Journal of Academic Development and Education JADE Issue 8 | Page 62

62 | JADE
HIGHLIGHT #3 | 63
HELEN E. MACHIN
an independent sense of self and can direct their own learning, 2)
can draw on a rich array of life experiences to support learning, 3)
have learning needs that are related to changing social roles, 4) are
focused on solving problems and applying knowledge, and they 5)
have internal rather than external motivation to learn. I used these
principles to develop a response to the learners’ concerns during an
open discussion at the beginning of the seminar where I emphasised
three key points:
1. I acknowledged that many learners in the group, regardless
of their age, have family and professional responsibilities that
affect their learning. By acknowledging learners’ non-academic
responsibilities, I was accepting the principle that an adult’s
learning needs change in accordance with their changing social
roles (andragogy principle 3).
2. I explained that all members of the group are likely to have
different learning styles and approaches to assessments. I stressed
that these approaches are non-hierarchical and encouraged the
learners to have confidence in their own approach which had
already brought success. In this respect, I was appealing to the
learners’ independent sense of self and their ability to direct their
own learning (andragogy principle 1).
3. I applied the issue raised to social work practice by explaining
that practitioners, too, have different approaches to case work
and comparing these approaches can lead to anxiety in the
workplace. This was an attempt to emphasise the importance
of managing comparisons with others in a situation applied to
practice (andragogy principle 4).
Evaluation of my response
In the short term, the open discussion at the beginning of the seminar
appeared to reassure the group about my expectations of their
progress and to reduce mature learners’ anxieties. Although mature
and young learners were physically divided on two sides of the
classroom during the seminar, I observed positive and cooperative
class dynamics between both groups of learners and most students
contributed ideas and raised questions. Mature learners in the group
were open about their progress on the dissertation project and the
difficulties of managing their research projects alongside practice
placements, continued employment and family responsibilities.
Younger learners also appraised their own progress honestly and
discussed which aspects of the project they found challenging. In
sum, my response and my use of the principles associated with
andragogy appeared to resolve the immediate feelings of anxiety
and the potential competition between mature learners and young
learners in the group.
“A BONE OF CONTENTION”: REFLECTIONS ON THE EXPERIENCES
OF MATURE LEARNERS IN SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION
To further evaluate my approach to the incident, Merriam’s (2001)
criticism of Knowles’ theory of andragogy provides a useful starting
point for reflection. Merriam has criticised andragogy for focusing
too narrowly on the psychological aspects of learning. Merriam
argues that andragogy fails to account for the social and structural
factors that shape adult learning environments and affect adult
learners’ development. This criticism of andragogy can also be
applied to my approach to the critical incident. Although I addressed
the presenting anxieties and the immediate issues around learner
dynamics during the seminar, I failed to address how the traditional
structure of the social work programme may affect mature learners
with caring responsibilities at Keele and how this structure may
have been affecting their academic progress and contributing to
their anxieties. There is general agreement in the empirical literature
about the measures required to improve access to and experience of
higher education for mature learners with caring responsibilities. For
example, improved student finance, good transport and child-care
facilities (Powney et al., 1997), accessible information about learning
opportunities and flexibility in programme design are recommended
to meet the specific needs of mature students with caring
responsibilities (Lister, 2003). Keele provides a range of services
targeted to meet the specific needs of mature students, including
a dedicated contact for mature students, a mentor scheme, a range
of personal and academic support services and childcare provision.
However, programme design within social work is inflexible and it
does not necessarily accommodate family responsibilities. Although
issues relating to programme design and the timing of assessments
could not have been resolved during my immediate response to
the critical incident, an exploration of how the structure of the
programme intersects with other responsibilities for mature learners
with caring responsibilities could have led to a wider programme-
level discussion and evaluation of the student experience for mature
learners.
Conclusions & implications
This critical incident relating to mature female learners in social work
education has highlighted several areas for development within
my own teaching practice that may be applicable to other social
work educators. First, the incident has underlined the importance
of recognising the challenges that mature learners with caring
responsibilities may face when enrolled on social work programmes
that are designed around traditional academic structures which fail
to account for mature learners’ wider responsibilities. Secondly, the
incident has revealed how an understanding of mature learners’
“bone[s] of contention” can help to improve group dynamics