 2001)

• Keppel promotes the Content Production Process (CPP) for eliciting info from SME

• Keppel’s work void of voice from SME point of view

This presentation considers

the theory of transformative learning and how it may have applications for the SME’s experience working with an ID during instructional design process as well as SME future practice.

Transformative Learning TheoryMezirow (1991, 2000)

• Been around for 25 years• The most researched and discussed theory in

adult, higher and continuing education• It’s a theory about understanding learning• A theory that is partly developmental• Uses prior interpretation to construct new

meaning to guide future action (Mezirow, 1996)

Recent Studies

• Raise questions about research trends in transformative learning theory

• Wonders what has been learned about the role of experience, critical reflection and relationships in the transformative learning process

Taylor (1997) build on Mezirow

• Investigated literature on perspective transformation• Contributed much to support Mezirow• But suggested need to reconceptualize the process• Recognizes the influence of context as a catalyst in the

process of transformative learning• Minimizes the role of critical reflection• Focuses on “other ways of knowing”• Unconscious knowing• Learning which occurs outside of the learners’

consciousness

Taylor (2007)(10 years later)

• Re-examines previous literature• Notes a shift from identifying transformative

experience (in various settings and stages) to making sense of factors that shape the transformative experience

• Criticized critical reflection• Perhaps not all forms of reflection are significant• Identified need to explore more informal settings

for transformative learning (inspiration for this proposed research)

Significance of Taylors (2007) Study

• Recognizes that knowledge change may not be sufficient for transformation to reach fulfillment among some participants

• Necessity to consider other factors• The need for on-going support to act on new

understanding• Guidance to put new understanding into

practice• Ensuring individuals have the skills to act on

new understanding

Taylor (2007) also questions

• Individual responsibility• The role of relationships

Gagne & Medsker (1996)

• Believe that learning is a modification in individual capacity

• Not necessarily contributed to development• Favor critical reflection – reorganizing meaning• Consider a more discriminative understanding of

one’s experience stemming from a disorienting dilemma which has preceded critical reflection

• Favors a move toward transformation• Individual acts on the transformation

Roberts (2007) looks at

• Disorienting dilemma's induced by adult educators

• Impact on learner performance• Adult educators expose limitations of learners

current knowledge• Affect on learner is dependent on learner

personality, beliefs, prior experiences, and values as well as nature of disorienting dilemma

In the event of a disorienting dilemma the learner may become

• Angry • Argumentative• Defensive• May begin to resent instructor• May feel humiliated• Feeling of shame, guilt• May trigger depression• May affect all areas of learners’ life

In the event of a disorienting dilemma

• A love/ hate relationship may develop on behalf of learner toward instructor

• Learner may exhibit decrease in punctuality, absenteeism, reduced participation

• General withdrawal• Learner may question decision to pursue

education• May drop class, the program, change career• Learner reaction is contingent on disorienting

dilemma – values, beliefs, prior experiences

Some learners navigate the disorienting dilemma through discourse with others

• Depends on personality of learner• Through discourse some learners may realize

their disconnect• Realize a paradigm shift• Explore new options• Pursue a different course of action• Transform

The Theory of Transformative Learningand the presence of a disorienting dilemma

• May have minimal, devastating or no consequence at all for ID’s and SME’s

• However – if designing e-learning is contrary to SME’s personal beliefs about how learning should occur they may struggle with process

• Resulting disorienting dilemma may be acted out against ID – withdrawal, absenteeism

• If the process aligns with SME’s own values, disorienting dilemma may not be present

Dodson (2009) examined approaches to resolving critical life events – disorienting dilemmas

• Factors such as acceptance of dilemma• Nature of dilemma• How emotions play a significant role in

negotiating the dilemma• Transformations are seldom sudden or

immediate• May take from a month to 6 years to begin

processing and resolving• Most likely a modified transformation as opposed

to “total”

Is it possible for Mezirow’s theory of transformative

learning to play a role, or have implications for the

relationship between ID and SME? Does the experience have implications for the

SME’s future practice?

References

Cranton, Patricia (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide for educators of adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dodson, Constance Tarver (2009). Negotiating disorienting dilemmas and the transformative learning process in a complex society. A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Southern Mississippi in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Retrieved through ProQuest, September 15, 2010.

Gagne, R. M., & Medsker, K. L. (1996). The conditions of learning; Training applications. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Keppell, M.J. (1997). Development and pilot-testing of a method to assist instructional designers elicit unfamiliar content from subject matter experts. PhD Dissertation. Graduate Division of Education Research, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Keppell, Mike (2001). Optimizing instructional designer—subject matter expert communication in the design and development of Multi-media projects. Journal of Interactive Learning Research.

Keppell, Mike (1999). The crucial roles of the instructional designer and subject matter expert in multi-media design. In B. Collis & R. Oliver, Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 99 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, Volume 1 (pp. 598-603). Seattle, Washington, USA, June 19-24, 1999.

Keppell, Mike (1999). The use of case stories to examine the instructional designer and subject matter expert interaction. Association for Qualitative Research (AQR) International Conference: Issues of Rigour in Qualitative Research, Melbourne, Australia, 6-10 July, 1999. [Online]. Available http://www.latrobe.edu.au/www/aqr/offer/papers/mkeppell.htm

Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipator learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

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

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult. In J. Mezirow and Associates (Eds.). Learning as transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 3-33.

O’ Sullivan, E. (2002). The project and vision of transformative education. In E. O’ Sullivan, A. Morrel and M. A. O’Conner (Eds.). Expanding the Boundaries of Transformative Learning. New York: Palgrave, 1-13.

Roberts, N. (2006). Disorienting dilemmas: Their effects on learners, impact on performance, and implications for adult educators. In M.S. Plakhotnik & S. M. Nielson (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Annual College of Education Research Conference: Urban and International Education Section. Miami: Florida International University, pp. 100-105. Available at http://coeweb.fiu.edu/research_conference/

Taylor, E. W. (1997). Building upon the theoretical debate: A critical review of the empirical studies of Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 48, 1.

Taylor, E. W. (2007). An update of transformative learning theory: A critical review of the empirical research (1999-2005). International Journal of lifelong Education, 26, 2,173-191.