User:Pikelake6/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Andragogy - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
My experience and education have been in adult learning. I am currently an adult education teacher and trainer. In working with curriculum and adult learners, I find that the field still depends on curriculum, including worksheets and exercises, and stories from K-12. It is time that we update curriculum to take into account the differences between pedagogy and andragogy. Also, because of my background in research and education, I thought that I could contribute to this evaluation.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: I would add one more sentence to the term andragogy. "Andragogy is important in adult education and training because it identifies methods and principals that contribute to effective instruction and learning in comparison to pedagogy".


 * 1) the lead does not include a brief description of the major sections.  "This article will cover accepted definitions of andragogy, a history of the theory, and a description of the several principles of adult learning and the academic discipline. The article will also describe the differences from pedagogy. Finally, the article provides a critique of the theory from the perspective of Knowles and J.R. Kidd".  note:  this may change because of editing.
 * 2) The lead only includes information in the article.
 * 3) The lead is concise.

Content


 * 1) The article's current content is relevant to the topic.  The concerns is listed below. This article is not update. There have been more advancement since Knowles.
 * 2) No - it is not updated. It does not discuss Andragogy in terms of other adult theories (instrumental, humanistic, transformative, social, motivational, constructivist  and reflective learning theories - also no mention of heutagogy). It also does not discuss the fact that andragogy is based on the integration of humanistic  and social tradition. There also is no update on learner motivation. There is also no update on online learning. In addition, there are no discussions about the evolution of the theory, diversity, nor work by Sharan Merriam.  Here are a few citations I would consider adding.   a. El-Amin Ph D, Abeni. "Andragogy: A theory in practice in higher education." Journal of Research in Higher Education 4.2 (2020): 5   b. Omoregie, C. (2021). The theory and practice of andragogy in adult education. Available at SSRN 3856464 3.  Govindaraju, V. (2021). Review on Adult Learning Theory and Approach. Multicultural Education, 7(12). d. Merriam, S. B. (2018). Adult learning theory: Evolution and future directions. In Contemporary theories of learning (pp. 83-96). Routledge.
 * 3) Yes. There is a gap. It does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.  Examples of resources include: a. Peltz, D. P., & Clemons, A. C. (Eds.). (2018). Multicultural andragogy for transformative learning. IGI Global. b. Summerlin, J., & Ponder, J. M. (2020). c. Politics of privilege in college classrooms: Cultural inequities and the paradox of safe spaces in critical andragogy. Handbook on promoting social justice in education, 1113-1128.

Tone and Balance


 * 1) Tone and Balance are described fairly and the article reflects a very general view of andragogy and its history without bias. The may concern is that this information is not up-to-date.
 * 2) All the facts are there and the citations are appropriate. But, there are not enough resources. Secondary resources are required and there is not current literature in spite of a plethora of journal-reviewed articles. T
 * 3) There is not a diverse spectrum of authors. There are suggestions of authors above, but these are areas where additional citations are needed:  a. underrepresented and diverse adult students, b. online learning, c. training and professional development  d.  a description of the transformation of this theory.
 * 4) Links work, but again, the most recent literature is 2010.

Organization and Writing Quality

1. The article is well written. It is clear and easy to read.

2. I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors.

3. It is well organized. The main problem is that it is dated and does not address several emerging areas of theory and application.

Images and Media


 * 1) There is one image from 1974.  I suggest that a picture of Malcolm Knowles and other leaders in the field be added as well a pictures of students in various settings.
 * 2) Yes, it meets copyright regulation.

Talk page Discussion


 * 1) On purpose I did not look at the talk page until I went through it first. I was pleased to see that others made similar comments. But there are also suggestions that I need to consider.
 * 2) Here are examples of the contents that show some concerns with the article:

Contents

 * 1This is quite unoriginal
 * 2instructional theory vs. learning theory
 * 3Temp page made
 * 4Andragogy and Motivation
 * 5Needs fleshing out
 * 6ericka roldan ralpie lozada ?
 * 7Etymology
 * 8Critique section
 * 9Possible copyright problem
 * 10Approaches
 * 11What are learning styles doing here?   (I am not sure that these should be omitted).
 * 12External links modified
 * 13Literal meaning of pedagogy as child learning is unsupported 3. There are discussions on whether or not learning styles should be included. This is pretty interesting because it shows several views. I am leaning toward including styles as it is relevant to the theory, in my opinion. I need to review the literature on this topic.

3. It is rated as Low-Importance and as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

4. I am not sure I understand this question, but I expected the Talk pages to be a place to more introduce what you intend to do/or how you suggest that the article be edited. And, that it was a place to ask questions - I see the conversation as more an opportunity to point out issues. There are some suggestions, and some questions - but I do not see see where individuals have introduced their plans or recommendations and asked for feedback.

Overall Impressions

The status says: The article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative education, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.