15
andragogy began to take shape. Knowles’s (1968) first published work titled “Andragogy not
Pedagogy” was the first established paper that described the concept of andragogy in depth
(Koskinen, 2018). Knowles described the main focus of andragogy as
the art and science of how
adults learn (Reischmann, 2004), as opposed to pedagogy, the art and science of teaching
children. Knowles’s theory of andragogy was originally based on two overarching assumptions:
(a) adult learners are self-directed, and (b) the teacher is a facilitator rather than a presenter of
content.
Acknowledging Knowles’s (1968) contribution to understanding
the limitations of
pedagogy for helping adults learn, Hase and Kenyon (2007) observed some deficiencies in the
current notions of pedagogy and andragogy. They thought andragogy did not go far enough.
Concerned with learner agency and self-directedness, they arrived at the notion of heutagogy.
Hase and Kenyon (2007) explained, “The term heutagogy, which
is derived from the ancient
Greek for ‘self’ with some adjustments and the ‘agogy’ added” (p. 112). Based on the
assumption that individuals are capable learners and they learn when they are ready and not
when their teachers think they should, heutagogy is concerned with learner-centered instructional
practices that see the learner as the major agent in their own learning, which occurs as a result of
personal experiences. Heutagogy then assumes the role of students in the teaching and learning
ecosystem is more active, and the role of instructors is more subdued.
Adopting these two theoretical perspectives, heutagogy
and social cognitive theory, as
one lens is helpful to avoid taking an absolutist view of human agency, for the three together
counterbalance each other. Bandura (1989) asserted people can exert some degree of influence
over their lives and they are “neither autonomous agents nor simply mechanical conveyers of
16
animating environmental influences” (p. 1175). Social cognitive theory, according to Bandura
(1989), subscribes to a model of interactive agency. He explained environments have causes as
do behaviors and contended that in
this interactive agency model, individuals determine the
nature of their environment and are influenced by it. He proposed the human “capacity to
manipulate symbols and engage in reflective thought allows individuals to generate novel ideas
and innovative actions that transcend their past experiences . . . to realize valued futures”
(Bandura, 1989, p. 1182). Heutagogy’s emphasis on the development of autonomy, capacity, and
capability adds another counterbalance to this theoretical lens. A self-directed
learning approach
requires learners to set their goals, reflect on their learning experiences, and take action toward
achieving their goals. Heutagogy emphasizes nurturing capability in learners (Hase & Kenyon,
2007). The role of teachers and course designers is implicit in this approach as they are the ones
designing and delivering the instructional content that will nurture capability in the learners. The
combined use of these theories as a lens recognizes that although students are
the focus, teachers
still play a very important role in HyFlex learning environments.
