Social Learning

The Diverse Theoretical Sources of Social Learning

The roots of social learning as it is now understood in the context of action research can be found in different but related bodies of literature. Social learning does not as such have a linear historical trajectory, but as a concept it takes its sources from a number of academic fields of expertise, such as education, developmental psychology, organizational development, international development and sustainability. Social learning was first articulated in the 1970s as a theory by Alfred Bandura, a development psychologist who focused on how children learn from observing and engaging with their environment, underlying the importance of social interactions in the learning process. During the same period, Chris Argyris and Donald Schön, who worked on organizational development, highlighted the role of organizational learning for organizational change to happen, implying that there is a systemic dimension to learning. The links between learning and change are also central to Paolo Freire’s pedagogy and to Jack Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. But much earlier, in 1946, it was Kurt Lewin’s seminal paper on action research which introduced the idea of the dynamics between actions, research and how social interactions or field forces can stop or foster learning. Nowadays, in the context of international development, and more specifically in natural resource management, social learning is conceptualized as a process of learning collectively to foster systemic changes. Jim Woodhill and Niels Röling consider social learning as a framework to foster reflective critical learning between stakeholders in the context of adaptation and innovation. Meg Keen, who worked with Val Brown and Robert Dyball in Australia, see social learning as an interactive process between, what they call, five braided strands of social learning. (1) Reflection and reflexivity, (2) system orientation, (3) integration, (4) negotiation and (5) participation are five ongoing processes, and the weaving of these strands help generate ideas and solutions to promote more sustainable futures.

The Process of Social Learning

Independently of the strengths and limitations of these contributions to the field of social learning, [Page 712]what transpires strongly is that social learning encompasses a dynamic process of interactions between people which stimulates learning and should generate some form of transformative change, based on critical reflection and analysis, where power and power relations play a major stimulus. For Freire, change is about creating new and different types of power relationships rather than having a reversal, with the oppressed becoming the oppressors. This is an important aspect of action research and more so Participatory Action Research, where the role of the researcher is to step down from the authoritative position of the expert to become a facilitator of the collective critical learning process. There are a number of different dimensions in the learning process that are emphasized by different social learning theorists. For Mezirow, transformation is key, and learners become able to look critically at their own mind frames and world views to consider others and create new world views which help them to be more innovative and adaptive. The learner should also retain this capacity to keep transforming as new information is acquired which challenges the old worldview. For Ira Shor, knowledge has to be reinforced by a critical dimension where learners become aware of what holds them back and what prevents them from achieving transformation. Chris Argyris and Donald Schön conceptualize learning as a process of moving through a succession of learning loops where the learner moves from following the rules (single loop) to changing the rules (double loop) to eventually learning about learning (triple-loop learning). Critical analysis is essential to move between the loops. Meg Keen and her colleagues have adapted this model, whereby the single-loop learning from an event leads to action, the double loop leads to questioning or changing the governing assumptions and the triple loop leads to reconsidering the governing values. This step is akin to Mezirow’s level of transformation. Finally, the other dimension of social learning, which runs through most of the work on adaptive management, is the acknowledgement of interconnectedness: People are connected to each other through very complex and dynamic relationships, but people are also a part of systems, such as the social, environmental or economic systems. And, thus, while poverty or environmental degradation, for example, have multiple roots, they cannot be solved through unilateral actions. Rather, they need to be understood through different disciplines as well as through the lenses of multiple social actors.

...