ANALYSIS

It was clear from the start of my observation that Dan took an andragogical approach to learning. I observed, and he reflected, that “self-direction [was] acknowledged” (Knowles et al., 1998), and he had an “internal drive for job satisfaction” (Knowles et al., 1998). I observed this through his confidence and open assumption that he would achieve the end result that he wished, even through obstacles and a moment of redoing. For instance, when he realized that he was not braiding the dough properly, he used his sources to return to the beginning and start over, determined to get it right. The bread would likely have tasted delicious even if the braid was not correct, but he had a drive to make it the way he envisioned. This connects to Jarvis’ (2010) discussion of self-directed learners: “Some learners may actively initiate their experience and seek out information; these are self-directed learners” (p. 91). And, not only was Dan self-directed at this moment, he was a self-regulator, thinking about his process and following similar steps that Beishuizen and Steffens (2011) outline: “Self-regulation is depicted as a cyclic process involving three stages: 1) goal setting, 2) monitoring processes and strategies, 3) self-evaluation” (p. 4). There was a moment when Dan wasn’t reaching his goal of a complex braid, so he stepped back, created a new strategy (watching a video), and began again; then, he stepped back again and evaluated the braid. 

Dan demonstrated what Wlodkowski (2008) says about motivation: “When learners are motivated during the learning process, things go more smoothly, communication flows, anxiety decreases, and creativity and learning are more apparent” (p. 6). Dan was calm through the entire process, even in the moment of the braiding obstacle. He admitted to being irritated when he said, “I was irritated when I didn’t get it right immediately,” but he added, “my irritation didn’t last long” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021). According to Dan, his motivation stemmed from a desire to “just learn a new lifelong skill” and “make something that has a connection to my Jewish identity, something my family will be excited about” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021). Although Dan doesn’t have the “influential factor” (Ambrose & Lovett, 2010, p. 7) of prior knowledge, his familial and cultural knowledge played a role in his understanding of the process, and he admitted that watching me make bread throughout the years helped him have some prior knowledge, even though he never observed deliberately. This precisely demonstrates what Sheckley (2006) argues: “By making connections between a new concept and elements of their personal experience-based consciousness, learners can bring both life and meaning to new ideas” (p. 48). This is why, perhaps, Dan said that he wants to create more challah variations in the future, and he noted that “it will be nice to not make my wife do all the baking” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021). Furthermore, Dan’s positive experiences he had with challah from his childhood mirror what Merriam and Bierema (2014) state, “A learning event that connects with a memory of a positive learning experience will be embraced and seen as positive” (p. 170). Even though he had never made challah before, he certainly has had experiences with the outcome.  Dan is an example of how “Students are not a blank slate when they enter a learning situation” (Sheckley, 2006, p. 46). And, this positive learning experience has made him want to continue baking in the future. Days later, Dan offered to make another loaf of challah for a family dinner, demonstrating that “Responses that are followed by satisfaction become more strongly associated with the situation so they are more likely to occur in the future” (Mayer, 2011, p. 22).

Dan’s approach is a mix of many adult learning theories as outlined in the Adult Learning Handout (2012): 1) cognitivism, as he “develop[ed] capacity and skills to learn better, [he’s] connected to development” 2) humanism, as he is active and his “inner motives drive [his] learning needs” 3) constructivism, as he constructed “meaning to make sense of [his] experience” (Mahler 2012). These approaches to his learning are not, however, uninterrupted. Through the phone call disruption, the noise of the children, and the football game flashing on the television, Dan had to do what Wolfe (2006) describes about stimuli: “The brain is designed to immediately filter all incoming sensory stimuli and select only those that are relevant at that moment so as to encode them” (p. 36). He believes he did, indeed, select those stimuli that were relevant to him, as he reflects, “I knew what my goal was, and I was able to just focus on that. I shut out the distractions” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021). This does, perhaps, connect to Mayer’s (2017) argument that learners must reduce extraneous processing (Mayer 2017). Although Dan did not get rid of the extraneous stimuli, he was able to disregard it. 

Mayer’s (2014) redundancy, segmenting, and modality principles were also at play. At first, Dan relied on text only. When he realized that he could not braid the dough by just reading text, he looked at pictures. When he realized pictures were not enough, he watched a video and listened to a narration. As Mayer’s (2014) states, “People learn more deeply from graphics and narrations” (p. 63). In addition, this multimedia approach was “presented in learner-paced segments rather than as a continuous unit” (Mayer, 2014, p. 65), demonstrating the significance of Mayer’s segmenting principle. Dan’s transition from written word to spoken word in the video proves Mayer’s argument that “People learn more deeply from a multimedia message when the words are spoken rather than printed” (p. 65). Dan said, “at first I just didn’t want to have to use a video, but it clearly made the difference in my learning” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021). This demonstrates, once again, Dan’s andragogical approach, as he as the learner brought “an array of resources and experiences that increasingly inform [his] learning process” (Knowles et al., 1998).  

In the interview, Dan mentioned that taking a baking class “might be really helpful; I think I would be able to really see how people approach certain skills...like kneading and proofing” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021). It is possible, then, that a social environment, like Merriam and Bierema (2013) argue, would provide Dan with an opportunity for “observing and modeling” (p. 35); according to social cognitive theory, this is “particularly important and relevant to adult learning” (Merriam & Bierema, 2013, p. 35). Even though his task to learn how to bake a round challah seems “straightforward and even simple” (D. Tress, personal communication, Nov. 14, 2021), it is clear through observation and discussion that “learning is a complex behavior that can involve how we think (cognitive), feel (affective), or do something (psychomotor)” (Merriam & Bierema, 2013, p. 41).