Overcoming barriers in teaching adult learners: prospects for using the theory of self-determination

Bragina Elena Vladimirovna Scientific Adviser, Designer of Learning Environments 199034, Russia, St. Petersburg, ul. Embankment Makarova, 6 nedoeduru@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

1. Introduction

Higher education throughout the 20th century has been criticized more than once for being isolated from the life of students and society as a whole ^[1]. In his program essay "The Life of Students", the German humanist philosopher Walter Benjamin writes about "... the divided nature of higher education as a giant game of hide and seek, in which students and teachers, each in their own single identity, constantly pass by without even seeing each other" ^[2]. Benjamin's words are a criticism of the teaching practice at the German higher school of the early 20th century, but it is also true of the modern university.

Higher education in Russia is constantly being transformed, "capturing the functional, structural, and substantive foundations of the system" ^{[3, p. 30]}. The long—term trend of transformations is the creation of conditions for the development of students' individuality. The request to build a student's educational path, in which the personal principle and life guidelines prevail, has been sounding more and more clearly lately. Universities and teachers are tasked with the development of personality-oriented education, within the framework of which "the requirements for the scientific level and creative potential of students are radically increased" ^{[4, p. 68]}. But in order to solve this problem, you need to get to know your student, finally "see him".

Of all the transformations observed in higher education over the past 50 years, students themselves have probably undergone the most significant changes. A financially dependent 18-year-old high school graduate entering full-time education is no longer a typical university student. More than a third of all students in Russia are over 24 years old ^[5]. In this regard, Russia confidently follows the trends of Western countries, where 30% of university students are over 30 years old; half of the students already have higher education and are financially independent; almost 40% work full-time; 27% have children. The growing variability of the student body poses a serious challenge to universities and teachers — "to ensure an inclusive and equitable quality education and to encourage lifelong learning opportunities for all students."

Age is a marker indicating didactics to the presence of objective characteristics of students and problems that they may experience in learning. Due to the socio-demographic status, morphological and individual psychological characteristics, as well as the specifics of adult education for many of them, the traditional structure and organization of higher education can create significant obstacles to successful studies. It is impossible not to note the diversity of forms and types of education at the university today, as well as the declared readiness of teachers for changes, but the level of individualization of adult education in Russian universities is still low ^{[4; 6; 7]}.

It requires not only the search for an answer to the question of new accents in the didactics of higher education, but also an active rethinking of the role and position of the teacher in the modern educational process. A student, and especially an adult student, needs not just a professional teacher, but a teacher-facilitator ^[8]. Understanding the importance of transforming the methodical thinking of university teachers and the high level of their empathy for optimizing personality-oriented adult learning actualizes the formation of technologies that allow teachers to develop the skills to "see through the eyes of another, listen with the ears of another and feel with the heart of another", to embody these skills in the design of educational programs and courses ^[9]. In this regard, an understanding of the barriers affecting adult learners' learning is necessary to develop an educational design that is adequate to their needs.

The article presents some results of the study of the problem of developing a pedagogical model to expand the context of adult education in the higher education system, conducted by the author in 2021-2023. This article, using a critical analysis of the literature on the problem of adult education in domestic and foreign psychological and pedagogical discourse, answers three research questions:

1) what factors and barriers affecting adult learning are highlighted by modern authors?

2) what motives are inherent in adult students?

3) how to overcome obstacles in teaching adult learners?

2. Results

2.1 Adult learners

The Russian legislator does not differentiate students by age. The terms "adult" or "adult student" are not defined in the law. Students, according to Article 33 of Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 29, 2012 (as amended on 02/17/2023) "On Education in the Russian Federation" (hereinafter referred to as the Law), are all "persons mastering educational programs of secondary vocational education, bachelor's degree programs, specialty programs or master's degree programs". The law does not set an age limit for admission to higher education institutions, except for the presence of at least secondary general education for bachelor's degree or higher education for master's degree. In addition, the obligation to take into account the age and health of the student is actually "prescribed" to the university by Article 34 of the Law, since it must provide "... conditions for learning, taking into account the peculiarities of psychophysical development and the state of health of students", as well as "... teach them according to an individual curriculum ...". This norm, however, is most often developed in local regulations of universities aimed at supporting students with disabilities and limited health opportunities or gifted students.

Students differ in many parameters, and the profile of the student, including his psychological, morphological and socio-demographic characteristics, according to D.H. Rose and N. Stranman, "is as individual as DNA or fingerprints" ^{[9, p. 381]}. The differentiation of students is largely determined by their morphological features and neural diversity in the sense that “[...] there are clear differences in individual neural networks associated with cognitive processes that affect how students pay attention, organize and remember information” ^{[10, p. 30]}. Psychophysiologist, Doctor of Psychological Sciences A.Y. Alexandrov points out: “... if two people do the same thing for an external observer, but this is the same thing formed in different ways, then the brain works in these two cases in completely different ways. And the memory in these two cases seems to be completely different ... although the students do something exactly the same” ^{[11, p. 6]}.

Personality development during adulthood is one of the most difficult psychological problems. The ambiguity of terminology, the blurring of time boundaries and descriptions of the stages of adulthood indicate the lack of elaboration of this problem ^[12]. In Russian psychology, the average age (maturity) was mainly studied from the point of view of professional and personal development in line with acmeology ^[13]. There are many age periodizations that we cannot consider within the framework of this article, however, in both domestic and foreign literature, "adult learners" are people of capable age, socially mature from 25 years and older ^[14].

Within the framework of this study, there is no task of a detailed description of the individual psychological characteristics of adult students or the study of biological, social and spiritual adulthood. With all confidence, however, we can agree with Eric Erickson that "different periods of life set certain development tasks for people and require them to master certain skills and abilities in order to gain positive experience and find peace of mind at the next stage of life" ^[15]. Accordingly, age directly affects the personal and psychological characteristics of the student and determines his psychological status. Students of different ages will have different socio-emotional attitudes and inclinations that may affect their approaches to learning and interaction with educational material, determine group work, initiate and support participation in learning. 

Adult students represent a socio-age group, which is quite difficult to define accurately. In the theory and practice of andragogy, there are different definitions of the concept of "adult" from a sociological, pedagogical and psychological point of view. At the same time, different authors focus on different perspectives of the study of this phenomenon ^[16]. Some foreign authors define adult learners from the point of view of “who participates and who does not participate in adult education”, up to such detailed definitions: “white, belonging to the middle class, working, younger and better educated than not participating” ^{[17, p. 583]}.

Other authors try to define adult learners by distinguishing between it and school education. The leading theorist of andragogy, Malcolm Knowles (1980, 1984), identified the characteristics of adult students. Chris Kenyon and Stuart Hayes in 2001, outlined the six main assumptions of Knowles' theory of adult learning ^[18]. According to their interpretation, adult learners are those who are: autonomous and self-directed; free to guide themselves; have accumulated a foundation of life experience and knowledge; are focused on relevance and want to see a reason to learn something; are more focused on problems than on the subject of learning; motivated to learn by internal factors, not external ones. At the same time, even if “people can enroll in the same program, they come to the educational institution with different experiences and expectations” ^{[12, p. 584]}. Moreover, it is argued that “[not] two [adults] perceive the world in the same way,” and emphasizes that adults should understand that they themselves decide what happens to them during the training event [ibid.]. Accordingly, it is a mistake to talk about a “certain average” adult student. Perhaps it is this diversity of adult learners that makes their teaching and pedagogical support of learning a complex, useful and creative activity ^{[12, p. 584]}.

2.2 Barriers to adult learning

Studies actively conducted in the last 30 years have revealed various factors affecting adult participation in higher education.

The literature presents various classifications of conditions and factors affecting adult learning at all levels of education. At the same time, there are few such studies in the Russian literature; there are separate studies on the problems and barriers (obstacles) of teaching some categories of students, including those with limited health ^[19]. Combining the results of several foreign studies, we were able to identify the most common classifications of barriers in adult learning. Thus, in 1981, researcher Cross systematized the obstacles that prevent adults from participating in learning as follows ^[20]: 1) situational barriers arising from an adult's personal and family situation, such as lack of time and financial constraints; 2) dispositional barriers related to the attitude, perception and expectations of adults, for example, the belief that they are too old to study, or lack of confidence or interest; 3) institutional barriers from-due to the insensitivity of educational institutions or the lack of flexibility in the courses and programs offered, such as inappropriate schedules or the content of academic disciplines.

In a more recent study conducted in 1998 by the consulting company Mathematica Policy Research, four main obstacles to further education of working adults were identified ^[18]:

- lack of time to continue education;

- family responsibilities;

- planning the time and place of training;

- the cost of educational courses.

G. Breuning and G. Kuvan identified a number of obstacles to adult participation in continuing education ^[20], including subjective factors (educational interests, socialization of learning), social factors (environment, employment, regional affiliation), structural conditions (organization and quality of offers), as well as political conditions (legal norms, support programs). The authors pointed out that adult participation in education largely depends on the socio-economic, political and cultural context, which varies from country to country.

The report "Adult Learners in Higher Education Barriers to Success and Strategies to Improve Results" for 2007 identifies the main obstacles faced by adult learners "trying to obtain diplomas that have value in the labor market" ^[19].  The greater the influence of certain factors a person experiences, the less likely it is that he will be ready to study at a university:

1) family support — those students whose parents or spouses have not shown interest in their previous and present educational experience are less likely to go to study in adulthood; 

2) educational experience — adults who have not had success in learning before are unlikely to continue their education or return to it ^[21];

3) age — there are numerous data on the deterioration of health, which affects the decline in memory, as well as learning ability in people aged 45 years and older;

4) social class — this indicator remains the strongest predictor of adult participation in learning ^[22].

Summarizing the existing approaches, barriers affecting adult participation in higher education can be divided into three separate categories according to the criterion of their stability (stability of action in time and space):

1) personal (student);

2) situational (the student's immediate environment);

3) socio-economic (broader external environment).

We believe that all these barriers, contextual in nature, are closely intertwined and probably have a bidirectional impact on other factors that may affect adult learning opportunities. At the same time, situational and social conditions are changing rapidly. By comparison, personal conditions generally seem to be more stable.

Fig. 1. Classification of barriers affecting adult participation in higher education

Source: compiled by the author

2.2.1 Personal factors

Personal contextual factors are factors that directly affect the likelihood of adults continuing their education and learning success ^{[9; 14]}.

The personal characteristics of adult students have a strong influence on whether they decide to participate in higher education. Recently, integrative hierarchical models of personality and personality disorders (RL), such as the "Big Three", "Big Four" and "Big Five" trait models, have received support in foreign psychology as a unifying dimensional structure for describing RL ^[22]. The concepts of the "Big Four and Five" reflect most of the variations of personality traits and reflect the stable structure of the traits of a normal and abnormal personality. These characteristics are part of an "active personality" in which students take the initiative necessary to actively manage the process of independent lifelong education. A proactive personality is defined as a willingness to "take personal initiative in a wide range of actions and situations." Thus, there is increasing empirical evidence that adult learners with certain personality traits are more likely than others to be internally motivated to plan, undertake and evaluate — in an independent and decisive way — a continuing education course that corresponds to their personal life. Such people demonstrate a high or higher level of "readiness" for independent learning. In addition, there are a number of personal conditions affecting participation in continuing education ^{[23; 24]}. Researchers note the importance of such self-concepts as self-esteem and self-efficacy ^[25]. Learning experience and cognitive abilities are also important predictors of participation in continuing education.

The question of motivation of adult students is relevant and generally poorly studied. There is an opinion that adults are mainly motivated to acquire practical, applied knowledge ^[26]. According to these studies, people's motivation to learn drops when their perception of the usefulness of learning drops, as it happens when they retire from work. This idea is consistent with age-related theories of reduced motivation ^[26], which consider age as the most important barrier to learning. The authors supporting these theories note that not only the usefulness of learning decreases with age, but also cognitive factors ^[24]. Studies like these consider the motivation of adult learners as a homogeneous group, where age is their defining personal characteristic, ahead of all other social or personal variables.

However, other researchers ^[27] note a large heterogeneity of adult motivation and point out that many motivated adults are active, involved in society, healthy and educated ^[28]. Education is inseparable from life, and therefore motives can range from utilitarian to internal, such as the pleasure of learning. Motivated adults face obstacles in accessing education, but it is important to recognize the heterogeneity of motives in terms of ability and motivation to learn. F. Marcaletti and co-authors ^[24] identified four motivational clusters of adult learners: “overcoming knowledge gaps”; “expanding horizons”; “pragmatists”; “focused on continuous learning”. In the OECD documents, adult students are divided into four groups depending on motivation: 1) those who enter the university for the first time in order to become the holder of a bachelor's degree; 2) those who have already studied at the university, but decided to take the course again to update their professional knowledge; 3) those who enter the university out of professional necessity, regardless of the availability of another higher education; 4) the main motive the education of these students is personal self-development ^[29]. Russian studies ^{[29; 30]} also confirm a large heterogeneity in relation to adult learners' learning goals, and all related contextual factors.

A wide range of motives clearly indicates the difficulty of adapting the educational offer of universities to the needs of adult students ^[31], which may limit the participation of adult students in education. From this point of view, it seems obvious that adult education requires a more holistic and humanistic approach, taking into account both the heterogeneity of this population and the inseparability of education from the life path of a particular person. It follows that adult education should be analyzed as an integral aspect of an individual's entire life, and not as a separate experience. Many motives related to the recognition of various ways in which learning can be carried out (formal, informal and unorganized) have led to the emergence of the term “lifelong learning” ^[32]. This term is used to describe the educational reality of the information society, in which learning is continuous, intensive and diverse, relies on very diverse sources and meets different needs.

2.2.2 Situational barriers

Situational barriers have also been discussed in the literature with reference to the "organizational circumstances" of a student's learning situation that affect individual learning outcomes, especially in terms of determining opportunity and desirability. for specific means and purposes of training ^{[30; 33; 34]}. However, to understand the need for continuing education, it is especially important that the evolution of ICT and digital technologies has led to a rapid change in social conditions. In particular, the nature of labor and its market are changing rapidly due to the introduction of technology in the workplace. One of the particularly important changes affecting vocational training and the demand for continuing education is the exponential and ever-increasing production of knowledge, which has a significant impact on the requirements and working conditions.

Teachers should help students apply knowledge and skills in the intended conditions of the real world. At the same time, the context can be adapted, but it cannot be controlled. For the purposes of educational design, Tessmer and Ritchie ^[28] offer an idea of the context of higher education, consisting of three parts: 1) the indicative context (related to the students themselves and their previous knowledge and skills); 2) the educational context (the conditions of the educational environment available to the student for continuing education); and 3) the professional context (related to professional requirements). In addition, it should be borne in mind that there are additional factors both in the work and in the personal context that can influence a person's decision to take a continuing education course. Thus, individual motivation to participate in education is closely related to socio-demographic characteristics.

According to the conducted studies ^{[31; 32]}, people with a low level of education and professional status are primarily motivated by social contacts and external expectations, while people with a higher level of education and professional status are primarily motivated by social contacts and external expectations. individual career opportunities and cognitive interests. A study conducted at the Siberian Academy of Public Administration (SibAGS) ^[25] showed that peers/social groups play an important role. Getting a higher education on the basis of an average professional person stimulates: 1) the need for special knowledge and skills (35% of respondents); 2) the expectation of promotion or a change in the profile of activity (33% of respondents); 4) regulatory requirements or management requirements (24% of respondents); 5) the need to improve social status (8% of respondents). The presence of a development network in the workplace can affect a person's inclination and propensity to continue education. These studies show the complexity of contextual factors that can affect participation in continuing education.

2.2.3 Socio-economic barriers

Much less is known about the impact of social barriers on an adult student's decision to get a higher education. Some of these barriers are likely to contribute to the desire to get a higher education, while others may become an obstacle to entering a university. First of all, these factors, according to existing studies, include the cultural and historical roots of a given society or the standard of living of the population ^{[10; 13; 23; 36; 37]}.

Unfortunately, the well-being of the Russian population is now at the level of 2010-2011. Over the past 10 years, the real disposable incomes of the Russian population have mostly been declining. In the face of increasingly limited resources in terms of money and time in a permanent economic crisis, the motive for admission to university is increasingly the expectation of positive benefits. An increase in social status is one of these expected benefits. Russians are working more and more; on average, our citizens work 1,874 hours per year at their main place of work — this is much more than in Japan and the USA. More and more Russians are working during their holidays. Precariat and precarious employment fully meet the signs of a social phenomenon, acquiring a mass character ^[30]. It is obvious that full-time adults have little free time to study. Despite this, many of our fellow citizens combine work and study at the university. We have summarized the statistical data presented in the articles of domestic authors and made the following conclusions: 1) the share of working students in Russia (permanently or from time to time) is about 40-50%; 2) about 30-34% of students work constantly ^[31]; 3) by senior years, the number of students combining work with study is increasing ^[27]; 4) every fourth working student works 5 days a weekelyu ^[38]. Evening students (part-time students) most often work and also have a family, so they may face difficulties in studying due to a variety of competing priorities (family, educational, professional). The need to assimilate large amounts of information independently, write research papers, as well as solve practical problems can be frightening even for those adults who already have a higher education, but have not studied for some time.

2.3 Overcoming barriers in adult learning: TSD and flexible educational design

Despite the above barriers, studies show that adult students of any age can study successfully if they are given the opportunity, help and support they need ^{[6; 30; 39]}. To do this, teachers should consider the support of each adult student as a right, and not as an optional addition.

The ability to design and develop educational programs and courses begins with the development of a sensitive understanding of adult students, their motivation and the structure of involvement ^{[6; 8; 12]}. In research on overcoming barriers in adult learning, first of all, the need to create a safe and favorable learning environment is highlighted. Not only “educational materials should demonstrate concern for the safety of students as subjects of the educational process", but also “teachers themselves should also listen, observe, develop and use open questions that will invite them to participate in discussing problems in a positive learning atmosphere” ^{[12, p. 584]}. In formal education, such a positive classroom environment could be created by involving students in learning ^[12].

There are differences in the literature regarding the interchangeability of the terms motivation and engagement ^[40], but for the purposes of this work we will distinguish between them. Following many scientists, we define "motivation" as an inner aspiration that gives energy and direction to achieve a goal ^[41]. On the contrary, "involvement" is evidence that a person has motivation to move towards the goal. From this point of view, the teacher needs to focus assessments of motivation and student engagement directly on engagement, since this is the part of the continuum that we can directly observe (Fig. 2). In addition, given that engagement positively affects both academic performance and student success, it is necessary to focus on didactic solutions, which increase engagement.

Fig. 2. The relationship between motivation, involvement and success of students

Source: compiled by the author

From both a scientific and practical point of view, involvement should be divided into elements.  As such, behavioral involvement includes explicit participation in learning, which indicates such "internal personal processes" as perseverance, effort and other behaviors leading to success in learning ^{[35, p. 9]}. Depending on the mode (modality) of the educational course, this may include asking students questions and getting answers to them, interacting with resources in the learning management system (for example, browsing the pages of an online course) or sending assignments in a timely manner. On the contrary, cognitive interaction is associated with self-determined actions that indicate higher-order thinking. Some forms of cognitive participation are easy to observe (for example, providing quality work, choosing complex options, generative response), while others are difficult, for example, establishing personal connections between ideas, participating in metacognitive reflections, choosing the distribution of mental effort. Researchers also highlight emotional involvement ^[36], which includes an affective connection that leads to the student's interest, value or curiosity. As in the case of cognitive involvement, emotional involvement can sometimes be revealed by the teacher (for example, when the student discusses the links between the course content and personally significant situations), and sometimes by the student himself (for example, when he experiences a state of flow while working on learning tasks).

The theory of self—determination (TSD) is a metatheory of motivation, covering everything from internal and external motivation to cause-and-effect attributions, but for our purposes the most important aspect of TSD is the subtheory of basic psychological needs ^[37]. The needs subtheory assumes that any student is a growth-oriented individual who demonstrates a high level of purposeful behavior when his psychological needs are met. According to A.N. Leontiev, "in its primary biological forms, a need is a state of an organism expressing its objective need for a supplement that lies outside of it. ... The change and development of needs occurs through the change and development of objects that meet them and in which they are "objectified" and concretized. The presence of a need is a necessary prerequisite for any activity, but the need itself is not yet able to give a certain orientation to the activity" ^{[35, p. 12]}. The adult learner's need for competence is linked to the hope that our efforts aimed at growth and well-being will prove effective.

When the need for competence is satisfied, and all the necessary knowledge and skills appear that give self-confidence, the need for relationships is activated, as a desire for security and support. When a student feels connected to others, he believes that his purposeful efforts will be crowned with success. Finally, an adult student has a great need for autonomy, which concerns freedom of action when making decisions. Adult students, whose need for autonomy is satisfied, feel that they can make choices that correspond to their identity and lead to personal growth. Studies show ^[38] that meeting the needs of a student leads to the desired academic results, including improved academic performance, as well as the assimilation of the content of educational materials and skills. These desired academic results are often preceded by the achievement of a certain level of perseverance, i.e., although TSD refers to the characteristics of the internal motivational state of a person, studies show that the degree of satisfaction of these internal needs largely depends on environmental factors (Fig. 3). Thus, studies show that students report the highest level of competence, when they are in a learning environment characterized by clear expectations and consistency of structure ^[39]. Frequent informational and pedagogical support (for example, clear information about assignments and assessment structures) and the use of feedback on the development of the course content strengthen students' sense of competence when performing relevant complex educational tasks.

Fig. 3. The relationship between teacher choice, motivation, involvement and student success

Source: compiled by the author

The needs for relationships can also be met by the environment itself, since students who feel the support of their teachers demonstrate an increased level of all types of participation in learning ^[40]. Teachers who teach online are aware of the importance of interpersonal relationships, paying special attention to the relationship between students, as well as between students and the teacher. Of all the various interactions that arise in the educational process, a good student-student and student-teacher relationship is invariably the most predictable for student success ^[33].

Finally, satisfying the need for autonomy leads to an increase in adult academic performance, including an increase in self-regulation, interest/pleasure and perceived competence, as well as a decrease in anxiety ^[33]. Students who face unmet needs for autonomy demonstrate a decrease in the ability to solve problems, creativity and depth of information processing ^{[34; 41]}. To strengthen the sense of autonomy, teachers can provide meaningful choices in the learning process so that students feel invited, not forced to complete learning tasks. When students feel that they control the learning environment, their competence increases ^[42]. Teachers who support autonomy also recognize that the learning process can be accompanied by feelings such as anxiety, irritation or frustration.

Designing according to the TSD requires teachers to view their students as complex personalities, which means that you have to design many possible personalities and many possible situations if you really want to maximize the competence, connectivity and autonomy of various students ^[43]. Thus, flexible educational design consists in the development of courses improved by technologies that are maximally independent of modality and focused on the needs of adult learners. 

Figure 4 shows a conceptual model of meeting the needs of students as a mechanism for influencing the design of an educational course on student engagement, developed by the author. It reflects the requirements that apply to the organization of the course, as strategies and tactics, assessment of learning, in order to meet the needs of adult students in the educational process as much as possible, while maintaining a clear focus on the flexibility of the approach.

Fig. 4. Conceptual model of student satisfaction as a mechanism of influence of educational course design on student engagement

Source: compiled by the author

3. Conclusion

Based on the results of a critical analysis of the literature, we classified all barriers affecting adult participation in higher education into three separate categories according to the criterion of their stability (stability of action in time and space): 1) personal (student); 2) situational (student's immediate environment); 3) socio-economic (broader external environment).

A wide range of motives of adult students, presented in the existing empirical literature, indicates the difficulty of adapting the educational offer of universities to the needs of adult students and possible limitations of adult participation in education. Changes in the adult higher education system require a more holistic and humanistic approach that will take into account the heterogeneity of motivations, and correspond to the concept of lifelong learning. Overcoming the limitations of sectoral interpretations of higher education (bachelor's, master's, DPO), taking into account age, is possible on the basis of humanistic and integral approaches, which are based on the students themselves.

The more we know about the barriers that adults face in learning and how these barriers interfere with their learning, the more flexible approaches to learning will be, the higher the level of student involvement, the more active their personal growth and reflection. Providing affordable higher education for adults requires monitoring and measuring adult learning needs and taking into account their psychological, morphological and socio-demographic characteristics. Teachers will be able to eliminate many obstacles in learning as long as they create an atmosphere conducive to learning and consider themselves as participants in an equal dialogue with students. This means the need to organize learning as a flexible learning space that “recognizes” the characteristics of the target students and the learning environment, and determines how adult students will access learning, participate in it and demonstrate its results.