Kathryn WellerAdult Learning Annotated Bibliography

Summer 2013

Lesgold, Alan M, and Melissa K. Welch-Ross. Improving Adult Literacy Instruction: Options for Practice and Research. Washington, D.C: The National Academies Press, 2012. Print.

Early on in my reading I began to notice the instances where motivation and persistence were mentioned in the terms of the other issues (chapters).

In Ch. 2, “Foundations of Reading and Writing,” the authors write that “Despite its importance, motivation is one of the least frequently studied aspects of writing” (48) and that self-efficacy is a vital part of writing motivation. Later, they discuss how important it is for instructors and researchers to understand and engage with the “maladaptive attributions, beliefs, and motivational profiles of struggling learners” (62).

In Ch. 3, “Literacy Instruction for Adults,” the idea of persistence is introduced in terms of instruction time needed to master reading and writing skills. Reasons why some students persist and others don’t are discussed, some within the classroom and some without: “transportation, competing life demands, supportive relationships, self-determination…family problems, the pace of instruction…health issues, dislike of classwork, and inconvenient class location or schedule” (77-78). In a later discussion of “effective instructional practices”, one is the need to create “safe and fun learning to create a motivating environment that avoids labels and feelings of failure if one’s written and spoken language is not consistent with certain standards” (90-91). Also mentioned is the importance of collaborative learning, which is also one of Cleary’s (see below) recommendations for reducing adult learner anxiety. Finally, deep within a discussion of assessment, the authors cite research that indicates that while some feedback might not have a measurable effect on the student’s writing performance, good feedback “can affect students’ abilities to cope with increasing difficulty in assignments…and increase their self-efficacy and motivation to continue tasks” (98).

Ch. 4, “Principles of Learning for Instructional Design” includes a section titled “Learning is Influenced by Motivation and Emotion”, which makes two points: that keeping learners’ interests in mind and making clear the “real” purposes of writing will lead to more motivated learners, and that students’ senses of self-confidence, self-efficacy, and identity play vital roles in their motivation and success (126).

Ch. 5, “Motivation, Engagement, and Persistence” is devoted entirely to this topic. Covered in this chapter are the psychology behind the theories connecting motivation and learning, as well as instructors learning to and helping our learners to set appropriate and achievable goals, develop self-efficacy, give timely, specific, useful, and encouraging feedback, and monitor and self-regulate progress. Also discussed are ways to create environments that foster intrinsic motivation, including some kinds of extrinsic rewards (although not everyone is in agreement there), the importance of capitalizing on what students are interested in learning and what they value learning, and encouraging/allowing students to enact some choice and autonomy in what they are learning (see also Sullivan). Finally, some “social, contextual, and systemic mediators of persistence” are discussed as well as the directions for research they identity as needed. I will be returning most often to this chapter in the future.

In Ch. 6, “Technology to Promote Adult Literacy,” I find myself wary of some of the assessment and instructional technology discussed. I know that I am unfamiliar with the way these technologies operate, but I have trouble believing that a computer program can grade or assess essays in ways that are sensitive enough to students’ needs. I can see adaptive technologies as being useful tools, such as text-to-speech programs. I also understand the many potential benefits of multimedia composing and internet based interactions, both among students and between students and instructors in order to adapt to the time and life constraints of adult learners.

I didn’t notice or mark any explicit mentions of motivation in Ch. 7, “Learning, Reading, and Writing Disabilities,” but I imagine that students with learning disabilities, whether children or adults, are potentially very likely to give up, whether they feel that their failures are out of their control, so what’s the point, or that their failures are entirely of their own doing, so they’re never going to succeed anyway. I will look for research on how to accommodate and encourage these learners without discouraging their self-efficacy or senses of autonomy. I worry that the accommodations discussed in this chapter might at times have a patronizing effect on adult learners that they wouldn’t for children.

Ch. 8, “Literacy Development of English Language Learners,” while discussing effects cultural and social backgrounds can have on ELL learners, quickly mentions the possibility of adult ELL students’ anxieties over speaking or writing English in classrooms with native English speakers. This seems like a valid concern, although I would look to researchers like Miller-Cochran (see below) to find ways to lessen that anxiety by making cultural and linguistic exchanges the regular business of the classroom.

Cleary, Michelle Navarre. "Anxiety and the Newly Returned Adult Student." Teaching English in the Two-Year College 39.4 (2012): 364-76. 

Cleary interviewed 25 adult students about their experiences writing in their college classes, focusing on two women, Jessica and Sam. She presents their experiences side by side to show what practices work well and which well-intentioned practices may not work as well to relieve anxiety among these adult learners.

While Sam’s instructor was aware that a standard practice of motivating and making adult learners feel comfortable is to build upon or draw from their prior experiences. However, what Sam’s instructor didn’t understand was that simply relying on the information students learn earlier isn’t enough--the ways the student has learned to learn need to be taken into account as well. As a former ballet dancer, modeling had been the core of her learning strategies, but that mode was met with resistance by her instructor, who saw modeling as leading to “slavish imitation” of examples (368). Cleary makes it clear that it’s vital to understand how adult students have learned their skills and funds of knowledge, not just the skills themselves.

Jessica’s experience was more positive; Cleary connects this experience to the idea of “positive feedback”. In some cases, adults especially, too much or too vague positive feedback comes off as the instructor giving up or not having confidence in the learners. The positive feedback that Jessica received, however, helped her to work through some of her anxiety and feel that she was on the right track, which encouraged her to continue to write and persist in the course. The feedback needed to be encouraging but also timely, specific, and constructive.

Cleary ends the piece with some recommendations for reducing adult student anxiety: these include drawing on students’ experiences and funds of knowledge, allowing students to work together, “demystifying academic writing with explicit instruction”, scaffolding through low-stakes assignments and drafts, and providing the appropriate kinds of feedback (371).

Funds of knowledge, feedback/evaluation, learning styles, instruction, practices

Sullivan, Patrick. ""A Lifelong Aversion to Writing": What if Writing Courses Emphasized Motivation?" Teaching English in the Two-Year College 39.2 (2011): 118-40. 

Sullivan identifies that many students have come away from their experiences writing in school with nothing but anxiety and “aversion”, and sees augmenting students’ intrinsic motivations to write and learn as a good way to solve these issues. After outlining some research on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, he looks at responses given by students about how English classes have made them feel, and the students see repetition as boring and creativity as motivating. Sullivan outlines how aversion to writing is “nurtured” in school systems and unwittingly by instructors, and addresses the possible concern that he is calling for instructors to abandon academic rigor.

Finally, Sullivan describes his three main theories of instilling intrinsic motivation in his students in terms of practical applications. To introduce variety, he asked students to write about a piece of visual art on campus. This also allowed the students to exercise their own choices, as did his “book report” assignment, where students were allowed to pick any book of any genre to write about. Finally, the Bonnie Awards he developed added some fun and excitement to the students’ writing and exchanges of writing, and also disguised the repetitions of the skills Sullivan valued the most.

Fear/Anxiety, motivation, relevance/meaning, practices

Vygotskii, L S, and Michael Cole. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978. Print.

In this edited volume, Vygotsky’s writings on (child) development of learning, play, and writing are presented. One salient idea is the zone of proximal development, “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (86). He then connects that zone to education, writing that “learning which is oriented toward developmental levels that have already been reached is ineffective…the only ‘good learning’ is that which is in advance of development” (89).

Vygotsky indicates that the writing done in school (writing instruction) should be “relevant”, “meaningful”, and “taught naturally” (118), and that “children should be taught written language, not just the writing of letters” (119). While his work was primarily with children, I can see several implications of this in adult education: that detached and unnatural writing assignments will not create the kind of motivation needed for adult learners to persist with the education; that (writing) assignments and activities must be challenging enough to be deemed a valuable use of their time (i.e., something beyond their level of actual development) but not so challenging (beyond their zone of proximal development) that achieving the goal seems impossible; and, based on the definition of the zpd given above, that group work in the adult writing classroom may be more useful than I’ve previously understood.

Zone of proximal development, relevant/meaningful instructional

Cushman, Ellen. The Struggle and the Tools: Oral and Literate Strategies in an Inner City Community. Albany, N.Y: State University of New York Press, 1998.

The critical theory of false consciousness “silences those it most hopes to liberate” (4) by not giving accurate credit to those who are oppressed and by assuming that because they do not, at least according to the public transcript, attempt to overthrow their oppressors, they are unaware of their own oppressions. Cushman asserts that 1) we must look to the hidden transcript to understand that the members of the community are in fact working against and within, struggling against and within, their oppression to improve their lives, and that 2) the material demands of their actual lives may prevent them from dramatically (and publicly) attempting to overthrow their oppressors in the ways that critical theorists may demand.

The three sections of the cycle of language use (the tools) that community members make part of their struggle are “how language strategies were taught and learned… the ways in which community residents deployed their linguistic skills in their daily interactions with institutional representatives... [and] how individuals metacommunicatively assessed and revamped their language strategies after these interactions” (4), and also that “the starting point for this process is…arbitrary” (230). Cushman describes in great detail several instances of members of this community taking part in all three of these stages. We learn about the ways that community members learn the tools (117).

Cushman asks us as teachers, as institutional gatekeepers, to interact with those who may be outside the mainstream in ways that encourage, welcome, and respect them (236-237). She also writes about the struggle of the community members to “strike a balance between institutional language practices and one’s own cultural practices” (130), employing Afriganzia’s experience and struggle as the co-director of the Voice youth project.

Respect, critical theory

Heath, Shirley B. Words at Work and Play: Three Decades in Family and Community Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Print.

Heath continues and expands her descriptions of the families originally from Roadville and Trackton by following the next generations to wherever their lives have taken them, up to the very recent present. Her discussion largely centers on the ways that children and parents interact with each other, but also how children interact with other children and how children interact with adults who are not their parents, adults Heath refers to as “intimate strangers” (location 1138): adults [or older youths] such as, in Mark and Rebecca’s cases, “Etta [in-home caretaker], soccer coaches, choir leaders, Mac’s Farm agronomists and youth leaders, Youth Arts Collaborative studio artists, science camp directors, Scout leaders, and summer camp counselors” (1138). Heath indicates that many conversations between parents and their children are frequently limited to scheduling discussions and dealing with the immediate present, and that children need to be able to discuss the future, contingencies, cause and effect relationships, histories, etc. The relationships and responsibilities children gained through activities fostered these kinds of interactions. The ability to discuss and plan for the future is represented as needed to become socially and economically stable.

One section of this book describes Tony’s experience at college (2217) and how difficult it could be for community members to persist through their higher education in an environment so radically different from their home environment: that “college was a poor match for their habits, values, and world views” (2230). Some of these issues are maybe understandable or expected: literacies and entire ways of thinking different from those required by academic institutions and financial literacies unprepared to deal with the requirements of college. Other issues persisted as well: families who had expectations of their college students that didn’t mesh with the student’s reality in school, and students who weren’t comfortable explaining those issues to professors; professors who don’t realize what issues these students might be having or the extent of those issues, even if they wanted to help the student. When working with learners (adult or otherwise) who may not have come from an environment that valued or experienced higher education, I need to keep issues like these in mind and strive to make a better match between learners’ world views and what they will experience in college.

Persistence, family

Gregory, Eve, and Ann Williams. City Literacies: Learning to Read Across Generations and Cultures. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.

City Literacies combines history, cultural studies, and literacy studies as it looks at the ways that students in one of the poorest areas of London (the Spitalfields in the East End) learned, formally/officially and informally/unofficially, to read and write over the course of the 20th century.

In the introduction, the authors set up the main ideas of the book: 1) that they will attempt to “dispel deep-seated myths concerning the teaching and learning of reading in urban, multicultural areas” (xvi), and 2) their “belief that contrasting rather than similar home and school strategies and practices provide a child with a larger treasure trove from which to draw for school learning…The argument put forth in this book is that difference complements mainstream school literacy rather than opposes it” (10-11, emphasis original). Those myths as the authors see them 1) “equate economic poverty with poor literacy skills”, 2) “equate early reading success with a particular type of parenting”, 3) “associate a mismatch between the language and learning styles used in the home and those demanded by school with difficult and early reading failure”, and 4) that there is only one “‘correct method’ of teaching reading” (xvi-xvii). By interviewing several different generations of students (including Jewish and Bangladeshi-British) who learned to read and write formally in their (English) schools, somewhat less “officially” in their Hebrew, Bengali, or Arabic (religious) classes, and very informally in their homes and outside-school cultural activities (public libraries, Toynbee Hall), the authors show the many and varied ways that these students’ experiences dispel the above myths and indicate that their “contrasting” literacies (although I think that “additional” might be more appropriate? Contrasting feels too oppositional to me somehow) helped, rather than hindered, their literacy learning and literate lives.

The discussion of the different ways that Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Kelly taught their Bangladeshi-British students (chapter 7) resonated in particular with me. One teacher adapted her teaching methods more to the learning styles the students brought with them from the cultural learning environments, where the other taught using methods that contradicted the students’ learning styles and created confusion among the students. See Cleary (2012) article, which showed how Sam’s modeling learning style (learned from her dance background) was devalued in college, leading to her dropping out.

Funds of knowledge, learning styles, extracurriculum, family

Nakamura, Jeanne; Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. In Handbook of positive psychology, by Nakamura, Jeanne, Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly,  89-105. New York, NY, US:Oxford University Press, 2002. 

This piece explains the fundamental ideas behind “flow theory”. Essentially, being in flow means “perceived challenges, or opportunities for action, that stretch (neither overmatching nor underutilizing) existing skills” (90). The “stretch” is an important factor--

the initial flow concept (Fig 7.1) describes flow as simply a “balance” between challenge and skill, but this does not take into account the idea of apathy. Fig 7.2 shows the current model, where flow occurs when challenge and skill are matched and “above the actor’s average levels; when they are below, apathy is experienced” (95). This connects to Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development: it seems that an individual would experience flow somewhere within their zpd.

This piece also discusses in terms of flow theory the concept of the autotelic personality, “a person who tends to enjoy life or ‘generally does things in order to achieve some later external goal’ “ (93), or more generally (I think?) someone who is more likely to achieve flow: those who were “most motivated in high-challenge, high-skill situations” (98). The authors describe the Experience Sampling Method (ESM), which is used to measure and gain information from participants about when they are in a state of flow, how that is achieved, etc.

This piece lays a foundation for learning more about and applying flow theory, and describes the several different areas of research that flow theory can be applied to and furthered.

Flow theory, motivation

Shernoff, David J., et al. "Student Engagement in High School Classrooms from the Perspective of Flow Theory." School Psychology Quarterly 18.2 (2003): 158-76. 

This piece takes Csikszentmihalyi’s flow theory and ESM and applies them to learning more about what high school students find engaging in their schooling and what is likely to make them disengage from the activity. Somewhat unsurprisingly, using the parameters that describe the state of flow, students are the least engaged while being lectured at and taking tests*. Group work and discussions as well as individual work were found to be more engaging to students, as they were seen as student-controlled or at least student-centered compared to lectures/exams. Students also reported being most engaged in less academic subjects, particularly art and vocational courses, and less in academic subjects like English and history. In general, “given the importance of challenge, skill, and relevance of instruction to overall engagement, teachers may be able to enhance engagement by supporting students’ sense of competency and autonomy, such as providing tasks that offer choice, are connected to students’ personal goals, and offer opportunities for success” (without being too easy/achievable, again hearkening to the zpd) (171).

*An important distinction the article makes is that of “positive emotional response” (172): that subjects/activities (namely math/exam taking) can be “associated with students’ concentration, interest, and attention” without also being “associated with significant increases in mood, enjoyment, esteem, and intrinsic motivation” (172). Therefore, while many activities as they now stand perform one or the other of these

functions, “activities that are academically intense and foster positive emotions stand the best chance of engaging students” (173, emphasis mine).

These lessons would need to be taken even more to heart when working with adult students, I would think, particularly those who have returned to school after some time, as these students are likely to be more sensitive about whether they are using their time and other resources wisely.

Flow theory, motivation

Ryan, Richard M., and Edward L. Deci. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions." Contemporary educational psychology 25.1 (2000): 54-67. 

This piece lays the foundation for the definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, but also complicates these definitions. The first distinction Deci and Ryan make is that motivation is not simply a level (or amount) of motivation, but also an issue of orientation (“what type of motivation”) (54), e.g. extrinsic and intrinsic. Therefore, levels of motivation can be equal but orientations are different. They define intrinsic motivation as “doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable” and extrinsic as “doing something because it leads to a separable outcome” (55).

On the whole, intrinsic motivation is seen as the more effective type of motivation, although it can be facilitated or undermined by external forces (58). “Feelings of competence”, “optimal challenges, effectance promoting feedback, and freedom from demeaning evaluations are all predicted to facilitate intrinsic motivation” (58). However, according to Deci and Ryan’s CET (cognitive evaluation theory), vital to this increase in intrinsic motivation is a sense of autonomy (58). Opposite to this is a feeling of being controlled, a lack of autonomy, which can undermine intrinsic motivation.

As most of the activities we perform day to day aren’t intrinsically motivating, research has been done to understand how extrinsic motivation works and can be augmented. Deci and Ryan see “internalization and integration” as a way that extrinsically motivated activities become more intrinsic: “Internalization is the process of taking in a value or regulation, and integration is the process by which individuals more fully transform the regulation into their own so that it will emanate from their sense of self” (60). In Figure 1, the authors show several different types of extrinsic motivation, along a sort of continuum as the motivation moves closer to the internal locus from the external. The authors note that it’s not a one way system, and that motivation does not necessarily stop at each stop along the way to internalized motivation, so to speak. From a complete amotivation on the extreme external end, to external regulation, to introjections, to identification, to integration, and then across into intrinsic motivation.

This research can be used to help teachers facilitate intrinsic or intrinsically-leaning motivation in their students, even when the task itself lacks any kind of intrinsic

motivation. It’s important to realize how vital autonomy and choice are in this process. Positive feedback can be useful but tends to move the locus of efficacy away from the individual, which puts the control in the wrong hands.

Motivation (intrinsic to extrinsic), feedback/evaluation, control/autonomy

Nicholls, John G. "Achievement Motivation: Conceptions of Ability, Subjective Experience, Task Choice, and Performance."Psychological review 91.3 (1984): 328-46.

This piece reviews a number of studies done on the issues listed in the title from the framework of the distinction between task-engaged (“with reference to the individual’s own past performance or knowledge”) and ego-engaged (“capacity relative to that of others”) (328). The differences in the performances of individuals under a (staggering) number of combinations of several factors are discussed. These factors include most prominently if the event is task-engaging or ego-engaging (how likely it is the individual is comparing themselves to others and aware of themselves), the individual’s perception of their own abilities, how much effort they are willing to give to the task, how committed they are to either demonstrating high ability or avoiding the demonstration of low ability, anxiety of the individual, what difficulty level of tasks they choose, etc. These factors all operate in various ways when combined with each other to predict either high or low performance.

Given an understanding of students’ perceptions of their abilities, I would be able to better understand how to motivate and give feedback to individual students, and to understand the reasoning behind what may seem like a lack of effort on their part. What may look like a lack of effort is more likely to be protecting their self-esteem.

Anxiety, motivation, self-efficacy

Ames, Carole. "Classrooms: Goals, Structures, and Student Motivation." Journal of educational psychology 84.3 (1992): 261-71.

Ames continues from Nicholls’ theory of ego-involved (what she calls performance) and task-involved (mastery) and applies it directly to structures and practices in the classroom. She defines mastery as when “one’s sense of efficacy is based on the belief that effort will lead to success or a sense of mastery” (duh) and performance as “a focus on one’s ability…and ability is evidenced by doing better than others, by surpassing normative-based standards, or by achieving success with little effort” (262). Overall, mastery leads to “intrinsic interest in learning activities” and “a preference for challenging work and risk taking” (262). The idea of “belonging” can also be an important effect of a mastery orientation (263). Performance goal orientation leads to superficial, short-term, and extrinsically driven efforts (263).

Classroom tasks and activities that foster mastery goal orientation will likely “involve variety and diversity”, will be perceived by students as being meaningful and relevant to them, will have “specific and short-term goals”, will be challenging and interesting, and will give the student some control (263-264).

In terms of evaluation, it’s vital that social comparison among students be downplayed as much as possible. Additionally, it’s important that the student understand the meaning of the evaluation to be to help them to improve, that the evaluation is based on effort (rather than simply completion of the assignment), and to perceive the evaluation as not controlling (264-265). Finally, it’s important that the students have a sense of autonomy in their efforts.

Ames makes two final points that are additionally interesting: one, that these different factors of the classroom structures and practices are all interdependent, and that changing only one may not have the desired effects; and two, that no matter how the teacher perceives the structures of the classroom, what matters are the perceptions of the students. Ames indicates that attention to the individual previous experiences of the students can help predict how they will react to and perceive the structures of the classroom and intentions of the teacher. (See Cleary [2012], Sam’s previous learning styles.)

Belonging/relatedness, feedback/evaluation, autonomy, motivation, self-efficacy, learning styles

Zimmerman, Barry J. "Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn." Contemporary educational psychology 25.1 (2000): 82-91.

Based on Bandura (1977), self-efficacy is defined as “personal judgments of one’s capabilities to organize and execute courses of action to attain one’s designated goals” (83), or essentially, the faith one has in their own abilities. Self-efficacy can have certain characteristics, including level, generality (transferability), and strength (83). It is also a focused on capability rather than qualities, is specific to different contexts or domains, and “refer[s] to future functioning” (83-84, emphasis original).

Self-efficacy is distinguishable from several related concepts/beliefs, such as self-concept, outcome expectancies, and perceived control. Being self-efficacious has several effects on the learner, some of which are also related to intrinsic motivation and mastery goal orientation: “self-efficacious students undertake difficult and challenging tasks more readily than do inefficacious students” (86), increased effort and persistence, and decreased adverse emotional responses (86-87). Finally, being a self-efficacious learner leads to improved self-regulation of learning and learning strategies as well as improved academic achievement (87).

Lastly, the author touches on ways to foster self-efficacy in students, breaking these ways down into four types of experiences available to the student, in order from most

effective for fostering self-efficacy to least: enactive experiences, “predicated on the outcomes of personal experiences;” vicarious, “an observer’s self-comparison with as well as outcomes attained by a model;” verbal persuasion in which “outcomes are described, not directly witnessed” by the student; and the student’s physiological reactions, “such as fatigue, stress, and other emotions that are often interpreted as indicators of physical incapability” (88). Additionally, helping students set and achieve proximal goals so that achievement and growth can be perceived providing enactive quality feedback that attributes success to effort can increase self-efficacy in students.

Self-efficacy, motivation, feedback

Whisler, Jo S. "The Impact of Teacher Relationships and Interactions on Self-Development and Motivation." Journal of Experimental Education 60.1 (1991): 15-30. 

This piece begins with a detailed introduction to the ideas of “self”-- even though the article on the whole is a little “free to be you and me” (although perhaps that’s expected from the Journal of Experimental Education), overall it has some good, if somewhat obvious, ideas, particularly from the teachers’ self-care perspective: “not taking students’ actions and behaviors personally,” being respectful toward students (reminiscent of Cushman), and not operating from a deficit perspective with respect to what students bring to the classroom. It’s also important, clearly, to understand where the students are coming from in their lives outside the classroom. Almost all of the references to students in this piece refer to children specifically, I think that much of this advice applies just as well, if not better, to adult learners. Many adult learners may be hearing from many different people in their lives they’ve lost their chance, that they’re not smart, that they aren’t doing well enough, or aren’t doing the right thing for their families and their children (see shame and guilt, Fredericksen). If I can be a source of calm, of encouragement, and of support to these adults, even by simply being more aware of myself and them, then I will bring us all closer to achieving our goals.

Guilt/shame, self-care, respect

Fredericksen, Elaine. "Silence and the Nontraditional Writer." Teaching English in the Two-Year College 25.2 (1998): 115-21.

This short piece had a number of excellent points and good practical suggestions but also included a few ideas that I find a little suspect. Fredericksen discusses the idea of silence, which while sometimes referring to “an absence of words”, “may also refer to the perceptions of others who disregard the words [of the student] or judge them meaningless” (115). She recognizes a fear of failure (Navarre Clearly, below), a lack of trust, a fear that their experiences or points of view will be rejected all as potential causes of students’ unwillingness or resistance to speak or be heard, to write or be read. She echoes several

other authors in indicating that allowing students to write drafts, to practice writing without being graded or judged (journal writing), can alleviate some of this anxiety. [She notes that feedback on writing is frequently used to “point out student error and justify low grades”, which is something I realize I was unconsciously trying to avoid while learning to grade these past two semesters.]

Incredibly interesting and useful to me were the points Fredericksen makes about the other demands on an adult learner’s life and time and the importance of positive feedback: “Positive response to their writing, writing which has often been made possible by neglecting other duties convinces students that their efforts are worthwhile” (119). Feelings of “guilt and shame” as well as feelings of isolation can prevent persistence, so positive feedback and the setting and achievement of short-term goals can help students see their growth as writers and the long-term benefits they sought out from schooling in the first place. Her final points are important as well: that all adult learners, while sharing many characteristics, cannot be “viewed as frightened and insecure”: some may be resisting actively or passively to “a system which they oppose”, and that anger and oppression cannot be taboo topics in the adult writing classroom.

[She gets close to asking women or minorities to “speak for” the experiences of all women or minorities, and she also indicates that one way to avoid potential gender-based silencing in the classroom is to group students into single-sex groups, which seems to me to be ignoring the problem rather than addressing it.]

Fear/anxiety, guilt/shame, feedback, practices

Cleary, Michelle Navarre. "What WPA's Need to Know to Prepare New Teachers to Work with Adult Students." WPA Writing Program Administration: Journal of the Council of Writing Program Administrators 32.1 (2008): 113-28. 

Navarre Cleary holds that due to a lack of training on the part of composition instructors to teach adult (25+) learners, WPAs need to be able to prepare those instructors to do so. This may be a more difficult task because of a number of misconceptions about adult learners and writers that some instructors may have (114). Navarre Cleary lays out some issues that adult learners might share, even considering the vast diversity of these students.

She first explores three types of fears and anxieties. “Fear of brain rot” refers to when adult learners see their age or years out of school as a liability, something that will keep them from learning at the same pace as their (younger) classmates. This might lead to students seeming “clingy” and “ask[ing] an excessive number of questions” or being “very quiet”, but being open in the classroom about these fears might help to alleviate them, as “students feel less anxious when they realize that they are not alone in their concerns” (115). The second fear is the “fear of the unknown”, which in these cases might refer to technology use, academic jargon and expectations (citations, formatting). Again, directly

addressing issues can help: “providing rationales” and “explanations”, “providing low-stakes opportunities” for writing, asking students to take part in designing assessment criteria, “providing formative feedback”, and allowing for student choice (“such as being able to choose the papers that will be included in a final portfolio”) could all help students feel more knowledgeable, prepared, and in control of their learning. [Gaining trust and respect from students who might be several years {decades} older than you is briefly addressed, something I occasionally worry about.] Finally addressed is the fear of failure, something I grapple with as well. Many returning students are doing so despite having been met with failure in previous academic situations, so this fear seems very logical. Giving positive but useful feedback and increasing students’ awareness of the writing process (revisions--understanding that it’s a positive part of writing to “get it wrong” the first few times) can help alleviate these fears.

Motivation: Along with positive feedback when something is done well, adults need accurate and constructive criticism about their writing in order to feel they are improving, and therefore that they are using their (precious free) time well. Instructors should also try to understand the adult learner’s unique needs and not “interpret adult students’ concern with how their learning can transfer to the workplace as a reductive focus on the monetary rather than the more abstract benefits of higher education…Teachers who embrace the practical motivations driving adult students can work with, rather than against, these motivations” (121). Along those lines, it’s vital that instructors take into account the unique time constraints of the students’ circumstances. Understanding that if the choice is between taking your child to the hospital or writing a paper, everyone would choose the former, and that “flexibility does not mean letting students off the hook” (122).

Finally, instructors must remember that for better or worse, they cannot expect adult students to ignore the experiences they have accumulated throughout their lives, and that that experience can be sometimes damaging (leading to anxieties) or beneficial to their writing. However, it’s important then that these experiences aren’t exploited or taken advantage of (“cultural suicide” 125).

Fear/anxiety, practices

Gillam, Alice M. "Returning Students' Ways of Writing: Implications for First-Year College Composition." Journal of Teaching Writing 10.1 (1991): 1-20. 

Gillam describes a number of characteristics of returning adult learners in the composition classroom, noting that “returning students’ writing background can and should be the matrix out of which their abilities develop” (15). She takes a detailed look at how those prior writing and life experiences, either in the workplace or in students’ personal lives, may affect the writing skills, learning skills, and anxieties students bring with them into the composition classroom. Gillam frames her discussion from a gender perspective, indicating that the different experiences had by men and women outside of the

classroom leads to their differing experiences and skills inside. I think this framework puts too much emphasis on prescribed gender roles, but her overall points I found to be very useful.

Gillam asks that as composition instructors we be as mindful as possible as to the writing experiences students bring into the classroom, considering their previous formal instruction as well as workplace and personal writing; being conscious of these will help instructors understand why the writers might write the way they do: writers who are used to writing business reports and memos might have trouble indicating their opinions in writing and achieving recommended page/word counts, while writers used to writing personal notes or letters might be likely to overshoot length, lack focus in their writing, and misunderstand audience requirements. Many of the writers also have trouble with authorial voice or intent and integrating their own opinions with those of other writers or experts.

In order for instructors to gain understanding of their students and to lessen the anxiety these writing students might have, Gillam suggests asking students to create an “experience portfolio including a prose vitae describing significant life experiences, a writing history and writer’s profile, and writing samples” (12). These pieces can serve a number of purposes, including helping students to step back and see their writing process, to see that other students likely have some of the same anxieties that they do, and particularly to help instructors understand where the writers are coming from in a way that can improve instruction.

Funds of knowledge, experience portfolio, workplace writing

Brunk-Chavez, Beth, and Elaine Fredericksen. "Predicting Success: Increasing Retention and Pass Rates in College Composition."WPA Writing Program Administration: Journal of the Council of Writing Program Administrators 32.1 (2008): 76-96.

Brunk-Chavez and Fredericksen begin their piece with their concern over the number of students who drop out of or fail to pass with the required grade their university’s first semester composition course. Rather than try to change the placement methods that determine whether students are prepared to take composition courses at this level (rather than the developmental level), primarily because that’s a non-negotiable administration issue, the authors look for ways to identify students who have been placed in first-year composition but are the most likely to drop out or under-pass and therefore could benefit from additional intervention.

The authors determine that the Accuplacer (computer graded) and their own diagnostic essays (human graded) both serve as good indicators of whether the student will pass first-year composition. Even though they have some issues with the basic idea of placement essays, such as their performative rather than rhetorical nature and that

students’ lack of motivation for the task might adversely affect their placement, they understand the practical needs and the necessity of this style of placement.

What they do decide upon, however, is to offer ways to increase the likelihood that those students identified as needing help will persist and pass. By encouraging* these students to attend not just the standard composition course but also an additional 1-hour lab course in composition, the students will benefit from several different aspects of the course including additional instruction from a composition instructor as well as an added social/academic aspect to their college careers. Research indicates that “students who are actively engaged in both the academic and social life of the educational institution achieve greater success” (91), and these lab sections could create “communities of learning” among students.

*Earlier in the piece, the authors recognize that the circumstances of commuting, adult, or working students might make it difficult to be involved in the campus outside of class, but at the end are calling for required attendance. This contradiction is characteristic of the many ways that “real life” and academia seem to be at-odds with each other.

Learning communities, placement, life vs school?, nature of schools

Ryan, Richard M., and Cynthia L. Powelson. "Autonomy and Relatedness as Fundamental to Motivation and Education." Journal of Experimental Education 60.1 (1991): 49-66. 

Ryan and Powelson being their piece by describing what many of us know but perhaps have never articulated: that school, by its “arbitrary nature”, is bound to be more extrinsically motivating to students than we’d like it to be. To combat this, the authors look to “creat[e] an optimal classroom climate [that] serves both learning and developmental goals” (49). Building again on the concepts of internalization and integration (51), intrinsic and extrinsic, mastery versus social comparison (social matrix) (52), this is the first article I’ve read that directly deals with the “organismic theory”, which Ryan and Powelson see as the need not just for autonomy and competence but also that of “relatedness”, which “reflects our strivings for contact, support, and community…[and] to the experience of connecting with others in ways that conduce toward well-being and self-cohesion in all individuals involved” (53).

After establishing the terms of what constitutes autonomy-supportive, competence, and relatedness, the authors describe a great deal of research supporting how these conditions play out in the classroom as well as the home, which is how this article goes somewhere different than I’ve read before. Research indicates that the same principles of “good teaching” (autonomy and competence supporting and relatedness) are also qualities of “good parenting”, and that students/children will respond similarly with curiosity and self-regulation. They also carefully make the point that these relationships are “bidirectional”, that a student in a controlling environment might act out, causing the

teacher to become more controlling, which exacerbates the student’s behavior, ad infinitum.

The authors realize that many teachers are under controlling pressure themselves from the public, administration, government, etc., to produce students who can do well on standardized tests. However, they hold that focusing on these “bottom line” measures cannot produce the kinds of learners and citizens that were produced from the pre-schooling era of social contact.

Self-efficacy, autonomy, nature of schools

Zajacova, Anna, Scott M. Lynch, and Thomas J. Espenshade. "Self-Efficacy, Stress, and Academic Success in College." Research in Higher Education 46.6 (2005): 677-706. 

The authors of this study look to determine the relationships between and effects of self-efficacy and stress on academic success. Their definition of academic success is measured by GPA, number of credits completed, and persistence into a third semester of study. They also define self-efficacy and stress for their purposes (678-680) and explore the relationships between them. Low or high levels of self-efficacy can help students see “each external demand…as a ‘threat’ or a ‘challenge’”, (respectively, low=threat, high=challenge), causing a low amount of stress. Additionally, “stress and anxiety may depress self-efficacy judgments of students” (680).

Through a study asking non-traditional students to rate their levels of self-efficacy and stress levels concerning the same set of 27 academic situations (previous studies didn’t use identical tasks), the authors come to several conclusions. [Side note: I totally don’t understand statistics.] High levels of self-efficacy were able to predict higher GPAs, but “self-efficacy does not have a significant effect on students’ persistence in the second year. This result suggests that students may drop out for reasons unrelated to their” self-efficacy (696). Stress levels had an “insignificant” negative effect on GPA but also a small positive impact on persistence, which they did not expect and attribute to their study not taking into account the threat-or-challenge distinction. Overall their findings indicate that self-efficacy can predict not only higher academic performance but can mediate stress and predict persistence.

Self-efficacy, stress, persistence

Gere, Anne Ruggles. "Kitchen Tables and Rented Rooms: The Extracurriculum of Composition." College Composition and Communication 45.1 (1994): 75-92. 

Through examining two adult writing groups in different parts of the country, Gere hopes to understand the kinds of writing and developments of writers in these groups in order to “listen to the signals that come through the walls of our classrooms from the world outside” (76). Through including the perspectives and feelings of several participants of

these groups, Gere shows how “despite their inexperience, workshop participants gain confidence and begin to think of themselves as writers” (76). She highlights the importance of audience reception and performance to this development. She also writes that the ways that “writing can effect changes in their lives” (77) helps the writers to value themselves as writers and to see their writing as useful and important.

Gere then gives some historical context to the idea of the “extracurriculum” but then gives her own definition: “it extends beyond the academy to encompass the multiple contexts in which persons seek to improve their own writing; it includes more diversity in gender, race, and class among writers; and it avoids, as much as possible, a reenactment of professionalization in its narrative” (80). Citing as influential to her studies others including Heath and Hull, Gere follows narratives of how non-traditional pedagogy and writing operates in the extracurriculum, in writers encouraging, critiquing, and listening to each other’s writing in the interest of improving not only their writing but their lives. She looks to a variety of social writing groups and forums throughout history and through that back to the school/out-of-school variations, and also looks at the possible dangers of an over-emphasis on professionalism in the field.

I feel these ideas could be useful in the adult composition classroom in encouraging adult learners to work with each other, even outside of the classroom space. A lot of the research I’ve been reading indicates that adult learners tend to be isolated from each other due to their outside circumstances (time/work/family constraints). Drawing on both Brunk-Chavez/Frederickson’s “learning communities” and Ryan/Powelson’s “relatedness”, encouraging adults to spend some time with each other in a low-stress, non-academic environment (coffee house, cafeteria?) discussing and sharing their writing could lower anxiety, create community, and improve audience awareness.

Relatedness, learning communities

Prat-Sala, Merce, and Paul Redford. "Writing Essays: Does Self-Efficacy Matter? the Relationship between Self-Efficacy in Reading and in Writing and Undergraduate Students' Performance in Essay Writing." Educational Psychology 32.1 (2012): 9-20.

Prat-Sala and Redford look to explore Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy by applying it to the essay writing of undergraduate students. First, they make two interesting points about self-efficacy: first, that “people with the same level of skills might perform differently in a given task depending on their belief of efficacy in that task” (9), which helps us to understand the actual import of a person’s self-efficacy; and second, that “self-efficacy beliefs affect people’s cognitions, motivations, affective processes and ultimately their behavior, which can in turn influence future efficacy beliefs (known an reciprocal determinism)” (10), which can help us see how vital each learning moment can be for students, as one experience that either supports or undermines their idea of their own self-efficacy could have a lasting effect. They also note the “relevance of feedback on self-efficacy beliefs” (11).

In conducting their research, the authors borrow a distinction from Shell (1989) between writing tasks (“the communicative aspects of writing”) and writing skills (“the structural aspects of writing”), a distinction that somewhat resembles what we might call “higher order” and “lower order” issues (11). The results of their study “show that both self-efficacies (reading and writing) were significantly related to actual writing performance” (16). The authors note that “relationships between self-efficacy and writing were slightly strong in year 2 [students] than year 1 [students]” (17), because the second-year students have had more practice at Bandura’s (1999, see above) concept of self-reactiveness, self-monitoring, and evaluation. This seems to also speak to the importance of retention and persistence in learners who may have returned to an educational environment, that their performance and self-efficacy might improve just by continuing to give yourself chances to learn. As the authors state, “Given that reading and writing are core tasks in many undergraduate degrees, increasing students’ self-efficacy in these two aspects might have the additive effect of increasing their motivation and perseverance in writing tasks”, and I would venture to extend, educational goals (18).

Self-efficacy, persistence, feedback

Prat-Sala, Merce, and Paul Redford. "The Interplay between Motivation, Self-Efficacy, and Approaches to Studying." British Journal of Educational Psychology 80.2 (2010): 283-305.

Prat-Sala and Redford bring together theories of motivation and self-efficacy to understand various approaches students have to studying and learning. They begin by explaining both self-efficacy (Bandura) and the continuum approach to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan). They then define several established types of studying and learning: deep level, “students intending to extract the meaning from the text…[and] aim[ing] to establish a link between their existing knowledge…and the new information”; surface-level, “students intending to extract superficial details from the text or to reproduce it”; and strategic, “students intending to maximize their efforts to obtain the best outcome” (287, all emphasis original). The authors note some relationship between assessment types, indicating that more open-ended assessment types foster more deep level learning and processing (288-289).

Several results were obtained concerning studying styles, motivation, and self-efficacy, including “the strategic approach is associated with interest in the subject but also significantly with extrinsic and competitive motivation” (292), “the surface approach correlated negatively with both self-efficacy in reading and self-efficacy in writing” (295), and “students with lower levels of self-efficacy in reading and writing tend to change their study strategies as [their time at] university progresses, adopting worse study strategies over time. Conversely, students with high self-efficacy continue to adopt successful study strategies” (296).

In general, these results can help instructors understand the cognitive reasons why learners adopt the learning strategies that they do and to get an idea of how best to foster deep-level processing.

Self-efficacy, motivation, studying

Bandura, Albert. "Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective." Asian Journal of Social Psychology 2.1 (1999): 21-41.

Bandura begins by defining agent: “To be an agent is to intentionally make things happen by one’s actions” (2) and that humans are “agents of experiences rather than simply undergoers of experiences” (4). The core features that characterize human agency are intentionality, forethought, self-reactiveness, and self-reflectiveness.

Agentic humans are trying to make something happen or change, showing intentionality. “An intention is a representation of a future course of action to be performed. It is not simply an expectation or prediction of future actions but a proactive commitment to bringing them about” (6). Understanding and imagining the future are acts of forethought: “Through the exercise of forethought, people motivate themselves and guide their actions in anticipation of future events…a forethought perspective provides direction, coherence, and meaning to one’s life. As people progress in their life course they continue to plan ahead, reorder their priorities” (7).

In order for these plans to be carried out, the agent must then be able to “give shape to appropriate courses of action and to motivate and regulate their execution”, the acts of self-reactiveness (8). These acts include “self-monitoring, performance self-guidance via personal standards, and corrective self-reactions” (8). Last in this process of agency is self-reflectiveness: “Among the mechanisms of personal agency, none is more central or pervasive than people’s beliefs in their capability to exercise some measure of control over their own functioning and over environmental events…Efficacy beliefs are the foundation of human agency. Unless people believe they can produce desired results and forestall detrimental ones by their actions, they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of difficulties” (10).

Bandura’s theories of self-efficacy are the foundation on which theories and research on the importance of self-efficacy in students are based. This piece helps us understand not only the psychological basis for self-efficacy but how self-efficacy relates to other vital characteristics of human agency.

Self-efficacy