168 Joy Penman and Bronwyn Ellis Australian Journal of Adult Learning

Volume 49, Number 1, April 2009

About the authors

Joy Penman is a lecturer in the Nursing and Rural Health Unit,
Whyalla Campus, teaching both science and nursing courses. Joy
is currently undertaking her doctoral studies in palliative care and
spirituality. Her other research interests include rural and remote
nursing issues, university–community links, and student learning.
She is passionate about community engagement and involves her
students in this.

Bronwyn Ellis is an adjunct research associate in the Spencer Gulf

Rural Health School. As well as her involvement in various research
and writing activities, she works as a temporary relieving teacher in Facilitating transformative learning:
Whyalla schools. Her research interests include rural and regional a framework for practice
education issues, equity and access in higher education, lifelong
Judi Apte
learning, and cross-cultural issues.
EOS (Education and Organisational Strategies) Management P/L
Contact details
Ms Joy Penman, Centre for Regional Engagement, University of This paper explores some of the challenges that are involved in
South Australia, 111 Nicolson Avenue, Whyalla Norrie, SA 5608 facilitating transformative learning. It presents a framework for
Tel: +61 8 8302 6068 Fax: +61 8 8302 6014 practice that considers transformative learning from the perspective
E-mail: joy.penman@unisa.edu.au of the facilitator. These ideas were developed through a doctoral
study in which adult educators were interviewed about their
Ms Bronwyn Ellis, Spencer Gulf Rural Health School, University of experiences in facilitating transformative learning. The framework
South Australia and University of Adelaide, c/- 111 Nicolson Avenue, comprises four components: confirming and interrupting current
Whyalla Norrie, SA 5608 frames of reference, working with triggers for transformative
Tel: + 61 8 8645 4005 Fax: + 61 8 8302 8156 learning, acknowledging a time of retreat or dormancy, and
E-mail: bronwyn.ellis@unisa.edu.au developing the new perspective. Using the four components of this
framework for practice, I outline a series of questions for reflection.
Through detailed reflection on aspects of program design and the
interactions in the learning group, we can further our knowledge
about the transformative aspects of our programs.
170 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 171

Introduction of Australian adult educators’ practice. The educators in the study

Learning is about transformation, it’s about change, it’s about facilitated transformative learning in such fields as social action,
seeing yourself in relation to the world differently (Lyn in Apte educational approaches for young people who have left school early,
2003a:92). personal skills and relationship education, and HIV/AIDS training
programs (Apte 2003a). In this paper, I present a framework for
This is the potential of transformative learning; how learning
the practice of transformative learning, from the perspective of the
sometimes transforms people’s perceptions, enabling them to see
facilitator. As Taylor comments:
things differently and act differently in their world. Transformative
learning involves change in the frames of reference that we use to It is imperative, in this new millennium, that we set a new
make sense in our lives. Frames of reference structure the ways that direction of research for transformative learning theory that
focuses on understanding with greater depth its inherent
we interpret the meaning of our experiences, and therefore guide our
complexities (Taylor 2000:286).
action and provide the rationale for our action (Mezirow 2000).

Much adult learning is additive; people gain new information, develop Overview of the framework for practice
understandings, and extend their skills within their current frames of Mezirow (1981) initially described the process of transformative
reference. However, we may be experiencing challenges that require learning by identifying a series of stages, based on his research into
us to do things differently. Our previous knowing, strategies and the experiences of women entering college in later life. In a later
personal strengths may be blocking the emergence of new solutions. publication (2000), he reworks the stages and presents them as
elements of transformative learning. They are:
Facilitating such transformative learning presents specific challenges
for facilitators. I am particularly interested in the knowledge that • a disorienting dilemma
experienced facilitators have developed about aspects of their • self examination with feelings of fear, anger, guilt or shame
practice, such as: • a critical assessment of assumptions
• recognition that one’s discontent and the process of
• What are the things that we do that create a greater likelihood for
transformation is shared
transformative learning?
• exploration of options for new roles, relationships and actions
• How do we increase the transformative impact of the program
• planning a course of action
design?
• acquiring knowledge and skills for implementing one’s plans
• What do learning groups do to contribute towards transformative
• provisional trying of new roles, and
learning and how do we foster that?
• a reintegration into one’s life on the basis of conditions dictated by
• What do we need to be alert to at different stages in the process?
one’s new perspective (Mezirow 2000: 22).
• What are the challenges and dilemmas experienced by facilitators?
Whereas the process outlined by Mezirow focuses on transformative
The ideas in this paper have been developed from ongoing reflection
learning from the participant’s perspective, I explore transformative
about my own practice as a facilitator and from a doctoral study
learning from the facilitator’s perspective. The framework that
172 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 173

I present is comprised of four components, and I picture these remembrances and impressions; they may be accurate, inaccurate, or
components as the four quadrants of a circle. Each component represent part of the ‘realities’ of the learning process. The reflections
represents a particular focus for the facilitator: express our version of what is happening, and our version may or may
not parallel the participants’ versions. Through such reflection we can
1. Confirming and interrupting current frames of reference
formulate, and review, the working knowledge that we are developing
2. Working with triggers for transformative learning
about the program.
3. Acknowledging a time of retreat or dormancy
4. Developing the new perspective. Confirming and Questions: focusing on the participants
interrupting
current frames of What is regarded as ‘normal’ behaviour (in the participant’s
As a facilitator, I have found that the significance of the four reference social world)?
components varies between different programs and different What examples are used to describe ‘good’ and ‘bad’?
participants. Further, I have found that transformative learning
What ideas or stories claimed people’s attention, and what is
rarely occurs sequentially; the process is more likely to be circular gripping about them?
and recursive, revisiting various components in a series of loops What are people’s expectations of themselves?
(Taylor 1997). • Are any expectations seen as impossible?
• Are their expectations coherent with other people’s
The framework has been designed as a resource for practice and expectations?
it could be used in a range of ways. Firstly, it could be used when • Are their expectations contradictory or split?
developing the program and preparing for the kinds of issues that What information has the participant never contemplated
before?
might arise. Secondly, the reflection questions could be used when
Have previous practices become lost along the way?
reviewing the program, to address emerging issues or to increase the
Questions: focusing on the facilitator
impact of the program. Thirdly, it could be used when designing an
evaluation of the program. What assumptions are embedded in the ideas that I am
presenting and/or the materials that I am using?

Framework for practice: questions for reflection Which assumptions are likely to be compatible with those of
the participants?
The reflection questions are used to explore practice issues that Which ideas presented alternative frames of reference?
relate to each of the four components in the framework. The What ideas or stories claimed my attention, and what is
questions guide reflection about the interactions within the learning gripping about them for me?
group, about personal responses to the learning process, and about
program design. The questions focus on what may be happening for
the participants, and also focus on what may be happening for the
facilitator.

Our reflections about the participants’ perspectives indicate our

emerging views. Our reflections may be based on observations,
174 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 175

Working with Questions: focusing on the participants Developing the Questions: focusing on the participants
triggers for What are the differences in perspective among these new perspective
transformative What capabilities are beginning to emerge?
participants?
learning How are views shifting over time?
What evoked people’s curiosity?
What were people surprised by? What strategies are people interested in developing further
What evoked people’s anxiety? and testing in their own lives?

What specific dilemmas are they raising? How can the learning in the program be continued?
What hopes do they express? What reactions do participants expect from people in their
Does the person experience any contradictions between who usual environment?
they want to be and who they are currently?
Questions: focusing on the facilitator
Questions: focusing on the facilitator
What aspects of the program are creating a mood of
What evoked my curiosity – what am I thinking and
possibility?
wondering about?
What was I surprised by? How can we take notice of the results that flow from the new
possibilities?
What evoked my anxiety?
What do I hope for at this point?
Acknowledging a Questions: focusing on the participants
time of retreat or What barriers do I see in their usual environment?
What indicates that people are having some doubts about the
dormancy change?
Is there inertia occurring around some things? Issues in facilitating each component
What are participants avoiding?
Confirming and interrupting current frames of reference
What provokes anger or defensive responses?
What assumptions are people being ‘pulled back to’? Reflection on this component considers the ways in which the
What unlearning might be required for them to move facilitator’s frames of reference and the participants’ frames of
forward?
reference will interact. Which of the frames of reference implicit in
What could the person ‘lose’ if their current assumptions are
not confirmed? the program might match the assumptions of the learners? Which
What aspects of the learning would require significant might provide a different angle or perspective? In what ways might
courage? we be challenging the participants’ frames of reference? Which ideas
Are there some risks that might occur if people move
might provoke discomfort or conflict?
forward with this?
What do people say is impossible for them?
Preparing the program
Questions: focusing on the facilitator
What doubts have come to my mind? Much of our reflection about this component occurs as we prepare the
Are there points at which I experienced anger or program: investigating learning needs, preparing learning materials,
defensiveness? developing promotional materials and inviting participants to attend.
What seems possible at this point?
We are tuning in to the participants’ current frames of reference and
What seems impossible at this point?
considering ways that these might influence the focus of the program.
176 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 177

We are also reflecting on our own frames of reference and identifying participant’s ‘inner world of concepts is entwined with behavioural
the assumptions that we are bringing to the program. coordination and social context that are co-emergent’ (Lange
2004:137).
If the program only confirms the participants’ perspectives, we can
limit the chance for transformative learning. If the program only Reflecting on gripping narratives
considers the perspectives of our profession, agency or funding Further, I have found that it is particularly important to reflect on
body we might position the participants as passively accepting/ the ways that some narratives claim dramatic attention in a learning
refusing a dominant knowledge. The facilitator is continually making group. These “gripping narratives” are a window into transformative
significant choices along this interface, deciding when to confirm the learning potentials and dilemmas (Gergen & Kaye 1996). Some
participants’ frames of reference and when to interrupt them. Our stories, experiences or ideas can grip a learning group with very
interaction provides a potential influence for change, both to the high intensity, almost as if it was a magnetising force or ‘black hole’.
frames of reference of the participant and the facilitator. These gripping narratives often give us a clue about the underlying
dilemmas, core anxieties and impossible expectations that people
Tuning into the participants’ social worlds
are grappling with. For example, educators in the study noted that
As professional adult educators we are often working with people at a
powerful themes such as death and loss, inclusion or exclusion,
time when they haven’t contemplated any prospect of change. People
gender identity, and contagion had gripping effects and required
often act habitually when their life-world and their assumptions fit
careful facilitation (Apte 2003a:103).
together. Their frames of reference may be quite invisible and are
often presented as normal and self-evident. The expectations that the Gergen and Kaye (1996) suggest that one response by facilitators
person holds of themselves may also mirror the expectations held by when faced with a gripping narrative is to act as the recipient of that
significant people in their world. Their inner and outer worlds are reality and accept the story as told. Thus we convey respect for that
thus in a coherent relation, and they see their assumptions confirmed reality, and we can engage participants in extending their skills and
by events. It is a time of continuity and habitual action: understanding within that frame of reference. However, if we make
this choice then we are also confirming the existing frame of reference
For as long as there is continuity between people’s own
individual stocks of knowledge and the socio-cultural temporal and the likelihood that it will remain fixed. As a result, the range of
world in which they act, they are enabled to perform in an possible options is circumscribed by the existing story. This can be a
almost unthinking manner (Jarvis 1987:167). particularly challenging dilemma when we are faced with a gripping
narrative. In what circumstances do we decide not to confirm a frame
We need to consider a participant’s world from their perspective and
of reference, but rather seek to interrupt its ‘taken for grantedness’
consider those experiences that have confirmed their assumptions,
and the habitual practices that flow from it?
and significant people who validate current, habitual practices.
Information that disrupts current assumptions may be pushed aside Inviting participants to consider the case for change
or re-interpreted, particularly if the existing frames of reference are Prochaska and DiClemente (1983) outline ways that health educators
regarded as normal or superior. We are tuning into the ways that the can open up conversations about change when people are at the
178 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 179

stage of pre-contemplation. Educators may need to step out of any Facilitators are continually making choices about how to traverse the
assumption that the person is ready for change at that time, and to interface of participants’ ideas and the ideas that they might speak for
present information that may be recalled at a later time. Therefore, throughout a program. We are receiving, confirming, stretching and/
comments are constructed to encourage exploration of the issues or challenging a participant’s frame of reference, and thus we are
and potential consequences of the person’s current behaviour, while recognising, confirming and interrupting various selves.
not conveying any expectation of action in the near future. Such an
invitational stance may ‘open the window’ for participants to look at Working with triggers for transformative learning
the possibility of change while reducing the risks of resistance. This component involves us in reflecting on the issues that are arising
in working with triggers for transformative learning.
Taking up the role of empathic provocateur
Our actions and communications can confirm some of the Assisting people to face the contradictions and dilemmas
participant’s assumptions at the same time as they interrupt the Mezirow notes that certain experiences can provide triggers for
certainty of other assumptions. As facilitators we can be perceived as transformative learning, particularly if those experiences provide
provocateurs with each action, conversation, idea and resource that a disorienting dilemma (Mezirow 1990:13). Facilitators can work
calls into question participants’ frames of reference. When we do not with these triggers, and assist participants to pay attention to the
affirm participants’ frames of reference, they may perceive this as dilemmas they raise:
invisible, surprising or provocative. … gently creating dilemmas by encouraging participants to
face up to contradictions between what they believe and what
Adult educators have written about the importance of their
they do… and discrepancies between a specific way of seeing,
provocative role in representing relevant, unnoticed ‘truth’. Stories of thinking, feeling and acting and other perspectives (Mezirow
self that have been developed in a person’s private social domain are 1991:366).
frequently reinforced in public domains; for example, by discourses
about gender, class, race and age. The legitimacy of the story is Numerous educators have outlined educational practices based
reinforced when there is mirroring of meaning in public and private on Mezirow’s theory of transformative learning (Mezirow 1990;
worlds. For example, Tisdell (1998) argues that educators have a pro- Courtenay, Merriam & Reeves 1998; Cranton 1992; Christopher,
active role in challenging unequal power relations so that systems of Dunnagan, Duncan & Lynn 2001; First & Way 1995; Lyon 2001).
privilege are not replicated in the educational context. The facilitator They outline the ways that they establish environments in which
seeks to extend what the participants define as an issue of interest. learners can uncover and critically reflect on assumptions. Cranton
Curry-Stevens (2007) outlines ways that community-based educators suggests that the role includes:
use strategies that are ‘confidence shaking’ as well as ‘confidence • recognising the learner’s assumptions
building’ with people who are ignoring the voice for change from • creating an environment to challenge those assumptions
others. • assisting the learner to identify the assumptions and consider the
consequences of the assumptions
180 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 181

• providing psychological support to the learner as they revise in the course… he was very put off (at) the beginning … He
assumptions said, ‘I’ve never spoken to a nun before’… and it seemed like
• supporting the learner to act on the revised assumptions (Cranton it was quite a significant shift for him to make (Lyn in Apte
2003a:100).
1992: 151–152).
The participant’s experience of seeing issues from another person’s
Overwhelmingly, the educators in the study noted that facilitating
perspective can disrupt the certainty of current frames and open up
transformative learning requires them to focus on the emotional
the possibility of alternate perspectives, ‘and to actually almost look
aspects of the learning. Lyn suggested that we need to be particularly
at it through the lens of all the differences of the people in the course’
alert to a participant’s personal history and the range of factors that
(Lyn in Apte 2003a:99).
may have led to their participation in the program. Personal stories
may be private and hidden, and may be creating a range of restraints Thus, differences among participants can introduce living, alternate
in their response to the program. For example, Lyn outlined a range frames of reference. This is the transformative impact of connected
of reasons for the intense emotional reactions among participants in a knowing, as participants listen to each other’s stories, seek to
program for volunteer carers of people living with HIV/AIDS: understand them and enter into belief in relation to them (Belenky &
Stanton 2000:87–89).
Sometimes they may be more reluctant to shift around
something for a whole lot of other reasons, not because they
The potential of surprise
don’t want to be good carers... I mean, the stated reason would
be ‘I want this information in order to be a good carer’ but the Bruner suggests that surprise indicates that an event violates
underlying reasons why people want that information; ‘I want presuppositions in some way:
to process my grief’, ‘I want to understand things that I didn’t
know when I was caring for someone’... ‘I want to know what’s Surprise is an extraordinarily useful phenomenon… for it
going to happen to my friend when they get sick’ (Lyn in Apte allows us to probe what people take for granted. It provides a
2003a:105). window on presupposition: surprise is a response to violated
presupposition (Bruner 1986:46).
The potential of diverse perspectives among the participants
The educators in the study noted the ways that surprise enabled
The educators in the study talked about the impact of encountering
participants to move beyond their taken-for-granted frames of
other people in the learning group who act as a trigger for
reference. In the study, Peter described the significance of surprise in
transformative learning. For example, one facilitator talked about
opening a space for alternate possibilities:
a man who found the group experience in the HIV/AIDS training
program to be provocative: … there is something that is sufficiently intriguing about doing it
at that moment in the group and in that way which really invites,
Most of our groups are very diverse… we get a real mix of gay, encourages some people to go into some part of their being in a
straight, men, women, nuns, priests, sex workers, literally, I way that they wouldn’t normally (Apte 2003a:114).
mean you can literally have those two people in the room at
the same time… we had one particular course where what was Therefore, we can take particular note of those program activities that
unusual about this course was that there was only one gay man evoke surprise and consider what assumptions are being interrupted.
182 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 183

Surprise can provide a window for us to move into possibilities where A key component of our facilitation is managing the risk of increased
things do not operate in the usual way. defensiveness alongside the potential for transformative learning. We
need to acknowledge the potential for participants to retreat as well
Acknowledging a time of retreat or dormancy as the potential for them to move forward: ‘… that doesn’t mean that a
The trigger for potential transformative learning may also prompt a person will not run away from it’ (Peter in Apte 2003a:98).
participant’s determination to defend their assumptions. At points
of change, people may feel that they live in a threatened life-world, Acknowledging the person’s current position in regards the change
rather than feeling curious about the possibilities of a transformed The facilitators in the study talked about transformative learning as
life-world (Wildemeersch & Lierman 1988:20–23). People may a circular and erratic process. People may return again and again to
feel confused, discontented, anxious, and angry during times of the same issues until they feel they have enough power or capacity to
transformative learning (Lyon 2001; Taylor 1997). They may also feel implement this change (Pope in Taylor 2000:311). Importantly, the
angry or ambivalent towards a facilitator who is aligned with the case participant was described as the person who held the choice about
for change (Robertson 1996). whether the change is actually made: ‘[It’s] up to her and what she
takes up and what she doesn’t’ (Peter in Apte 2003a).
Facilitating throughout defensive responses
Participants may retreat from their exploration and return to One of the activities I conduct with organisations and teams is The
the previous frame of reference. Lange suggests that such retreat River of Change activity. We explore the experience of change via
or defensiveness is a stabilising response when information is the metaphor of a river, and I often ask the person where they are
discrepant with a valued frame of reference. People return to previous positioned now in relation to the change. For example, some people
assumptions to deal with the disorientation that has resulted from the describe themselves as in the middle of the river, trying to navigate
trigger event (Lange 2004:122). all of its complexity such as waterfalls and rapids. Others describe
themselves as on the riverbank, contemplating whether they will join
People may return and consolidate a previous frame of reference even the change or move away. The aim of this question is to acknowledge
more strongly, in the hope that it can be reinforced and will continue choice and the person’s current position in relation to the change. We
to remain valid. This is more likely to occur when the trigger raises then discuss options for the future.
doubts about central aspects of a participant’s identity. Further,
people are more likely to perceive themselves as being threatened Peter also outlined one way he prompts the person to notice the path
when the outcomes of change are very uncertain, when the experience of change so far:
evokes fear and/ or guilt, and when the context is unstructured … so throughout the course of the year we go and check how
(Jarvis 1987). Thus facilitators may be faced with significant she’s travelling… same question, ‘what is your answer now?’… ‘is
defensive responses, or even despair, particularly if a participant this the same or different from last time?’ (in Apte 2003a: 110).
experiences their context as ‘unchanged, unchanging and apparently
Small but significant steps towards change can be overlooked, so
unchangeable’ (Jarvis 1987:170).
questions such as this draw people’s attention to the movement that
has occurred. Our role may include acting as a provocateur if we
184 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 185

are presenting a case for change, but at other times we need to act experimenting with options for action at first. The educators in the
as evocateurs, exploring where people are located in relation to the study indicated the value of such experimentation:
change. Change is thus acknowledged as a moving forward, moving
Then I think people started seeing possibilities… I think it was
back, and moving to and fro process. when we had some sort of concrete proposals in front of us that
went beyond ‘do we’ or ‘don’t we’… and when people started
Pacing our response through a time of dormancy
saying ‘Well, we could do it this way’ (Bev in Apte 2003a:98).
Dormancy is an empty, ‘not-knowing’ time, when a participant
is poised on the edge of the unknown. This participant is neither If the experiments indicate positive possibilities, the participant
engaged with the old frame of reference nor with an alternate is more likely to continue to develop and test the transformed
perspective. For example, I noted that attendance in parent education frame of reference. Participants become engaged with building
programs often dropped about half-way through the series; parents their competence, in developing their confidence with new skills,
had been really engaged with the ideas the previous week, and it was in planning a course of action, and in assessing feedback arising
as if they ‘took a breather’ at this point. Others came but had a major from their efforts (Mezirow 2000:22). The focus of the facilitator is
drop of confidence that week, and needed to recap key themes rather to establish a group environment that will foster the emergence of
than moving on to a new topic. capability. In the study, Peter outlined ingredients of his work that
support the emergence of capability. The ingredients include social
We need to avoid being driven by the timing of the program content, contact and intimacy; respectful interactions; being expected to be
particularly during this component of the process. The facilitator capable in a situation; and decision and choice (Apte 2003a:116).
needs the courage to stay with the participants in this time of
uncertainty, ambiguity, ambivalence and distress, and resist the Acknowledging any restraints in the participant’s usual social environments
desire for premature closure and emancipation (Dirkx, Pratt & Mezirow describes this as a time of re-integration for the participant,
Taylor 2002). in which they re-engage in their social world in ways that are based
on the new meaning perspective (Mezirow 2000:22). However, the
Developing the new perspective educators in the study suggested that we need to remind ourselves
We establish opportunities for participants to trial new approaches, that the person may experience their usual environment as a relative
practice new skills and experiment with possibilities that might arise constant that counters the learning from the program:
from the transformed frames of reference. Our reflections take us
People can see things in one particular environment and appear
again to the participants’ worlds, and the issues that they might face
to make a shift in one particular environment and then you
in following up the learning in their usual environment. go back to a much more consuming environment, which has
always been and continues to be a particular way (Lyn in Apte
Supporting tentative steps and experimentation 2003a:101).
Initial actions based on a transformed frame of reference are
Experiences in the learning environment are therefore seen as
often quite tentative and exploratory. Participants are often only
creating the potential for transformative learning, but are not seen
as the complete process. As Peter stated: ‘… if you have enough
186 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 187

experiences where you are more like this than that, then you might References
end up being more like this’ (Apte 2003a: 101). Apte, J. (2000). ‘Revealing the contexts of complex incidents of adult
education practice’, in Working Knowledge Conference Proceedings,
When educational programs are offered in conjunction with Sydney: University of Technology Sydney.
initiatives to develop the community environment or workplace Apte, J. (2003a). ‘The facilitation of transformative learning: A study of
environment, we are more likely to see the learning continue. Lyon the working knowledge of adult educators’, doctoral thesis, Sydney:
(2001) makes the point that transformative learning often occurs over University of Technology Sydney.
a long time span. Apte, J. (2003b). ‘A narrative approach to transformative learning’, in
Proceedings of the 43rd Annual National Conference of Adult Learning
Australia, Communities of learning: communities of practice, University
Conclusion of Technology, Sydney, 27–30 November.
As educators, we are not only an audience for participants’ current Apte J., Slattery P. & Bonser, G. (2001). Successful outcomes for youth at
risk, Brisbane: Australian National Training Authority.
frames of reference. We are also the audience for emerging knowledge
Belenky, M. & Stanton, A. (2000). ‘Inequality, development, and connected
and capability. Transformative learning is a possibility in many knowing’, in Mezirow, J. & Associates (eds.) (2000), Learning as
educational contexts, particularly when a person, organisation or transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress, San
community is facing a major challenge. However, facilitators of Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
transformative learning are often navigating complex processes of Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds, Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press.
learning and change (Apte 2000, 2003a, 2003b; Apte, Slattery &
Christopher, S., Dunnagan, T., Duncan, S. & Lynn, P. (2001). ‘Education for
Bonser 2001).
self-support: evaluating outcomes using transformative learning theory’,
Family relations, 50(2): 134–143.
This framework for practice has been developed to guide our
Courtenay, B.C., Merriam, S.B. & Reeves, P.M. (1998). ‘The centrality of
reflection and to identify particular challenges that might arise
meaning-making in transformational learning: how HIV-positive adults
throughout a learning process. By detailed reflection on aspects of make sense of their lives’, Adult education quarterly, 48 (2): 65–84.
program design and the interactions in the group, we can further our Cranton, P. (1992). Working with adult participants, Ohio: Wall & Emerson.
knowledge about the transformative features of our programs. On Curry-Stevens, A. (2007). ‘New forms of transformative education’, Journal
occasions we may also be prompted towards our own transformative of transformative education, 5(1): 33–58.
learning – our assumptions may be reassessed and new possibilities Dirkx, J., Pratt, D. & Taylor, E. (2002). ‘Archetypes of teaching: tethers in
emerge. the wind or flashlights in the dark?’, USA: AERC 2002 Annual Adult
Education Research Conference Proceedings, Raleigh, North Carolina,
5–8 June.
Acknowledgements First, J. & Way, W. (1995). ‘Parent education outcomes: insights into
The author wishes to thank Peter Slattery, Elizabeth Yeo and Mike transformative learning’, Family relations, 44(1): 104–110.
Newman. Gergen, K. & Kaye, J. (1996). ‘Beyond narrative in the negotiation of
therapeutic meaning’, in McNamee, S & Gergen, K. (eds.), Therapy as
social construction. London: SAGE Publications.
188 Judi Apte Facilitating transformative learning 189

Jarvis, P. (1987). ‘Meaningful and meaningless experience: towards an About the author
analysis of learning from life’, Adult education quarterly, 37(3): 164–172.
Lange, E. (2004). ‘Transformative and restorative learning: a vital dialectic Judi Apte is a Director of EOS Management P/L. She specialises
for sustainable societies’, Adult education quarterly, 54(2): 121–139. in the design of education and organisational strategies for
Lyon, C. (2001). ‘Hear our stories: relationships and transformations of professional development in human service organisations. She
women educators who work overseas’, Studies in the education of adults, completed a Doctor of Education at the University of Technology
33(2): 118–127.
Sydney in 2003 by researching the working knowledge of adult
Mezirow, J. (1981.) ‘A critical theory of adult learning and education’, Adult
educators involved in the facilitation of transformative learning.
education quarterly, 32(1): 3–24.
Mezirow, J. (1990). ‘How critical reflection triggers transformative learning’, Contact details
in Mezirow, J. & Associates, Fostering critical reflection in adulthood,
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 117A River Road, Greenwich, NSW 2065
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning, San Tel: (02) 9460 9302 Fax: (02) 9460 9304
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Email: judi@eosmanagement.com
Mezirow, J. (2000). ‘Learning to think like an adult: core concepts of
transformation theory’, in Mezirow, J. & Associates (eds.), Learning
as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress, San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Prochaska, J. & DiClemente, C. (1983). ‘Stages of self-change of smoking:
toward an integrative model of change’, Journal of consulting and clinical
psychology, 5: 390–395.
Robertson, D. (1996). ‘Facilitating transformative learning: attending to
the dynamics of the educational helping relationship’, Adult education
quarterly, 47(1): 41–54.
Taylor, E. (1997). ‘Building on the theoretical debate: a critical review of the
empirical studies of Mezirow’s transformative learning theory’, Adult
education quarterly, 48 (1): 34–60.
Taylor, E. (2000). ‘Analysing research on transformative learning theory’,
in Mezirow, J. & Associates (eds.), Learning as transformation: critical
perspectives on a theory in progress, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Tisdell, E. (1998). ‘Poststructural feminist pedagogies: the possibilities and
limitations of feminist emancipatory adult learning theory and practice’,
Adult education quarterly, 48(3): 139–156.
Wildemeersch, D. & Leirman, W. (1988). ‘The facilitation of the life-world
transformation’, Adult education quarterly, 39 (1): 19–30.