Comparison Of Adult Learning Theories And Models

This paper will analyze ways in which traditional and newer adult learning theories and models both support and do not support curriculum design when using the principles of backward design; subsequently, it will provide insight into practical application of adult learning theories. It will disclose ways in which backward design can be utilized with adult learners in informal, formal, and nonformal learning environments by providing insight into practical application.
Traditional Adult Learning Theories and Models Bloom’s taxonomy has been utilized for curriculum planning and developing learning objectives; thus, on the lowest level of Bloom’s six-level taxonomy is knowledge – the remembering of specifics facts or concepts (Merriam & Bierema,

The behavioral approach theory for adult learning is designed to work with behavioral objectives to specify particular learning outcomes, and the notions of competency-based curricula, instructional design models, and some types of program-planning models; therefore, it could be adapted to the backward design by incorporating the learning outcomes as questions that would address what the student will learn and how it will be used in other settings. When an adult is taught a skill, there are certain skilled-based behaviors they will acquire during the learning process; therefore, their prior behavior will change to include the skilled-based behaviors. The backward design for the skilled-based lesson would include questions in the beginning that will clarify the directions for obtaining the skilled-based behaviors that will be utilized in other settings. The humanistic learning theory is based upon learning about the development of the person; thus, underpinning this perspective is the notion that human beings have the potential for growth and development and that people are free to make choices and determine their behavior. The humanistic learning theory contradicts the backward

The cognitive perspective asserts transformative learning is a learning process of making meaning of one’s experience; therefore, this aspect makes it adaptable to the backward design (Merriam & Bierema, 2014). A learner will be able to experience transformative learning with the backward design concept in stages one and three. The learner will know from the start the purpose the lesson with serve and be able to make sense of one’s learning; subsequently, stage three will identify the skills and knowledge for achieving the purpose (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). The utilization of the unconscious, emotions, relationships, culture, spirit, aesthetics, and ecology are characteristics of transformative learning that encompasses beyond rational that can cause it to be contradictable to the backward design (Merriam & Bierema, 2014). The backward design calls for instructors to make goals or standards specific and concrete based on assessment evidence, which its contradictable to the beyond rational aspect of transformative learning. Transformative learning can take place in a variety of settings and can be adapted to the backward design based upon the cognitive