Nurse Education in Practice (2008) 8, 302–305

Nurse

www.elsevier.com/nepr

Educationin Practice

ISSUES FOR DEBATE

Take time to facilitate self-directed learning

Fiona Timmins *

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, 24 D’Olier Street, Dublin 8, Ireland

Accepted 29 February 2008

Nurse educators have long valued self-directedlearning (SDL) as a method of teaching and learningwithin the nurse education programs (Quinn, 2000).Recognising that not all content delivered to stu-dents needs to be formally taught, a variety of ap-proaches to the use of SDL have evolved (Quinn,2000). This can range from simply providing freetime within a formal timetable to enable the stu-dents to decide on their own learning requirements,to structure the teaching strategies that requirespecific pre set independent reading or preparationby the students. SDL is also used as the basis of sum-mative or formative assessment such as its use inthe increasingly popular student portfolio (Enda-cott et al., 2004). However, at a national or interna-tional level no consistent approach to SDL is used oradvocated and it is unclear exactly how much timeis devoted within the curricula to SDL. Further-more, nurse educators sometimes struggle to cometo terms with the concept and its meaning and rel-evance to nurse education; even within the singleteam multiple views and usages of SDL can occur(Walsh, 2004). Confusion with regard to its usage in-cludes some nurse educators believing that SDL maybe inappropriately used on occasions, in response tospace restrictions for example (Walsh, 2004). Thereis also a belief that the students see this as an easyopt out for teachers (Walsh, 2004), or as a do-it-

1471-5953/$ - see front matter �c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserdoi:10.1016/j.nepr.2008.02.004

* Tel.: +353 18963699.E-mail address: Fiona.Timmins@tcd.ie

yourself (DIY) approach (Hamill, 1995) which theydo not necessarily favour.

However, beyond these reports of student viewsby their teachers (Walsh, 2004) there is littleextrapolation of students attitudes to SDL. Thereis, however, some anecdotal evidence to suggestthat some students struggle with their own SDL abil-ity, preferring instead to be instructed by the tea-cher. A dependent learning style developed inearly school experiences may contribute to thisand some students may even resent the time setaside for SDL work. It is interesting though thatwhile SDL has been widely adopted, there is very lit-tle empirical evidence that identifies its particularvalue for use with undergraduate nursing students.Furthermore, it is being increasingly recognized,for SDL to occur, students may need direction orfacilitation to achieve their end goals (Knowleset al., 1998). In addition, not all the students maypossess the required ability to be self-directed, in-deed SDL ability is often confined to high achievers(McCauley and McClelland, 2004). It is likely, there-fore, that where SDL is adopted to achieve specificlearning outcomes without alternative directivemethods that some students may be disadvantaged.In addition, even though encouraging ‘‘adult learn-ers’’ and student participation is welcomed by theuniversity lecturers, there is also a professionalresponsibility to deliver the prescribed curriculum.Withinmany contemporary nurse education settingsguidelines exist with regard to the required learningoutcomes of the program. EU guidelines provide

ved.

Take time to facilitate self-directed learning 303

specific criteria for nurse preparation and in the UKand Ireland regulatory bodies both incorporatethese requirements and identify a set of competen-cies/proficiencies required by nursing students atthe end of their educational period (NMC, 2004; AnBord Altranais, 2005). The evidence of achievementof these specific competencies is an important facetof entrance to a professional register of nurses inthese countries, and a variety of summative assess-ments including the measurement of clinical com-petence provide the necessary evidence to supportthis. Although clearly accepted as an additionalextra, whether the SDL is a sufficient teaching/learning method to demonstrate specific learningoutcomes within this tightly regulated frameworkis debatable. This view is reflected in Walsh’s(2004) study where one educator suggests that pro-fessional learning differs from the traditional adultlearning as learning outcomes are preset and spe-cific to ensure that the nurses are fit for purpose.They suggest that nurse education differs fromother university programs and a more didactic ped-agogical approach is required. It could be further beargued that if SDL methods are inappropriately usedwithin a university setting that primarily uses didac-tic lecture methods, this could constitute groundsfor student appeal on the basis that the course con-tent was not delivered. Hence clarity about defini-tion and usage within nursing Schools where littleguidelines exist is urgently required.

It seems that some nurse educators have beennaively optimistic about Knowles account of theadult learners (Knowles, 1962, 1970, 1989; Knowleset al., 1998).Where once nursing students weresometimes taken by the hand in traditional nursingprograms, embracing Andragogy has necessitatedthat the individual students become more indepen-dent learners with mixed results. However,embracing Andragogy makes perfect sense. Know-les (1962, 1970, 1989); Knowles et al. (1998) advo-cates that humans can instinctively identify theirown learning needs within a situation, set learninggoals, are influenced by their past experience andtheir confidence with the subject. They are alsolikely to focus on the information that is relevantto their own learning needs. However, there issome difficultly with the direct application acrossthe groups of students as it is increasingly beingrecognized that these processes occur when theconditions for learning are right. Simply placing‘‘SDL’’ time in the timetable may lead the studentsto waste this time. Furthermore, one stand alonefree hour or two may be insufficient time for a lear-ner to begin their own preparation, particularly iflibraries or study rooms are on separate campus.For the larger groups frequently seen within univer-

sity programs there are practical limitations toreleasing 250–300 students for short periods duringthe day, all at the same time as there may be dif-ficulty in accommodating them in either studyrooms or libraries in order to attend to the SDLactivities that are required. It seems therefore,that there are both practical and philosophical is-sues that need to be addressed within a systematicapproach to SDL across schools. Rather than blindlyaccepting SDL as an unrestricted alternative teach-ing and learning methodology, physical conditionsfor managing SDL need to be considered.

From a philosophical perspective, while self-direction has been described as being a fullyindependent activity in some discussions and appli-cations of the method Knowles accepts that thislevel of independence varies between individualsand that in a formalised education system such asnurse education, learners need to be supported toachieve this self-direction (Knowles et al., 1998).Quite simply self-direction within the nursing edu-cation does not imply being given a reading list toread from, or given time to read. It occurs withinthe context of a facilitative relationship with clearguidelines. It is important, however, for schools ofnursing to recognize that students may need to beguided by the teacher on how to undertake effec-tive SDL (Milligan, 1995). An assumption ought notto be made that adults are automatically indepen-dent learners (Knowles et al., 1998) as some groupsof students are not well equipped to self-direct intheir own learning (McCauley and McClelland,2004). Portfolio use, for example, enmeshed inthe principles of adult learning, in the absence ofquite rigid guidelines and instruction often pro-duces substandard work (Endacott et al., 2004).While the educators expect a cohesive account oflearning from the practice in the portfolio, thismaterializes only in those who have received veryspecific instruction (Endacott et al., 2004). In somecases students express the need for more instruc-tion and formalised guidance to replace the currentprimarily self-directed learning tools (Prendergastand Langan, 2007). For many students thereforeKnowles learning conditions are merely aspira-tional. In the absence of quite specific direction,the result is often disappointing. Walsh’s (2004)study further supports the need for student supportfor SDL including providing ample time to explainabout SDL, creating awareness among the studentsof their own learning styles, imparting library re-trieval information, and ensuring that the studentshave critique and discussion skills. Some of thelatter are unlikely to have developed in the earlystages of the program so it may be worth taking adevelopmental approach to the process.

Table 1 Four core components of the diagnosis oflearning needs Knowles (1989)

Assessment of needsFormulation of objectivesThe design of learning experiencesEvaluation

304 F. Timmins

It is also worth noting that within Knowlesdescription of Adult learning theory, Andragogy,there is a formulaic approach to achieving thisindependence in learning and it does not happenby chance. Initially the self-direction movement,largely emerging from the United States of Amer-ica, identified the ability of the adults in colonialAmerica to be self taught(Guglielmino et al.,2004). Self teaching was also observed and associ-ated with increasing access to public libraries,when, hungry for knowledge, people scrambled toeducate themselves once the knowledge becamemore freely available (Guglielmino et al., 2004).From these observations and others, it graduallybecame accepted that the adults may self-directtheir own learning. This occurs within the individ-ual when they firstly (consciously or unconsciously)diagnose their own needs, and then work out whatit is they need to know. Then they set themselvesto clear goals and identify key actions towardsachieving these. Once learning is operationalisedthey (consciously or unconsciously) evaluate theextent to whether they have achieved these.Although obviously a natural process in some, it ishowever accepted that the individuals may ormay not have the required ability to conduct theirlearning in this way. It is also accepted that learn-ing is influenced by prior experience and confi-dence, and adults need to be ready to learn.Therefore, in order for SDL to take place conditionsneed to be right. Translating this learning gleamedfrom individuals who are self-directed means that asimilar set of approaches to learning needs to befostered and encouraged to maximise the abilitytowards SDL. This means that in the classroomSDL is not ‘‘given’’ to the students, in the formof time, a reading list or a task. Instead the teacherbecomes actively involved in assisting the studentsto be self-directed. Knowles suggest that the adultsneed to be ready to learn. Therefore, an obviousfirst step is to ascertain whether each student isready. This full and true yielding to Knowles’ prin-ciples, while a necessary route to take if one is totake SDL seriously, immediately creates difficultiesfor a teacher who cannot rely upon the student tostate whether he or she is ready to learn as curric-ulum needs usually supersede individual needs.However, once readiness is established, the nextphase is for the students to diagnose their ownlearning needsin the area; then to set specificlearning goals and identify specific learning experi-ences (Table 1). This approach, which fully com-plies with Knowles principles of adult learningessentially means that each student will have anindividualised journey, with a differing set of needsand perhaps different ways of achieving those

needs. The influence of adult’s prior knowledgeand experience, which Knowles takes into account,is partially responsible for this.

The best way for the students to be facilitated toachieve SDL is to achieve individual guidance to beable to identify their needs and goals and plan theirlearning. An example of this in action is in the useof learning contracts, where similar principles ap-ply (Timmins, 2002). This has been found to bequite rewarding for both students and teachers,but extremely resource intensive. The studentsare also found to need quite specific guidelines inrelation to diagnosing their own needs. So the‘‘teaching’’ of SDL is not as simple as it first seems.It is neither timetabling a free period of ‘‘SDL’’ noris it providing key reading or set tasks, it involvesphysically sitting down with the students to enablethem to begin to learn by themselves in the waysthat have been described. The teacher becomes afacilitator of learning. Therefore, in order to max-imise the possible benefits of the use of SDL, oneneeds to explore beyond Knowles to another keywriter in the field, Carl Roger’s (Rogers, 1969).

Although supporting independence and freedomwithin learning, in an approach known as studentcentred learning, Rogers (1969, 1983) advocatesthat rather than acting as authority figures, educa-tors should facilitate learning through the under-standing, acknowledgement and consideration ofunique motivations. Student centred learning ap-proaches are emphasised. This involves the crea-tion of environments that emphasise freedom forindividual development and, according to Rogers(1969, 1983), enable the students to become moreadaptable and self-directed. Nurse educators areencouraged to use these approaches (Quinn,2000) and it is an approach that nursing studentsfavour (Harvey and Vaughan, 1990). Rogers (1969,1983) suggests that the teacher empathy andpositive regard for the students create the condi-tions for learning to take place. Rogers (1983)also emphasises the importance of the facilitatorbeing genuine. Facilitation as a concept that re-lates to how adults learn has been enthusiasticallyemployed by nurse education for a number ofyears. Small student numbers at hospital-basedschools of nursing were especially amenable to this

Take time to facilitate self-directed learning 305

facilitative method (Quinn, 2000). Although this isless so with the advent of university educationand inherent large class sizes, nurse educators re-tain a commitment to facilitative student centredmethods, favouring these as methods to achievethe adult learning. From Rogers (1969, 1983) per-spective, facilitation is deemed a requirement ofindependent learning, therefore ways to developthis process, even in the presence of large groupsneeds to be considered.

From this discussion it emerges that SDL occursand is encouraged in the presence of a facilitativestudent/teacher relationship and is not thereforea fully independent student activity. Rather thansubstituting for lack of classroom space, lack ofimagination or an ill informed opinion that studentscan DIY, facilitating SDL requires intensive teacherinput. High achievers are more likely to achieveimpendence and for some SDL will be quite difficult.Clearly, in order to fully maximise the students SDLpotential there are several skills that need to be fos-tered and developed in the students that will enablethem to be able to retrieve, read and analyse thesuitable material. SDL will also be more productiveis students are taught the skills of independentlearning that are facilitated by the teachers in someway. Students need support to diagnose their ownlearning needs, set objectives and designate keytasks towards achieving these. Although dependenton their own readiness, they require support withthe latter extrapolations. In an approach that isinherently individualised, they also need to evalu-ate their own learning. Experiences with portfoliouse suggest that as opposed to an independentactivity that is often expected students to requireclose facilitation to achieve success (Hull et al.,2005; O’Donovan, 2006). It is likely therefore, forSDL to become a reality that more attention is paidto one-to-one or small group student supervision.Consideration also needs to be given to the extentto which this personalised approach fits within cur-rent curricula. SDL is a phenomenon that is value la-den. It is not simply the expectation that thestudents will study, read or perform learning re-lated tasks. These are a given expectation withineducational settings. SDL is a more far reachingexpectation that students will decide upon andreach, learning goals independently. SDL and adultlearning principles have become common parlanceamong the nurse educators, perhaps without alwaysa full understanding of the implications. It is timethat the naı̈ve optimism about SDL is replaced withpractical solutions that realistically support the stu-dents towards independent learning. This ulti-

mately may be a very time consuming activity assome level of facilitation is required. However,time and investment is required in this activity tomake current aspirations a reality and reduce theburden placed on the students when expectationsare placed too high.

References

An Bord Altranais, 2005. Requirements and Standards for NurseRegistration Education programmes. Dublin, An BordAltranais.

Endacott, R., Gray, M.A., et al., 2004. Using portfolios in theassessment of learning and competence: the impact of fourmodels. Nurse Education in Practice 4 (4), 250–257.

Guglielmino, J., Long, H.B., et al., 2004. Historical perspec-tives series: self-direction in learning the united states.International Journal of Self-Directed Learning 1 (1), 1–18.

Hamill, C., 1995. The phenomenon of stress as perceived byproject 2000 student nurses: a case study. Journal ofAdvanced Nursing 21 (3), 528–536.

Harvey, T.J., Vaughan, J., 1990. Student nurse attitudestowards different teaching/learning methods. Nurse Educa-tion Today 10 (3), 181–185.

Hull, C., Redfern, J., et al., 2005. Profiles and Portfolios AGuide for Health & Social Care. Palgrave Macmillan,Basingstoke.

Knowles, M.S., 1962. The Adult Education Movement in theUnited States. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Knowles, M.S., 1970. The Modern Practice of Adult Education.Association Press.

Knowles, M.S., 1989. The Adult learner: A Neglected Species.Gulf Publishing Company, Houston.

Knowles, M., Holton, E., et al. 1998. The Adult Learner. TheDefinitive Classic in Adult Education and Human ResourceDevelopment.

McCauley, V., McClelland, G., 2004. Further studies in self-directed learning in physics at the University of Limerick,Ireland. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning 1 (2),26–37.

Milligan, F., 1995. In defence of andragogy. Nurse EducationToday 15 (1), 22–27.

NMC, 2004. Standards of Proficiency for Pre-registration NursingEducation. NURSING and MIDWIFERY COUNCIL, London.

O’Donovan, M., 2006. Reflecting during clinical placement –discovering factors that influence pre-registration psychiat-ric nursing students. Nurse Education in Practice 6 (3), 134–140.

Prendergast, M., Langan, D., 2007. Using Portfolios in Practice –the Undergraduate Nursing Experience.

Quinn, F.M., 2000. The Principles and Practice of NurseEducation. Nelson Thornes.

Rogers, C.R., 1969. Freedom to Learn. Merrill.Rogers, C.R., 1983. Freedom to Learn for the 80’s. CE Merrill

Publishing Company.Timmins, F., 2002. The usefulness of learning contracts in nurse

education: the Irish perspective. Nurse Education in Practice2 (3), 190–196.

Walsh, M., 2004. Lecturers understanding and experiences’ ofself-directed learning and its relevance to undergraduatenurse education. University College Dublin, M.Sc. Thesis.