The Implementation of Andragogy in the Adult Education Program in Ethiopia

Abstract

Although there are multiple studies about the application of andragogy in multiple disciplines, studies on the implementation of andragogy in basic adult education/literacy programs are too limited in the Ethiopian context. The overarching purpose of this study was to scrutinize the implementation of andragogy in the Integrated Functional Adult Education [IFAE] program in Ethiopia. A qualitative case study design was employed to guide this research. Through in-depth interviews and observations, the data were collected from purposively selected five facilitators and five learners. The findings of this research revealed that andragogy was not implemented satisfactorily as expected. The facilitators did not communicate the objectives of the session before each session and their effort in making adults self-directed learners is limited. The adult learners’ experience is not considered as a resource in the facilitation process. The learning content is determined by curriculum developers, and the facilitators teach the learners as it appears in the textbook without contextualizing it with the adult learners’ lives. The extrinsic motivational strategies are mostly employed to sustain adult learners in the IFAE program. The results of this study also revealed that the needs assessment of adult learners has never been done so far. The adult learners did not participate in the facilitation process. In general, the facilitation process seems dominated by prescriptions and pedagogy dependent, which is incongruent with andragogy.

1. Introduction

There is a growing body of literature that depicts the differences between how to teach children and how to facilitate adult learning [1–5]. This implies, “there is a fundamental need to recognize the differences between adult and child learners” [5], p. 21 since “adults are distinctly different in the learning endeavor” [1], p. 16. With this assumption, andragogy emerged to make adult education unique from the traditional teaching approaches widely seen in formal schools [2].

Originally, the term andragogy is defined as “the art and science of helping adults learn, in contrast to pedagogy as the art and science of teaching children” [6].

In the teaching of adults, adult educators agree that learners are not the passive recipient of what the teacher says rather they are active [6] and the learning experience is driven by learners [7]. Parker [8] further suggested that “andragogical teaching is student-centered and personal (p. 138)” and it acknowledges the previous experience of the learners. Taylor and Kroth [4] argued that an instructor who employs the adult learning principles is a facilitator of learning to be happening but not the transmitter of knowledge. However, this is not true all the time; the facilitator may transmit knowledge to introduce new concepts for adult learners [3].

Adult learning is mainly distinguished as experiential, problem based, immediate and purposeful, and self-directed [3, 5, 6]. As Tomei said [5]; adults often come to the classroom with pre-established life and career goals. Knowles [3] asserted that as children become mature/adults, their self-direction increases, whereas their dependency on somebody else will decrease.

At the outset, Knowles came up with four basic assumptions about the characteristics of adult learners in which andragogy is premised [3] and laid the foundation of adult learning [4] that are distinguished from the assumptions of pedagogy premised. These assumptions include as a person matures: (1) the self-concept moves from dependency to independent personality and self-directedness, (2) the experience will increase both in quantity and quality which will serve as a resource for learning, (3) readiness to learn will be shifted from postponed use to immediate application of knowledge, and (4) orientation to learn will be changed from subject centeredness to performance centeredness. Later, he added the two additional basic andragogical assumptions: as a person matures (1) he/she needs to know why and how he/she is learning and (2) he/she is highly motivated by internal motivation [6].

Andragogical assumptions are flexible in nature and situational [3, 6] that would be adapted or adopted partially or the whole in different situations [6]. As Chan said [9]; it can be also applied to start from adult literacy level to the higher education level or any planned adult education programs. Chan [9] argued that andragogy has changed the philosophy of education in the world in which the transformation of the linear behavioral and cognitive way of teaching to the participatory and student centered. Andragogy makes education collaborative, practical, and engaging, leading to creativity and innovations among students [9]. Knowles [3] suggested that andragogy is not only applied for adults but also has implications for children. As discussed above, though these assumptions can also be applied to children and youth education, they are more relevant to adult education and the training of adults [3].

Ethiopia is providing a two-year integrated functional adult education [IFAE] program integrating with some basic skills related to the adult learners’ lives and development packages of the country as part of basic adult literacy/education. The program is supported by the National Adult Education Strategy, which was developed in 2008 with a special focus on two-year IFAE programs for those illiterate youths and adults, and dropouts. Ethiopia has also recognized the importance of literacy for the achievement of the development goals of the country [10]. Hence, adult and nonformal education are one of the six priority programs of the education and training system of Ethiopia in the education system development program [ESDP] V (2016–2020).

IFAE program, in Ethiopia especially in the Amhara region, is confronted with the problem of quality and relevance [10] due to the implementation of inappropriate facilitation among others. The quality and relevance of adult education programs largely depend on the implementation of andragogy. Considering this issue, the authors tried to examine different study results related to the application and implementation of andragogy in adult education programs.

There are studies conducted internationally on how to teach adults using the theory of andragogy and how to adapt and adopt the pedagogical assumptions in multiple disciplines. Among others, these include education and training [11], public health [12], criminal justice and police training [13], social work [14], human resource development [15], photoshop training [7], and online education [16].

In Ethiopia, Yilfashewa and Garkebo [17] conducted research entitled “Andragogical Methods to Sustain Quality Adult Education in Ethiopia.” The study surveyed a relatively high sample, 800 adult learners, 20 facilitators, and 10 coordinators and they found that active learning methods were not implemented satisfactorily. However, the study mainly focuses on the implementation of active learning methods in the adult classroom and did not examine the application of all adult learning principles in the IFAE program.

Despite several pieces of research are being conducted on the issue, there is a dearth of studies emphasizing the implementation of six andragogical assumptions on basic adult literacy programs. For example, a study carried out by Yilfashewa and Garkebo [17] focused on only instructional methods; a study by Bryan, Kreuter, and Brownson [12] considered five and ragogical assumptions; another study by Gravani [11] emphasized the selection of learning contents, instructional methods, and assessment. Neither of these studies investigated the implementation of andragogical assumptions at the basic adult literacy level, and particularly on the implementation of andragogy in the Ethiopian context is lacking.

The overarching purpose of this study, therefore, was to understand the implementation of andragogy in the IFAE program in Ethiopia. With this in mind, this study tried to answer the following research question:(i)To what extent are andragogical assumptions being implemented in the facilitation process of the IFAE program in Ethiopia?

2. Theoretical Framework

The theory that guides this study is Malcolm Knowles’s theory of andragogy. Malcolm Knowles’s andragogy is premised from six main assumptions including (1) the need to know, (2) the learner’s self-concept, (3) the role of experience, (4) orientation to learn, (5) readiness to learn, and (6) motivation to learn [6] and three additional assumptions including (1) adults can learn, (2) learning is an internal process, and (3) there are superior conditions of learning and principles of teaching [3]. The focus of this study is examining to what extent these six andragogical assumptions are being implemented in the IFAE program.

These andragogical assumptions have implications for instruction and program/curriculum development [3]. In this study, the instructional application of the six main andragogical assumptions in the IFAE program was investigated. Adult learning principles/andragogical assumptions have implications for experiences both inside and outside of the classroom [14]. Thus, the facilitation process of the IFAE program including the planning process, diagnosis of learners’ needs, instructional methods, and evaluation is examined from andragogical assumptions perspectives. Along this line, Hugo [18] argued that “adults must be involved; they must participate, from the very beginning and consistently thereafter, in the “diagnosis” of their own needs, their deficits, the planning of their learning, the process itself, and the evaluation thereof” (pp. 59–60).

3. Methods

The study was conducted in Debark city administration in Amhara regional state in Ethiopia. Debark city administration has been serving as a destination for tourists to visit Simien Mountains National Park, the world heritage site. In the city, there are about 13 IFAE centers, from these five centers are located at elementary schools, two centers in Kebele (the smallest administrative unit in Ethiopia) offices, and the remaining six centers are located in churches, kindergarten schools, and private houses. The number of facilitators is 13, one facilitator per IFAE center. In terms of sex, all of the facilitators were females.

The qualitative research method was employed as a guide for this research to investigate the status of implementation of andragogical assumptions in the IFAE program. The data were collected from the natural settings of the participants through close and face-to-face interaction [19]. A qualitative case study design was employed to guide this research and the entire IFAE program was considered as a single case [20]. A detailed investigation was carried out through in-depth data collection from multiple sources through interviews and observation [19, 20].

Five centers were selected using the purposive sampling technique, that is, two centers were selected from those located at primary schools, one center from each private house and church, and those located in Kebele offices to include participants from each set because the researcher believes that there will be variety in the implementation of andragogical assumptions in each IFAE center context. In the sampled centers, five IFAE program facilitators and five adult learners were selected purposively.

The age of IFAE program facilitators who participated in this study is ranged from 25–36 years. Their experience as a facilitator of the IFAE program is 2–4 years. Tsehay has four years of experience as a facilitator of the IFAE program, and Lemlem experienced facilitation in the program for 3.5 years. Banch, Menber, and Emebet have served for 2 years as a facilitator of the IFAE program. In terms of the level of education, Tsehay completed her diploma (10 + 3) in tourism management and Banch earned her diploma (10 + 3) in plumping. Lelem completed grade 12, and Emebet and Menber completed grade 10 (Table 1).

Table1 

Chrematistics of the IFAE program facilitators who participated in this study.

Interviews and observations were employed as data collection instruments. In-depth interviews were conducted with five facilitators and five adult learners in person since they are the main actors of the facilitation process of the IFAE program. A semi-structured interview was found to be appropriate to emphasize the main issues and to raise potential questions that will answer the basic question and probe the responses from the participant’s point of view [21]. We observed the entire classroom of each sampled center two times as a nonparticipant observer. Each observation lasted 40 to 65 minutes. The actual facilitation process looks like such as the teaching methods the facilitators employed, the adult learners’ participation, and the interaction of facilitators and adult learners, and some other observable problems/issues in the implementation of the andragogical assumptions were observed.

Thematic analysis was employed to analyze data obtained from interviews and observation [22]. The analysis was done following the analysis procedure of transcribing, coding, and theme development [22].

To ensure confidentiality and anonymity, written consent from each participant was taken and direct quotations of the participants in the finding were presented using pseudonyms.

4. Results and Discussion

In this research, implementations of andragogical assumptions are treated in the way that the facilitation process is undertaken. Moreover, the findings revealed that the actual implementation of andragogy in the facilitation process of the IFAE program includes needs assessment, planning, facilitation methods, and the assessment and evaluation as follows:

4.1. The Need to Know Why

As a person matures, he/she needs to know why and how they are learning [4,6]. The first question mostly raised by adult learners before the delivery of any content will be why we learn this. It is important to give a genuine and compelling reason for why they are learning and the way the program/content is being delivered for them to make them fully engage in the teaching-learning process.

However, this study indicates that although the facilitators stated the objective of the program and the content in their annual and lesson plans, they failed to communicate the objective of each session to the adult learners.” I have stated the objective and the expected outcome when I prepare the lesson and annual plan…..I state just like…after the end of the this…..students will be able to……” (Tsehay).

4.2. The Facilitators’ Effort to Make Adult Learners Be Self-Directed Learners

The interview result showed that most of the facilitators lack knowledge of self-directed learning and the concept was strange for them. Hence, this, in turn, hindered the effort of making adult learners are self-directed learners.

What…directed? …. I do not know about self-directed learning. …. I did not make learners self-directed. We facilitators only direct them, …. we do not leave them alone to learn on their own. I have never thought they should be self-directed. The concept is even something new for me. [Banch].

I do not do more than the class session. Because all my learners have aged above, 30 and they will not learn further. They tend to learn simple alphabets, reading, and writing. Some learners learn by asking their children, they ask what is not clear in their textbook what we provided/gave them. [Menber].

Another facilitator (Emebet) believed that the learners’ needs would not go beyond what has been discussed in the classroom. “…learners need does not go beyond what we deal in the class, I did not emphasize to make adult learners self-directed learners before. Um…I can say that I do not try to make adult learners self-directed.”

Some facilitators explained that they advised the adult learners who want to continue their education in the primary education/formal education to learn outside the classroom, especially in their local meetings, and they recommended adult learners to learn from their educated family members. They also advised learners to buy reference materials to read by themselves outside the classroom. These facilitators’ efforts to make adult learners self-directed learners seem unintentional.

…. I help one learner who wants to enjoy formal education…. I advise learners to learn from a variety of meetings what is related to the contents in the IFAE program such as health, saving, police meeting, and others. [Lemlem].(i)First, I make them buy Amharic alphabets, and those who have educated families study alphabets in their homes. I suggested the learners learn from their families. [Tsehay].

4.3. Utilization of Adult Learners’ Experiences in the Facilitation Process

As a person matures, the worth of experiences increases both in quantity and quality. Adult learners’ prior experiences are rich resources for learning in the facilitation process [3]. Therefore, the facilitators’ effort to utilize the adult learners in the facilitation process would increase the effectiveness of the facilitation process.

The result of this study revealed that most of the facilitators of the IFAE program did not utilize the adult learners’ experiences in the facilitation process. The facilitators’ effort in creating a conducive environment for adults to share their experiences among themselves seems low. Concerning this, Wubalem (learner) reported that her facilitator considered the learners’ informal discussion as noise and disturbance. “…she said that do not make noise, do not disturb. …We do not have group discussions. We talk…. talk… each other and go back to our home.” The facilitators did not provide a topic for discussion or did not make learners come up with topics for discussion; the usual topics that provoked talk amongst the learners were their daily lives and other social life chores. They did not understand that the adult learners’ prior life experiences are resources for learning.

Learners search for work by talking to each other. One learner searches and facilitates work for the other learner. They share experiences freely about what has been going on in their lives. However, I do not provide a title/issue to share their experience on that issue. I do not utilize the learners’ experience in the teaching-learning process. [Menber].

We do not share our experiences in the class with our classmates. …. just…emm… simply the teacher writes something and we write what is written on the board. Then she taught us. Sometimes she asks us to answer questions orally. Sometimes she makes us demonstrate some exercises related to alphabets and numbers in the class. Else, she did not make us share our experiences in the class. [Maritu].

In the observation, we were able to attest to the aforementioned views of facilitators and learners. The facilitators alone taught only alphabets and numbers. There were no group discussions in the classroom. The learners by themselves talk to each other informally about their lives with a slow voice in the classroom. This shows that adult learners have the interest to share their life experiences among themselves in the classroom.

Some facilitators misunderstood experience sharing that giving a chance of free talking among learners during the session as prior experience sharing. The facilitators made those who were fast adult learners to teach those who were late.

I make those who are fast students to teach those who are late. Those who fast blame the late learners, they said to them ‘we started at the same time why you late?’; 'please ask us what is not clear for you?’; ‘we do not want you late.’ To make all learners learn at the same pace, I make the fast learners teach the late learners. [Tsehay].

One facilitator explained that she utilizes the adult learners’ prior life experiences in the facilitation process. She further explained as follows:

Yeah! … For example, in sanitation, in toilet/latrine construction, I let them share the experience via discussion among themselves. For example, … it may be about housekeeping. …Then after discussion, they identify the better experiences. I invite those who have experiences to share with the rest of the classmates. When an invited learner is sharing his/her experiences with other learners, I write what he/she said and later ask the rest of the class to know what they learn. I will ask questions such as what do you understand from her/him? Who has better experience than him/her does? [Lemlem].

During our observation in this center, however, the adult learners talked about theft in their village and they were discussing it after the class. It became a hot issue and the facilitator joined talking. However, there was no sharing of experiences among the adult learners during the facilitation process. The adult learners followed what their facilitator taught and the facilitators instructed the learners. She did not make adult learners get into dialogue.

4.4. The Selection of Learning Contents and Its Relevance

Andragogy assumes that learners want to learn to perform effectively their societal and individual roles as community members, workers, spouses, parents, organizational members and leaders, leisure time users, and so forth [23].

The finding of this research revealed that the program developers select learning content and the facilitators accepted it as it is and teach the adult learners based on what is depicted in the textbook. The facilitators reported that the selected contents would be part of the session plan and would be delivered for adult learners. “I select the learning contents based on what is depicted on the textbook and then I will make it as part of session plan then I provide the contents to the learners.” [Emebet] The learners were not involved in the selection of content rather the facilitators taught the content in the textbook without contextualizing it in a way that would help to improve the adult learners’ lives; they imagined that all the contents in the textbook are relevant.

I select the learning contents from the book prepared for adult learners. The book guides me in the selection of learning content. The book is divided into chapters and topics and based on this I prepare the session plan. [Banch].

I cannot say I contextualized totally, …. but to some extent… I try to contextualize and aware learners of the importance of education. In general, I try to deal with all points stated in the textbook with the learners. All parts of the textbooks are supposed to be relevant to the learner. [Emebet].

There was a facilitator, who did not use the IFAE program curriculum. The facilitator reported that she taught adult learners the formal education curriculum by borrowing textbooks from the primary school teachers due to her lack of expertise on some learning contents of the IFAE program and stakeholders’ reluctance to provide the IFAE program. She taught adult learners based on her prior schooling experiences. Moreover, she reported that the adult learners’ interest was to continue their education through formal education and they wanted to learn English, which is out of the IFAE program.

I select contents based on the textbook from formal education. I do not use the IFAE book because I do not have expertise in agriculture, health, and others and the learners want to join the formal education. Therefore, I teach my learners based on my prior schooling experience. I may add some points, which will be useful for adult learners. For example, they want to read and write English…..Based on their interest I teach them about English alphabets and literature from elementary school books. In general, it is difficult to use the IFAE textbook because stakeholders are reluctant to provide education for adults. Students are clever… if you make a mistake they will ask you. I am preparing them to continue their education through formal education. [Tsehay].

Readiness to learn is dependent on the relevance of the learning content to the adult learners’ interest/purpose [4]. Adults come to the class with pre-established life and career goals [5] and they want to be able to apply whatever the knowledge to make them effective for tomorrow [3]. Therefore, learning should emphasize performance and skill improvement, which has an immediate application in the adult learners’ lives.

The current study revealed that most of the facilitators believed that the priority of the program is enabling the learners to read and write. “Our emphasis is reading and writing, we teach adults about alphabets and numbers daily.” [Banch]. They tried to cover all points stated in the textbook and they believed that all of the contents stated in the textbook are relevant.

The main task here in the program is enabling adult learners to read and write their names. Then we will teach adult learners further other education because our head told us repeatedly to enable adults to read and write their names. [Menber].

Although the program is supposed to be provided in integration with different stakeholders to make the learning content meaningful and relevant to the learners, the facilitators reported that a single facilitator provided it for both level one and level two learners within one classroom.

Umm…last year we provided integrated functional education like agriculture, health, saving, HIV/AIDS, harmful traditional practices, and so on with other stakeholders. Our role is facilitating education, we will adjust the program and fulfill materials, we will invite the stakeholders, and we do not provide education for adults. It will be integrated in such a way even the learners will be inspired to learn if stakeholders participate in the provision. [Menber].

Some adult learners who wanted to continue their education through formal education believed that the IFAE program learning contents would help them to continue their formal education. “It is good for me. It will help me to continue my education in the formal education.” [Abebe] Similarly, adult learners who were learning the formal education curriculum reported that the learning contents were relevant to them. Concerning this, Adem (learner) said, “All the contents are relevant for us. Now we can read and write both Amharic and English. In addition, other contents are relevant for us.”

In the observation, the facilitators tried to teach alphabets with local examples, what each letter looks like. The facilitator did not contextualize the learning contents except teaching alphabets; they gave examples stated in the textbook, which are unrelated to their context. They did not use local examples for other contents than the alphabets and some examples were strange for adult learners.

4.5. Motivational Strategies

The motivational strategies that the facilitators employed greatly influence the effectiveness of the facilitation process. We need to know the motives and interests of our students to be successful teachers because “adults are not just large children” [24], p. 3. Even though adults are motivated by some external motivators such as good grades, salary increments, and prizes, their potent motivation is internal motivation such as job satisfaction, personal satisfaction, and increased self-esteem [5]. Making the learning contents meaningful and relevant to their daily life activity has a vital role to keep and sustain the learners motivated. Adult learners are further motivated when you remind them how the activities in the class will help towards the progress of their goal [24].

This study indicated that most of the facilitators did not emphasize the role of motivation for effective learning. They emphasized how to treat adults when they make mistakes in doing exercises. They did not identify the adult learners’ goals and they did not make them achieve their goals. Furthermore, the facilitators tried to motivate those who perform better by giving marks. The motivational strategies that the facilitators mostly employed are oral motivations/passions to inspire adults to learn. The facilitators motivated learners who answered their questions. They motivated not only those who perform better but also motivated those who made mistakes in doing exercises. Some facilitators motivated their adult learners by giving some gifts as a reward to those who performed better. Hence, the motivational strategies that the facilitators employed were extrinsic and competitive.

I motivate them orally by saying be strong, study hard, and so on. When they write, I will say very well, keep it up and so on, even when they do not write properly to keep their morale up. I will make the class clap their hand for those who perform better. I appreciate the writing on the board in front of the learner. Adults do not feel good if you tell them directly that they do not perform better. Rather you will say ‘..it is good if you do in this way.’ [Menber].

Just…just…. by appreciating those who participate better in the class and by inspiring those who do not participate to participate in the classroom. For example, I ask questions and thank those who answer the question. …I appreciate all those who do better and who do not do well because those who do well will be satisfied and those who do not do better will not be demoralized. [Banch].

For those who attend regularly, I give an exercise book. For example, I gave four exercise books to four learners. When learners demonstrate and lecture for the remaining classmates, I order learners to clap their hands to them. I motivate them by saying you are clever and keep it up. When they made a mistake, I said to them it is good, if you do it in the way it will be better. I do not say ‘you miss it! You do not get it!’ etc. [Lemlem].

Some adult learners reported that their facilitators continuously help them to read and write, and they threaten them that they will be ashamed/abase by their supervisors, if the learners cannot read and write their names. The facilitators inspired the adult learners to read and write their names daily. They told them that being illiterate is shameful.

We all of the learners have a rural style; she advises us to wash our clothes and to keep our hygiene. She inspires us usually to read and write our names. In the classroom, she advised us to write our names and she said do not to embarrass me in front of my supervisor. [Wubalem].

Some adult learners explained that their facilitator motivated the learners by advising them not to miss the class and creating awareness about the benefit of the IFAE program. The facilitators help the learners by teaching learners repeatedly what the learners did not understand. “Just…she is good. She always said do not to miss the class. She told us the program is useful for us. She shows us repeatedly if there is something we do not understand.” [Maritu] They also motivated the adult learners to ask any question that was not clear for them freely.

She motivates us to ask what we do not understand, she said that she will answer every question and we should ask her freely. [Aberash].(i)study hard, well-presenting education, by making the education useful for us, making awareness about the importance of education, etc. [Abebe].

Some facilitators motivated adult learners who scored high by giving marks and appreciating what they have scored and this pushed the learners into the competition.

For example, those who scored 5 out of 5 in the homework will be said to be very good and keep it up. In addition, those who lose marks will be inspired to obtain such marks and appreciation. They get into competition with each other. I make them read passages in front of the learners. I invite learners to ask questions among themselves. [Tsehay].

4.6. Needs Assessment

Needs assessment would be carried out before the adult learners’ enrollment into the adult education program both nationally and locally [25]. There should be a link between learning and the learners’ interest [26]. Needs assessment helps us to know the learners’ current level of knowledge and skill and learning needs [25], thus allowing us to select appropriate learning material and develop appropriate curriculum-appropriate learning content and learning experience/activities. Hence, once the problem is identified, it will be easy to address [26]. We can diagnose the learners’ needs formally or informally [25] through a variety of methods including interviews, observation, focus group discussion, and questionnaires. After collecting the needs of the adult learners, their needs and interests will be prioritized in terms of the importance and feasibility of meeting the need [27]

This study indicated that most of the facilitators did not conduct the needs assessment before the adult learners started their education. During their mobilization of the adult learners, the facilitators informed the adult learners to come to the center and to learn even without informing which type of education they would have learned. The facilitators did not know the learners’ needs and they did not make learners set their learning goals. They were mobilizing the adult learners to attend the program, after mobilization, the learners directly joined the program, and the facilitators taught the learners.

The facilitators reported that they asked the adult learners’ needs and interests before starting the daily session, but the alternatives were provided by the facilitators for adult learners to choose either alphabets or numbers. The adult learners could not decide the learning contents they want to learn. “Before starting this education, she did not ask about our needs. Now she asks what we need and we say please teach us alphabets and numbers and based on our interest she is teaching us.” [Abebe] The other contents were provided based on the facilitators’ preference in which they were supposed to be relevant to the adult learners.

Some facilitators expressed that they tried to understand the learners’ interests when they mobilized the learners. However, they did not identify and keep a record of the individual learners’ needs and interests.

I understand that they want to learn. I asked the learners before starting the session about what they wanted to learn and what I should teach. Then I will teach them based on their interests and needs. Before delivering the program, I have mobilized the community and the learners told me their interests. Most of them need to read and write their names. They said that we should know how to use mobile and how to read letters and other literature.

Interviewer: How did you identify each learner's needs and interests? Do you have a record of each learner’s needs and interests?

OH … (Pause)… I came to know that the learning needs of most learners were reading and writing. Nevertheless, I did not identify and record each learner's individual learning needs. At the first time, they had a positive attitude towards the program although some of them became reluctant. Um…. In general, during mobilization, most of the learner gives their thoughts emphasizing reading and writing their name and other.

literature, they prefer reading and writing to signing with the thumb. However, we do not identify each learner’s needs and interests. [Banch].

Some of the facilitators believe that most of the learners had similar needs and interests, that is, reading and writing. They explained that most of the learners did not want to learn for a long period, and their needs were to identify alphabets and numbers and use mobile.

Yes, I asked them what they want to learn. For example, they want to learn numbers, they said that for today we want to learn about numbers. They asked me if they want to learn how to use mobile phones. At the very beginning, learners had a big desire to write and sign their names. The majority of learners' needs are similar, writing their names. Some others prefer to learn numbers. [Emebet].

As it was explained by the facilitators, some adult learners want to learn the primary school curriculum to continue their education in primary education in the future. These learners had a big desire to know English alphabets and other contents, which is beyond the IFAE curriculum. She explained that she has been giving special support to them, facilitating a special program. She has also reported that they are fast learners compared with the other learners.

I have learners who have a unique need, to know English alphabets and other contents related to formal education because they want to continue their education in the formal education system in the future. I call them early in person and teach them what they want before they come to the center. I want to support them to continue their education. They are level one but they can write and read better than the other read and now I group them as level two because I am helping them join the formal education by next year. [Lemlem].

4.7. The Planning Process

Planning in adult education is a participatory process. The adult learners’ needs and interests are the main ingredients in the planning process. The more the planning is participatory, the more the facilitation process would be effective and the learners would be committed to achieving the plan. Because adult learners are self-directed learners [3], they can determine the learning contents, the facilitation methods, the assessment procedures, etc. Mutual planning should be promoted in the planning of adults’ learning [23]. We, adult educators, may plan time, facilitation methods, learning contents and learning experiences, resources/learning aids, and assessment and evaluation with the full participation of adult learners. Since adults come to the learning sessions with pre-established goals, the planning process should be participatory to include the learners’ needs and aspirations. Furthermore, UNESCO [26] stated that adults are supposed to be responsible for their learning; they need to participate in the planning, delivering, and evaluation of their learning.

The current study indicated that the facilitators alone were preparing the annual and session plans without adult learners’ participation. First, they prepared the annual plan at the beginning of the academic year based on the textbook chapters/units followed by the sessions plan. Based on the annual plan, the daily session plans were being prepared day today.

Adult learners do not participate in the planning process. I plan alone then I share with them daily about what to learn. When the annual plan is being prepared, the learners had no voice.

I simply prepare the annual plan based on the textbook then I will prepare a session plan based on the prepared annual plan. [Banch].

Preparing lesson plan…? I prepare the lesson plan based on the annual plan. Of course, I have an annual plan. I prepare alone both the annual and session plans. The learners did not participate in the planning process. [Lemlem].

The facilitators reported that each learning topic in the textbook is planned in the session plan. They seem to follow their plan strictly; they provide education for learners based on the annual and session plans. “I planned yesterday what I want to teach today. I cannot go beyond my plan. This session plan guides me the daily lesson.” [Menber].

It was believed by some of the facilitators that the adult learners might not know about preparing the session plan and annual plan. The facilitators alone prepare the annual and session plans. “We did not consider that learners should be participating in the planning process. Learners might not know about session planning. They might be guided by us. First, I prepare alone the plan then I will communicate to the learners.” [Menber].

The adult learners confirmed that they have no knowledge of planning and they reported that their facilitators did not invite them in the planning process. What plan? She planned Thursday, Friday, and Sunday for teaching, otherwise I do not know any other plan. The other will be planned by her or another body I do not know. [Wubalem]. What does a plan mean? I do not know it. Interviewer: Plan means planning what and how you will learn. Ehhhh…. No one invited us to prepare a plan. [Adem].

Some facilitators did not know whether the adult learners should participate in the planning process. “Oh! Um … I prepare alone the plan [laugh]. Should the students participate? Anyways, they have never participated in the planning process.”[Tsehay].

4.8. The Selection of Facilitation Methods

Learning is an active process in which learners participate actively to make decisions in their learning such as what, how, and why they are learning [26]. Participatory learning, active learning, experiential learning, reflective learning, and collaborative learning are the language of andragogy to infer the learner-centered facilitation methods.

This study indicates that the facilitators usually wrote on the blackboard and the learners tried to copy it. Afterward, the facilitator lecture about what is written on the board. About this, Maritu (learner) said, “…first the facilitator writes on the board then we write immediately...” The facilitators checked how each adult learner wrote and gave immediate feedback. Most of the time, the facilitator employed lecturing as a facilitation method. The adult learners explained that facilitators usually lecture the learners on what is written in the adult learners’ textbook. “She reads the book first and tells us what the book says.” [Aberash] “…. First, I usually use lecturing to make brief on the issue/topic. Chair to chair supervision/support….” [Menber].

In the observations, we were able to confirm that the most frequently employed facilitation methods were teacher centered including lecturing, oral questioning, class exercise, and drilling. Some facilitators employed demonstration rarely to teach practical learning content. A similar study by Yilfashewa and Garkebo [17] confirmed that the implementation of active learning methods was not satisfactory in the IFAE program.

Some facilitators reported that they employed discussion and demonstration rarely as a facilitation method to make adult learners share experiences among themselves. “….. for every topic, I lecture learners first. For example, by demonstrating what I have done so far in agriculture, Practical demonstration. [Lemlem] …. If there is a discussion, they will discuss….”[Menber].

In our two observations in each of these IFAE centers, the facilitators were lecturing the adult learners all over the daily session and the learners were attending what their facilitators said. Sometimes, the facilitators asked the adult learners oral questions and the learners were answering what they have asked.

The facilitators explained that the facilitation methods were selected by the facilitators when they prepare the session plan without the participation of learners. In the session plan, the learning contents and the facilitation methods were included. They determined before which facilitation methods should be employed for given learning content. Concerning this, for example, member said, “I select the facilitation methods during the preparation of the session plan.”

The adult learners noted that they do not believe that they had roles in the selection of facilitation methods rather they believe that selecting the facilitation methods was the responsibility of the facilitators. “I do not participate in this way. This is the teacher’s responsibility.” [Adem] Moreover, most of the adult learners and some facilitators had no adequate knowledge of facilitation methods. OH! How do I…. select…? I do not know facilitation methods. Interviewer: Facilitation methods/means are the ways/methods in which the learning contents are provided to you. For instance, lecturing, group discussion, demonstration, etc. Um…She did not let us participate in this way. [Maritu]-Learner Based on the learners' interests what I choose will not fit for learners. Interviewer: Could you give me an example? Just …example if they are interested in numbers, I teach them numbers [Banch]- facilitator.

4.9. The Assessment and Evaluation

Tomei [5] suggested that adults should be involved to identify and evaluate the assessment techniques to be employed. In addition, MoE [28] stated that assessment of adult learners should be a participatory and coordinated activity undertaken by learners, facilitators, functional adult literacy and other relevant committees, and professionals from community development agents.

The finding of this study revealed that the assessment methods employed by the IFAE program facilitators varied from center to center and from facilitator to facilitator. Most of the facilitators employed assessment methods such as reading, writing, oral question, and demonstrating/showing alphabets, tests, and class exercises. The facilitators’ word of the mouse is stated as follows:(i)making learners show letters, by monitoring when they read and write and if they said that they understand. [Lemlem].

….by chair to chair/their sit supervision, who write correctly especially his/her name, to what extent learners participate to answer questions and to what extent they understand and answer it correctly and I will give them mark by ticking. [Emebet].

In addition, some facilitators employed assessment and evaluation methods such as participation in the class, punctuality, and the capacity of learners to grasp lessons. For instance, Banch (facilitator) reported, ‘… I check the adult learners' progress through Participation, punctuality, and the capacity of learners to grasp lessons. ‘Some other facilitators noted that they employed tests, oral questioning, and peer evaluation to assess the adult learners' progress. The adult learners took continuous tests. The facilitators gave the learners something to be written and they made them check their progress among themselves. ‘Test/exam, oral questioning…. and I will give something to be written by learners and checking each learner whether they write or not, I will invite them to show for their classmates.’ [Tsehay] Some other facilitators have employed test and class exercises only. ‘There is a test. The facilitators also give us class exercise.’ [Wubalem] Some facilitators asked adult learners about what they have learned previously before starting the daily session. They checked the learners' progress based on how much the adult learners remember what they have learned so far. ‘I always ask today what they have learned yesterday, I ask questions like what we have learned yesterday. Do you remember what we have Learned So Far...?’ [Banch]

During observation, the facilitators have been giving individual class exercises for adult learners repeatedly. The adult learners were eager to give their exercise books to their facilitators for tick. It seems that they believed ticking as a means of obtaining marks. The facilitators gave value to each class exercise. The adult learners were eager to get good marks. The adult learners were getting into a competition; they tried to do the class exercises faster. Moreover, the facilitators followed learners and they checked how they were doing each class exercise. They also asked oral questions repeatedly to check the learners' progress. The facilitators invited those who were voluntary learners to do exercises on the board. The learners were reluctant to do exercises on the board. They invited them by calling their name.

The facilitators explained that the learners were evaluated based on their practical performance followed by theoretical lessons learned in the class. The practical learning contents included urban agriculture, toilet construction and handling, saving, and personal and environmental hygiene. These practical learning were given weights for example out of 10, 15, and 20. The sum of each assessment result took out of 50 per semester. Then at the end of the academic year, the average of the two semesters would be cumulated and adult learners will be evaluated out of 100%. Adult learners, who scored 50 and above will be promoted to the next level.

For example, when I make home-to-home supervision, I usually check how learners are applying what they have learned in the classroom. For instance, their engagement in agricultural activities, saving money, and use of a toilet. I usually evaluate each of their home-based activities either out of, 10, 15, 20 marks which sum up to 50% in each semester finally, at the end of the year the learners will be evaluated out of 100 to determine their promotion to the next level. [Emebet].

I set criteria for practical lessons on different issues like agriculture, saving, sanitation, etc. to evaluate learners’ outcomes. For theoretical lessons, I evaluate simply by observing what they write and inviting them to demonstrate in the class. Finally, semester evaluation constitutes 50%. The sum of the two semesters' results summed up to 100% to evaluate whether the learners were promoted to the next level. [Lemlem].

In one of the IFAE program centers, a facilitator did not evaluate the learners’ performance yet, she was new for evaluation of adult learners and she assumed that the learners should be evaluated in terms of their classroom participation. She had not had sufficient knowledge of.

How adult learners should be evaluated? Her word of the mouse is illustrated as follows:

I evaluate the learners' outcomes in terms of their daily participation in the classroom. I do not take the result yet. However, I have information from my colleague that learners will be evaluated out of 100% in June. Finally, I will evaluate learners based on their participation and their performance in reading and writing. In general, since we teach them, we know who have good performance or not. Finally, we can evaluate them. I do not know how students should be evaluated. I can learn from my senior colleagues. [Banch].

Most of the facilitators determined all the assessment methods and procedures. They selected the assessment methods that they were supposed to be important. They did not communicate to the adult learners about the assessment methods that will be employed and the weight of each assessment. …they do not participate; I select assessment methods that I supposed to be important to assess the learners’ progress [Tsehay] I do not have any role to select the assessment methods. The teacher herself selects the assessment methods. [Maritu]. Umm…I do not know how we are evaluated. I know that last year those who read and write were promoted to level two. [Wubalem].

Most of the facilitators reported that adult learners were not certified for their participation in the program and they usually asked that they should be certified at the end of the academic year as the primary school did.

…They request us to be certified. Learners have results out of 100 but there is no certificate. There is no prize/reward yet for those who achieve better. Last year we were ordered by Education Office to identify those who achieve better for reward/prize. We have identified those top five adult learners but they did not receive the reward. The learners complain about why they were not certified and rewarded. [Emebet].

5. Conclusion

Andragogy is a theory that guides adult education practices by provoking need-based learning and a learner-centered facilitation process in which the learning process is initiated more on the learners’ side. Andragogy acknowledges the adult learners prior learning experience in the facilitation process since adults has a greater volume of experience that will serve as a resource for learning. Hence, implementing andragogy and andragogical assumptions in the facilitation process of adult learning is vital.

With this premise, the present study mapped the implementations of andragogy in five IFAE centers. Despite a wider consensus being reached on the relationship between the proper practices of andragogy and effectiveness on adult literacy programs, the findings of this study revealed that the andragogical assumptions have not adhered.

The facilitators appeared to be unfamiliar with most of the concepts and principles in line with andragogy. Consequently, facilitators provided little or no attention to the adult learners’ life experiences, their need to know, motivational issues, and joint planning during the learning process. The facilitation process seems full of prescriptions and authoritative. Experiential, collaborative, and participatory learning seems to be neglected in the IFAE programs. As juxtaposed through different instruments, facilitators tended to teach adult learners based on their traditional schooling experiences. It can be fairly argued that the facilitation of IFAE sessions has not been conducted in accord with the core andragogical assumptions. Hence, the low level of the implementation of andragogy in turn highly deteriorates the quality of the IFAE program.

6. Implications of the Study

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are forwarded:(i)As shown in the findings of this study, most of the facilitators do not know about andragogy and andragogical assumptions. Therefore, in-service and preservice training on andragogy and basic facilitation skills should be devised for facilitators to make the facilitation process effective and the IFAE program in general.(ii)There should be continuous monitoring and follow-up by the IFAE program experts on whether andragogy is being implemented in the program as expected.

6.1. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research

This study contributes to the field through an in-depth analysis of the facilitation practices in the IFAE program by using andragogy as a theoretical and analytical framework. Nevertheless, the study has some limitations. First, the factors why andragogy is not being implemented to the expected level in the IFAE program have not been explored. Second, the relatively small sample that participated in this inquiry could not allow for generalization to the larger IFAE centers. Third, the participants of this study were only the IFAE program facilitators and adult learners. However, IFAE experts/supervisors who could have provided additional important information did not participate in this study. Therefore, we recommend those researchers in the area of the adult education program investigate the factors affecting the implementation of andragogy in the adult education program by participating adult learners, facilitators, and IFAE program experts and/supervisors.

Data Availability

Data are available from the authors on a reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.