Conceptualising the learning process

This study of the significance of life experiences is framed within the broader context of constructivist adult learning theory. The study’s framework is anchored by the fundamental components of the learning process based on the work of Peter Jarvis (1987; 2006; 2018) and Knud Illeris (2018b) from within the tradition of experiential learning, as described in the previous section of the chapter.

Using an ELT perspective, Jarvis (2018) proposes that learning always starts with experiencing a social situation, where the learner interacts with their life-world. Jarvis first theorised learning as “transformation of experience into knowledge, skills and attitudes” (1987, p. 32). In a later work, Jarvis (2006) refined his ideas to regard learning as:

17

The combination of processes whereby the whole person – body (genetic, physical and biological) and mind (knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, emotions, beliefs and senses) experiences a social situation, the perceived content of which is then transformed cognitively, emotively or practically (or through any combination) and integrated into the person’s individual biography resulting in a changed (or more experienced) person.

(Jarvis 2006, p. 13) This expanded idea aligns with more recent work on adult learning theory that looks beyond just

cognitive processes to acknowledge the place of body and mind (including emotions) in the learning process (Dirkx 2001a; Merriam 2017). It acknowledges that learning is a “transformation from a physical experience to an internal change in the individual” (Beard 2018, p. 32). Jarvis’s idea of the learner being changed by integrating the transformed content of an experience into the self acknowledges developmental psychology theories, where development is seen by some theorists as “integration of more basic, previously acquired behaviours into new, higher level structures” (Keenan, Evans & Crowley 2016, p. 2). These understandings of learning are applicable to this study as the researcher seeks to explore how experiences are translated through the learning process into knowledge, capabilities, attitudes and beliefs that change or enhance the self in some way.

Jarvis’s (2006) conceptualisation of learning informs the central part of the study’s framework, as shown in its first iteration (Figure 2.2). These expressions of learning from Jarvis (2006) are used throughout this thesis.

Figure 2.2: How learning is understood in this study

The first circle of the diagram shows that learning begins with transforming the content of an experience (Jarvis 2006). Transformation is understood to mean the learner interprets an experience by converting their bodily sensations or reactions to episodic experiences into mental meanings through thought, action or emotion or any combination of these acts (Jarvis 2006; 2018). These mental meanings help explain an experience to the learner, i.e. they help the learner make sense of the

18

experience and make it personally meaningful. Learners themselves are also transformed (Jarvis 2006; 2018). This happens through an awareness of an episodic experience that gives the learner a sense of consciousness about what is happening around them (Jarvis 2006).

The second circle describes how assigning value to an experience leads to change in the learner (Jarvis 2006). The ‘transformed content’ is integrated into the person’s individual biography and is drawn upon to shape future interactions with the social world. What this means is that reactions to an experience are internalised by the learner and accepted as part of the changed self. In alignment with Knowles’s (1980) concept of adult learning, Jarvis (2006) proposes that the learner comes to an experience with a history that shapes their interactions with it and facilitates certain kinds of learning, based on a gap between this history and the learner’s perception of the experience (Jarvis 2018).

The transformation and integration process results in a changed or more experienced person (Jarvis 2006), as shown in the third circle. As a result of this process, the person may achieve change in relation to (i) their sense of self, i.e. identity, self-confidence, self-efficacy, (ii) new knowledge, skills, capabilities, values or beliefs, and (iii) enhanced capacity to deal with similar situations or future problems (Jarvis 2006). Jarvis’s (2006) notion of the changed (or more experienced) person is the person who has learned from their experiences. The changes are the outcome of the learning process.

The idea of the person experiencing the world acknowledges that learners are a “whole person rather than a body or a mind; they are both material and mental” (Jarvis 2006, p. 13). What this means is that the learner is responsive to their world and the activities that happen around them through thoughts, feelings and actions (Jarvis 2006). As Dirkx (2001a) notes, emotions and feelings are deeply connected to the way learners perceive and process their experiences. These affective responses are also a product of the learner’s social world, using socially-acquired language, so that interpretations of experiences reflect that world (Jarvis 2018). The interactions between people and their worlds are at the heart of experiential learning theory, where the way the individual interprets these interactions influences learning (Boud & Walker 1990).

The researcher acknowledges the limitations on Jarvis’s definition of learning and indeed of using any single definition to capture the nuances and complexities of adult learning. As Brown (2015, p. 54) notes, all learning theories are by nature incomplete as they “examine only limited elements of the process of learning, approach the whole person from different perspectives, and are the product of particular historical, political and cultural contexts”. All learning theories endure scrutiny, and

19

Jarvis’s definition has been criticised for its limited treatment of socially-constructed meanings, the reactive and sequential structure of learning in his approach, and the insufficient attention given to the various elements of the learning process (Brown 2015). Despite the inadequacy of a single learning theory to define all learning, this study proposes that the constructivist perspective theorised by Jarvis (2006) has efficacy as an approach. The approach champions the place of identity in understanding learning, by conceptualising it as the construction of the learner’s individual biography. It recognises the role of thought, emotions, and actions in learning and the complex combination of these processes. Jarvis’s approach is relevant to this study, as he places the learner in their life-world, where learning stems from interactions with that world (Jarvis 2006, p. 23). This study also seeks to recognise the influence of the socio-contextual dimension of learning (discussed later in the chapter).

The conceptualisation of learning used in this study from Jarvis (2006) is informed by the work of Danish learning theorist, Knud Illeris, who sees learning as consisting of two simultaneous processes (Illeris 2018b). These processes include an interaction between the learner and their environment (or a situation) that gives the person some ‘impressions’, and an acquisition process where the learner assesses the impressions based on their content (what is learned) and the incentive to learn (using the required mental energy). The interaction and acquisition processes involve three dimensions: (i) content, which is largely cognitive, (ii) incentive i.e. engagement, interest, and motivation, which is chiefly emotional, and (iii) interaction, which is the social dimension of learning (Illeris 2018b). Illeris’s theory of learning is represented by Figure 2.3:

Figure 2.3: The learning process as conceptualised by Illeris (2018b)

Illeris’s theory of learning aligns with that of Peter Jarvis, where the interaction and acquisition processes are comparable to Jarvis’s concept of transforming the content of an experience and integrating that content into the learner’s biography. Both theorists acknowledge the role of the emotional dimension of learning. The social element of learning that both theorists advocate will be

20

explored later in the chapter.

Summary: Contribution to the framework

The researcher acknowledges that learning is a complex process. While it is possible to consider the constituent elements of learning, it is unlikely that there will ever be comprehensive theory of the human process of learning (Jarvis 2006; Merriam 2017). The researcher has adopted Jarvis’s (2006) theory of learning to anchor the framework, complemented by the work of Illeris (2018a; 2018b), where learning involves transforming reactions to an experience and adopting those reactions as part of the self, resulting in the changed person. Both Jarvis and Illeris emphasise the learner’s interactions with their environment and the process of engaging with experiences to transform them into learning. They and other theorists (for example, Mezirow 2000) propose that learning is about change. It is change in the learner that forms the basis of the idea of significant learning, the type of learning that is of interest to the researcher.