Philosophies of Adult Education Movements in 20th Century Canada: Implications for Current Literacy Educators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the philosophical roots of today's adult literacy movement in Canada, as reflected in the Women's Institutes, Frontier College, and the Antigonish Movement of the early 20th century. It compares these movements' expressions of three philosophical approaches to adult education: (a) the liberal focus on pre-determined skills instruction, a deficit model perspective, and learners' needing to learn how to learn; (b) the progressive focus on learners' life role experiences, personal/social development, and needs-motivated learning; and (c) the humanistic focus on self-directed learning and independence, meaningful learning, and learners' self-image/self-esteem. Each movement's adult educators were ethically committed to manifesting these philosophical elements in their programming practices. The philosophical beliefs they conveyed have implications for current adult literacy educators. Résumé Cet article examine les origines philosophiques du mouvement de l'alphabétisation des adultes au Canada, tel que vécu par l'Institut des Femmes de Frontier College ainsi que par le mouvement Antigonish du 20ieme siècle. Il met en comparaison les visions de ces organisations selon trois approches philosophiques de l'évaluation des adultes : (a) la vision libérale de l'enseignement d'habiletés prédéterminées, soit un modèle donnant peu de résultats et dans le cadre duquel les apprenants doivent apprendre à apprendre; (b) la vision progressiste sur les expériences de vie des apprenants, sur leur développement personnel et social ainsi que sur leur motivation instrumental; (c) la vision humaniste sur l'auto-apprentissage et l'autonomie, sur l'apprentissage essentiel ainsi que sur le reflet des apprenants et l'estime qu'ils ont d'eux-mêmes. Les enseignants de chacun de ces mouvements en éducation des adultes furent invités à exprimer ces éléments philosophiques dans la programmation de leurs pratiques d'enseignement. Les croyances philosophiques que ces organisations ont transmises engendrent des répercussions pour leurs enseignants aux adultes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".