From Pedagogy to
Heutagogy
A Teaching and Learning
Continuum
Dave Laton
Joe Reynolds
Ted Davis
Dave Stringer
Forward
In the 1970s, when Malcolm Knowles first introduced his ideas about adult
education, many regarded andragogy as a breakthrough in explaining the adult learner.
Since those early years, more than 200 subsequent works by various authors have
sought to clarify, substantiate, and amplify Knowles’ andragogical assumptions
(Henschke & Cooper, 2006). Among the literature, one also finds additional gogical
variants either aiding or, perhaps, confusing those involved in adult teaching and
learning. This paper introduces a Teaching-Learning Continuum to explain these
variants. It presents four teaching/learning stages (pedagogy, mesagogy, andragogy, and
heutagogy) through which students navigate as they mature in their learning abilities,
and it addresses the roles that teachers assume in this journey. This continuum is
highly contextual; that is, both external or environmental factors as well as intrinsic
influences impact the continuum’s implementation.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-2-
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 - Recognizing – Yet Avoiding – Gogymania
4
Chapter 2 - The Teaching-Learning Continuum
8
Chapter 3 - Applying the Continuum
15
Chapter 4 - Philosophical Underpinnings
17
Chapter 5 - Mesagogy
20
Chapter 6 - Utility: How the Continuum Assist Educators
22
Chapter 7 – Conclusion
30
References
32
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-3-
Chapter 1
Recognizing – Yet Avoiding – Gogymania
It could be said that when Knowles first articulated the concept of andragogy,
he opened the proverbial can of worms. In the debate that followed, his ideas about
adult learning and distinct teaching methodology for adult educators inspired rebuke
from some (Elias, 1979; Houle, 1972; London, 1973), plaudits from others (Carlson
1979; McKenzie, 1977), and—for better or for worse—theoretical conjecture from
just about everyone in the field. As the debate over Knowles’ concepts for
andragogy was only just beginning, many apparently thought the more significant
lesson was his relegation of pedagogy to a situational teaching method. The resulting
void on the landscape of educational theory then became a playing field for other
suggested concepts, sometimes in harmony with andragogy and sometimes not.
Armed with pieces and parts of Knowles’ arguments, and certainly his semantic
license, a number of authors attempted to introduce additional ‘gogies’ into the
dialogue. In the decades since, the field has been presented with gerogogy (Lebel,
1978) and eldergogy (Yeo, 1982) for older adults, synergogy (Mouton & Blake, 1984) for
small groups, ergonagy (Tanaka & Evers, 1999) for workplace training, heutagogy (Hase
& Kenyon, 2000) for those who have graduated from an andragogical environment,
ubuntugogy (Bangura, 2005) for education in Africa, and humanagogy (Knudson, 1979)
and anthrogogy (Trott, 1991), which are meant to cover the full spectrum of learners.
Surely there are others of which this paper’s authors are unaware.
Expectedly, there was a significant backlash to what Courtenay and Stevenson
(1983) disparagingly referred to as gogymania. Rachal (1983) warned against an
unneeded “educational taxonomy” of gogies (Davenport & Davenport, 1985, p.
156). Plecas and Sork (1986) devoted a good part of their discussion to an
endorsement of the gogymania critique, accusing the adult education discipline of
“building outward but not upward” (p. 55) and employing terminology on a “user
preference basis” (p. 57). Davenport (1987) notably characterized the gogy line of
discussion as a “morass.” Ferro (1997) gave perhaps the most impassioned plea
against the linguistic adventure set in motion by Knowles, blaming “the seductive
temptation to coin and use ‘cute’ or ‘catchy’ terms” (p. 41).
It is within this rather daunting context that the following paragraphs will
attempt to move the gogy discussion forward, not backward. The paper will argue
the utility of such a theoretical and, yes, linguistic exercise, and will endorse certain
perspectives—old and new—that will further identify and refine what aspects of it
can be useful to practitioners. Indeed, this paper is primarily concerned with what is
immediately applicable in the field of adult education, and will be wholly informed
by challenges faced by the Alabama Department of Postsecondary Education.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-4-
Background: The Alabama Department of Postsecondary Education
The idea of a Teaching-Learning Continuum sprang from several years of
experience within the Alabama Department of Postsecondary Education (DPE). A
part of the Alabama Community College System, DPE has a subordinate unit
known as the Curriculum and Instruction Unit (CIU). The CIU develops
standardized curricula within the state’s various career and technical education
programs by working closely with faculty from around the state and with other
subject matter experts. This work facilitates state-wide articulation between
Alabama’s secondary institutions and the two-year colleges.
As part of the CIU’s activities, faculty development is fostered under the
Instructor Skills Enhancement Training (ISET) program. ISET equips faculty with
basic instructional methodologies, lesson planning and presentation skills, and
information related to how adult students learn. ISET emphasizes methods to create
an environment in which adult learners are motivated to develop new skills in
various career and technical disciplines. Additionally, college administrators may
request other specific content to meet faculty needs.
One of the CIU’s goals is to stimulate postsecondary students to transition from
pedagogical to andragogical learning. During recent faculty development sessions,
members of the CIU were specifically asked about motivating students toward this
transition. This spurred discussion among the CIU team about how this change
occurs and how to better foster it during instruction. This then led to research that
culminated in the development of the Teaching-Learning Continuum. The intent of
the continuum is to illustrate the progressive maturation of learners as they improve,
enjoy, and benefit from the teaching-learning transaction; further, it illustrates the
changing role of the teacher during that process.
The Need for a Teaching-Learning Continuum
The idea of a continuum of theoretical perspectives in adult learning, one
that could inform practice, is an established one. Knowles (1980) presented the
discipline with a continuum that articulated a relationship between pedagogy and
andragogy and acknowledged the situational utility of each method. These gogies sat
at opposite ends and forced theorists and practitioners to consider the balanced
approach required at various points in between. This paper does not seek to
critique, redefine, truncate, or otherwise compromise the integrity of what pedagogy
has come to be viewed as or the andragogy Knowles has advocated. On the
contrary, we believe the methodologies presented by pedagogy and andragogy to be
critical for sound practice. What we will argue is that the continuum could, and
indeed should, be expanded and clarified. This could be accomplished in such a way
as to preserve the vision of Knowles’ continuum while at the same time offering
additional guidance for educators.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-5-
The Current Continuum: Two Questions
Knowles’ continuum, although representing a major step forward, begs two
questions. First, what happens when andragogy succeeds? Andragogy’s aim is to see
a learner become fully self-directed, but the continuum does not incorporate any
such end state. If adult educators are going to embrace the idea that learners are to
be empowered through andragogical methods, then they would be aided in
understanding this terminal learning relationship, in which the learner successfully
commandeers the educational contract. This stage would see the teacher relegated to
the role of a passive resource, a person useful only to the extent that he or she can
further the learner’s objectives. This can be a delicate topic for educators for
obvious reasons. We are professionals who feel an obligation to steer students in
their activities, and certainly in most scenarios that responsibility does exist.
However, any continuum of adult education must contain a stage in which the
learner’s agenda, leadership, and level of responsibility exceed that of the teacher.
Such a concept is supported by the writing of Hase and Kenyon (2000), who
offered the term heutagogy to describe the realization of andragogical goals.
Heutagogy describes a point at which the student becomes the primary agent in the
student-teacher relationship. Fittingly then, the model presented in this paper will
expand the continuum to include this stage as a necessary follow on to andragogy.
The next question an educator might ponder when considering Knowles’
continuum is how he or she is to conceptualize the vast array of possibilities that lie
between pedagogy and andragogy. The realization by Knowles et al. (2005) that a
complementary relationship did exist was a momentous revelation. As the teachinglearning situation evolved, instruction from the educator would begin to share space
with the volition of the student. This evolution remains a crucial concept, but the
often-laborious process of pursuing it remains undefined. Educators would be
helped immensely if the continuum offered them just such a transitional stage.
In the field, the process of bringing learners into an andragogical stage of
learning is a difficult one. It could be said that the task of moving the teacher-learner
relationship along the continuum toward andragogy is a skill in and of itself. We
would suggest that it therefore constitutes another new stage along the continuum,
occupying a space between pedagogy and andragogy. This stage would validate the
journey which many teachers and learners have experienced and, more importantly,
can inform those who have yet to face it. This stage is presented here as mesagogy, a
uniquely “transitional” stage that would embody the struggle both teachers and
learners experience in moving beyond pedagogical assumptions and techniques. As
stated earlier in this paper, the authors are sensitive to the introduction of yet
another “gogy,” as many others will undoubtedly be; yet, for the time being it
effectively communicates the concept. The gogy convention is at this point familiar
within the discipline, and therefore must be accepted as one method of
communicating new ideas.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-6-
Linking the Gogies
By expanding on Knowles’ position in this manner, a unified framework
emerges that illustrates learner maturity in gogical terms. Such a framework is useful
in so far as it can familiarize practitioners with a single developmental learning
model applicable to a vast array of teaching situations. It subsumes a number of
other, more disparate, propositions regarding teaching and learning and should,
therefore, prove more practical in the field. Its impact could be far reaching since, as
Knox (1977) pointed out, “[p]ractitioners can use generalizations about adult
development and learning in many ways. Included are facilitation of client selfdirectedness, linking of client needs to relevant resources, and articulation of
services with those from other specialists” (p. 28).
As with the work of Knowles, the Teaching-Learning Continuum could come
to be described as a learning theory, an assumption, an explanation, or, as Knowles
described andragogy, “a conceptual framework that serves as a basis for an
emergent theory” (1989, p. 112). In assuming any one of these roles, this continuum
could assist in the:
search for a body of ideas, theories, and experience which will guide practical
workers in many fields of adult learning. It is probably no longer necessary
to justify the importance of theory. Theory is usually the result of the
distillation of practice. Nothing is so practical as good theory. Put in the
words of the old saw – theory without practice is empty, and practice
without theory is blind (Kidd, 1973, p. 25)
The Continuum provides gogical alignment to maximize the consistency, efficiency,
and effectiveness of the teaching and learning transaction – a sought benefit as
described by Wlodowski (1999, p. 87).
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-7-
Chapter 2
The Teaching-Learning Continuum
The continuum (Figure 1) indicates that learners progress through four
gogical stages as they mature. This maturity can inhabit any or all domains of
learning, whether cognitive, affective, or psychomotor. The figure also portrays the
teacher’s various roles. Teachers should respond appropriately to the learner’s stage
of development, thereby facilitating the student’s move from dependence to
independence, from passive to active learning. The rate of movement and
development through stages of the continuum vary from learner to learner and from
situation to situation. Again, the continuum is contextually contingent. The learner’s
development is indicated on the continuum by a diagonal line intersecting the model
from left to right. This line traces upward towards the right hand side of the model,
which represents the continuum’s terminus. Of note, the areas underneath the
line—representative of the student’s role—become increasingly larger as the line
progresses across the model. Conversely, as a learner’s degree of maturity and
responsibility increases, the active role of the teacher decreases.
This model also introduces a stage of development between pedagogy and
andragogy, which the authors have termed mesagogy. Meso in Greek refers to middle
or intermediate; therefore, mesagogical learners are beyond pedagogical learning—
being largely dependent upon the teacher—and are focused on becoming
andragogical, motivated largely by their own needs and desires to learn. A more indepth discussion of mesagogy, and the other gogical stages, is provided later. The
Teaching-Learning Continuum depicts the cognitive, affective, and (or)
psychomotor maturation of learners, regardless of age, and the role teachers assume
in that process.
The Continuum reflects the work of Grow (1991) in terms of learner
growth and the teacher’s concomitant role. As our research team reviewed the
literature, we initially had not encountered Grow’s Staged Self-Directed Learning
(SSDL) Model, yet it was refreshing to discover similar thinking. Although Grow
did not directly associate the gogical stages with the SSDL, it is important to include
his ideas in explaining the Continuum.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-8-
Figure 1 - The Teaching-Learning Continuum
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
-9-
Student Progression
The Teaching-Learning Continuum offers four terms to define the student’s
maturation process. These four terms are tied directly to four stages of gogical
development and are intended to help describe the learner during that stage of
cognition. A summary of these four terms can be found at Table 1.
Receiving describes a student (one possibly accustomed to pedagogical methods)
whose role is to acquire basic facts and concepts presented by the instructor.
Termed by Grow (1991) as Dependent Learners, these students learn through such
methods as rote memorization, reading assignments, and attending lectures. They
are dependent upon the teacher at this point and, as the term “receiving” indicates,
are generally passive learners. Typically, their development is limited. They have
little self-confidence in their ability to apply the information, may not be motivated
to learn, might be dissatisfied or frustrated with the current situation, or may feel
varying levels of discomfort, anxiety, or fear.
The term used to describe the next group of students along the TeachingLearning Continuum is accepting, as depicted within the model’s mesagogical stage.
Here, the student exhibits emerging self-confidence and motivation and
comprehends the relationship of facts and concepts taught. Grow (1991) referred to
these learners as Interested Learners. Therefore, although still dependent upon the
instructor, these learners show some interest in learning and application. They now
accept the teacher’s instruction and advice as applicable to them.
The third term, internalizing, coincides with the andragogical stage because the
student has taken personal control of learning. Although still dependent upon the
instructor for some information, this learner prefers to interact with the teacher and
take direct responsibility for “how learning will be conducted, what learning will
occur, and why learning is important” (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005, p. 184).
Students here seek to apply learning, integrating new concepts and values into their
mental schema. Grow (1991) described these as Involved Learners. Students will be
confident, committed, and motivated to learn because they now recognize the
validity of the information and how it applies to their particular situation.
Synthesizing relates to the heutagogical stage and is characterized by a student’s
expectation of success. Described by Grow (1991) as a Self-directed Learner, the
student has developed to the point of accountability for his or her decisions and
actions, as well as the creation of new and unique applications of learned concepts.
Full responsibility for determining sources, flow, content, and outcomes of the
learning experience is assumed by the learner. The student-instructor relationship (if
an instructor is needed) is now one of interdependence, where challenges are met
through mutual inquiry.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 10 -
Table 1 - Learner Characteristics and Teacher’s Roles
Learning Stage
Pedagogy
Learner Characteristics
Teacher Role
Receiving – Is looking for a solution;
dissatisfied or frustrated with the current
situation. May feel varying levels of discomfort,
anxiety, or fear. Low self-confidence; depends
on others for knowledge.
Close support Provides physical or
psychological support by
giving advice, directives,
and external control.
Is able to identify basic facts and terms about
the subject. Is able to name parts, tools, and
simple facts about a competency.
Is willing to pay attention or participate in the
learning process.
Accepting - Willingness to try or comply.
Unconvinced of validity of solution but willing
to comply (acquiescence). Emerging selfconfidence. Dependent on external control.
Mesagogy
Is able to recognize the relationship of facts and
state general principles about the subject. Is
able to determine step-by-step processes.
Moderate Support Allows opportunities for
performance and
recognizes effort.
Provides guidance,
encouragement, and
feedback.
Exhibits new behaviors as a result of new
knowledge and experience.
Internalizing - Recognizes the validity of the
solution. Self-confidence grows. Begins to
internalize the information and take ownership
of it. Moves toward independence.
Andragogy
Consulting - Allows
self-directed learning. Is
available as needed for
guidance and feedback.
Is able to analyze facts and principles and
draw conclusions about the subject. Can identify
why and when a competency must be done and
why each step is needed.
Shows definite involvement or commitment.
Integrates new values into one’s general set of
values, giving it ranking among general priorities.
Synthesizing – Creatively applies knowledge
and skills. Has an expectation of success.
Accountable for decisions and actions. Realizes
Independence.
Heutagogy
Evaluates information and makes decisions to
its value or worth. Predicts, isolates, and
resolves problems about the competency.
Fully integrates new values. Behaves
consistently with new values.
Synergy – Collaborates
in the learning and
exploration process.
Blends abilities to
capitalize on strengths
and to compensate for
weaknesses. Encourages
higher levels of
exploration and learning.
Serves to validate
learning.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 11 -
Teacher’s Roles
Although these four terms (receiving, accepting, internalizing, and synthesizing) are
accurate in describing student characteristics in each gogical stage, they are not
descriptive of teachers. Wlodkowski (1999) defined learning as the human act of
making meaning from experience and added that teachers must be aware of how
learners make sense of their world and how they interpret their learning
environment. Further, according to Grow (1991), an instructor must distinguish the
stage of cognition that each pupil has attained and adjust instruction to meet the
student’s needs; otherwise, a mismatch occurs which impedes the learning-teaching
transaction. Both Grow’s and Wlodkowski’s assertions would presumably find
wider acceptance were teachers to recognize the existence of a continuum,
understand associated teaching strategies, and embrace the importance of leading
learners toward self-direction. To initiate such an understanding among teachers, the
Teaching-Learning continuum suggests four terms to describe the teacher’s role.
These are also summarized at Table 1.
During initial, pedagogical instruction, the instructor should establish a personal
relationship with a student, because trust increases a student’s willingness and ability
to move to the next gogical level. Grow (1991) described a teacher in this stage as a
coach who uses clear direction and “formal lectures emphasizing subject matter,
structured drills, highly specific assignments, ‘ditto’d’ exercises, and intensive
individual tutoring” (p. 131). This type of action is termed close support within the
continuum, with the teacher providing physical or psychological support by giving
advice, directives, and external control.
As students develop and become more interested in learning, the teacher
becomes more of a motivator (Grow, 1991). Assignments will now include research
and lab activities, although there will still be the need for traditional methods. Class
activity becomes more engaging through a combination of presentation (lecture,
dialog, and debate for example) and interactive strategies (buzz groups, listening
teams, and fishbowl) (Seaman & Fellenz, 1989). The instructor’s role as a counselor
changes also. He or she will still be relied upon to give some direct advice, but there
will also be a need to foster more student self-direction. Students can then choose
from varied paths that will stimulate their development. The Continuum terms these
actions as moderate support.
As students internalize the learning task, teachers are now viewed as facilitators
or, taken a step further, “a participant in the learning experience” (Grow, 1991, p.
133). Guidance is less direct, and teaching is much more interactive. These actions
are termed consulting within the continuum. Students now are assisted in their
progress only as required, and higher learning levels are sought through interaction
and action strategies like the in-basket, role playing, and case studies (Seaman &
Fellenz, 1989). Students now exert more control over their learning process, thus
accepting responsibility for their personal learning.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 12 -
At the heutagogical stage, a learner begins synthesizing personal learning into new
applications. The teacher’s role—if a teacher is needed—is described by Grow
(1991) as a delegator towards sophisticated projects outside of normal classroom
settings. Common tools include internship-like relationships that foster high levels
of learning. While the student will hold teachers in high regard, they will no longer
be dependent upon them. The instructor may now be a partner with the student on
new and collaborative efforts. Instructors will serve as a validating source for
research efforts, and will further challenge students with probing questions such as
“Have you considered . . .?” These actions on the part of the teacher are termed
synergy within the continuum. Synergy is attained when the teacher and student
together are able to navigate and fuse disparate resources and learning constructions
to further their collective knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Furthermore, they may be
able to create wholly new resources or learning constructions.
Further Defining the Various Gogical Stages
The preceding discussion highlighted the learner and teacher, and also provided
insights regarding the gogical stages. This section further illuminates the stages, and
asks, “What is a gogical stage?” Does it describe an environment, the learningteaching transaction, the curriculum, or does it involve all these elements? In this
context, a gogical stage embraces both the process and the environment, uniquely
incorporating the teacher, learner, and content contingent on learner maturity. The
brief definitions below amplify this definition:




Pedagogy is the process of influencing introductory level learners to
acquire basic knowledge, skills, and (or) attitudes; it serves as a baseline
from which further learning can occur. In a pedagogical environment,
emphasis is on the teacher, while the student is viewed as passive and
dependent.
Mesagogy is the process of influencing intermediate level learners to
further their acquisition of knowledge, skills, and (or) attitudes; it serves
as the enabling link between pedagogy and andragogy. Teachers in a
mesagogical environment engage the learner in the process of becoming
active and independent.
Andragogy is the process of influencing learners to acquire higher levels
of learning employed in life-centered applications. In an andragogical
environment the teacher’s role clearly shifts toward facilitating or
mentoring, and the learner often takes the lead in acquiring
information.
Heutagogy is the process of learners personally acquiring advanced levels
of learning through self-discovery and creativity. A learner in a
heutagogical environment has responsibility for direction and application
of information, while the teacher (if present) assumes the role as full
partner in learning.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 13 -
Departing from Age-centric Notions
Some theorists have specifically acknowledged the importance of a “lifelonglearning model” that recognizes an age-related continuum. However, these
approaches, although certainly of value, stress learning as an activity spanning one’s
life rather than focusing on cognitive, affective, and (or) psychomotor maturation
regardless of age (see, for example, Merriam & Brockett, 1997, p. 84; Tanaka &
Evers, 1999). Conversely, Merriam and Caffarella (1999) noted that “pedagogyandragogy represents a continuum ranging from teacher-directed to student-directed
learning and that both approaches are appropriate with children and adults,
depending on the situation” (p. 275). This is a significant departure from age-centric
notions to a more dichotomous depiction, where, for example, learners are
contrasted as passive versus active, dependent versus independent, or subject versus
problem-centered learners (Cross, as cited in Merriam & Caffarella, 1999, p. 275). In
point of fact, this represents a departure from Knowles et al. (2005), who had ageinfluenced definitions for both pedagogy and andragogy, with the former generally
applicable to teaching children and latter associated with adults.
Hase and Kenyon (2000), on the other hand, defined heutagogy as selfdetermined learning without age-centric stipulations. Likewise, the stages defined by
the Teaching-Learning Continuum are not age-centric. Thus, when describing, for
example, pedagogy, a more accurate description of pedagogy is as an environment
where teachers make decisions as to what, when, and how information is learned,
and the students learn in a dependent, mostly passive mode.
Finally, when a learner achieves a stage he or she may continue to exhibit
characteristics of a lower level. This is due to contextual factors. For example, a
learner with andragogical or heutagogical attributes may willingly submit to a
pedagogical environment simply to gain basic knowledge, skills, or attitudes. Thus,
learner reasoning skills and ability to be, for example, self-determined generally do
not revert to a completely elementary level, because he or she has developed abilities
to learn and adapt.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 14 -
Chapter 3
Applying the Continuum
The Teaching-Learning Continuum can be used to make judgments about the
teacher-learner relationship within any learning situation and can aide in the
determination of corrective actions. This will be of obvious utility to teachers and
students and could find application by others as well. Administrators, researchers,
policy makers, parents, and loved ones are examples of other important stakeholders
who could benefit from such insight.
In the context of this discussion, a learning situation could extend for 20 days,
20 months, or 20 years. The common factor open for evaluation in each case is how
the student and teacher progress with the task of imparting, or in some cases,
exchanging knowledge. An example of an abbreviated learning situation would be the
learning of simple tasks associated with an entry level vocation that takes place over
just a few weeks. An example of an extended learning situation—one that could very
well span most of one’s lifetime—would be a learner’s intellectual development over
many years, at the hands of a mentor or series of mentors. The fact that the duration
of these learning situations can vary to such an extreme degree in no way confuses
the application of the Teaching-Learning Continuum or qualifies the inferences to
be made from it. A learning event will be protracted to the extent that the
knowledge to be imparted, and any associated skills or attributes, is complicated and
difficult to transfer to a learner. The ways in which a teacher and learner interact,
and the potential for them to interact in more effective ways, remain fundamentally
the same throughout all scenarios.
A central assumption of the Teaching-Learning Continuum is that at various
points during the course of a learning situation there is an optimum relationship to
be had between the teacher and the learner. Once achieved, this optimum
relationship will accelerate the learning event as well as create a comfortable
environment for all stakeholders. This optimum dynamic occurs when the teacher’s
posture within the relationship is in harmony with the capabilities of the learner, yet
challenging enough so that there is the required amount of movement toward the
desired learning outcome. The line that dissects the model (see Figure 1) from the
lower left corner to the upper right corner of the model articulates this ideal
dynamic and represents the continuum at issue here. When the teacher and learner
are collocated along the continuum, the relationship between them is considered
optimum. However, when an evaluation of the learning dynamic places them at
different locations along the continuum, the model should prompt actions by the
teacher and/or the learner meant to rectify the problem. The depiction in Figure 1 is
purposely general. Grow’s (1991) work detailed appropriate teacher-student roles to
optimize the teaching-learning transaction.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 15 -
It is appropriate to note here that progression along the continuum requires
action by at least one change agent. Either the teacher or the learner—or a
combination of the two—needs to recognize opportunities to move toward a
relationship based more on mutual respect and cooperation and less upon narrow
and traditionally defined roles. Various scenarios are possible. If a learner were to
become complacent within a pedagogic environment, a teacher may elect to
challenge him or her with a significant shift toward mesagogic methods. Likewise, a
learner, having found success within a pedagogic environment, may feel compelled
to confront the educator and articulate a desire for mesagogic methods. Of course,
if neither takes any interest in moving the relationship forward, it will remain
stagnant and stationary along the Teaching-Learning Continuum.
Summary: The Teaching-Learning Continuum
The model is accurately called a Teaching-Learning Continuum because,
ultimately, the impetus is placed upon the teacher to assess student maturity, modify
instruction to meet the student’s gogical needs, and assist maturation to the next
stage. Ideally, the instructor’s knowledge of the student’s learning preferences,
personality, and external context must be merged with instruction to ensure learning
objectives are met, but in a manner that is helpful and meaningful to the student. In
essence, instructors must use their knowledge to craft a strategy that will compel a
student to move on to the next gogical level. Analogous progressions could be cited.
From a novice chess player to a skilled grandmaster, from a new company employee
to one who has risen to a high level supervisory position, or to a sports coach who
begins at the junior high level and progresses to professional athletics, all of these
have experienced maturation through educational environments and techniques
unique to their context.
Implications of the Continuum
One of the more frustrating aspects of education is the variety of disparate ideas
found in the literature. For example, when exploring learning theory, Knowles et al.
(2005) distinguished two camps: “propounders of theories (who tend to be single
minded), and that produced by interpreters of theories (who tend to be
reconciliatory)” (p. 18). They then listed over 60 propounders and 30 interpreters
who, since 1885, have formulated ideas about learning. Unfortunately, learning
theory is but one of several areas in education where different notions exist.
Philosophies of education, ideas about teaching, and concepts regarding educational
evaluation, among others, each possess distinct, sometimes contrasting ideas.
It would be beneficial to have a framework that embraces this multiplicity,
accommodating the merits of individual ideas while explaining how such diversity
can and does exist. The Teaching-Learning Continuum offers a way to do this. This
section demonstrates how the continuum subsumes different educational
philosophies and complements developmental learner models.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 16 -
Chapter 4
Philosophical Underpinnings
Philosophies of education help explain such things as educational aims, sources
of curricula, student and teacher roles, and classroom methods. Merriam and
Brockett (1997, p. 31) pointed out the variety of philosophical approaches as well as
assorted categorical frameworks. One framework they highlighted is Apps’ (1973)
rendering, which here can be used to argue that strong linkages exist between
philosophies and the Teaching-Learning Continuum. Apps proposed five
philosophical orientations in adult education: essentialism, perennialism,
progressivism, reconstructionism, and existentialism. All but reconstructionism, with
its focus on societal change (ends) rather than individual improvement (means), are
subsumed by the Teaching-Learning Continuum.
Essentialist and perennialist philosophies inform pedagogical beliefs and
methods. Whether steering students toward materials viewed as classic or essential,
these methods are likened to the “banking approach” of education disdained by the
Brazilian educator Paulo Freire (1970). Passive students with authoritarian teachers
would constitute a typical scenario, and classroom methods often consist of lecture,
memorization, and drill.
As students transition to mesagogical learning, the classroom becomes more
progressive. Progressivism “represents a response to both essentialism and
perennialism which were criticized because of their extreme authoritarian positions”
(Apps, 1973, p. 22). Students in a progressive milieu are urged to employ techniques
like the scientific method to solve problems and derive more knowledge “from
observation and experience than from tradition and authority” (Merriam &
Brockett, 1977, p. 35). Although exhibiting some roots as a social change
philosophy, progressivism does recognize a “shift from teacher as authority figure to
teacher as facilitator of learning” (Merriam & Brockett, p. 36).
Notable is the transitional nature of progressivist thinking. Progressivism is a
philosophy born by the desire to develop a learner’s critical thinking skills, which
subsequently fosters maturation. Thus, just as mesagogy here represents an
intermediate stage between pedagogy and andragogy, progressivism removes
teachers and students from essentialist and perennialist environments and offers a
way toward what Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Gordon Allport termed
“becoming,” an existentialist tenet (as cited in Knowles et al., 2005, p. 51).
Interestingly, progressivism’s American champion, John Dewey, had an initial focus
on child learning, yet he strongly influenced Eduard Lindeman, whose 1926 book,
The Meaning of Adult Education, is considered the seminal work in modern adult
education, and, in turn, a major influence on Malcolm Knowles’ work in andragogy.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 17 -
As the learner becomes adept with andragogical and, subsequently, heutagogical
methods, a sense of autonomy is initiated, and the teacher’s role evolves to that of
consultant, facilitator, or change agent (Knowles et al., 2005, p. 115). This is very
much in line with existentialist thought, where “education should be directed toward
individual self-fulfillment… education is viewed as an instrument for encouraging
maximum individual choice and autonomy” (Apps, 1973, p. 23). As depicted on the
continuum, andragogical and heutagogical dynamics see the learner assume a major
role in learning, while the teacher acts as a facilitator or partner in the transaction.
Existentialists would recognize these as the same roles that enable self-actualization.
Apps (1973) stated that “there is obviously no clear agreement as to which
educational philosophy should be followed” (p. 24); however, when correlated with
the Teaching-Learning Continuum, it becomes clear that it is not a matter of making
a permanent choice. Instead, the philosophical foundation that undergirds the
teaching-learning transaction at a given moment in time can be willfully and even
tentatively selected by the educator, based on demonstrated learner maturity. Thus,
the simultaneous acceptance and use of various educational philosophies can be
fostered through the continuum. That is, depending on which gogical stage a learner
inhabits, a certain philosophy becomes more relevant. Of course, there are other
factors guiding philosophical decisions, but the continuum helps place differing
philosophies in gogical terms and adds to the understanding of learner maturity.
Cognitive Development Models
Although perhaps counterintuitive, the Teaching-Learning Continuum is a nonage-centric development model informed by existing age-centric developmental
ideas. Most of these notions begin with the foundational work of Piaget, whose well
known studies divided cognitive development into four stages with associated age
ranges: sensorimotor (birth to age 2), preoperations (ages 2 to 7), concrete
operations (ages 7 to 11), and formal operations (ages 11 to 16) (Bjorklund, 2000, p.
79). A few others have suggested subsequent developmental stages that extend
Piaget’s formulation into adulthood. For example Pascual-Leone, as well as Benack
and Basseches (all cited in Knowles et al., 2005, p. 227), proposed dialectic thinking
as a development stage beyond formal operations. “Dialectic thinking is a level of
thinking at which a person comes to see, understand, and accept alternate views and
truths about the world, and the inherent contradictions in adult life” (Knowles et al.,
p. 227). Others have proposed different extensions to Piaget’s original work, but
what is important is that many of his tenets are found within the Teaching-Learning
Continuum.
The pedagogical stage subsumes Piaget’s first three periods: sensimotor,
preoperations, and concrete operations. That is, the pedagogical setting and
associated teacher-learner roles appear compatible with these periods, which
culminate with learners capable of concrete thinking founded in real experiences. At
this point, abstract thought is minimal. However, as students mature into Piaget’s
final period, formal operations, they can “make and test hypotheses. . . [they] are
able to introspect thought processes and, generally, can think abstractly” (Bjorklund,
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 18 -
2000, p. 79). This coincides with the mesagogical stage and positions students to
eventually graduate to an andragogical environment. One could postulate that
andragogy and heutagogy subsume a fifth or perhaps sixth Piagetian stage (beyond
formal operations), which could include the problem finding stage proposed by
Arlin (1975) or the aforementioned idea of dialectic thinking. Unfortunately, work
beyond Piaget’s fourth stage is rather limited. Regardless, the continuum supports
the existence of subsequent cognitive maturation as these more recent researchers
have shown. Finally, the continuum’s ability to complement existing ideas about
cognitive development through association with the various gogies further adds to
the understanding of learner maturity.
It is interesting that Piaget associated ages with his cognitive development periods.
In doing so, he was able to present an ideal type; that is, his stages represented the
expected cognitive maturation of children. Yet, the literature is quick to point out
that many adults do not reach the formal operations period (Merriam & Caffarella,
1999, p. 140; Knowles et al., 2005, p. 227). Hence an age-centric continuum is not
requisite. Instead, the dichotomous continuum proposed in Figure 1 is more
appropriate. However, while it is the position of this paper that maturity is not
necessarily age-centric, it is still possible to associate ages with the gogies because
doing so provides a very basic understanding of the Continuum and its implications.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 19 -
Chapter 5
Mesagogy
Earlier, mesagogy was defined as the process of influencing intermediate level
learners to further their acquisition of knowledge, skills, and (or) attitudes; it serves
as the enabling link between pedagogy and andragogy. Mesagogy is a new term. That
is, it is the one gogy not previously described in the literature. This section further
discusses mesagogy by validating its position between pedagogy and andragogy and
summarizing the mesagogical learner and teacher.
Validating Mesagogy
Evidences of an intermediate step were provided in previous discussion. For
example, earlier it was noted that Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Gordon
Allport all subscribed to the process of becoming (as cited in Knowles et al., 2005, p.
51), whereby one dispenses with older, more pedantic methods to assume a more
liberated persona. Here, becoming is recognized as a process or journey traversing a
path between juvenile penchants and adulthood. Somewhere in between is a time
period through which one travels, and it might include, in this context, the teenage
years. Although age-centric insinuations are not requisite, the analogy appears valid.
There is an intermediate step. Reference was also made earlier regarding mesagogy’s
relevance to progressivism. Progressivism is an intermediate level educational
philosophy, separating the essentialist, perennialist, and existentialist camps.
It is interesting that many authors do not find the pedagogy/andragogy
dichotomy sufficient. Earlier it was mentioned that various authors have suggested
an assortment of gogies to fill these gaps: gerogogy, eldergogy, synergogy, ergonagy,
ubuntugogy, humanagogy, and anthrogogy. In fact, ergonagy is clearly positioned
between pedagogy and andragogy, overlapping both to represent “the working
years” (Tanaka & Evers, 1999, see Figure 3, p. 17). Consider also Grow’s (1991)
Staged Self-Directed Learning (SSDL) Model, where types of learners and associated
teaching styles are described. His second stage learner clearly resides between
pedagogic and andragogic methods although a gogical stage is not identified.
The existence of an intermediate stage was also experienced and articulated by
Carl Rogers (1983) in his book Freedom to Learn:
I ceased to be a teacher. It wasn’t easy. It happened rather gradually, but as
I begin to trust students, I found they did incredible things in their
communication with each other, in their learning of content material in the
course, in blossoming out as growing human beings . . . Though at the time
I had never thought of phrasing it this way, I changed at that point from
being a teacher and evaluator, to being a facilitator of learning—a very different
occupation. (p. 26)
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 20 -
Rogers described a gradual process as a teacher: it took time to unfold and
manifest, it was an intermediate step that was somewhat unnerving, and the
transition he experienced changed him from the role of a teacher to a facilitator.
Similarly, his students blossomed, which recognizes a time period transitioning from
pedagogic to andragogic learning. Such an event is similarly unnerving, yet
refreshing, as students realize that a pedagogic environment and associated
processes are merely one way to educate. Finally, as was discussed previously,
Piaget’s description of formal operations aligns with the mesagogic stage.
Summarizing the Mesagogical Learner and Teacher
The mesagogic learner possesses baseline knowledge appropriate for a given
topic but typically requires further practice or application to make the knowledge
fully useful. He or she demonstrates emerging confidence and motivation through
various observable responses and actions. He or she willingly participates in
discussions and asks probing questions beyond basic facts or principles. He or she
values the applicability of the learned concepts and shows commitment to personal
responses when questioned. From a skills based perspective, the student performs
tasks in a prescribed manner even in the absence of direct control. He or she
recognizes the validity of procedures and values, adheres to them, and demonstrates
a willingness to attempt new and more difficult tasks.
In response to the new behaviors exhibited by the student, the teacher is
now able to maintain appropriate physical or psychological proximity to the student
while allowing him or her to take the lead. The teacher may encourage the student
to assist in designing projects or tasks to be performed, and challenges the student
to translate basic knowledge into a new context. Further, the teacher encourages
students to interpret facts and compare and contrast new information with
previously learned concepts. Information may be presented in a problem/solution
format requiring the students to analyze facts and draw conclusions. The teacher
can now challenge the student to self-evaluate performance and recommend
improvements. Collectively, these teaching methodologies and others serve to
support the student’s emerging motivation and confidence while further challenging
them to seek higher levels of knowledge and to begin taking responsibility for their
maturation.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 21 -
Chapter 6
Utility - How the Continuum Assist Educators
The Teaching-Learning Continuum has utility within the Alabama Community
College System (ACCS), which is comprised of 26 community and technical colleges
with multiple campuses, as well as one four-year institution. Additionally, the ACCS
has several divisions that provide work force development activities through shortterm, non-credit, focused training for business and industry. Through its ACCS
programs, the Alabama Department of Postsecondary Education (DPE) provides
relevant education and training activities to prepare individuals for entry into the
workplace, to provide higher level skills, and to prepare students for further
academic opportunities.
According to the ACCS 2006 Annual Report, a typical student of the college
system is 27.9 years old. The student is likely to have an outside occupation and is
looking to retrain into a new skill area due to economic reasons, such as loss of a
job; or, he or she might desire additional skills in order to progress to higher income
levels. The college system is uniquely suited to meet these students’ needs.
The Continuum illustrates a process through which many students of the
college system progress, from their initial entry into a program of study to their
entry into the workplace. The Continuum also serves to assist DPE in its curriculum
development activities. This section provides a case study showing how a typical
ACCS student might progress through the continuum and it also demonstrates how
the Continuum assists in curriculum development.
Case Study
This case study features a 25-year-old male with no college experience who is
entering into the machinist discipline, in which he has no previous experience. He is
taking this action because he has determined that his current job does not offer the
opportunity to progress as a production operator for a local automobile
manufacturer. He has been assured that if he is successful in obtaining appropriate
credentials, he will be eligible to bid for job openings and an associated pay increase.
Because he is primarily focused on obtaining job skills, he is not interested in a full
associate’s degree, desiring instead a 26-credit-hour certificate program representing
entry level skills. As he progresses through the program, he is likely to experience
the various gogical environments and associated teacher-learner roles.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 22 -
Pedagogical Beginnings
The machinist program includes one mathematics course related to machining
applications; further, because the student has no prior experience in machine tool
technology, his class load is focused on introductory knowledge and skills, as well as
related laboratory activities. He begins with general information such as safety,
interpreting blueprint and mechanical drawings, layout, and tool use. He also takes
low level courses in specific skill areas such as lathe operations, turning, and
machining. The student recognizes this type of learning, as it reflects much of his K
through 12 experience.
The instructor for the course is aware that the majority of students have no
prior experience in the discipline, so he takes a moderately slow pace until he feels
students have gained enough skills and confidence to move to higher level demands.
He uses a combination of formal and informal lecture combined with
demonstrations of tools and their use. Before students are allowed to use any tools,
they must pass cognitive testing, both written and oral, in which the students
communicate sufficient knowledge related to the skill. The instructor maintains
constant control of the flow of information and activities in which students are
allowed to participate.
Mesagogical Transition
In short order, the student has grasped the basic knowledge and skills related to
the machinist discipline. The instructor now assigns more complex information and
activities. The student is required to produce simple objects in the laboratory based
on mechanical drawings provided by the instructor. The instructor is physically
close, but allows the student to perform activities including measurement, tool
setup, and fabrication of the part from the drawing. The instructor is ready to step
in as needed for safety or if the student needs additional guidance. When the student
finishes the activity the instructor will inspect the product for compliance to
standards and either pass the student or provide remediation.
The student has now demonstrated appropriate knowledge and skills and is
confident enough to move to more complex activities. The instructor now allows
the student to select which activities he would like to perform relative to the course
under instruction. The student selects a task that has moderate levels of difficulty
and one which he feels he can satisfactorily accomplish. The instructor directs the
student to resources from which the student will gather needed information and
perform the task. The instructor is available if needed, and upon completion of the
task the student is graded and declared to have satisfactorily completed the course.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 23 -
Andragogical Activities
The student now enrolls in the next set of classes and decides to take a
combination of higher skilled courses related to the previous courses and a new
course in machining. He has the same instructor from the previous courses who is,
therefore, well aware of the student’s knowledge and skills. The instructor uses
interactive methods to review, with the student, past learning, and presents new
information related to higher level knowledge and skills. The student quickly moves
into the laboratory where the instructor combines hands-on activities and
presentation methods to facilitate the student’s development of knowledge, skills,
and confidence.
The student readily understands the requirements for the new tasks and
confidently takes on activities. He rarely requires direct intervention from the
instructor, doing so only for highly complex tasks. The instructor spends more time
evaluating tasks and providing new tasks than actually instructing. Upon completion
of the course, the student possesses the necessary entry level skills required for the
automobile manufacturer and is eligible to bid for the new position.
Heutagogy in Action
The student obtains the sought job position and has been working for two
years. His primary duties are to operate a metal lathe and grinder to repair tools used
in manufacturing. Although somewhat content with his job, he would like to try
other tasks but lacks the knowledge and skills required. His supervisor informs
employees of a machining position that requires new skills. The student contacts the
local instructor at the college and informs him of his needs. The college does not
offer the classes, so the student contacts the local workforce development office
and finds that there are evening classes available that he can take. The student
quickly enrolls in the program and secures the knowledge and skills needed to
obtain the new job.
After several more years on the job, the student has developed high level skills
in several areas related to machining. The manufacturer has obtained new
equipment and technology and has decided to offer a training position. Because of
his demonstrated skills, he is awarded the position. The student has now become
the teacher and methodically studies the training manuals and associated literature
accompanying the new equipment. He blends the knowledge and skills he has
obtained over the years with the new equipment’s literature to synthesize a
curriculum.
This example explains how a student can successfully progress through the
Teaching-Learning Continuum. Through a combination of learner needs and
appropriate responses from the instructor, the student navigates through the
continuum at a contextually appropriate pace. Notable are the blurred transitions
among the stages, the requirement to submit to pedagogical techniques despite
physical maturity, and the applicability of the continuum in the postsecondary
environment.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 24 -
Curriculum Development
The critical question of the continuum’s utility—especially to the practitioner—
is also addressed by DPE through the Curriculum and Instruction Unit (CIU). The
CIU ensures that Alabama’s career and technical education students receive the
knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform tasks required of a specific discipline. The
unit is comprised of subject matter experts, or SMEs (instructors and industry
experts from across Alabama), and a curriculum development specialist. Together,
they create the learning objectives for various courses.
The CIU believes that the role of curricula is to guide learning toward desired
outcomes. Curricula serve as a tool for facilitating cognitive and skill development
through the various gogical stages. Therefore, curricula must be relevant to both
learners and teachers, consistent with the student’s level of maturation, and
appropriate in terms of teaching methods and strategies. As a guide to learning,
curricula should outline those competencies necessary for maturation, and therefore
should provide a clear path toward desired outcomes. Curricula designed by the
CIU do this by establishing student learning objectives, performance objectives, and
the level to which each objective must be learned or performed.
As objectives are devised, a general level of development is agreed upon, but it
is important to note that the specification of the level of skill or knowledge
attainment is not verb dependent. This is because variances in interpretation of
objective action verbs can (and do) occur. Instead, objectives are based on the
complexity of the knowledge, skills, and abilities required for successful mastery.
The levels are developed through SME discussion pertaining to actual student
requirements. To guide this process, Table 2 is used to depict the relationship
between gogical levels, stages of the cognitive taxonomy, and learner’s development
of general knowledge. Table 2 provides the CIU with a common conceptual
framework and vernacular to guide the process.
However, developing general knowledge is not sufficient for learner maturation.
Therefore the CIU also considers knowledge of skills important in devising
curricula. This knowledge differs from general knowledge in that it specifically links
performance skills to a course’s learning objectives. This relationship is depicted in
Table 3.
Still, a final iteration is needed to complete development. General knowledge
and knowledge of skills must be linked with performance ability as depicted in Table
4. This shows the relationship between the student’s cognitive maturation, Bloom’s
Taxonomy of Learning for performance levels, and the CIU’s application. The
progression within Tables 2, 3, and 4 reflects the process through which student’s
acquire knowledge and skills. The relationship between the level of teacher input
and individual student discovery is the primary determining factor for
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 25 -
Table 2 - Curriculum Development Tool – General Knowledge categorizing a
student in a gogical level.
Gogical
Stages
Bloom’s
Taxonomy
Evaluation
Heutagogy
Knowledge, Skills,
and Abilities
Indicators
Evaluation - Evaluates
conditions and makes
proper decisions about
the subject.
Synthesis
Analysis
Analysis - Analyzes
facts and principles and
draws conclusions
about the subject.
Andragogy
Application
Application
Principles - Identifies
relationship of basic
facts and states general
principles about the
subject.
Mesagogy
Comprehension
Comprehension
Pedagogy
Knowledge
Facts - Identifies basic
facts and terms about
the subject.
Application
Requires high cognitive and reasoning
abilities that expect students to make
connections and to relate ideas within the
content or among content areas. Student
must form judgments as to the value or
worth of alternatives of how a situation
may be resolved. Measurement is in the
form of complex responses comparing
and contrasting alternatives.
Requires students to exhibit
understanding through activities such as
planning, using evidence, decision
making, and other complex and
demanding cognitive reasoning.
Measurement is performed through the
use of complex and abstract situations in
which students must seek out additional
information not presenting in the original
problem. Measurement is in the form of
complex case studies and justification of
answers provided from the possibility of
more than one “correct” response.
Requires students to explain
relationship of facts and principles
beyond recalling or reproducing a
response. Measurement implies
involvement of more than one mental or
cognitive process or step. May require
students to make decisions as to how to
approach the question or problem by
differentiating between elements of
information. Measurement involves
selection, completion, or short answer
type questions associated with case
studies, problem/solution situations, or
other such cues that the student may not
have previously seen before.
Requires recall of information such as
facts and definitions in the same or
similar form in which instruction was
presented. Measurement involves
selection, completion, or short answer
type questions.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 26 -
A prime example of how the CIU uses the Teaching-Learning Continuum in its
curriculum development work is found in the ACCS nursing curriculum for
registered nursing (RN) and licensed practical nursing (PN). As this curriculum was
being developed, the subject matter experts continuously referred to various stages
referenced in Tables 2, 3, and 4 to insure that the material was taught at the
appropriate gogical level for the student, based on the course taken, and to show
gradual progression in scope, detail, complexity, and student’s internalization of the
material as students matured. The development committee recognized that one
could not guarantee the maturation of a student, but that the curricula needed to be
taught to a particular level in order to insure the students were led along the path
that would present them with the knowledge, skills, and abilities to complete the
National Council Licensure Examination (NCLEX) for both RN and PN.
The curriculum started with a pedagogical approach. Students were taught
primarily through lecture style, in which the primary emphasis is on memorizing and
similar activities designed to acquire basic knowledge. The curricula followed a path
on which students moved from pedagogical learning and teaching to mesagogical
techniques so that students had an opportunity to begin practicing the concepts they
were being taught under strict oversight of experienced faculty and/or practicing
nurses in associated lab and clinical settings. At this stage, the SMEs ensured the
curricula moved from a lecture style to one including more interactive strategies.
The CIU guided the development committee in slowly moving the curricula from a
mesagogical to an andragogical approach as the students neared completion of the
program. This helped ensure that students were prepared to take the NCLEX. This
was vital to the success of the students because a large portion of their test and their
career requires maturity, self motivation, and an ability to work collectively as well as
independently. Since curricula completion and implementation, the ACCS nursing
program has excelled. The majority of students are passing the NCLEX on their
first attempt. The percentage of PN students passing the NCLEX improved from
86.6% in 2004-2005 to 94.3% in 2006-2007. The percentage of RN students passing
the NCLEX improved from 83.1% in to 86.8% over the same time period.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 27 -
Table 3 - Curriculum Development Tool – Knowledge of Skills
Gogical Stages
Bloom’s
Taxonomy
Evaluation
Heutagogy
Synthesis
Analysis
Andragogy
Application
Application
Mesagogy
Comprehension
Comprehension
Pedagogy
Knowledge
Knowledge Skills
and Abilities
Indicators
Complete theory
Predicts, isolates, and
resolves problems
about the
competency.
Operating
Principles
Identifies why and
when the competency
must be done and
why each step is
needed.
Procedures
Determines step-bystep procedures for
doing the
competency.
Nomenclature
Names parts, tools,
and simple facts
about the
competency.
Application
Students use complex problem
solving and diagnostic techniques
for a new situation and develop
procedures for accomplishing a
task or resolving a situation.
Students are able to choose an
ideal procedure from several
possible procedures using
problem-solving and
troubleshooting strategies with the
intent of obtaining optimal results.
Students apply previously gained
information to more complex
motor skills. Student is able to
state ideal sequence for performing
a specified task.
Students recall or recognize basic
facts, terminology or rules related
to performance of a specified skill.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 28 -
Table 4 - Curriculum Development Tool – Performance Ability
Gogical
Stages
Heutagogy
Bloom’s
Taxonomy
Complex Overt
Response
Andragogy
Mechanism
Mechanism
Mesagogy
Guided
Response
Set Readiness
Pedagogy
Perception
Knowledge Skills
and Abilities
Indicators
Highly Proficient
Performs competency
quickly and
accurately. Can
Instruct others how
to do the
competency.
Proficient
Performs all parts of
the competency.
Needs only a spot
check of completed
work.
Partially Proficient
Performs most parts
of the competency.
Needs help only on
hardest parts.
Limited Proficiency
Performs simple parts
of the competency.
Needs to be told or
shown how to do
most of the
competency.
Application
Proficiency is indicated by a quick,
accurate, and highly coordinated
performance, requiring a minimum of
energy. This category includes
performing without hesitation and
automatic performance.
Learned responses have become
habitual and the movements can be
performed with some confidence and
proficiency. Includes imitation and
trial and error. Performs tasks as
demonstrated. Follows specific
instructions and responds exactly as
directed.
Knows and acts upon a sequence of
steps in a process. Recognize one’s
abilities and limitations. Shows desire
to learn a new process. NOTE: This
subdivision of Psychomotor is closely
related with the Responding
subdivision of the Affective domain.
Detects non-verbal communication
cues. Awareness, willingness to hear,
selected attention. NOTE: This
subdivision of Psychomotor is closely
related with the Receiving subdivision
of the Affective domain.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 29 -
Chapter 7
Conclusion
The Teaching-Learning Continuum will not be without cynics. Mentioned
earlier were arguments regarding gogymania. Further, others might criticize the
Continuum as a simple repackaging of other’s ideas. At the Alabama Department of
Postsecondary Education, however, the staff has found it a useful tool in making
the ACCS one of the nation’s best-regarded postsecondary systems. Some important
features of the Continuum that assists these educators are:
 It is not age-centric, but instead provides a contextually dependent
framework that can be applicable regardless of age. Therefore it explains
why certain methods are appropriate as learners progress.
 It uses the gogical stages to describe the learning-teaching environment as
well as the roles of the teacher and learner. These four gogical stages
provide a common vernacular among the state’s postsecondary educators.
 It provides congruence among different, perhaps conflicting, views on the
gogical stages, educational philosophy, and traditional educational
structures.
 It enhances cognitive development notions and substantiates allusions of a
fifth, perhaps even a sixth, Piagetian stage.
 It provides utility to the practitioner, whether in terms of curriculum
development or simple understanding of student maturation.
Other utilities might also be mentioned, but these suffice in demonstrating why
this paper was written. We feel the Continuum answers many questions regarding
the teaching-learning transaction, and explains student and teacher roles in fostering
student growth and maturity. Still, there are other questions that remain:
 How do Knowles’ six assumptions about the adult learner apply to
mesagogy?

Is mesagogy an actual stage or the journey between two ideal types:
pedagogy and andragogy?
 Is heutagogy an actual stage or the purest form of andragogy?
 Can both mesagogy and heutagogy be proven to exist through empirical
study?
 Does the continuum offer utility to instructors seeking ways to spur student
maturity?
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 30 -
These and other questions provide fertile ground for those seeking to improve
education in general and, more specifically, adult education. Certainly the TeachingLearning Continuum is embryonic, yet it does help to encapsulate and harmonize
disparate notions about the teaching-learning transaction. This, it is hoped, moves
the gogy discussion forward, not backward.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 31 -
References
Apps, J.W. (1973). Toward a working philosophy of adult education. Syracuse, NY:
Syracuse University Publications in Continuing Education.
Arlin, P.K. (1975). Cognitive development in adulthood: A fifth stage? Developmental
Psychology, 11, 602-606.
Bangura, A.K. (2005, Fall). Ubuntugogy: An African educational paradigm that
transcends pedagogy, andragogy, ergonagy, and heutagogy. Journal of Third World
Studies, Fall 2005.
Bjorklund, D.F. (2000). Children’s thinking: Developmental function and individual differences
(3rd ed.). Wadsworth: Belmont, CA.
Carlson, R. A. (1979). The time of andragogy. Adult Education, 30(1), 53-56.
Courtenay, B., & Stevenson, R. (1983) Avoiding the threat of gogymania. Lifelong
Learning: An
Omnibus of Practice and Research, 6(7), 10-11.
Davenport, J., III. (1987). Is there any way out of the andragogy morass? Lifelong
Learning: An
Omnibus of Practice and Research, 11(3), 17-20.
Davenport, J., & Davenport, J. A. (1985). A chronology and analysis of the
andragogy debate. Adult Education Quarterly, 35, 152-159.
Elias, J. L. (1979). Andragogy revisited. Adult Education, 29(4), 252-256.
Ferro, T. R. (1997). The linguistics of andragogy and its offspring. In S. J. Levine
(Ed.),
Proceedings of the sixteenth annual Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult,
Continuing and Community Education (pp. 37-42). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State
University.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 32 -
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Grow, G.O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly,
41, 125-149.
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. Ultibase, RMIT, Dec.
Retrieved
October
24,
http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec00/hase2.htm
2007
from
Henschke, J.A. & Cooper, M.K. (2006, November). Additions toward a thorough
understanding of the international foundations of andragogy in HRD & adult education. Paper
presented to the Commission on
International Adult Education (CIAE) Pre-Conference
American
Association
for Adult and Continuing Education (AAACE) Conference, Milwaukee, WI,
November 5-7, 2006.
Houle, C. O. (1972). The design of education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Kidd, J.R. (1973). How adults learn. New York: Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1970). Modern practice of adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy.
Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, Association Press.
Knowles, M. S. (1980). Modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy
(Revised and updated). Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, Association Press.
Knowles, M.S. (1989). The making of an adult educator. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R.A. (2005) The adult learner (6th ed.).
New York: Elsevier.
Knox, A.B. (1977). Adult development and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 33 -
Knudson, R. S. (1979). Humanagogy anyone? Adult Education, 29, 261-264.
Lebel, J. (1978). Beyond andragogy to gerogogy. Lifelong Learning: The Adult Years,
1(9): 16-18.
London, J. (1973). Adult education for the 1970’s: Promise or illusion? Adult
Education, 24, 60-70.
McKenzie, L. (1977). The issue of andragogy. Adult Education, 27(4), 225-229.
Merriam, S.B. & Brockett, R.G. (1997). The profession and practice of adult education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S.B. & Caffarella, R.S. (1999). Learning in adulthood (2nd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Mouton, J. S., & Blake, R. R. (1984). Synergogy: A new strategy for education, training, and
development. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.
Plecas, D. B., & Sork, T. J. (1986). Adult education: Curing the ills of an
undisciplined discipline. Adult Education Quarterly, 37.
Rachal, J. (1983). The andragogy-pedagogy debate: Another voice in the fray. Lifelong
Learning: An Omnibus of Practice and Research, 6(9), 14-15.
Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn from the 80s. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
Seaman, D.F., & Fellenz, R.A. (1989). Effective strategies for teaching adults. Columbus:
Merrill Publishing Company.
Tanaka, K. & Evers, M. (1999). Ergonagy: Its relation to pedagogy and andragogy. Paper
presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Comparative and International
Education Society.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 34 -
Toronto, Ontario, Canada: April 14-18, 1999. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED438464)
Trott, D. C. (1991). Anthrogogy. Paper presented at the meeting of the American
Association for Adult and Continuing Education, Montreal, Quebec.
Wlodkowski, R. J. (1999). Enhancing adult motivation to learn (Revised ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Yeo, G. (1982). Eldergogy: A specialized approach to education for elders. Lifelong
Learning:
The Adult Years, 5(5): 4-7.
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 35 -
From Pedagogy to Heutagogy – A Teaching and Learning Continuum
- 36 -