Perspectives on Adult Education: Reflections on the 2010 <i>Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As one of the co-editors of the Handbook of adult and continuing education, 2010 edition, I have been asked to write a brief column on trends in research. I find this a daunting, and for me, impossible task. First of all, I was one of three co-editors and I do not feel comfortable speaking for the others. Second of all, I do not feel that I have a firm handle on all of the differing aspects of adult education research. Certainly, some of the more tantalizing aspects of research in the field deal with the varying aspects of informal and nonformal learning, especially the kinds of learning gained through popular culture, museums, and trolling the internet. Some of the work on transformative learning is also part of a strong trend within adult education research. In addition, the study of the perceptions of students and teachers in more formal settings can add enormously to our understanding of the teaching/learning dynamics. Yet, while I find these trajectories interesting, I also feel that the field itself has lost its focus. I am not sure where all of this will end. The meaning of adult education has traditionally been a contentious area. For this reason alone, the future of it is always in doubt. In the first place, the very definition of adult education is fraught with problems. Is all learning educative? How do we categorize the multitude of nonformal and informal learning endeavors that can lead to profound, even transformative change? Academics have a need to delineate the field in a way that practitioners do not. After all, the work will go on regardless of the name. From the vantage point of the most recent handbook, it is fair to ask, what we can tell about the future of the field, rather than simply the future of its components. Although it would be nice if the Handbook could serve as a blueprint for the future, I see it more as a snapshot of the present or more specifically an aspect of the present. Thus, the Handbook examines the state of research, illuminates key issues, and points out controversies. From the perspective of the Handbook, we came to think of adult education as an intellectual commons, where various concepts and theories could be engaged, explored, and examined. Adult education, unlike schooling, is not bound by a building or organization. Therefore, it is always questionable about whether it is a field, a profession, or a discipline. This has been an ongoing debate in the field, and I do not intend to engage in it here. However, at heart, this is the key question I believe. If we do not understand what kind of entity we are discussing, it is very difficult to really consider its parameters, philosophy, or even purpose. There is some discussion of policy, or the failure thereof, but really the central question is the future of organized adult education or adult education as an entity. Certainly, the enterprise of adult learning will continue to take place in a variety of settings. Adult education transcends disciplines. That was perhaps the most daunting aspect of the Handbook. It is very difficult to step outside of our own academic silos and figure out the big picture. If we think about the future of adult education, we can divide up the question into approximately three areas: the future of practice; the future of academic research; the future of the field. I will deal with each of these, although my focus is primarily on the last. First of all, in terms of practice, there is no question that the practice of adult education is strong and vibrant. One could argue that in fact most of higher education has become focused on what used to be considered the non-traditional student. Additionally, the added interest in the education of veterans has led to a rethinking of the services offered to veterans, the problems they face (and have faced) and the ways that their needs can be accommodated. While higher education has expanded its practice of adult education, basic education has been contracting. …
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".