Overcoming Challenges In Andragogy Using CAL Theory

Overcoming Challenges in Andragogy Using CAL Theory

As I sat watching my seven year old memorise her multiplication tables, I was amazed by her speed. This made me contemplate on how I had struggled to learn the verbs in the morning in my French classes. Till the latter half of the nineteenth century, it was assumed that kids and adults learnt things pretty much the same way. In fact research in those years was never conclusive on the ability of an adult to learn. It was only towards the early years of the twentieth century, that it was concurred that both were different and adults could learn effectively if the right approach was used.

One of the earliest works in Andragogy or adult learning – the Six Principles of Learning by Malcolm
If you would need to conduct trainings for people who vary in their experience, you could hand the stage over to the “experienced” trainees to capitalise on the rich knowledge base they may have.

If development is the goal then challenge is to identify the motive for the learning, which would vary for each. For the student it could be recognition amongst peers, while for the young manager it could be appreciation for work. The senior would probably be driven by a career progression. The outcome of the training for each should be closely interlinked to the challenge of achieving their individual motives. Then learning would be voluntary for all three.

The effectiveness of facilitation for adult learning is inversely proportional to the effort put in by the facilitator. This would mean that if the trainee is involved in every step starting from the design of the training program to its evaluation facilitation achieve its true objective –
The idiographic perspective of personality emphasizes on the unique psychological makeup that an individual possesses which cannot be seen or compared with others most of the time. So even though a pair of identical twins has the same physiological makeup, they cannot be compared since they are psychologically different.

The nomothetic view on the other hand says that individuals can be compared . Though each may have their unique set of personality traits, the way they exhibit those traits would be similar , since a particular trait has the same psychological meaning across individuals. However for a particular trait people would differ in the intensity of manifestation along a continuum.

So if I love being with friends can be called as extroverted, then I would be described as sociable, outgoing , talkative, easy-going etc. But my spouse who is probably not as extroverted as I am, would have the same traits , but to a slightly lower scale. Thus he may not be as sociable or talkative as I am. The nomothetic school of thought uses factor analysis, self-rated assessments and questionnaire based surveys to understand and compare