This chapter summarizes the transformation theory of adult learning,
explains the relationship of transformative learning to autonomous,
responsible thinking (viewed as the central goal of adult education),
and discusses practical implications for educators.
Transformative Learning:
Theory to Practice
Jack Mezirow
A defining condition of being human is that we have to understand the mean-
ing of our experience. For some, any uncritically assimilated explanation by an
authority figure will suffice. But in contemporary societies we must learn to
make our own interpretations rather than act on the purposes, beliefs, judg-
ments, and feelings of others. Facilitating such understanding is the cardinal goal
of adult education. Transformative learning develops autonomous thinking.
Transformative Learning Theory
Transformative learning (Mezirow, 1991, 1995, 1996; Cranton, 1994, 1996)
is the process of effecting change in a frame of reference. Adults have acquired
a coherent body of experience—associations, concepts, values, feelings, con-
ditioned responses—frames of reference that define their life world. Frames of
reference are the structures of assumptions through which we understand our
experiences. They selectively shape and delimit expectations, perceptions, cog-
nition, and feelings. They set our “line of action.” Once set, we automatically
move from one specific activity (mental or behavioral) to another. We have a
strong tendency to reject ideas that fail to fit our preconceptions, labeling those
ideas as unworthy of consideration—aberrations, nonsense, irrelevant, weird,
or mistaken. When circumstances permit, transformative learners move toward
a frame of reference that is more inclusive, discriminating, self-reflective, and
integrative of experience.
A frame of reference encompasses cognitive, conative, and emotional com-
ponents, and is composed of two dimensions: habits of mind and a point of view.
Habits of mind are broad, abstract, orienting, habitual ways of thinking, feeling,
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR ADULT AND CONTINUING EDUCATION, no. 74, Summer 1997 © Jossey-Bass Publishers 5
, 6 TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING IN ACTION
and acting influenced by assumptions that constitute a set of codes. These codes
may be cultural, social, educational, economic, political, or psychological. Habits
of mind become articulated in a specific point of view—the constellation of belief,
value judgment, attitude, and feeling that shapes a particular interpretation.
An example of a habit of mind is ethnocentrism, the predisposition to
regard others outside one’s own group as inferior. A resulting point of view is
the complex of feelings, beliefs, judgments, and attitudes we have regarding
specific individuals or groups (for example, homosexuals, welfare recipients,
people of color, or women).
Frames of reference are primarily the result of cultural assimilation and
the idiosyncratic influences of primary caregivers. Habits of mind are more
durable than points of view. Points of view are subject to continuing change as
we reflect on either the content or process by which we solve problems and
identify the need to modify assumptions. This happens whenever we try to
understand actions that do not work the way we anticipated. We can try out
another person’s point of view and appropriate it, but we cannot do this with
a habit of mind. Points of view are more accessible to awareness and to feed-
back from others.
Jürgen Habermas (1981) has helped us to understand that problem solv-
ing and learning may be instrumental—learning to manipulate or control the
environment or other people to enhance efficacy in improving performance;
impressionistic—learning to enhance one’s impression on others, to present one-
self; normative—learning oriented to common values and a normative sense of
entitlement (members of the group are entitled to expect certain behavior); or
communicative—learning to understand the meaning of what is being com-
municated. Communicative learning involves at least two persons striving to
reach an understanding of the meaning of an interpretation or the justification
for a belief. Ideally, communicative learning involves reaching a consensus.
In instrumental learning, the truth of an assertion may be established
through empirical testing. But communicative learning involves understanding
purposes, values, beliefs, and feelings and is less amenable to empirical tests. In
communicative learning, it becomes essential for learners to become critically
reflective of the assumptions underlying intentions, values, beliefs, and feelings.
If someone claims he loves you, how authentic is the expression of affec-
tion? Is the intent of a friendly stranger to sell you something, to proselytize,
or make a sexual overture? Is an acquaintance being truthful? Is what is com-
municated only a rationalization? Is it meant to be taken literally or as a
metaphor? Is the message of a play what you interpret it to be? To resolve these
questions of assumption, we rely on a tentative best judgment among those
whom we believe to be informed, rational, and objective. We engage in dis-
course to validate what is being communicated. Our only other recourse is to
turn to an authority or tradition to make a judgment for us.
Discourse, as used here, is a dialogue devoted to assessing reasons pre-
sented in support of competing interpretations, by critically examining evi-
dence, arguments, and alternative points of view. The more interpretations of