International Journal of Progressive Education
ISSN (Print): 2834-7919 - ISSN (Online): 1554-5210

Original article    |    Open Access
International Journal of Progressive Education 2019, Vol. 15(6) 151-169

Do 21st Century Teachers Know about Heutagogy or Do They Still Adhere to Traditional Pedagogy and Andragogy?

Seçil Tümen Akyıldız

pp. 151 - 169   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.215.10

Publish Date: December 08, 2019  |   Number of Views: 1703  |  Number of Download: 3235

PDF Download

Abstract

There are revolutionary changes in the field of education to keep up with the benefits of globalization (Hase & Kenyon, 2014). The necessity of taking the learner to the center within the framework of  Roger’s (1951) humanistic psychology is also supported by educationalists (Hase & Kenyon, 2014; King, 1993; Novak & Gowin, 1984).  If this educational change is applicable to all grades and disciplines then permanent solutions can be reached.  Examining the researches , it is observed that heutagogy is a useful strategy to make the learners self-determined ones in their learning process especially in higher education. This paper presents the participants perceptions on heutagogical implementation and its practicality. It will contribute to the field for a number of reasons. Firstly the perceptions of the teacher administrators on this issue have not been studied before. Secondly, their views are of great importance, since high schools are the last steps before higher education. So the attitudes and views of teachers on this grade are important for students’ readiness for the next step. Lastly it has some contributions for the heutaogy model in educational settings.

Keywords: Heutagogy, Self-determined Learning, Double-loop Learning, Student-centered Teaching

How to Cite this Article?

APA 7th edition
Akyildiz, S.T. (2019). Do 21st Century Teachers Know about Heutagogy or Do They Still Adhere to Traditional Pedagogy and Andragogy?. International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(6), 151-169. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.215.10

Harvard
Akyildiz, S. (2019). Do 21st Century Teachers Know about Heutagogy or Do They Still Adhere to Traditional Pedagogy and Andragogy?. International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(6), pp. 151-169.

Chicago 16th edition
Akyildiz, Secil Tumen (2019). "Do 21st Century Teachers Know about Heutagogy or Do They Still Adhere to Traditional Pedagogy and Andragogy?". International Journal of Progressive Education 15 (6):151-169. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.215.10

References
  1. Agonács , N. & Matos, J. F.  (2019). Heutagogy and self-determined learning: a review of the published literature on the application and implementation of the theory, Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning [Google Scholar]
  2. Ashton, J., and L. Newman. 2006. An unfinished symphony: 21st century teacher education using knowledge creating heutagogies. British Journal of Educational Technology 36(6): 825–40. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ashton, J. & Elliott, R. (2007) Juggling the balls—study, work, family and play: student perspectives on flexible and blended heutagogy, European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 15(2), 167-181. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bahçeci, B., Yıldırım, İ., Kara, K. & Keskinpalta, D. (2015).  A Comparative Study On The Attitudes Of Students From Education Faculties And Science Faculties Towards Being A Teacher. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 307-324. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bell, S.  (2010) Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, 83(2), 39-43. [Google Scholar]
  6. Berg, B. L., (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Allyn and Bacon, Boston. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bhoyrub, J., Hurley, J., Neilson, G. R., Ramsay, M. & Smith, M. (2010).  Heutagogy: An alternative practice based learning approach. Nurse Education in Practice, 10, 322-326. [Google Scholar]
  8. Blaschke, L.M., Porto, S., & Kurtz, G. (2010). Assessing the added value of Web 2.0 tools for e-learning: The MDE experience. In Proceedings of the European Distance and E-learning Network (EDEN) Research Workshop, October 25-27, 2010. Budapest, Hungary.  [Google Scholar]
  9. Blaschke,  L M.., & Brindley, J. (2011). Establishing a foundation for reflective practice: A case study  of learning journal use. European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning, 2. http://www.eurodl.org/materials/special/2011/Blaschke_Brindley.pdf.   [Google Scholar]
  10. Blaschke, L.M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 56-71. [Google Scholar]
  11. Blaschke L.M., Hase S. (2015) Heutagogy, Technology, and Lifelong Learning for Professional and Part-Time Learners. In: Dailey-Hebert A., Dennis K. (eds) Transformative Perspectives and Processes in Higher Education. Advances in Business Education and Training, vol 6. Springer, Cham [Google Scholar]
  12. Blaschke,  L M.,  &  Hase, S. (2019). Heutagogy and digital media networks: Setting students on the path to lifelong learning. Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning1 (1), 1-14. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bozkırlı, K. Ç. ve Er, O. (2011). Türkçe ve Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı öğretmeni adaylarının öğretmenlik mesleğine ilişkin tutumlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi (Kafkas Üniversitesi Örneği). Turkish Studies, Volume 6/4 Fall, 457-466. [Google Scholar]
  14. Bozkurt, A. (2015). Sosyal Ağlar ve Yaşam Boyu Öğrenme Deneyimi. Akademik Bilişim, 113-118. [Google Scholar]
  15. Cavanagh S. (1997). Content analysis: concepts, methods and applications. Nurse Researcher 4, 5–16. [Google Scholar]
  16. Canning, N. (2010). Playing with heutagogy: exploring strategies to empower mature learners in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34:1, 59-71. [Google Scholar]
  17. Canning, N. & Callan, S.  (2010). Heutagogy: spirals of reflection to empower learners in higher education, Reflective Practice, 11(1), 71-82. [Google Scholar]
  18. Carpenter, J. P. & Linton, J. N. (2018).  Educators’ perspectives on the impact of Edcamp unconference professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 56-69. [Google Scholar]
  19. Carr, A., Balasubramanian, K., Atieno, R. & Onyango, J. (2018). Lifelong learning to empowerment: beyond formal education, Distance Education, 39(1), 69-86. [Google Scholar]
  20. Cochrane, T; Antonczak, L; Gordon, A; Sissons, H; Withell, A (2012). Heutagogy and mobile social media: post Web 2.0 pedagogy. In Proceedings ascilite Wellington, 204-214. [Google Scholar]
  21. Cordon, C. P. (2015). Heutagogy in oncology nursing: The experience of nurses and the factors that facilitate and hinder self-determined learning in nursing. Doctoral dissertation, Fielding Graduate University [Google Scholar]
  22. Crawford, C.M., Young Wallace, J. & White, S.A. (2018).  Rethinking Pedagogy, Andragogy and Heutagogy. Academic Exchange Quarterly. 22(4).  [Google Scholar]
  23. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Boston: Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  24. Darkenwald, G. G., & Merriam, S. B. (1982). Adult education: Foundations of practice. New York: Harper & Row. [Google Scholar]
  25. Davenport, J., III. (1987, March). A way out of the andragogy morass. Paper presented at the conference of the Georgia Adult Education Association, Savannah, GA. [Google Scholar]
  26. Davis,L. & Hase, S. (2001). The River of Learning in the Workplace. Proceedings of Research to reality: Putting VET research to Work: Australian Vocational Education and training Research Association (AVETRA), Adelaide, SA, 28-30 March, AVETRA, Crows Nest, NSW [Google Scholar]
  27. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2002). The handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press. [Google Scholar]
  28. Eberle, J. (2009). Heutagogy: What Your Mother Didn’t Tell You about Pedagogy and the Conceptual Age. ECEL2009- 8th European Conference on E-Learning, 181-188. [Google Scholar]
  29. Eryaman, M. Y. (2010). Frameworks in curriculum development. In C. Kridel (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  30. Garnett, F., & O’Beirne, R. (2013). Putting Heutagogy into Learning. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.). Self-Determined Learning: Heutagogy in Action (pp. 131–144). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Retrieved July 3, 2019, from http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781472553232.ch-010 [Google Scholar]
  31. Gerstein, J. (2014). Moving from education 1.0 through education 2.0 towards education 3.0 in L. M Blaschke, C. Kenyon & S. Hase, S. (eds.) Experiences in self-determined learning, Amazon, 83-98. [Google Scholar]
  32. Halsall, J. P., Powell, J. L. & Snowden, M | Sandro Serpa (Reviewing Editor) (2016). Determined learning approach: Implications of heutagogy society based learning, Cogent Social Sciences, 2:1 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hargreaves, A. (2005). Educational change takes ages: Life, career and generational factors in teachers’ emotional responses to educational change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 967-983. [Google Scholar]
  34. Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2000). From Andragogy to heutagogy. Ultibase, RMIT, Dec. [Google Scholar]
  35. Hase, S, Tay, BH & Goh, E (2006).  Developing learner capability through action research: from pedagogy to heutagogy in the workplace, Global VET: Challenges at the Global, National and local levels: Australian Vocational Education andTraining Research Association (AVETRA) Conference, Wollongong, NSW, 19-21 April. [Google Scholar]
  36. Hase, S. (2009). Heutagogy and e-learning in the workplace: Some challenges and opportunities. Impact: Journal of Applied research in Workplace E-learning, 1(1), 43-52. [Google Scholar]
  37. Hase,  S.  (2011).  Learner  defined  curriculum:  Heutagogy  and  action  learning  in  vocational training. Southern Institute of Technology Journal of Applied Research, 1-10  [Google Scholar]
  38. Henderson, J. G. (1992). Reflective Teaching: Becoming an Inquiring Educator. New York: McMillan. [Google Scholar]
  39. Holmes, G. & Abington-Cooper, M. (2000). Pedagogy vs. andragogy:  A false dichotomy.  Journal of Technology Studies, 26, 2.   [Google Scholar]
  40. Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2010). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010. 00387.x  [Google Scholar]
  41. Kapasi, I. & Grekova, G. (2018). What do students think of self-determined learning in entrepreneurship education? Education + Training, 60 (7/8), 841-856. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kenyon, C. & Hase, S. (2010). Andragogy and heutagogy in postgraduate work. In T. Kerry (Ed.), Meeting the challenges of change in postgraduate education. London: Continuum Press. [Google Scholar]
  43. Kerry, T. (2013). Applying the principles of heutagogy to a postgraduate distance-learning program. In S. Hase and C. Kenyon (Eds.) Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. London: Bloomsbury.  [Google Scholar]
  44. King, A. (1993).  From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side.  College Teaching, 41(1), 30-35. [Google Scholar]
  45. Knowles, M. (1973). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston: Gulf. [Google Scholar]
  46. Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education. New York: Cambridge, The Adult Education Company. [Google Scholar]
  47. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  48. Mezirow, J. 2003. Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education 1: 58–63. [Google Scholar]
  49. McAuliffe, M., Hargreaves, D., Winter, A., & Chadwick, G. (2009). Does pedagogy still rule? In Proceedings of the 2008 AAEE Conference, December 7-10, 2008. Yeppoon, Queensland. [Google Scholar]
  50. Merriam, S. & Bierma, L. L. (2013).  Adult learning:  Linking theory and practice.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
  51. Moursund, D. (1999). Project-based learning using information technology. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. [Google Scholar]
  52. Narayan, V.L. (2017). The mobilized learner: Heutagogy and mobile social media (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from //www.easybib.com/guides/citation-guides/apa-format/how-to-cite-a Williams, C. (2002). Learning on-line: A review of recent literature in a rapidly expanding field. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 26 (3): 263-272.-thesis-dissertation-apa/ (03.07.2019) [Google Scholar]
  53. Narayan, V. and Herrington, J. (2014) Towards a theoretical mobile heutagogy framework. In: ASCILITE 2014: Rhetoric and Reality, 23 - 26 November 2014, Dunedin, New Zealand [Google Scholar]
  54. Naqvi, T.F.& Parvez, J. (2019).  Considering Heutagogy as An Innovative Approach for Skill Development. Socialsci Journal, 3, 1-7. [Google Scholar]
  55. Ocak, G. ve Demirdelen, C. (2008). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencileri ile tezsiz yüksek lisans öğrencilerinin öğretmenlik mesleğine yönelik tutumlarının karşılaştırmalı incelenmesi. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10 (2), 151-171. [Google Scholar]
  56. Patel, J.V., (2019). Paradigm Shift-Pedagogy to Andragogy to Heutagogy in Higher Education. Weekly Journal of Higher Education By Association of Indian Universities, New Delhi, 56(30), 23-29. [Google Scholar]
  57. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  58. Rachal, J. R. (1983). The andragogy-pedagogy debate: Another voice in the fray. Lifelong Learning: The Adult Years, 6(9), 14–15. [Google Scholar]
  59. Riedler, M. & Eryaman M.Y.  (2016). Complexity, Diversity and Ambiguity in Teaching and Teacher Education: Practical Wisdom, Pedagogical Fitness and Tact of Teaching. International Journal of Progressive Education. 12(3): 172-186 [Google Scholar]
  60. Rogers, C. 1951. Client-centered Therapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. [Google Scholar]
  61. Schugurensky, D. 2002. Transformative learning and transformative politics: The pedagogical dimension of participatory democracy and social action. In Expanding the boundaries of transformative learning: Essays on theory and praxis, ed. E. O’Sullivan, A. Morrell, and M. O’Connor, 59–76. New York: Palgrave. [Google Scholar]
  62. Singh, H. 2003. Building effective blended learning programmes. Issues of Educational Technology 43(6): 51–4. [Google Scholar]
  63. Stephenson, J. & Weil, S. (1992). Quality in learning: A capability approach in higher education. London, UK: Kogan Pa. [Google Scholar]
  64. Stephenson, J. (1994) ‘Capability and Competence: Are they the same and does it matter?’ Capability, 1 (1), 3 – 4. [Google Scholar]
  65. Wenger, E. 2002. Communities of practice and social learning systems. In Supporting lifelong learning. Vol. 2: Organising learning, ed. F. Reeve, M. Cartwright, and R. Edwards, 160–79. London: RoutledgeFalmer/Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
Meta
Vol. 15 (6)
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 15 Issue 6

December 2019

All Manuscript

International Journal of Progressive Education

Copyright © 2025 International Journal of Progressive Education.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website were created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.