Blog Comment

I would like to make a comment about a post on Ruby’s blog http://programplanner.wordpress.com/ in regards to power in the program planning process. I wasn’t able to post a comment directly on her blog the way it was set up, so I’ll make my comment here on my own blog. I was intrigued by Ruby’s statement that while an equal distribution of  power within the program planning process would be nice, in reality it is the almighty dollar which often exudes the most power. Her example of  training sessions from the corporate world certainly seem to emphasize the role of money in programming. It really is a shame, as Ruby mentions, that in the end it is the learner, or the client itself, who loses from this unequal distribution of power. Thanks for your insight, Ruby.

Week 5: Learner Needs Assessments

I was reading Krista’s blog http://kristasadventuresinadulted.blogspot.com  and I found her answer to #5  in the questions about Learner Needs Assessments to be quite informative. I wasn’t able to post a comment on her blog the way it was set up, so I thought I’d post my comment on my own blog. The examples Krista  gave and the rationale for each really helped me understand the strengths and weaknesses for each of the needs assessment tools. This will assist me as I go forward with this week’s assignment. Thanks, Krista.

Module 4 Reflections – Power and Ethics

Quotes such as Benjamin Franklin’s “An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest” and Edward Everett’s “Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army” illustrate the enormous power of education. However, while there is no question that an education can wield tremendous power in a person’s life, the process of achieving the education can be influenced, both positively and negatively, by the effects of power. I was pleased to find the inclusion of “power” as one of the major topics in this Program Planning course. In my dual roles as an adult learner and as a facilitator of adult programs, I have felt both the negative and the positive effects of power. As stated in the introduction to this week’s module, “adult education is always “political” in the sense that someone who “knows things” and can “do things” has more options than someone who cannot”. However, it is also true that “who has access to which learning” is dependent on many variables. “For a variety of reasons, some personal and some situational, not everyone is able to participate in the learning that they want or need. Where access to learning is limited by situational factors, either intentionally or unintentionally, some type of power dynamic is usually at play”. In my role as an adult learner, I have personally seen and felt the effects of this type of power dynamics. The majority of learners in my adult learning program are dependent on funding from outside sources, such as First Nations Reserves or government agencies. These learners require the funding to supplement their living expenses while they are attending school. This is an example of “determining populations” – one of the ways, as described by Caffarella (2002), that power influences the program planning process. Whether or not an individual learner receives funding in my program is often dependent on the positional or political clout of those in authority. The power in this case seems to rest entirely on the organization and/or individuals within the organization. A second example from my work experience of the effects of power in adult programming, relates to the fact that the entire operational funding for my adult education program rests on the acceptance or denial of the organization’s annual funding application by one group of stakeholders. In my experience with adult education and program planning within a formal educational context, I have found that the learning process itself can often be influenced by power dynamics. For example, in an educational setting, particularly formal learning situations, learners seldom have full control over their own learning. “Decisions about what should be learned and even how it should be learned are usually made by other stakeholders who have been given decision-making authority”. In my personal experience, any courses offered at my registered adult learning centre must be approved by the Adult Learning Branch of the provincial government. Thus, this branch of government wields the majority of programming power. The instructors, however, do have some power in determining how the courses will be delivered, and they are able to negotiate some of the content with the learners themselves.

Clearly, power dynamics come into play on a regular basis and on many levels within my experience as an adult educator and as a learner.  I have seen first-hand how critical it is for program planners to develop excellent communication and people skills in order to address these power dynamics. As Caffarella (2002) states, “One communication skill in particular that is essential for program planners when addressing issues of power is being willing and able to negotiate between and among the various stakeholders involved in the planning process” (pg. 70).

In her program planning blog my course mate, Jer, provides an apt analogy comparing a program planner to a juggler. Jer suggests that program planners are not only responsible for meeting their own needs, but must also juggle those of the other power players.

From this week’s readings, I have determined that in order to be an effective program planner one must not only identify the key individual, organizational, and “wider context” stakeholders, but must also understand the existing or potential power dynamics at play within these three stakeholder groups. For example, individuals can wield power based on their position or political clout as well as through their knowledge base or their ability to build coalitions. Organizations can wield power through setting and enforcing regulations and standards and can have major influence over program funding. The wider context – the economic, political, and social climate within which planners work is, according to Caffarella (2002), becoming increasingly important “…especially as program planners work across numerous types of borders, from geographic to cultural to ideological” (pg. 65). Thus, the power dynamics from the wider context can be just as influential as the power wielded at individual and organizational levels.

 It is also important for a planner to be cognizant of the fact that the various power dynamics can potentially have either a beneficial, or a detrimental, effect on the program. One example Caffarella (2002) suggests for using power positively in program planning is to “ensure that all voices that need to be heard are included”. This was the opposite of what occurred recently within our province’s adult education program when the Adult Learning and Literacy branch decided to make some major changes to how adult programs would be regulated and funded as well as how programs would be delivered. These controversial decisions were made without all voices being heard, and resulted in a volatile situation at a mandated in-service session for all stakeholders. As a result of the stakeholders’ negative response to their decisions, the governmental stakeholders relented on some of the changes. Perhaps if negotiations had taken place early in the planning process and, most importantly, had included representatives from all stakeholder groups, a more positive outcome would have been achieved and the negative situation would have been avoided. A second example provided by Caffarella (2002) of the positive influence of power is finding “…funding sources so opportunities can be given to any community member to attend no matter what their income level”. In this case, the provincial Adult Learning and Literacy branch does exert its power in a positive way by providing tuition-free programs which are accessible to all adult learners.

A concept introduced in this week’s readings that was new to me, and which I found particularly interesting, was the differentiation between “felt” and “ascribed” needs and how these needs can be affected, positively or negatively, by those in positions of power. Adult education and training programs are ultimately about creating some sort of change – on a personal, organizational or social level. Sometimes, there is agreement amongst all stakeholders about the desired change. Most often, however, the more powerful stakeholders (those with money and authority) will ascribe these needs to others. Thus, the more powerful voice is speaking more loudly than the others in determining the required learning outcomes. In the example of the situation with my provincial adult education program described earlier, the stakeholders in the position of power were attempting to ascribe the learning needs for the entire province without hearing the felt needs of all the other stakeholders. What I have learned is that ascribed needs, however, are not necessarily unfair or inappropriate in all cases. In adult education, for example, there exists a continuum of programs that range from flexible and learner-centred (based entirely on learners’ felt needs) to more structured or mandatory programs (based almost entirely on ascribed needs). I found this point very interesting as the majority of the adult learning research and literature I’ve read suggests that the most effective adult programs are those that are “learner-centred” and take into account the individual learners’ needs, goals, and learning styles. According to this week’s readings on the topic, while it is important for program planners to be cognizant of the learners’ needs and wants, these may not necessarily always be appropriate as the primary factor in shaping the program and thus the needs of all key stakeholders must be investigated. “In other words, program planners must be able to analyze the context of programs they are working with to determine where along the continuum of the program they are designing falls”.

This week’s lesson included a video about an adult training centre for underprivileged adults in Pittsburgh built by Bill Strickland who himself started out life as a disadvantaged youth. The video is a good illustration of the positive effects of power in the program planning process. Bill Strickland’s ability to use his highly-tuned people and negotiation skills to elicit support from potential funders is a good example of how “power” can be used in a positive way in program planning. Bill uses to his advantage his “power” – the ability to “sell” his ideas to others through creative storytelling and negotiation, as well as with humour. Bill Strickland’s vision for the centre he created was based on his belief that people will change their behavior when they have the opportunity to change the way they see themselves. He is a strong believer in the powerful effect of one’s physical surroundings on spiritual and emotional well-being. Along with state-of-the art programs, facilities, and instruction, Bill insists on top-notch aesthetics throughout his buildings. As he states many times throughout his presentation, Strickland believes that “flowers, sunlight, good food, music, and expectations” can cure “spiritual cancer” every time. Bill’s introduction of programs such as gourmet culinary arts, painting, music, and photography to his disadvantaged students could be considered an example of “ascribed needs” as these programs are primarily based on what he considers necessary for his students.

In conclusion, I have learned from this week’s readings and video that power is a key issue in the program planning process. By understanding the intricacies of the power dynamics in any given program planning situation, the planner can ensure the highest possible quality of program delivery. On the other hand, “if planners ignore those in power, they assure their own powerlessness” in the planning process. To effectively address the power dynamics in a program planning situation a planner must be able to:

• cultivate and/or enhance negotiation skills
• develop finely-tuned people skills
•  listen to multiple voices
•  be a good analytical thinker, and
•  be willing to communicate effectively through a variety of means

In order to incorporate the dynamics of power in the planning process, the planner must also ensure that his/her beliefs and actions convey ethical practices. Being reflective in one’s practice and stating personal, unit, and organizational beliefs related to program planning are essential elements of being consistently ethical in practice (Caffarella, 2002, pg. 80).

Reflections on Module 3 – Discerning the Context

The following are my reflections on Module 3 – Discerning the Context:

Introduction

Adult education programs come in a great variety of formats, both informal and formal. Programs can be offered in a wide array of settings for an equally wide range of purposes. However, regardless of their context or venue, all adult programs have something in common: they all need to be planned, piloted and implemented. The planner of any program needs to first understand the context in which the program is to be offered. “Context” refers to the larger social, political, economic and educational environment in which the program is taking place. Context also refers to the different stakeholders who have a direct or indirect investment in the program’s success. Clearly, the program participants and instructors are primary stakeholders; however, funders, organizers, communities, and even society at large can be considered stakeholders of educational programs. Each of these stakeholders’ views and expectations, as well as the resulting power dynamics, can be considered part of the context of the program.

Pre-reflection

Questions #1 -#3  

Five examples of adult programs:

INTRODUCTION TO NATURAL HEALTH AND HEALING (an online, distance learning course)

Possible reasons for launching this program:

• Previous students enrolled in the program’s courses may have included this type of course in a needs/interest survey
• Other courses similar to this one may have been offered previously and received positive feedback from participants

People and/or organizations who may have been involved during the program’s planning phase:

• The course’s instructor
• The administrators of the online training program
• Previous students in similar courses

Likely sponsors or funders of this program:

• This course would be funded through participants’ registration fees and possibly through endorsements by natural health companies
• Companies selling natural healing products might have some sponsorship in the course (advertising, etc)

Who might benefit from this program:

• The students would gain the most from taking this course through improved health and well-being
• Participants involved in health and well-being businesses would pass on the benefits of the course to their own clients

 

RISK/THREAT ASSESSMENT TRAINING (FOR EDUCATORS)

Possible reasons for launching this program:

• Past tragedies and instances of violence in various North American educational institutions may have led to a need or interest in training of this nature

What planners likely hoped to achieve through this program:

• Increased understanding of risk/threat assessment on the part of educators and communities
• Increased communication between the various parties involved with the safety and well-being of youth
• Heightened awareness in society about the devastating and far-reaching effects of school violence

People and/or organizations who may have been involved during the planning phase:

• Educators
• School administrators
• Former and current students
• Family members touched by school tragedies
• Psychologists
• Police; RCMP representatives
• Government agencies (ex. Child and Family Services)

Likely program funders and sponsors:

• Youth justice agencies
• Child and Family Services agencies
• Law enforcement agencies
• Local school districts

Who might have hosted this training:

• Local school districts
• Parent advisory councils

Who, other than learners, might benefit from this training:

• Other school employees
• Counselors
• Current and future students and their families
• Society as a whole

JOB READINESS TRAINING PROGRAM

Possible reasons for launching this training:

        §   Unemployment rates may have warranted the need for this type of program

        §   Local employers may have indicated the need for this type of program

        §   Needs assessments and surveys completed by underemployed and unemployed individuals may have led to this program

                What planners likely hoped to achieve through this program:

        §   Knowledge and understanding by participants about personal strengths, marketable skills, resume writing, interview preparation, etc.

        §   Increased numbers of  underemployed and unemployed entering the job market

            People and/or organizations who may have been involved in the planning phase:

        §   Employers

        §   Career counselors

        §   Government employment and social service agencies

        §   Participants from previous similar programs

        §   Human Resource specialists

 

              Likely program funders and sponsors:

        §   Government employment and social service agencies

        §   Human Resource businesses

                Who might have hosted this program:

        §   Government employment office

        §   Human Resource department

        §   Local Friendship Centres

                Who, other than learners, might benefit from this program:

        §   Local employers

        §   Families of participants

        §   Society as a whole

 

INTRODUCTORY COMPUTER COURSE FOR SENIORS:

                Possible reason for launching this program:

        §   Community needs survey addressed a need for the program in the local community

                What planners likely hoped to achieve through this program:

        §   Promote the importance of technology for seniors in today’s society /marketplace

        §   Promote the benefits of computer literacy on the social and emotional well-being of seniors

        §   Provide training in a non-threatening environment

                People and/or organizations who may have been involved in the planning phase:

        §   Services for Seniors organizations

        §   Government employment agency

        §   Local adult learning centres

        §   Continuing education organizations

                Likely funders/sponsors of this program:

        §   government organizations

        §   Continuing Education organizations

        §   Seniors’ groups

        §   Local service clubs

                Who might have hosted this program:

        §   Local service clubs

        §   Senior Centre

                Who, other than learners, might benefit from this program:

        §   Local employers

        §   Participants’ families

 

DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY WORKSHOP:

                Possible reason for launching this program:

        §   Results of local community needs/interest surveys

                What planners likely hoped to achieve through this program:

• To encourage continuous growth and development of participants
• To instill a love for photography in participants
• To provide participants an opportunity to enhance their technical abilities

        People and/or organizations who may have been involved in the planning phase:

• Continuing education administration
• Local community centres
• Camera/Photography store
• Course instructors
• Participants in previous similar courses

                Likely funders/sponsors of this program:

• Continuing Education organizations
• Participants’ registration fees
• Sponsorship/endorsement from local photography businesses

                Who might have hosted this program:

• Community centre

                Who, other than learners, might have benefitted from this program:

• Photography and computer businesses
• Learners’ families

Definition

One Merriam- Webster definition of stakeholder is : one who is involved in or affected by a course of action. According to this definition, the stakeholders in this Program Planning course would be the Continuing Education branch of the University of Manitoba, the CACE course administrators, the course instructor, the course participants, as well as current and future clients/ learners within each participant’s  program. One could also argue that the participants’ families could be considered stakeholders as they would be directly or indirectly affected by the amount of time required of the participants to complete this course.

Understanding Context

Question #4

I would place each of the five programs I named in Question #1 in the following columns of the chart found on page 9 (Sponsors of Education and Training Programs for Adults):

INTRODUCTION TO NATURAL HEALTH AND HEALING – Independent Public and Private Adult Education Organizations (offered through an online learning enterprise)

 

RISK/THREAT ASSESSMENT TRAINING – Educational Institutions (offered as  staff development training within  a public school setting)

 

JOB READINESS TRAINING PROGRAM – Non-educational Organizations (offered through a human resources department or government employment agency)

INTRODUCTORY COMPUTER COURSE FOR SENIORS – Independent Public and Private Adult Education Organizations (offered in conjunction with an Adult Literacy program)

 

DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY WORKSHOP – Educational Institutions (offered in a community-based organization such as a community center or recreation centre)

Question #5

I would place each of the five programs I named in Question #1 in the following categories of the chart found on page 10 (Examples of Program Purposes):

 

INTRODUCTION TO NATURAL HEALTH AND HEALING – To assist people in responding to practical problems and issues of adult life

RISK/THREAT ASSESSMENT TRAINING – To provide opportunities to examine community and societal issues, foster change for the common good, and promote a civil society

JOB READINESS TRAINING PROGRAM – To prepare people for current and future work opportunities

INTRODUCTORY COMPUTER COURSE FOR SENIORS – To encourage continuous growth and development of individuals

DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY WORKSHOP – To encourage continuous growth and development of individuals

Question #6

Five ways, as illustrated in the scenarios in Chapter 4, in which “people” can have a negative impact on the program planning process are as follows:

1. A program presenter’s failure to take into account changes in cultural diversity among the participants in the current training context and adapt the presentation accordingly. (For example, “Peter” ignoring the fact that the company had gone international since his previous presentations and not accounting for these changes in his current situation.)
2. Senior level management assuming that an HRD consulting firm will be aware of any major changes in the company’s structure and staffing patterns (for example, going international) prior to a training program. This also represents a lack of communication among the stakeholders.
3. Failure on the part of a major stakeholder (such as the human resource development director in the case study) to have the appropriate number of meetings with the planners and presenters of the training program.
4. Stakeholders allowing themselves to be intimidated by the program planner or presenter, and failing to speak up with concerns regarding the upcoming training.
5. A failure, on the part of the stakeholders, to include and equally value, the opinions of each member of the planning team. (For example, in the case of “Juan” whose input as a member of the planning team was not validated, resulting in critical aspects of the planning, particularly cultural diversity amongst the participants, being ignored.)

Question #7:

One of the programs I mentioned in Question #1 was a Risk/Threat Assessment Training Program for High School educators and administrators. The organizational structure in which this program was offered might have included the following features:

1. Training of this type would likely be offered through the staff development and training department and/or a parent council of a local school district.
2. The primary purpose of the school district offering the training would be education of youth and staff development.
3. Decisions about training opportunities within the school district would be made collaboratively by the teachers, administrators, and parent committees.
4. The need for this training would have come about as a result of significant political and social pressures from the local communities and parent organizations.
5. The hierarchy in the school district would have several levels: school district superintendents, school boards, school administrators, teachers, parent councils, students.
6. All of the stakeholders (administrators, teachers, and parents) would likely be very supportive of this type of training if it was determined by the community that a need was warranted.
7. The organization’s underlying values prompting the offering of this training to be offered would include the mission of providing a safe learning environment for the entire school community.

Question #8:

Some of the “big picture” issues that are currently in the news in my local community  include retention of doctors, unemployment, homelessness, healthcare, and crime. Unemployment issues might affect adult educational programming by a focus being placed on job readiness and essential skills training or technical training. Two of the programs listed in my pre-reflection, computer training and job readiness training, would be affected by the wider context issues related to unemployment. A program such as the Risk/Threat Assessment Training mentioned in my pre-reflection would be affected by the wider context issue of increased crime rates.

Question #9:

 A planner of a program, such as the Introductory Computer Course for Seniors mentioned in my pre-reflection, could learn about the “people issues” for that program in the following ways:

• By reading results of needs assessment surveys and evaluation forms from previous similar courses
• Communicating with personnel from the organization hosting the course, as well as participants of previous similar courses
• By reading promotional materials about the hosting organization’s structure and values
• By using pre-course surveys to determine any participants’ special learning needs , prior experience, and course expectations

Question #10:

The following sources might provide information about the Introductory Computer Course for Seniors’ organizational context:

• Written mission and values statements of the organization hosting the program
• Discussions with the organization’s management to get a sense of the hosting organization’s standard operating policies and procedures
• Visiting the hosting organization’s website
• Touring and assessing the facility where the program is to be held

Question #11:

The following information might be found online about the wider context in which the Introductory Computer Course for Seniors  might have been offered:

• Online articles about the benefits of computer literacy on the social and emotional well-being of seniors
• Blogs written by seniors on the benefits of computer literacy

Reflection and Evaluation

As I reflect on this module, the new knowledge I gained was the fact that people plan programs and that it is crucial for planners to develop finely-tuned social and communication skills as well as the ability to negotiate effectively with all stakeholders. It is extremely important for planners to keep in mind who the people are and where they are coming from in any planning situation. What struck me most about the “people” aspect of the planning process is the potential effect of increasingly cultural diversity amongst stakeholders and participants. It seems critical for a program planner to be cognizant of these factors in order to effectively plan a program that appeals to all. Another new source of knowledge for me was the definition of stakeholder which includes not only the planner and learners but anyone who is directly or indirectly involved with or affected by the program. I also learned how a program planner must take into account the wider social or organizational factors which might affect the program. As a result of my work on this module, I am now able to determine whether the purpose of a program is one of individual, organizational or social change. I believe that I will be cognizant of all of this new information related to discerning the context of a program  whenever I am involved with program planning in the future.

Module 2: Reflections and Responses to Questions and Readings

PROGRAM PLANNING MODELS

My Reflections on Week 2 readings and PowerPoint:

Questions 1. & 2: In the file card activity, I initially placed the cards in the following order, which I felt best represented the flow of the steps in program planning:

• Identifying program ideas
• Sorting and prioritizing program ideas
• Discerning the context
• Preparing budgets and marketing plans
• Building a solid base of support
• Developing program objectives
• Selecting formats, schedules, and staff needs
• Designing instructional plans
• Devising transfer-of-learning plans
• Formulating evaluation plans
• Coordinating facilities and on-site events
• Making recommendations and communicating results

While working through this activity, it quickly became clear to me that prioritizing the necessary program planning steps was not as straightforward as it seemed. I realized that a linear structure would not have the flexibility needed in outlining the steps, and that a circular model would be required to allow for a more flexible arrangement. I also discerned that it would be necessary to overlap several of the steps as they fit into more than one area. For example, building a solid base of support would likely be required at the pre-planning stage and then maintained throughout the process. Also, the coordinating of facilities and on-site events may need to be addressed at the beginning of the process (for example, during the preparation of budgets and marketing plans) as well as during the actual delivery of the program. This activity led me to believe that while it would be crucial for a program planner (especially a novice one) to be cognizant of the necessary steps in planning, he or she should also be aware that the planning process requires flexibility and may not look exactly the same from one event to the next. It seems that many factors must be taken into account in the planning process, including the context, the background of the participants, the program objectives, and the venue. It is definitely not a clear-cut and linear process.

Question 3: My initial reaction to Tyler’s Rationale (1950) is that while the model is clear and straight-forward and each of the necessary steps is included, its linear format would likely not fit with the flexibility required for many of today’s adult programs. The same could be said for the other early linear models presented in the PowerPoint. The program planning wheel depicted in Murk & Galbraith’s SAM model appealed to me more than the linear models. This particular model takes into account the interrelatedness of the various components and the flexibility required. The fact that central to this model are the concepts of evaluation and follow-up is another feature that appeals to me, and is one that took precedence in the placement of my file cards. Evaluation and follow-up, as well as establishing a strong support base, are factors that I consider critical to the program planning process. Caffarella’s Program Planning Model seems to be the most logical for today as it is interactive and takes into account the dynamic nature of the planning process as well as the necessity of including all stakeholders in an ongoing process of negotiation.

Question 4: I would categorize the early program planning models as linear, prescriptive, and content-centred as opposed to learner-centred. The early program planning approaches, most of which were informed by the works of Tyler (1950), could also be described as technical-rational. These early linear models do not necessarily correlate with adult program planning processes of today, as they lack flexibility and do not take into account the interrelatedness of the planning steps and the necessary negotiation amongst stakeholders. The early program planning models were based on behaviourist learning theories while the more recent models, such as Sork’s and Cafarella’s Interactive Model, are based on humanistic theories.

Question 5: According to Thomas Sork, feminist critiques of program planning have challenged the legitimacy of conventional planning theory by the exclusion of women in its development and the absence of gender as an important element. While there is substantial literature in the field in regards to women as learners and the role of gender in education, the feminist perspective has not translated into program planning theory. This makes sense to me due to the fact that the majority of conventional program planning theories focused on a behaviourist approach rather than the humanist focus of more modern models. Sork indicates that while current program planning literature is lacking a feminist critique, such perspectives would likely include the relational aspects of planning, the role of intuition and insight, and the gender-power dynamics. It seems logical to me that a feminist critique be applied to current program planning models particularly in light of the 21^st century global economy and the rapid advancements in technology. With more and more programs being available online and participation taking on a global perspective, issues related to culture, diversity, and gender may increasingly come into play for program planners.

Question 6: The core principle of post-modernism is that world views are a construct of one’s personal experiences, and thus highly subjective. In regards to program planning, a post-modern approach would include increased stakeholder involvement as well as a more politically-aware, consultative role for the program planner. The emphasis in a post-modern approach to program planning would be on the context, and the process would be less prescriptive and linear as in earlier models.

Question 7: Critical theory focuses on the power of change – in particular fundamental social change that reduces or eliminates oppression. Paulo Freire’s work is perhaps one of the best known examples of adult education based on critical theory. Critical theory is important to program planning because of its emphasis on “power” and “negotiation” between the program planner and other stakeholders.

Question 8: Ethical responsibility requires that program planners recognize the moral commitments they are making as they develop their programs. These moral commitments affect decisions about whose interests will be represented in the program planning, the aims of the program, how learners are defined, the allocation of resources, and what instructional approaches will be employed, as well as financial allocations and how success will be determined. At a more advanced level of ethical responsibility, planners are required to continually challenge themselves and others to engage in discussions and decisions regarding the moral questions and issues.

Question 9:

The 3 Dimensions of Program Planning

Domain	Examples of typical actions taken by a planner in this domain
Technical Domain	Asks “how to” questions such as “How should I define the learner community and what do I need to know about it?”
Sociopolitical Domain	Asks questions concerned with the human dynamics of planning including the interests involved and power relationships at play, example, “Why aren’t more women involved in the program planning Concerned with how people engage with one another in planning, what the consequence are, and what responses are politically astute
Ethical Domain	Asks deeper questions, framed using the language of ethics and morality

 

Question 10:

A Comparison of Sork’s Question Based Approach to Planning and Caffarella’s Interactive Model of Program Planning:

• Both models are presented as guides, not blueprints. In other words, the models are non-prescriptive. As Caffarella (2002) states, “The 12-component model…provides a map of the terrain of the planning process, but the map often changes in contour, content, and size.” (pg. 21).
• Both models are represented in an oval format which emphasizes the fact that the models are non-linear and interactive. With both models, program planners are encouraged to use the relevant parts of the model in any order and combination based on their particular planning situation.
• Caffarella’s Model has 12 components each which include a set of tasks and decision points. The tasks that make up each component are presented in the form of a checklist. Planners are encouraged to focus on the particular components and tasks which are relevant for their planning situation.
• Thomas Sork’s Model is presented as a Question-Based Approach to planning. The framework consists of six basic elements, each representing a cluster of possible questions, decisions, and actions involved in planning programs.

 Question 11: Caffarella (2002) suggests that program planning is essentially a people activity. In other words, programs are planned by real people in complex situations within organizations which have traditions, political relationships, and interests-all of which may have a profound influence on the planning process. Therefore, according to Caffarella, program planning becomes a negotiated activity between and among educators, learners, organizations, and other stakeholders. Each of these negotiators brings to the planning table their own beliefs, interests, and contexts. In this negotiation process, with its central issues of power and control, a planning model such as Caffarella’s allows for adaptation of components and tasks. Caffarella’s claim that program planning is a people activity is substantiated by the fact that her model is designed to be interactive, non-linear, and adaptable,  

 Question 12: The checklist for planning programs, found on pages 23-24, was quite dissimilar to the sequence of my list in the file card activity, which is included in my response to Question 1. However, I do not find this alarming, as Caffarella’s model is intended to be interactive and non-linear. It seems that the actual order of the steps may vary according to the context and program situation, and some of the steps may be covered in more than one area. In other words, Caffarella’s model is intended to be a guideline rather than a prescriptive blueprint, and the actual order of the steps is adaptable.

 Question 13: I actually agree whole-heartedly with all seven of Caffarella’s assumptions on which her Interactive Model is based. I feel that these assumptions recognize the dynamic nature of adult programs and take into account the fact that programs involve real people in complex and diverse situations and contexts representing a myriad of backgrounds and prior experiences.

Further Reflections on Module 1: Program Planning

Some of  the key elements (activities,stages) of program planning are:

• discerning the context (the people, the organization, wider environmental contextual factors)
• ensuring a base of support from key stakeholders
• identifying program ideas through a variety of techniques and sources
• sorting and prioritizing program ideas
• developing program objectives
• designing insturctional and transfer-of-learning plans
• preparing budgets and marketing plans
• coordinating facilities and on-site events
• formulate evaluation plans

The following are some of the common purposes of adult education programs with examples from my own experiences as an adult learner and as an adult educator:

• To encourage continuous growth and development of individuals

       In my own experience as an adult learner, I participated in a week-long Hay House cruise seminar series called “I Can Do It!” The series of seminars encouraged spiritual and emotional well-being. I also completed an on-line Ed2Go course on short-story writing. As an Education Director, I oversee an annual six-week introductory computer course for older women which introduces them to keyboarding and navigating the Internet.

• To assist people in responding to practical problems and issues of adult life

As an adult learner, I have recently participated in a series of Diabetes Education workshops and I am currently attending a series of pre-retirement seminars.

• To prepare people for current and future work opportunities

As a curriculum consultant, I was a member of a project team which developed a program for adult educators. The program is called Enhancing Transitions for Adults to Further Education, Employment, and Training. As an adult learner, my participation in the CACE program fits into this category, as well.

• To assist organizations in achieving desired results and adapting to change

I have participated with the staff and board of the adult learning centre where I am employed in a series of seminars on succession planning and coping with changes in adult education in my province.

• To provide opportunities to examine community and societal issues, foster change for the common good, and promote a civil society

 

Reflections on Module 1- Informal vs Formal Learning

In his 2002 article, “The Iceberg of Informal Adult Learning”, Allen Tough defines learning as “any period of time in which your primary motivation is to gain and retain certain knowledge and skill”. With decades of research related to adult learning, Tough provides an enlightening distinction between “informal” and “formal” learning with implications for adult learners, adult educators and program planners. According to Tough, very little (roughly 20%) of adult learning takes place in formal settings, while approximately 80% of adult learning can be considered “informal”. Tough suggests that adults spend on the average 15 hours per week on informal learning. Of this 80% which constitutes informal learning, the vast majority (73%) is fully controlled by the learner, while only the remaining 7% of informal learning happens in conjunction with others. Some of these informal learning activities are self-directed and carried out independently, while others involve interaction with individuals or groups. The motivations to learn and the types of informal learning carried out by adults are diverse and vary from learner to learner. One can only assume that instances of informal learning will continue to increase in the lives of 21^st century adults, particularly with advancements in technology and the impact of a global economy.

 I find Allen Tough’s metaphor comparing informal learning to an iceberg to be very fitting. Although, as indicated above, informal learning comprises the largest type of learning carried out by adults, this type of learning is often invisible or (like the largest portion of an iceberg) hidden beneath the surface. In fact, informal learning is often not recognized by adult educators, or by learners themselves, as true “learning”. This fact could have several implications for learners and educators. In my own experience as an adult educator, I find that many adults return to school with poor self-esteem and low self-confidence about their ability to learn. By creating a list of all of the learning they have done (both formal and informal) since attending formal school, the adult learners are able to recognize the value of their prior experiences and develop a greater sense of self-worth about their ability to continue their education and develop realistic learning goals.  Being cognizant of their students’ prior learning experiences also assists adult educators in planning course activities which best meet the needs of their learners.

My Personal List of Informal and Formal Learning Experiences

My own personal list of learning experiences carried out in the past year includes examples of both formal and informal learning. It is also interesting to note that my list correlates with Allen Tough’s research in that only a small proportion of my learning would be classified as “formal” while the majority would be considered “informal”. The majority of the formal learning in which I have been involved has been through courses in the CACE program in addition to a number of one-day workshops related to my role as an adult educator. The focus of my informal learning within the past year has related to my personal health and a recent diagnosis. This informal learning has been both self-directed, independent study via the internet and print materials as well as one-on-one sessions with health professionals. Other types of informal learning in which I have been involved include general interest topics such as gardening, baking, and home-improvement, as well as topics related to pre-retirement such as financial planning and RRSP’s. I have also been involved with several informal learning experiences related to my workplace, in particular learning a new computer system.

What do Programs for Adults Look Like?

According to Rosemary S. Caffarella (2002), “Education and training programs for adults come in all shapes, sizes, and formats. They vary from information or skill sessions lasting only an hour or two to day-long workshops and conferences to highly intensive residential study at corporate training centers and universities”. Programs for adults can range from informal sessions to formal training programs, and may be planned for individual learners or designed for small or large groups, including whole communities. Some programs are planned for a small, select group of people while others are planned for the general public. In my own experience as an adult learner, I have taken part in both informal sessions in small and large group settings, as well as more formal work-related sessions ranging from one or two-day workshops to full-length courses. As an adult educator, I have been involved in planning and facilitating programs for both individual learners and small groups.

Who is Responsible for Planning Programs for Adults?

Just as there is a vast variety of programs available for adults, those who are responsible for planning and coordinating adult programs come from a wide variety of backgrounds and experiences. Examples of job titles or roles which may be responsible for program planning include: program developers, training specialists, conference coordinators, and staff developers for whom program planning may be a primary responsibility. Some job titles, such as human resources managers, training managers, deans of continuing education, directors of nonprofit organizations, and volunteer planners, may include program planning as one of multiple responsibilities in their job descriptions. Other job titles or roles, such as supervisors, managers, and directors, may have program planning as a secondary or tertiary responsibility. In my own work experience, I have been involved with program planning as both a primary responsibility (as a curriculum consultant) and as a tertiary responsibility in my role as the director of an adult learning centre.