Levels of energy

Against this background, Illeris focuses on the process of acquisition and de-scribes four distinct types or levels of learning with respect to the amount of change and psychic effort they require. His typology closely resembles the thinking of Gregory Bateson, who explored a similar general idea (see Chap-ter 4). Yet it also introduces the additional thought of relating different levels of learning to different biographical phases. Moreover, by explicitly referring to Mezirow’s concept of transformative learning and Piaget’s developmental approach, it is linked to two other important taxonomic approaches of learn-ing.

Figure 3: Levels of learning

Source: cf. Illeris, 2006

The most simple type, ‘cumulation or mechanical learning’ (Illeris, 2004, p.

96) denotes the isolated acquisition of bits of information. Illeris states that although this type is dominant among children, it is less important for adults (except when memorising a phone number and the like). Yet research shows that cumulative learning is of high systematic importance even among adults:

memorising plays a crucial role in learning foreign languages, for example.

The next two types are denoted in terms borrowed from Jean Piaget: assimi-lative learning and accommodative learning. The former is described as the most common type of learning; it is also the usual way of learning at school.

On this level, new information is integrated into existing concepts without challenging their core structure. Compared to cumulative learning, it can be imagined as not only piling up information, but also as sorting it according to a pre-existing system. Learning to use a new technical device, for example, often falls into this category. Although the specific procedures to operate the device may differ in detail, they are usually still similar to those used to oper-ate previous versions of the device. The third type, accommodation, in con-trast, requires more effort as it affects the system of knowledge itself. As de-scribed by Piaget, accommodation means not only to acquire new informa-tion, but also to reshape the existing system of concepts in a certain domain, as the new information will not comply with the old structure and, even when it does, cannot be neglected. Learning new theories, for example, often re-quires us to temporarily ‘forget’ what other theories say about the same issue, and to start rethinking the matter ‘from scratch’ instead. Illeris’s fourth type of learning goes beyond Piaget’s model and is linked to Mezirow’s concept of transformative learning (ibid, p. 97). Mezirow himself distinguishes be-tween two types of transformative learning: the ‘transformation of patterns of meaning’ (Mezirow, 1997, p. 78) questions the interpretational background against which new experiences or insights are processed. It therefore resemb-les Piaget’s concept of accommodation. But to the extent to which transfor-mation also affects the very person of the learner, it may go beyond

accom-modation. In this case, Mezirow speaks of ‘perspective transformation’

(ibid.), which is the deepest change an individual may undergo within the process of learning. Here, one’s own ‘perspectives of meaning’ (ibid., p. 38) are fundamentally transformed: basic convictions and beliefs are profoundly changed against the background of new experiences. Therefore this type of learning is often associated with life crises.

Different taxonomies of learning, such as those of Mezirow and Illeris, are not identical, but they share a number of core ideas:

• Learning experiences can vary in depth.

• These variations are related to the extent to which the learning expe-rience affects the whole person (identity, values, etc.).

• The depth of the learning process, therefore, is also related to its sustain-ability.

Accordingly, transformative learning requires more mental energy and deeply affects a learner’s cognitive and emotional processes at the same time. Evi-dently, this often leads to changes in the learner’s social environment as well.

What we can learn from Illeris’s approach in terms of arriving at a com-prehensive understanding of adult learning is that any type of learning may turn out to be relevant for the development of competence. The different lev-els build upon each other, even though they are not meant to form a particular hierarchy in which on type of learning is more valuable than another. Moreo-ver, there is a considerable degree of overlap: transformative learning, for ex-ample, may contain aspects of all of the other levels of learning described above. We will return to this concept in Chapter 4.2.

Exercises and tasks

Exercise 1

In this chapter, the expression ‘levels of energy’ is used in a somewhat meta-phorical way. What types of (physical or mental) energy might play a role with respect to the different levels of learning?

Exercise 2

What may provide the energy to sustain difficult learning processes? Think of personal examples.

Exercise 3

At the beginning of this chapter, it was said that memorising phone numbers could be regarded as cumulative learning. However, can you imagine condi-tions and situacondi-tions in which it may be more than just that?

Task 1

Have a look at the self-determination theory of motivation by Ryan and Deci (see source below). How may the influences on motivation mentioned there have an impact on each of the four levels of learning depicted in Figure 3?

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psycho-logist, 55(1), 68–78.