The field of adult education is rife with differing theories of what it is, what it should accomplish, how it should be presented and what should be ignored (Apps, 1988; Bolman & Deal, 1997; Brookfield, 1986; Carnevale & Schulz, 1990; Conway & Ross, 1984; Dixon, 1987; Knowles, 1980; Merriam, 1993; Merriam & Caffarella, 1999).
Due to the large increase in the number of scholars in the field of andragogy, and to the marked increase in the diversity, complexity, and specificity of the work done by sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, we are now in an era where it is impossible for the major general sociological journals to focus heavily on the topics of primary interest to any particular group of sociologists.
This means that articles published in such journals as the American Journal of Sociology, the American Sociological Review, Adult Education Quarterly, and Social Forces will, of necessity, be very diverse regarding opinions and views of adult education.
It is important to note that diversity is a characteristic both of journals in low-consensus fields and of general journals that cover a wide range of specialties. Such diversity is also an intrinsic characteristic of a discipline that, among other things, attempts to integrate knowledge from diverse fields. In order to give this paper some focus, the three inquiry units presented in this seminar will be maintained and each shall serve as a topic heading. Those three are:
2. Theories and Research for Adult Learning
3. Methods and Techniques for Teaching Adults
To give the paper even more precise focus, the subject of adult education will be delimited to that sub-area of corporate and industrial training programs and theories.
In Learning in Adulthood, (1999) Merriam and Caffarella talk of ego-syntheses, where each individual integrates her or his experience into a group identity, in accordance with her or his space, time, and life-plan. "To som...