Where Andragogy Assumes Too Much” (Hybrid, Friction)

Knowles’ theory of andragogy, one of the foundational frameworks in adult education, assumes the adult learner is self-directed, ready to learn based on social roles, and motivated by internal rather than external factors. It’s a genuinely useful model, and most adult education curricula, including some of what I draw on, are built on top of it.

Here’s where I think it runs into a real limit with the population we serve. Self-direction assumes a baseline of stability and bandwidth that crisis-time consciousness simply doesn’t have available. Someone navigating an active eviction isn’t failing to be a self-directed learner. They’re operating under conditions andragogy’s model didn’t anticipate, where the “readiness to learn” the theory assumes is genuinely, temporarily unavailable, not absent as a trait, but inaccessible under current conditions.

I don’t think this makes andragogy wrong. I think it makes it incomplete for crisis populations specifically, and I’d rather say that plainly than pretend the model applies cleanly when it doesn’t.

Where have you seen a well-established framework in your own field run into a population it wasn’t originally built to describe?

Author: Sandra Roussel
Copyright © 2009-2026 Sandra Roussel. Reproduction and distribution of all materials without written permission is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved.