Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other

Richard Steven Hyland

doi:doi:10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

| Peer-Reviewed

Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other

Richard Steven Hyland

Published in Education Journal (Volume 11, Issue 4)

Received: 23 June 2022 Accepted: 8 July 2022 Published: 18 July 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The ongoing development of Transformative Learning (TL) theory includes an ever-growing array of perspectives. This is a testament to the power of the theory’s underlying concepts and the potential for both broad and specific applicability. The theory was originally conceived as a normative – or prescriptive – framework that hinted at social action and a movement toward democratic education. Over time, the range of voices within the TL community has grown to encompass ideas that do not necessarily conform to these earlier normative underpinnings. A review and analysis of the literature highlights what appears to be a growing dichotomy regarding the process of perspective transformation and the increasing use of both normative and descriptive assumptions and frameworks. This paper highlights two such lenses - descriptive and prescriptive – and recommends the explicit identification of which lens is being used by researchers and authors going forward. This recommendation may also apply to qualitative research more broadly, since researcher positionality, bias, and other similar limitations are often stated. Identifying a researcher’s approach can lend transparency and enhance credibility to a study by making the reader aware of any ideological implications, or lack thereof. Likewise, future research and theory development might proceed in a way that is more intentional and transparent.

Published in	Education Journal (Volume 11, Issue 4)
DOI	10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
Page(s)	156-162
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Transformative Learning, Perspective Transformation, Adult Education, Cognitive Development, Education, Ethics, Qualitative Research, Research Bias

References

[1]	Bell, B., Gaventa, J., & Peters, J. (Eds.). (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on education and social change, Myles Horton and Paolo Freire. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
[2]	Boyd, R. D., & Myers, J. G. (1988). Transformative education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 7 (4) 261-284.
[3]	Brookfield, S. D. (1993). Self-directed learning, political clarity, and the critical practice of adult education. Adult Education Quarterly, 25 (4) 227-242.
[4]	Brookfield, S. D. (2000). Transformation as ideology critique. In J. Mezirow and Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation (pp. 125-148). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[5]	Brookfield, S. D. (2005). Learning democratic reason: The adult education project of Jurgen Habermas. Teachers College Record, 107 (6), 1127-1168.
[6]	Clark, M. C., & Wilson, A. L. (1991). Context and rationality in Mezirow’s theory of transformational learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 41 (2), 75-91.
[7]	Collard, S., & Law, M. (1989). The limits of perspective transformation: A critique of Mezirow’s theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 39 (2), 99-107.
[8]	Cook-Greuter, S. (2004). Making the case for a developmental perspective. Industrial and Commercial Training, 36 (7), 275-281.
[9]	Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide for educators of adults (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[10]	Cunningham, P. M. (1993). Let’s get real: A critical look at the practice of adult education. Journal of Adult Education, 22 (1), 3-15.
[11]	Daloz, L. A. (1986). Effective teaching and mentoring: Realizing the transformational power of adult learning experiences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[12]	Daloz, L. A. (1999). Mentor: Guiding the journey of adult learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[13]	Dirkx, J. M. (1998). Transformative learning in the practice of adult education: An overview. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 7, 1-14.
[14]	Dirkx, J. M. (2000). After the burning bush: Transformative learning as imaginative engagement with everyday experience. In Proceedings of the third international transformative learning conference, Columbia University, New York, October 26-28.
[15]	Dirkx, J. M. (2001). The power of feelings: Emotion, imagination and the construction of meaning in adult learning. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), The new update on adult learning theory (pp. 63-72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[16]	Dirkx, J. M. (2006). Engaging emotions in adult learning: A Jungian perspective on emotion and transformative learning. In E. W. Taylor (Ed.), Teaching for change (pp. 15-26). New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 109. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[17]	Donovan, L. L., Meyer, S. R., & Fitzgerald, S. P. (2007). Transformative learning and appreciative inquiry: A more perfect union for deep organizational change. Academy of Management Proceedings.
[18]	Drago-Severson, E. (2004a). Becoming adult learners: Principles and practices for effective development. New York: Teachers College Press.
[19]	Drago-Severson, E. (2004b). Helping teachers learn: principal leadership for adult growth and development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
[20]	Drago-Severson, E., Helsing, D., Kegan, R., Popp, N., Broderick, M., & Portnow, K. (2001, October). The power of a cohort and of collaborative groups. Focus on Basics: Connecting Research and Practice, 5 (B), 15-22.
[21]	Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (Revised 20th Anniversary Ed.). New York: Continuum.
[22]	Heron, J. (1992). Feeling and personhood: Psychology in another key. London: Sage.
[23]	Hoggan, C. (2016). A typology of transformation: Reviewing the transformative learning literature, Studies in the Education of Adults, 48: 1, 65-82.
[24]	Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[25]	Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[26]	Kegan, R. (2000). What ‘form’ transforms? A constructive-developmental approach to learning. In J. Mezirow & Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation (pp. 35-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[27]	Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2001). How the way we talk can change the way we work: Seven languages for transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[28]	Merriam, S. B. (2004). The role of cognitive development in Mezirow's transformational learning theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 55 (1), 60-68.
[29]	Mezirow. J. A. (1989). Transformation theory and social action: A response to Collard and Law. Adult Education Quarterly, 39 (3), 169-175.
[30]	Mezirow, J. A., & Associates. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[31]	Mezirow, J. A. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[32]	Mezirow, J. A. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48 (3), 185-198.
[33]	Mezirow, J. A. (2000). Learning to think like an adult. In J. Mezirow & Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation (pp. 3-33). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[34]	Piaget, J. (1954a). Intelligence and affectivity: Their relationship during child development. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Review.
[35]	Piaget, J. (1954b). The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books.
[36]	Prange, C. (1999). Organizational learning – desperately seeking theory? In Easterby-Smith, M., Burgoyne, J., Araujo, L. (Eds.), Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization, (pp. 23-25). London: Sage.
[37]	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.
[38]	Van der Veen, R. (2007). A model for the support of active citizens: Based on Habermas’ theory of communicative rationality. In R. Van der Veen, D. Wildesmeerch, J. Youngblood, & V. Marsick (Eds.), Democratic practices as learning opportunities (pp. 33-44). Rotterdam: Sense.
[39]	Yorks, L., & Kasl, E. (2006). I know more than I can say: A taxonomy for using expressive ways of knowing to foster transformative learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 4 (1), 25-64.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Richard Steven Hyland. (2022). Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other. Education Journal, 11(4), 156-162. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Richard Steven Hyland. Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other. Educ. J. 2022, 11(4), 156-162. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Richard Steven Hyland. Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other. Educ J. 2022;11(4):156-162. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13,
  author = {Richard Steven Hyland},
  title = {Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other},
  journal = {Education Journal},
  volume = {11},
  number = {4},
  pages = {156-162},
  doi = {10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.edu.20221104.13},
  abstract = {The ongoing development of Transformative Learning (TL) theory includes an ever-growing array of perspectives. This is a testament to the power of the theory’s underlying concepts and the potential for both broad and specific applicability. The theory was originally conceived as a normative – or prescriptive – framework that hinted at social action and a movement toward democratic education. Over time, the range of voices within the TL community has grown to encompass ideas that do not necessarily conform to these earlier normative underpinnings. A review and analysis of the literature highlights what appears to be a growing dichotomy regarding the process of perspective transformation and the increasing use of both normative and descriptive assumptions and frameworks. This paper highlights two such lenses - descriptive and prescriptive – and recommends the explicit identification of which lens is being used by researchers and authors going forward.  This recommendation may also apply to qualitative research more broadly, since researcher positionality, bias, and other similar limitations are often stated. Identifying a researcher’s approach can lend transparency and enhance credibility to a study by making the reader aware of any ideological implications, or lack thereof. Likewise, future research and theory development might proceed in a way that is more intentional and transparent.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other
AU  - Richard Steven Hyland
Y1  - 2022/07/18
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
T2  - Education Journal
JF  - Education Journal
JO  - Education Journal
SP  - 156
EP  - 162
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2327-2619
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
AB  - The ongoing development of Transformative Learning (TL) theory includes an ever-growing array of perspectives. This is a testament to the power of the theory’s underlying concepts and the potential for both broad and specific applicability. The theory was originally conceived as a normative – or prescriptive – framework that hinted at social action and a movement toward democratic education. Over time, the range of voices within the TL community has grown to encompass ideas that do not necessarily conform to these earlier normative underpinnings. A review and analysis of the literature highlights what appears to be a growing dichotomy regarding the process of perspective transformation and the increasing use of both normative and descriptive assumptions and frameworks. This paper highlights two such lenses - descriptive and prescriptive – and recommends the explicit identification of which lens is being used by researchers and authors going forward.  This recommendation may also apply to qualitative research more broadly, since researcher positionality, bias, and other similar limitations are often stated. Identifying a researcher’s approach can lend transparency and enhance credibility to a study by making the reader aware of any ideological implications, or lack thereof. Likewise, future research and theory development might proceed in a way that is more intentional and transparent.
VL  - 11
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Richard Steven Hyland

Department of Business, SUNY Westchester Community College, New York, United States

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Richard Steven Hyland. (2022). Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other. Education Journal, 11(4), 156-162. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Richard Steven Hyland. Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other. Educ. J. 2022, 11(4), 156-162. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Richard Steven Hyland. Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other. Educ J. 2022;11(4):156-162. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13,
  author = {Richard Steven Hyland},
  title = {Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other},
  journal = {Education Journal},
  volume = {11},
  number = {4},
  pages = {156-162},
  doi = {10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.edu.20221104.13},
  abstract = {The ongoing development of Transformative Learning (TL) theory includes an ever-growing array of perspectives. This is a testament to the power of the theory’s underlying concepts and the potential for both broad and specific applicability. The theory was originally conceived as a normative – or prescriptive – framework that hinted at social action and a movement toward democratic education. Over time, the range of voices within the TL community has grown to encompass ideas that do not necessarily conform to these earlier normative underpinnings. A review and analysis of the literature highlights what appears to be a growing dichotomy regarding the process of perspective transformation and the increasing use of both normative and descriptive assumptions and frameworks. This paper highlights two such lenses - descriptive and prescriptive – and recommends the explicit identification of which lens is being used by researchers and authors going forward.  This recommendation may also apply to qualitative research more broadly, since researcher positionality, bias, and other similar limitations are often stated. Identifying a researcher’s approach can lend transparency and enhance credibility to a study by making the reader aware of any ideological implications, or lack thereof. Likewise, future research and theory development might proceed in a way that is more intentional and transparent.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Perspective Transformations: The Good, the Bad, and the Other
AU  - Richard Steven Hyland
Y1  - 2022/07/18
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
T2  - Education Journal
JF  - Education Journal
JO  - Education Journal
SP  - 156
EP  - 162
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2327-2619
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20221104.13
AB  - The ongoing development of Transformative Learning (TL) theory includes an ever-growing array of perspectives. This is a testament to the power of the theory’s underlying concepts and the potential for both broad and specific applicability. The theory was originally conceived as a normative – or prescriptive – framework that hinted at social action and a movement toward democratic education. Over time, the range of voices within the TL community has grown to encompass ideas that do not necessarily conform to these earlier normative underpinnings. A review and analysis of the literature highlights what appears to be a growing dichotomy regarding the process of perspective transformation and the increasing use of both normative and descriptive assumptions and frameworks. This paper highlights two such lenses - descriptive and prescriptive – and recommends the explicit identification of which lens is being used by researchers and authors going forward.  This recommendation may also apply to qualitative research more broadly, since researcher positionality, bias, and other similar limitations are often stated. Identifying a researcher’s approach can lend transparency and enhance credibility to a study by making the reader aware of any ideological implications, or lack thereof. Likewise, future research and theory development might proceed in a way that is more intentional and transparent.
VL  - 11
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download