View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Creating Technology-Enabled Lifelong Learning: A Heutagogical Approach

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Creating Technology-Enabled Lifelong Learning: A Heutagogical Approach
Language: English
Authors: Jennifer Lock, Sawsen Lakhal, Martha Cleveland-Innes, Paula Arancibia, Debra Dell, Noeleen De Silva
Source: British Journal of Educational Technology. 2021 52(4):1646-1662.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 17
Publication Date: 2021
Document Type: Journal Articles
Information Analyses
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Lifelong Learning, Technology Uses in Education, Blended Learning, Distance Education, Electronic Learning, Independent Study, Teaching Methods, Educational Strategies, Delphi Technique, Instructional Design
DOI: 10.1111/bjet.13122
ISSN: 0007-1013
1467-8535
Abstract: Can a new instructional approach influence lifelong learning and the development of competent lifelong learners? Blended and online learning provides a platform for learning that introduces technological affordance to enable learning. We seek to find an intersection between blended and online learning and lifelong learning through an instructional approach that encourages learners towards management of their own learning. This opens the door to becoming an autonomous, capable, self-directed lifelong learner. In this context, heutagogy offers an instructional approach that may connect blended and online learning settings with the development of lifelong learning competence. After conducting a systematic literature review using the terms heutagogy, blended and online learning, and lifelong learning, literature that considers how to inspire and build human agency capabilities over the lifespan was chosen for Delphi method expert review. Using this methodology, we explore the possibility that online and blended higher education will contribute, where heutagogical experiences exist, to technology-enabled lifelong learning. Results corroborate the idea that heutagogy and lifelong learning are intertwined by some common principles and that these are applicable to both blended and online learning settings and lifelong learning.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1464212
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGGUrWw9RAwBqD4ze_Ee7uWAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDHKUNWWC6ZjouNfslwIBEICBm4w93O-pr2CHlXI7DwZ8PJUEdBri3Fq94oATn-__6TxEGO6ydU1kWhgOcbQG_JHs2xbVaH7QWNY9aDutil0TyYU1NN2lRedR5BI-GmbcCsr1CklNqjRa5dUxdUQJvn_AiN17pm8b2AZcO0kYx2H88TS-Y9pgS0izngdq0aK0MOgbqq0ya2kcFkE2k3WYQNxphsHavtIRSoHW1Eyx
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0151267540;58i01jul.21;2021Jul08.01:51;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0151267540-1">Creating technology‐enabled lifelong learning: A heutagogical approach </title> <p>Can a new instructional approach influence lifelong learning and the development of competent lifelong learners? Blended and online learning provides a platform for learning that introduces technological affordance to enable learning. We seek to find an intersection between blended and online learning and lifelong learning through an instructional approach that encourages learners towards management of their own learning. This opens the door to becoming an autonomous, capable, self‐directed lifelong learner. In this context, heutagogy offers an instructional approach that may connect blended and online learning settings with the development of lifelong learning competence. After conducting a systematic literature review using the terms heutagogy, blended and online learning, and lifelong learning, literature that considers how to inspire and build human agency capabilities over the lifespan was chosen for Delphi method expert review. Using this methodology, we explore the possibility that online and blended higher education will contribute, where heutagogical experiences exist, to technology‐enabled lifelong learning. Results corroborate the idea that heutagogy and lifelong learning are intertwined by some common principles and that these are applicable to both blended and online learning settings and lifelong learning. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topic Recent, and what is often continuous, change is impacting all we do, including the design and delivery of education.This change requires new instructional models that improve immediate learning outcomes and prepares learners for learning across the lifespan.The use of instructional processes labeled heutagogy include the opportunity for, and application of, activities of learning self‐direction, ‐determination, and ‐regulation, which can be helpful, even essential, for lifelong learning.What this paper adds This paper identifies an informed perspective, from data, that heutagogical design must be consciously implemented and supported for online and blended learning by instructional designers, instructors, and institutional leadership and infrastructure.It is reasonable to suggest that online and blended learning could contribute, where heutagogical learning opportunities exist, to technology‐enabled lifelong learning.Instructional practices that include choice, flexible or negotiated assessment, facilitation of reflection, learner confidence development, and involvement of the learner in designing their learning can be considered heutagogical.Implications for practice and/or policy Develop policy in support of a change in instructional practice that embraces a heutagogical approach in the design of courses to foster greater self‐directed and lifelong learning.Educational development to support instructors to understand heutagogy and how it can be applied in the design and delivery of blended and online learning to foster technology enabled lifelong learning.With the implementation of a heutagogical approach, student orientation along with purposeful scaffolding needs to be implemented to support students as they become more autonomous learners in technology‐enabled settings.</p> <p>Keywords: blended and online learning; heutagogy; higher education; technology‐enabled lifelong learning</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-2">INTRODUCTION</hd> <p>Recent and ongoing economic, pedagogical, social, and technological, change has created the need for significant adjustments for higher education and a new relationship between higher education and society. For Broucker et al. (2016), higher education change must include development of strict discipline in graduates as this is needed in a new public sector. Others see a decided need for higher education to promote social awareness and advocacy as development of a view towards the greater good (Williams, 2016). Universities historically have been in place to execute two critical roles: construct and critique knowledge and hold society's members accountable in reference to the truth value of knowledge. Pond (2002) suggests that "neither the purpose, the methods, nor the population for whom education is intended today bear any resemblance to those on which formal education is historically based" (p. 1). Given this, there are multiple opportunities for higher education to adjust to the needs of students and society. Dynamic, complex societies now expect learning across one's lifetime. Known as lifelong learning, it "refers to the process where individuals acquire knowledge and skills... from different sources, either intentionally or not. The sources may be established teaching institutions but need not be; sources can be other people, every situation in life, and so on. Learning is an individual process" (Jarvis, 2014, p. 53). For the purpose of this article, the focus is on lifelong learning in general and not on workplace learning.</p> <p>These multiple shifts have evolved into significant pressure for change in higher education. The response from higher education could be in reference to "changing student demographics, global migration, delocalization of education offerings through technology, increased competition for students, 21st‐century skill development, employment sector transformation, increasing accountability requirements" (Cleveland‐Innes, 2016, p. 21), in combination with a related but distinct need for technology‐enabled lifelong learning competency development (Duderstadt, 2009; Weber & Duderstadt, 2012).</p> <p>It is evident that student demographics are changing and new technology is emerging; both must be considered as necessary influences on higher education reform (Barnett, 2012). As we consider student participation in higher education shifting to blended and online learning and the impact, if any, on lifelong learning, we will do so with careful reference to the current diversity of students in higher education. It is reasonable to assume that as student characteristics change, so must higher education design and delivery change according to their needs. Quaye et al. (2019) suggest the increasing diversity in the higher education student population includes age and more, with demographic changes occurring in traditional patterns of gender distribution, race, disability of all types, sexual identity and preference, religious beliefs, and social and economic status.</p> <p>In sum, multiple changes at the microlevel of student characteristics will require higher education to change. In addition, societal or macrolevel changes in the form of greater information access, rapid communication, emerging technology and digital economies will also create pressure for higher education change. Knowledge construction occurs often and at a faster pace. A culture of continuous learning to stay abreast of workplace change is just one example. Continuous or lifelong learning development will prepare graduates to respond to demands for many changes, including highly skilled labour competencies that must be upgraded often.</p> <p>Technology‐enabled learning is likely to be part of this continuous or lifelong learning, learning beyond the higher education experience. With the growth of blended and online learning, higher education institutions have more ability "to increase flexibility, improve efficiency, and foster engagement in learning" (Hashey & Stahl, 2014, p. 78). Available technologies support multiple ways to engage with the content, collaborate with others and share understanding. This provides more opportunities to serve diverse student populations. Providing such opportunities in higher education gives students experiences that help them develop learning confidence and competence. This then may influence their capacity to become lifelong learners that engage in continuous learning.</p> <p>Traditional forms of education delivery that are content driven and teacher led are not flexible or personalized enough to meet the diverse needs of learners. Assuming that blended and online learning with heutagogy, in its well‐defined form, will lead to pedagogical practices that support learner independence and control (Blaschke, 2021), we suggest that this instructional strategy will also serve diverse learners. The range of experiences, competence and capability among this population of diverse learners is too wide to be addressed by even the most effective teaching practices. Instead, learners need the opportunity to choose ways of learning and ways of demonstrating learning that are most beneficial to them. In addition to our suggestion that heutagogical opportunities will offer development that can allow students to use these practices technology‐enabled lifelong learners, it is also beneficial during their university level study.</p> <p>Combining the needs of a diverse student population with the needs of lifelong learners can be called "lifelong learning mode" in higher education (Schuetze & Slowey, 2002, p. 324). Add more salient and transparent treatment of students as lifelong learners, and we address multiple demands aligned to the needs of changing societies and student populations. A diverse higher education delivery system that uses blended and online learning will address the needs of diverse students, support technology‐enabled lifelong learning, and, ultimately, the required competencies for citizens in diverse, dynamic societies. In this article, by technology‐enabled learning, we mean the use of technology by individuals as a cognitive tool in order to "access and analyse information, interpret and transform that information into their own personal knowledge, and then represent that knowledge to others" (Ertmer & Ottenbreit‐Leftwich, 2013, p. 176).</p> <p>Models of blended and online teaching and learning can be more, or less, heutagogical in practice. "The renewed interest in heutagogy is partially due to the ubiquitousness of Web 2.0, and the affordances provided by the technology" (Blaschke, 2012, p. 56). In a review of blended learning models, Cleveland‐Innes and Wilton (2018) refer to multiple models, some of which emulate more traditional transmission models of education and others more learner‐centred and interactive. According to Blaschke (2012), heutagogical approaches are present in blended and online programmes, but not uniformly. Those that exist demonstrate "course design elements that are characteristic of heutagogy" (p. 56). In the event that students are afforded learning opportunities characteristic of heutagogy in blended and online learning, it is possible that such opportunities will be used later in technology‐enabled lifelong learning.</p> <p>The lifelong learning that is a required 21st‐century core competency (Romero, 2015) can be defined by these underlying principles: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) the centrality of the learners and learners' needs, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) the importance of equal opportunities in life, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>) the quality and relevance of learning opportunities. These principles are derived from research that sampled 12,000 European citizens (European Commission, 2001). The Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (1996) was also creating lifelong principles that considered learners' needs but puts emphasis on self‐directed learning, motivation to learn, and learning to learn. Delors (1996) developed four pillars of learning as fundamental principles for reshaping education with regard to lifelong learning: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref4">1</reflink>) learning to know, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref5">2</reflink>) learning to do, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref6">3</reflink>) learning to live together and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref7">4</reflink>) learning to be. This early work supports the continuing efforts to describe and design lifelong learning practices (Karoudis & Magoulas, 2017). The concept of heutagogy is becoming part of this narrative.</p> <p>Heutagogy, as defined below, provides characteristics supportive of lifelong learning. According to Moore (2020), heutagogy is "a learner‐centred instructional strategy or approach" (p. 382). Embodied in the concept of heutagogy is reflective practice, supporting a critical learning skill for learning to learn and learning to know (Blaschke, 2012; Delors, 1996). Heutagogical design elements enclose some features relevant to the development of lifelong learning skills, "learner‐defined learning contracts", "flexible curriculum", "learning‐directed questions", and "flexible and negotiated assessment" (Blaschke, 2012, pp. 64–65). By using a heutogocial approach to instructional design, students learn to make decisions with regard to their learning, become more autonomous learners, and develop the knowledge and skills to engage heutagogically beyond higher education as lifelong learners.</p> <p>Blended learning by definition includes both online or technology‐enabled learning and in‐person classroom learning (Friesen, 2012; Garrison & Kanuka, 2004; Garrison & Vaughan, 2008; Hrastinski, 2019; International Association of Blended Learning, 2020). Lifelong learning in the digital world shares this requirement of learning technology competency. Add to this the notion that online and blended learning is an evolution of distance education, and learner independence and control are necessary if not sufficient conditions for success. Lifelong learning is steeped in notions of similar premises of learner self‐directedness, self‐regulation and self‐determination. Two things have changed. Long‐standing lifelong learners now must self‐direct, self‐regulate and self‐determine using technology. In addition, many students who are new to lifelong learning of any kind will find it an imperative rather than a choice. They will need to be ready to self‐direct, regulate and determine in much of their continuing learning; "students are the professionals of tomorrow and need to develop the competences of the knowledge worker" (van Weert, 2005, p. 1). These competencies include "knowledge, skills, behaviour to effectively use digital technology and smart devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops and personal computers for purposes of collaboration, communication, support, and expression" (Anthonysamy et al., 2020, p. 6). They will have the opportunity and need to use the technology. If we:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> define heutagogy to include the application of student self‐direction, regulation and determination;</item> <p></p> <item> create online and blended learning opportunities experience in university programmes that include these applications while in technologically mediated learning settings; and</item> <p></p> <item> novice and seasoned lifelong learners engaged in this type of university study will be further prepared for technology‐enabled lifelong learning.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0151267540-3">Aim of the study</hd> <p>According to the results of the 2019 Canadian National Online and Digital Education Survey, "[o]nline course registrations grew by around 10% between 2016–17 to 2017–18" (Johnson, 2019, p. 10). Further, with the COVID‐19 pandemic, there has been a major shift in education to online learning. Within these online, technology‐enabled learning environments, is there support for self‐directed learning, the development of learner empowerment and autonomy? Further, how within these online learning environments can we create heutagogical practices to provide students with greater experience in becoming lifelong learners?</p> <p>This study explores the possibility that online and blended learning in higher education will contribute, where heutagogical learning opportunities exist, to the practice of activities that lead to competent technology‐enabled lifelong learning. We propose that learning experiences available in credit‐based, formal, online and blended higher education may be used, when designed with heutagogical opportunities, in other learning situations that require technology‐enabled lifelong learning. We present a conceptual relationship that explains this relationship. For this purpose, we have completed an exploratory Delphi method expert review to examine a plausible conceptual relationship, if one exists, between online and blended higher education, heutagogical practices and technology‐enabled lifelong learning.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/58I/01jul21/bjet13122-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="bjet13122-fig-0001.jpg" title="." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0151267540-5">LITERATURE REVIEW</hd> <p>In the systematic analysis of literature, the terms self‐regulated, self‐directed and self‐determined revealed themselves to be overlapping but distinct. As our research unfolds, we determine the significance of all three phases, student self‐direction, determination, and regulation, and include a new sense of the overlap and uniqueness inherent in all three of these phrases (Banerjee, 2019). It is in this overlap that we see the possibility of heutagogical definition.</p> <p>Proponents of heutagogy insist that the Internet and all its connected offerings create prime conditions for heutagogical practice to emerge (Blaschke & Hase, 2015a, 2015b; Rusli et al., 2020). This suggestion is supported in some of the literature which concludes that blended learning is effective at building skills for self‐direction (Uz & Uzun, 2018). However, self‐determined learning is central to heutagogy. The emphasis is on the development of learner capacity and capability (Blaschke, 2021; Blaschke & Hase, 2015a, 2015b, 2019). These researchers (Abraham & Komattil, 2017; Bhoyrub et al., 2010; Conesa et al., 2020; Moore, 2020) identified that autonomous and confident learners are more likely to achieve success in education, particularly in technology‐enabled distance education. Bachman and Scherer (2015) conclude that:</p> <p>creating a classroom that embraces autonomy is more likely to result in superior learning and to enhance students' feelings of competence and support. An autonomous environment also creates a sense of belonging as students feel like they can learn on their own time leading them to feel more competent and cared for. (p. 13)</p> <p>Today, we are faced with considering online and blended learning and how learner agency and capability development can be nurtured and validated in a highly "autonomous environment" (Bachman & Scherer, 2015, p. 13) In this regard, Blaschke (2012) states,</p> <p>In a heutagogical approach to teaching and learning, learners are highly autonomous and self‐determined and emphasis is placed on development of learner capacity and capability with the goal of producing learners who are well‐prepared for the complexities of today's workplace. (p. 56)</p> <p>Luckin (2010) describes a continuum of learning that develops the learner from pedagogy through andragogy to heutagogy: the PAH Continuum. Both pedagogy and andragogy are conceived as teacher‐led and/or community‐led forms of learning (Blaschke, 2021), whereas, heutagogy is "presented as an extension of andragogy" (Blaschke, 2012, p. 67) that is focused on self‐determined learning. This process runs along a lifelong learning path that may foster lifelong learning skills or tendencies (Tezer & Aynas, 2018). The self‐directedness of the learner becomes critical in navigating along the continuum and a necessary skill of the lifelong learner (Bonk et al., 2015; Mello, 2016; Rivenburg, 2016; Song & Bonk, 2016; Yang, 2016). In particular, the impact of blended and online learning on the development of self‐directed learning has been found to be positive and significant in enhancing learner agency, capability and academic success (Broadbent, 2017; Geng et al., 2019; Hill et al., 2017; Taylor et al., 2018; Vanslambrouck et al., 2019). It is critical that we reassess how we learn, and how we design learning environments, in reference to this learning continuum, lifelong learning, the range of, and relationship between, self‐directed and self‐determined learning skills, learning environments and technology usage.</p> <p>Our systematic literature review investigated the connection between heutagogy and online learning. While some pattern of language use exists, clarity is not yet attained. Moore (2020), for example, calls the concept of heutagogy a "self‐directed knowledge journey" (p. 382), while others use self‐determination as a descriptor for heutagogy. Many interesting explications use the constructs of self‐direction and self‐determination interchangeably to describe the characteristics of a learner's heutagogical disposition. Studies that integrate one or both of the terms focus on multiple related topics, such as learner disposition (Agonács et al., 2020); learner technology readiness (Geng et al., 2019); building learner skills (Mello, 2016); or pedagogical design (Blau et al., 2019; Haworth, 2016; Snowden & Halsall, 2016). Other examples are described below.</p> <p>Geng et al. (2019) combined a variety of self‐direction, motivation and technology readiness instruments to compare the cognitive, social and teaching presence of blended learning and non‐blended learning students. They conclude that the blended learning environment is superior for facilitating learning. In another example, Mello (2016) used action research to investigate whether technology‐enabled blended delivery with online learning resources aided in the development of motivation and self‐direction. Although students in the study reported value for the blended resources, there was a considerable difference in readiness depending on the programme of study and indications that scaffolding of controls may be beneficial.</p> <p>The complexity identified in these examples is evident in recent systematic reviews which conclude that more theory, definition and empirical application of heutagogy are warranted (Agonács & Matos, 2019; Moore, 2020). This evidence provides support for further investigation into what heutagogy is, how technology‐enabled learning is combined with heutagogical principles, and how the use of heutagogical principles in blended learning may be used in lifelong learning. While still in its development phase, the opportunity to employ what appear to be emerging conceptual outlines of heutagogy to define the type of learner independence and control (Garrison & Baynton, 1987) required in successful distance education experiences is enticing.</p> <p>Blaschke and Hase (2019) provide some of the most thorough explications of heutagogical practice. They suggest this practice is imperative now, as "our educational systems are being challenged to adopt new learning and teaching approaches that maximize technological affordances" (p. 1). Other challenges exist. Higher education institutions must address the needs of a more diverse student body who are prepared for the continuous learning required in new dynamic, complex and digital societies (Cleveland‐Innes, 2020; Yang et al., 2015). In this regard, lifelong learning opportunities become imperative.</p> <p>Lifelong learning describes a continuous learning process throughout the lifespan. This activity enhances knowledge, skill and competence that can contribute to personal development for the individual. It can also contribute skill capacity to "an advanced knowledge society, with sustainable economic development, more and better jobs and greater social cohesion" (Council of the European Union, 2006, p. 46).</p> <p>Engagement in lifelong learning is not free of difficulties. One of the main difficulties is lack of time (Sabrià‐Bernadó et al., 2017). They suggest that these issues could be overcome with flexible, convenient learning and teaching approaches. Technology plays an important role in such delivery. Conesa et al. (2020) recognize that technology today is ready to support lifelong learning. It is possible to move to a technology‐enabled lifelong learning process which adapts to learners' needs, providing a more personalized model that allows for self‐determined learners to develop knowledge and skill that applies to their personal or professional lives.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-6">RESEARCH DESIGN</hd> <p>Our research design asks: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref8">1</reflink>) what type of relationship, if any, exists between online and blended learning and technology‐enabled lifelong learning, and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref9">2</reflink>) what role, if any, heutagogical practices can or do play in this relationship. A systematic literature review was followed by a Delphi method expert review. This review allowed for the exploration of this possible relationship or bridge with the identified experts in the field. Education experts on the panel examined available definitions, theory and practices represented in the literature. They were then asked to respond to the following research questions: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref10">1</reflink>) Based on empirical evidence or theoretical argument from published literature about online and blended higher education design, heutagogical practices and technology‐enabled lifelong learning, what conceptual relationship, if any, exists between these subject areas; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref11">2</reflink>) what is your response, as an education expert, to any proposed conceptual relationship; and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref12">3</reflink>) what design and practice implications, if any, can be gleaned from this Delphi Panel expert review of the proposed conceptual relationship?</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-7">Step one: Systematic review of literature</hd> <p>A systematic literature review involving published scholarly works was established for "appraising, summarizing, and communicating the results and implications of otherwise unmanageable quantities of data" (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006, preface). This review provided conceptual definitions, measurement options and possible conceptual relationships, between online and blended higher education, heutagogy and technology‐enabled lifelong learning. Extracted concepts and questions for verification were used to frame questions answered by the expert review.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-8">Step two: Delphi method expert review</hd> <p>A Delphi method expert review engages relevant specialists to respond to questions developed through the systematic literature review or other means. According to Okoli and Pawlowski (2004), the Delphi method of capturing expert review of issues or phenomena has often been used in theory development. Each member of the Delphi Panel is from an institution that has offered online and blended higher education for over a decade. Up to three participants from each researchers' home institutions were invited to participate in the study. A purposively drawn sample of experts with research, learning, teaching and/or design experience in online and blended higher education and/or lifelong learning, were invited to review selected readings from the systematic literature review.</p> <p>Experts' responses were collected via a survey, individual interviews and a focus group. The first instrument consisted of an online survey that was completed by seven participants. Data includes demographic information, the experts' professional profile and knowledge about blended and online learning, heutagogy, and/or lifelong learning. Questions focused on examining the relationship between heutagogical practices and blended and online learning and the use of these practices to lifelong learning.</p> <p>Following the online survey, participants were given three articles (Blaschke & Hase, 2019; Jones et al., 2019; Song & Bonk, 2016), selected from the systematic literature review, to read. Each article provided further background on the relationship of the three concepts being investigated. After reading the articles, the Delphi experts engaged in an individual interview.</p> <p>Interview data was thematically analysed (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Review of the data from the survey and interviews were summarized into a two‐page summary document that was shared with the participants for information, verification and feedback.</p> <p>All Delphi experts were then invited to participate in a focus group discussion to explore a proposed conceptual relationship. From the transcript of the focus group, a two‐page summary was developed and shared with the participants for verification and feedback.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-9">FINDINGS</hd> <p>Following the sequence of the Delphi method expert review process, the findings are shared first from the survey, followed by individual interviews, and conclude with the synthesis of the focus group data.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/58I/01jul21/bjet13122-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="bjet13122-fig-0002.jpg" title="." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0151267540-11">Findings from the survey</hd> <p>From the three research sites, seven academics completed the online survey. Six participants had a PhD, and one had a master's degree. Their areas of research expertise included such topics as professionalizing distance education, interpersonal and soft skills, online delivery, adult learning, assessment, open education, educational technologies, learning, technology, systems, self‐regulation of learning, curriculum development, curriculum review in higher education, and mindfulness. Participation in online and blended teaching and learning varied; only one person had 1 year of experience, three participants had between 4 and 9 years of experience, one person had 17 years of experience, and two had between 23 and 25 years of experience.</p> <p>All Delphi experts agreed that there is a relationship between learner self‐direction, self‐determination and self‐regulation and blended and online learning. One expert noted,</p> <p>the learner cannot rely solely on the teacher to carry out his learning. In a hybrid and online course, the learner finds himself in an environment where there are more different actions to take: listening and reading, of course, but (also) answering, interacting, consulting a document, annotating while other actions take place simultaneously.</p> <p>Another commented, "self‐determination is tricky with any course (online, f2f or blended) because we use a competency‐based model: we identify learning outcomes (mandated according to the university calendar regulations) that students are expected to meet". Three experts suggested that students come with some degree of self‐determination. Less clear is the role of teacher or learning designer in developing support or encouragement for such actions.</p> <p>Most participants acknowledged a relationship between self‐direction, self‐determination and self‐regulation in terms of lifelong learning. Four people suggested that non‐formal learning opportunities also require all three constructs. However, the terms seemed to be used interchangeably with no clear definition to separate terms in the responses.</p> <p>Five experts agreed that, based on their current understanding, they see a conceptual relationship between heutagogical practices in blended and online learning and support for technology‐enabled lifelong learning. One was unclear about what was being asked and one reported agreement only if "accompanied by conditions and perhaps caveats".</p> <p>It was evident that heutagogy is a new concept to the experts; there was indistinctness in what it is and how it may impact design. Further, there seemed to be a tension between technology as an enticer or detractor. Survey question responses and this ambiguity, especially in reference to technology, encouraged us to further explore the role of technology in learning.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-12">Findings from the interviews</hd> <p>Individual interviews provided responses to the question of how often online learning provides an opportunity for self‐determination. Key concepts emerged for discussion of a diverse nature. Experts noted that choice should be built into the design of any online course. As noted by one expert,</p> <p>Good assessments (online or otherwise) allow students to choose the evidence (and even the kind of evidence) that provides competence, allow students to identify learning outcomes that matter to them (and create their own, if appropriate), and involve them in the assessment process so that they have ownership of it.</p> <p>It was evident to experts that choice and flexibility provide opportunities for student self‐determination. There needs to be consideration for students' own objectives and motivations.</p> <p>The experts felt that heutagogical opportunities integrated into course design and teaching could have an impact on lifelong learning. They reported that it helped to build confidence, autonomy, empowerment and reflexivity. According to one expert,</p> <p>My goals are always to support learners in learning to be, which includes not only learning to learn but adopting and critiquing their own values and purposes. This is about nothing but lifelong learning. In the process, they may learn facts, and how to do things, but always with a critical and reflective eye.</p> <p>Another commented, "it is important to empower students' sense of lifelong learning by allowing them to develop capacity and explore their own personal goals and motivations". A third expert argued that it is more than developing skills, but "attitudes, so a sense of competence, a sense of security that is needed when faced with uncertainty rather than always looking for the ready‐made answers".</p> <p>Delphi experts noted challenges in implementing heutagogical practices such as instructor obligation, student readiness, communication about becoming self‐directed, scaffolding required, and institutional and/or bureaucratic barriers. Student readiness and understanding for why heutagogical practices are implemented require both communications via the instructor and institutional support. As noted by one expert, students tend to be on opposite ends of appreciation. "The lovers are mostly the ones that value self‐direction, freedom and community, the haters are usually those that just want to be told what to do". From the institutional side, one expert reported that a heutagogical approach is "incredibly difficult to support in traditional LMS (learning management system) that deeply embed teacher control, especially as they are virtually always assembled with institutional expectations and norms that lock them down further". For a heutagogical approach to be implemented in the design of online and blended learning, it must involve contributions from students, instructors, instructional designers and administrators.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-13">Findings from focus group</hd> <p>All seven Delphi experts in the study engaged in conversation with the three research assistants in the focus group. Two main questions were discussed.</p> <p>The first question asked the experts to unpack the nature of the relationship between heutagogy and lifelong learning. In this discussion, lifelong learning was viewed as a process, inclusive of self‐directed learning. Some experts agreed that heutagogy emphasized the individual's own will, has an emphasis on values and focuses on what the learner wants to learn. Heutagogy "embraces principles and values" shared one expert. The term heutagogy was viewed as a part of a family of pedagogical concepts. In considering heutagogy, as described by Blaschke (2012), the term was seen by experts neither as an end result across a learning continuum nor as a realization. Only one expert viewed it as part of actualization. There was no acknowledgement of heutagogy as a concept, theory or model. While these findings corroborate what was identified from the literature on the concept called heutagogy, expert insights gathered from the findings suggest there may be opportunities to use this concept, even in this early stage of definition, in reference to lifelong learning. One expert described the relationship between the two concepts by stating, "lifelong learning is what we do and heutagogy is a way of doing it". There was consensus among the experts that heutagogy can be a way to achieve lifelong learning, similar to andragogy. It was suggested that andragogy and heutagogy are similar to a distinction of self‐directed versus self‐determined and are the terms that need deeper exploration. An expert explained:</p> <p>I had a really hard time breaking apart heutagogy from andragogy...Those are theories of how we learn and lifelong learning is not a theory, lifelong learning is a different pie. I'm trying to think of a word for what it is, it's a thing, it's a habit. It is a process that is engaged in, by people... lifelong learning encompasses a broad range of things within which you could fit activities that are andragogically based or heutagogically based or even pedagogically based for that matter.</p> <p>The notion of "self" as connected to heutagogy was also connected to achieving lifelong learning. An expert raised the question of whether lifelong learning itself needs to be considered as an autonomous process. In contrast, another expert considered lifelong learning in conjunction with self‐awareness.</p> <p>I usually think of lifelong learning as more rooted in a value or an approach, maybe even a philosophy of sort of this active, ongoing autonomous pursuit of knowledge and this idea that a person wants to self‐investigate and self‐sustain this sort of learning throughout their years... Whereas with heutagogy, if I were to try to tease apart that from lifelong learning, I suppose I could think of it in terms of this idea of, again, self‐awareness, but also trying to provide more opportunities for students to have more choices in how they want to approach their learning and demonstrate their learning.</p> <p>"Heutagogy, andragogy or pedagogy are different ways to question how we can achieve lifelong learning", commented another expert. This individual went on to argue that heutagogy is a pedagogy used in supporting learning in that "they're just different ways of questioning how we can support and how we can act as educators, pedagogues, you know, specialists, designers, instructional designers, or whatever how we can see and question learning".</p> <p>The second question addressed the practice of heutagogy. Experts discussed what course design features be used, inclusive of a heutagogical approach, that may be used in technology‐enabled lifelong learning. Experts were provided with a framework of foundational principles from Blaschke and Hase (2019). Some were uncomfortable with connecting heutagogy and technology‐enabled lifelong learning as interrelated concepts. Others shared examples of design elements that supported heutagogy (eg, learner agency, non‐linear design and reflection), and others shared instructional design examples of using technology (eg, facilitate "real‐world" setting and activities, creating learning maps/journeys and ensuring student choice in achieving and assessing learning outcomes). An expert shared, "I find there are many technologies that will make it easier maybe to have this learning happen in a real setting, like on real projects with real people. And I find the challenge and all of that is really the teacher facilitator, facilitator learning coach". Another noted, "I don't think I design anything according to the heutagogical practice. I have some elements in my practice in the way I teach that consider some parts that belong to the students and some parts belong to my control". For the instructors, awareness within the design of the learning, where and how they provide choice and empowerment, and fostering the development of self‐directed and self‐determined learning that count.</p> <p>Another emergent theme is the notion of online instructors "letting go" of their traditional role in exchange for supporting student choice and autonomy. As stated by an expert, "there is a role for teachers in supporting the people who are self‐directing when they want to". Part of this letting go is supporting the development of competencies and the motivation needed to support learning. One expert described it in terms of what occurs in the structured versus organic part of the learning noting that "when you are in the structured part, you need to help them to develop things like digital competency as was said, that they know how to be critical about what application when, why, how. They need to know how to be self‐determined, self‐regulated learners". Within the chat feature of Zoom, they questioned the trade‐offs that might exist with technology integration and learning and the notion of "control" impacting individual learning; "technology integration always presents a trade‐off: it offers some more possibilities and limits others". It was evident that the change in the balance of control and autonomy is an ongoing issue both in the design and in the instructor's confidence in and competence for implementing such an approach.</p> <p>All the experts engaged deeply in the discussion focused on the design that gives students autonomy and choice. One particular element of design of note was nonlinear design, which remained an area of contention as to what it is and how it is designed. They also had differing perspectives on such items as control, agency and the use of technology. As such, a design for heutagogical practice was not identified in whole, though they acknowledged that heutagogy can embrace certain important principles and values for the learners.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-14">DISCUSSION</hd> <p>Asking Delphi experts to identify a relationship between blended and online learning and technology‐enabled lifelong learning through heutagogical practice was obfuscated by the early stage of heutagogy definition. However, rich and reasoned insights from our Delphi experts provided additional clarity for this definition and the application of such in both blended and online learning and technology‐enabled lifelong learning. We submit that heutagogy could be seen as an umbrella term for all ideas about learner independence and control, as seen through all three of self‐regulation, self‐direction and self‐determination. Heutagogical practices may then be identified as teaching and learning actions that seek to develop and support all three. If we understand these three student actions as components of heutagogical practices, the notion by most Delphi experts that heutagogical practices exist in blended and online learning and in support for technology‐enabled lifelong learning makes sense.</p> <p>From the analysis of the interview data, the following six key concepts, in order from most to least discussed, were identified and shared with the Delphi experts in a summary document. The first concept is that of <emph>choice</emph> embedded in the learning design. This corroborates what Garrison and Baynton (1987) identified in relation to control that "is composed of three major dimensions: independence, power, and support. Control of the learning process is determined by the dynamic balance of these three components" (p. 3). While not an exact part of the narrative, choice provides opportunity for all three of these dimensions. Choice was discussed in terms of content, learning activities, and assessment. The idea of choice provides a requirement to self‐direct, as the student is not teacher directed and therefore must self‐direct through choice. Second, <emph>control</emph>, emerged as a common topic. While students can always choose whether to engage or not, and choose what effort to expend, the teacher and the learning design maintain control over how many choices, and which choices, to allow. Third, <emph>flexibility</emph> was discussed in terms of design, delivery and assessment. It is linked with ideas of choice but goes beyond; the dynamic of learner‐centred teaching requires a vibrant, moveable, energetic process. Fourth and fifth were <emph>motivation</emph> and <emph>autonomy</emph>. These concepts were discussed in relation to individual characteristics and as something to encourage via the learning design, which has to take into account the fact that "learning is an individual process" (Jarvis, 2014, p. 52). Sixth, <emph>assessment</emph> was discussed as having critical importance. Key to assessment is a self‐directed response by students willing and able to demonstrate what learning has been realized, rather than only assessing that which the curriculum or the teacher has identified as critical. Disciplinary differences in application are likely to exist.</p> <p>These key concepts of heutagogical practice are also suggested to be the main tenets of lifelong learning. One expert suggested that heutagogy <emph>is</emph> lifelong learning. In Blaschke's (2021) article, she examines the connetion between heutagogy and lifelong learning. Other concomitant issues that emerged as challenges to heutagogical practice are student apathy, teacher competence and learner development. In addition, challenges outside the classroom are identified: institutional expectations, technology support by institutions and students' unequal access to technology.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-15">Implications for practice and/or policy</hd> <p>From this study, it is possible to deduce that there is a need to create policies that attend to lifelong learners. In making new policies, faculty need to be encouraged to use pedagogy and create disciplinary content in a way that adapts to diverse and self‐directed learner. When it comes to practice, if heutagogy is to be adopted into courses and programme design, institutional support becomes crucial. It cannot be assumed that educators will adhere to these practices instantly. Therefore, if this is a priority for institutions, resources and support need to be put in place. Additionally, there are implications for students. When adopting heutagogical practices, it becomes relevant to orient students towards this shift in practice, to support them during the process so they can be empowered to direct their learning and finally, to be aware of the expectations associated with this shift.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-16">Limitations</hd> <p>The current study considered only two points of view: Francophone and Anglophone. In this vein, the Delphi study focused on the Canadian context only and included a limited number of participants. Therefore, it would be important that further iterations of this work explore wider perspectives on the subject. This should include expanding the context to other locations where distance education has a long history such as Australia, Spain and the United Kingdom. Second, the new terminology and the unclear boundaries of heutagogy meant much discussion had to clarify shared meaning, leaving less time to consider relationships with other concepts.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-17">Directions for future research</hd> <p>This study started in 2019 before the COVID‐19 pandemic started. The pandemic has accentuated serious discussion about online and blended education, discussion that centres on students, their skills and their ways of learning and living (Nørgård, 2021), and how universities and professors structure learning and teaching. It is a time to discuss how educational practices were previously shifting and provide context for the education response to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Further research should include a larger sample of respondents from other universities across countries and cultures to explore other ways of thinking about teaching and learning. In addition, including students in the study would provide meaningful insight on their perspectives about heutagogy, technology and lifelong learning and the implications of these concepts in education. Finally, as we reiterate the need to examine how these concepts play a role in higher education, we think it is important to develop such skills across the K‐12 and higher education contexts.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-18">CONCLUSION</hd> <p>This study explored the possibility that online and blended learning could contribute, where heutagogical learning opportunities exist, to technology‐enabled lifelong learning. The results obtained in the Delphi method expert review corroborated the idea that heutagogy and lifelong learning are intertwined by common principles and that these are applicable to blended and online learning settings. Notably, the contribution of heutagogy to technology‐enabled lifelong learning occurs by encouraging students' capacity development, autonomy, empowerment and critical reflection. Blended and online learning settings necessarily imply that learners take a more active role in their learning than what they are required to do in traditional learning settings. However, results suggest that heutagogical opportunities are not universal in blended and online learning, but need to be consciously designed and implemented by instructional designers and teachers, and supported by institutions. In addition, it was found that experts do not apply or consider heutagogy as a theory or framework. Institutional barriers, and students' diversity and readiness, also limit implementation. However, the Delphi experts see some aspects of their practices as heutagogical. These practices include providing flexible or negotiated assessment, facilitation of reflection, learner confidence development and involvement of the learner in designing their learning. Students' capacity development, autonomy, empowerment and critical reflection, which experts have recognized as contributors to lifelong learning, also exist in varying degrees.</p> <p>We conclude that heutagogy exists but is yet to be defined. A collection of pedagogical practices that foster self‐direction, self‐regulation and self‐determination can ultimately contribute to lifelong learning. Further research that confirms a working definition of heutagogy through design and practice principles and links between self‐direction, self‐regulation and self‐determination is now required.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-19">ETHICS STATEMENT</hd> <p>Research Ethics Approval was secured from the Research Ethics Board at each member institution.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-20">CONFLICT OF INTEREST</hd> <p>There was no conflict of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0151267540-21">DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT</hd> <p>Data availability is restricted due to ethics requirements. Please contact corresponding author for information about access to the data.</p> <ref id="AN0151267540-22"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Funding information This research as funded by the Athabasca University Academic Research Fund</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0151267540-23"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Abraham, R. R., & Komattil, R. (2017). Heutagogic approach to developing capable learners. Medical Teacher, 39 (3), 295 – 299. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1270433</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Agonács, N., & Matos, J. F. (2019). Heutagogy and self‐determined learning: A review of the published literature on the application and implementation of the theory. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e‐Learning, 34 (3), 223 – 240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2018.1562329</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Agonács, N., Matos, J. F., Bartalesi‐Graf, D., & O'Steen, D. N. (2020). Are you ready? Self‐determined learning readiness of language MOOC learners. Education and Information Technologies, 25 (2), 1161 – 1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639‐019‐10017‐1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref7" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Anthonysamy, L., Koo, A. C., & Hew, S. H. (2020). Self‐regulated learning strategies in higher education: Fostering digital literacy for sustainable lifelong learning. Education and Information Technologies, 25 (4), 2393 – 2414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639‐020‐10201‐8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bachman, C., & Scherer, R. (2015). Promoting student autonomy and competence using a hybrid model for teaching physical activity. International Journal of Instruction, 8 (1), 3 – 18. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2015.811a</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Banerjee, P. (2019). Heautagogy: A self‐determined approach enhances constructivism. International Journal of Scientific Research and Review, 7 (6), 223 – 230.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Barnett, R. (Ed.). (2012). The future university: Ideas and possibilities. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bhoyrub, J., Hurley, J., Neilson, G. R., Ramsay, M., & Smith, M. (2010). Heutagogy: An alternative practice‐based learning approach. Nurse Education in Practice, 10 (6), 322 – 326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2010.05.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Blaschke, L. (2021). The dynamic mix of heutagogy and technology: Preparing learners for lifelong learning. Manuscript submitted for publication.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self‐determined learning. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 13 (1), 56 – 71. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1076</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2015a). Heutagogy, technology, and lifelong learning for professional and part‐time learners. In A. Dailey‐Hebert & K. S. Dennis (Eds.), Transformative perspectives and processes in higher education (pp. 75 – 94). Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐319‐09247‐8_5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2015b). Heutagogy: A holistic framework for creating 21st century self‐determined learners. In B. Gros, Kinshuk & M. Maina (Eds.), The future of ubiquitous learning: Learning designs for emerging pedagogies (pp. 25 – 40). https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐662‐47724‐3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2019). Heutagogy and digital media networks: Setting students on the path to lifelong learning. Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1 (1), 1 – 14.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blau, I., Shamir‐Inbal, T., & Avdiel, O. (2019). How does the pedagogical design of a technology‐enhanced collaborative academic course promote digital literacies, self‐regulation, and perceived learning of students? The Internet and Higher Education, 45, 100722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100722</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Kou, X., Xu, S., & Sheu, F.‐R. (2015). Understanding the self‐directed online learning preferences, goals, achievements, and challenges of MIT OpenCourseWare subscribers. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18 (2), 349 – 368.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner's self‐regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24 – 32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Broucker, B., Wit, K. D., & Leisyte, L. (2016). Higher education reform: A systematic comparison of ten countries from a new public management perspective. In M. O. Pritchard, R. A. Pausits & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Positioning higher education institutions: From here to there (pp. 19 – 39). Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cleveland‐Innes, M. (2016). Student change and faculty roles: New ways forward for higher education. In Book of Abstracts, 13th International Workshop on Higher Education Reform. https://<ulink href="http://www.dcu.ie/sites/default/files/herc/final%5fbook%5fof%5fabstracts%5fher2016%5fsept6.pdf">www.dcu.ie/sites/default/files/herc/final%5fbook%5fof%5fabstracts%5fher2016%5fsept6.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cleveland‐Innes, M. (2020). Student demographic change and pedagogical issues in higher education. In M. Slowey & H. Schuetz (Eds.), Inequality, innovation and reform in higher education (pp. 159 – 173). Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cleveland‐Innes, M., & Wilton, D. (2018). Guide to blended learning. Commonwealth of Learning. https://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/3095</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Conesa, J., Batalla‐Busquets, J.‐M., Bañeres, D., Carrion, C., Conejero‐Arto, I., del Carmen Cruz Gil, M., Garcia‐Alsina, M., Gómez‐Zúñiga, B., Martinez‐Argüelles, M. J., Mas, X., Monjo, T., & Mor, E. (2020). Towards an educational model for lifelong learning. In L. Barolli, P. Hellinckx, & J. Natwichai (Eds.), Advances on P2P, parallel, grid, cloud and Internet computing (pp. 537 – 546). Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐030‐33509‐0_50</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Council of the European Union. (2006). Decision number 1720 (No. 1720).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within; report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty‐first Century. UNESCO Digital Library. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000109590</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Duderstadt, J. J. (2009). Aligning American higher education with a twenty‐first‐century public agenda. Examining the national purposes of American higher education: A leadership approach to policy reform. Higher Education in Europe, 34 (3–4), 347 – 366.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit‐Leftwich, A. (2013). Removing obstacles to the pedagogical changes required by Jonassen's vision of authentic technology‐enabled learning. Computers & Education, 64, 175 – 182.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> European Commission. (2001). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality. https://viaa.gov.lv/files/free/48/748/pol_10_com_en.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Friesen, N. (2012). Report: Defining blended learning. <ulink href="http://learningspaces.org/papers/Defining%5fBlended%5fLearning%5fNF.pdf">http://learningspaces.org/papers/Defining%5fBlended%5fLearning%5fNF.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garrison, D. R., & Baynton, M. (1987). Concepts: Beyond independence in distance education: The concept of control. American Journal of Distance Education, 1 (3), 3 – 15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648709526593</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7 (2), 95 – 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Geng, S., Law, K. M. Y., & Niu, B. (2019). Investigating self‐directed learning and technology readiness in blending learning environment. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 1, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239‐019‐0147‐0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hashey, A. I., & Stahl, S. (2014). Making online learning accessible for students with disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46 (5), 70 – 78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914528329</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haworth, R. (2016). Personal learning environments: A solution for self‐directed learners. TechTrends, 60 (4), 359 – 364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528‐016‐0074‐z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hill, T., Chidambaram, L., & Summers, J. D. (2017). Playing 'catch up' with blended learning: Performance impacts of augmenting classroom instruction with online learning. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36 (1), 54 – 62.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63 (5), 564 – 569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528‐019‐00375‐5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> International Association of Blended Learning. (2020). Definition of blended learning. https://<ulink href="http://www.iabl.org">www.iabl.org</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jarvis, P. (2014). From adult education to lifelong learning and beyond. Comparative Education, 50 (1), 45 – 57. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2013.871832</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson, N. (2019). Tracking online and distance education in Canadian universities and colleges: National survey of online and digital learning 2019 national report. http://www.cdlra‐acrfl.ca/wp‐content/uploads/2020/07/2019_national_en.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones, C., Penaluna, K., & Penaluna, A. (2019). The promise of andragogy, heutagogy and academagogy to enterprise and entrepreneurship education pedagogy. Education + Training, 61 (9), 1170 – 1186. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET‐10‐2018‐0211</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karoudis, K., & Magoulas, G. D. (2017). An architecture for smart lifelong learning design. In E. Popescu, Kinshuk, M. K. Khribi, R. Huang, M. Jemni, N.‐S. Chen, & D. G. Sampson (Eds.), Innovations in smart learning (pp. 113 – 118). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐981‐10‐2419‐1_16</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luckin, R. (2010). Re‐designing learning contexts: Technology‐rich, learner‐centred ecologies. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mello, L. (2016). Fostering postgraduate student engagement: Online resources supporting self‐directed learning in a diverse cohort. Research in Learning Technology, 24 (1), 29366. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v24.29366</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moore, R. L. (2020). Developing lifelong learning with heutagogy: Contexts, critiques, and challenges. Distance Education, 41 (3), 381 – 401. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1766949</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nørgård, R. (2021). Hybrid lifelong learning: Ways of knowing, doing and being in a post‐digital world. Manuscript submitted for publication.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, 42 (1), 15 – 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development. (1996). Lifelong learning for all: Meeting of the education committee at ministerial level, 16‐17 January 1996. Author.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide (2005‐16245‐000). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pond, W. K. (2002). Distributed education in the 21st century: Implications for quality assurance. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5 (2), 1 – 8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Quaye, S. J., Harper, S. R., & Pendakur, S. L. (Eds.). (2019). Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rivenburg, C. R. (2016). Instructional design strategies and their effect on self‐directed learning in online learning (2016–17334‐264). ProQuest Information & Learning.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Romero, M. (2015). Work, Games and Lifelong Learning in the 21st Century. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 115 – 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.634</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rusli, R., Rahman, A., & Abdullah, H. (2020). Student perception data on online learning using heutagogy approach in the faculty of mathematics and Natural Sciences of Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia. Data in Brief, 29, 105152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.105152</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sabrià‐Bernadó, B., LLinàs‐Audet, X., & Isus, S. (2017). Determinants of user demand for lifelong learning in institutions of higher education: Determinants of user demand in HEI. International Journal of Training and Development, 21 (2), 145 – 166. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12101</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schuetze, H. G., & Slowey, M. (2002). Participation and exclusion: A comparative analysis of non‐traditional students and lifelong learners in higher education. Higher Education, 44, 309 – 327.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Snowden, M., & Halsall, J. P. (2016). Self‐determined approach to learning: A social science perspective. Cogent Education, 3 (1), 1247608. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1247608</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Song, D., & Bonk, C. J. (2016). Motivational factors in self‐directed informal learning from online learning resources. Cogent Education, 3 (1), 1205838. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1205838</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor, M., Vaughan, N., Ghani, S. K., Atas, S., & Fairbrother, M. (2018). Looking back and looking forward: A glimpse of blended learning in higher education from 2007–2017. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 9 (1), 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2018010101</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tezer, M., & Aynas, N. (2018). The effect of university education on lifelong learning tendency. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 13 (1), 15. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v13i1.3370</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Uz, R., & Uzun, A. (2018). The influence of blended learning environment on self‐regulated and self‐directed learning skills of learners. European Journal of Educational Research, 7 (4), 877 – 886.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> van Weert, T. (2005). Lifelong learning in knowledge society: Implications for education. In T. J. van Weert (Ed.), Education and the knowledge society: Information technology supporting human development (pp. 15 – 25). Kluwer Academic.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vanslambrouck, S., Zhu, C., Pynoo, B., Lombaerts, K., Tondeur, J., & Scherer, R. (2019). A latent profile analysis of adult students' online self‐regulation in blended learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 126 – 136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.021</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weber, L., & Duderstadt, J. J. (Eds.). (2012). Global sustainability and the responsibilities of universities. Economica.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Williams, J. (2016). A critical exploration of changing definitions of public good in relation to higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 41 (4), 619 – 630. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.942270</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yang, J., Schneller, C., & Roche, S. (Eds.). (2015). The role of higher education in promoting lifelong learning. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yang, Y.‐F. (2016). Self‐directed learning to develop autonomy in an online ESP community. Interactive Learning Environments, 24 (7), 1629 – 1646. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1041402</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Jennifer Lock; Sawsen Lakhal; Martha Cleveland‐Innes; Paula Arancibia; Debra Dell and Noeleen De Silva</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1464212
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Creating Technology-Enabled Lifelong Learning: A Heutagogical Approach
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jennifer+Lock%22">Jennifer Lock</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sawsen+Lakhal%22">Sawsen Lakhal</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Martha+Cleveland-Innes%22">Martha Cleveland-Innes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Paula+Arancibia%22">Paula Arancibia</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Debra+Dell%22">Debra Dell</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Noeleen+De+Silva%22">Noeleen De Silva</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22British+Journal+of+Educational+Technology%22"><i>British Journal of Educational Technology</i></searchLink>. 2021 52(4):1646-1662.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 17
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Lifelong+Learning%22">Lifelong Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technology+Uses+in+Education%22">Technology Uses in Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Blended+Learning%22">Blended Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Distance+Education%22">Distance Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Electronic+Learning%22">Electronic Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Independent+Study%22">Independent Study</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Strategies%22">Educational Strategies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Delphi+Technique%22">Delphi Technique</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Design%22">Instructional Design</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/bjet.13122
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0007-1013<br />1467-8535
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Can a new instructional approach influence lifelong learning and the development of competent lifelong learners? Blended and online learning provides a platform for learning that introduces technological affordance to enable learning. We seek to find an intersection between blended and online learning and lifelong learning through an instructional approach that encourages learners towards management of their own learning. This opens the door to becoming an autonomous, capable, self-directed lifelong learner. In this context, heutagogy offers an instructional approach that may connect blended and online learning settings with the development of lifelong learning competence. After conducting a systematic literature review using the terms heutagogy, blended and online learning, and lifelong learning, literature that considers how to inspire and build human agency capabilities over the lifespan was chosen for Delphi method expert review. Using this methodology, we explore the possibility that online and blended higher education will contribute, where heutagogical experiences exist, to technology-enabled lifelong learning. Results corroborate the idea that heutagogy and lifelong learning are intertwined by some common principles and that these are applicable to both blended and online learning settings and lifelong learning.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1464212
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1464212
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/bjet.13122
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 1646
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Lifelong Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Technology Uses in Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Blended Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Distance Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Electronic Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Independent Study
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Strategies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Delphi Technique
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Instructional Design
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Creating Technology-Enabled Lifelong Learning: A Heutagogical Approach
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jennifer Lock
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sawsen Lakhal
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Martha Cleveland-Innes
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Paula Arancibia
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Debra Dell
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Noeleen De Silva
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 07
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0007-1013
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1467-8535
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 52
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: British Journal of Educational Technology
              Type: main
ResultId 1