reading response: Phenomenon

Self-directed learning is, by nature, a very personal process. It’s experiential, and varies greatly between individuals. Perhaps this is why it can be hard to define. As part of my own research process, I have chosen to undertake a learning project and reflect on that process. I’ll be honest – the reflection process hasn’t been recorded as much as it could be (there’s lots of room left in this blog!), but I’ve certainly been thinking about it a lot. In the course of my research into the literature of SDL, I’ve seen theories and models and surveys… but this study in particular caught my eye, thanks to a different research approach. Donaghy decided to approach the study of self-directed learning on a more personal level: with influences from phenomenology, he interviewed four of the leading contributors in the field, and employed hermeneutics to interpret the results. This article was a pleasure to read, if only for the introduction it provides to some of SDL’s most prevalent researchers. I have run across Roger Hiemstra and Huey B. Long before, but Ralph Brockett and Lucy Guglielmino, while I have heard these names before, were new to me.

The basis of the study consisted of the author asking each expert the following four questions:
1. Could you describe the experiences that led you to first get involved with the study of self-directed learning?
2. Could you describe your experiences with self-directed learning over the years?
3. How has your thinking on self-direction evolved over time?
4. Could you describe your future vision for self-directed learning?

One thing I really enjoyed was reading about each subject’s “personal theories of learning”. This seemed to be the confluence between theoretical influences, experience and thought processes, distilled into an organic, unique and very human viewpoint. Not only is this more enjoyable to read than dry theory, it provides insights that formal academic models don’t seem to currently embrace.

It’s also interesting to see that Donaghy included a section devoted to the importance of collaboration in self-directed learning. Apparently this is something that all of his subjects brought up. Experience with other people has an impact on everyone’s learning.

The future of SDL was also discussed, with themes about social considerations and qualitative research as “one of the different lenses through which SDL is now
being viewed” (Donaghy, p. 8). Roger Hiemstra’s view of the immediate future was a bit gloomy, as he believes that current governments and administrations don’t see the real importance of SDL. He does comment on the role of the Internet in the field: “His opinion is that the Internet “emphasiz[es] self-directed learning . . . and so there’s a big role for adult educators in the future” (p.186)” (Donaghy, p. 9). Huey B. Long also gave me some hope for my own research endeavors: “Long noted that changes in technology increase the requirement for more research concerning SDL” (Donaghy, p. 9). Right on, there’s still work left for me to do!

All in all, I found this article to be a very useful study. Seeing how the scholarship of important researchers has developed really gives insight into how the study of self-directed learning itself has developed, and some of the influences that are affecting the field as it currently stands.

Coming up: my answers to Donaghy’s questions.

Reference:
Donaghy, R.C. (2005). Studying Self-Directed Learning: The personal stories of four scholars. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning 2(2) 1-11.