Teachers’ reflections on their practices in older adult non-formal education

ABSTRACT

This study aims to contribute knowledge about teachers’ reflections on their own practice in Folkbildning activities for older adults and is based on Nordic-German Didaktik theory and the three main Didaktik questions: why?, what? and how?. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with teachers from different adult education associations. The study identified that the following purposes reflected by the teachers are connected with the why question: enjoyment, critical inquiry and resocialisation. Three principles of the what question are participants’ interests, standards and plurality. Four principles relating to the how question are students’ active participation, teachers’ distinct guidance, individualisation and a permissive environment. The results further indicate that teachers expressed two approaches about their own teaching practice. The first approach emphasises the elements of Bildung, which involves critical thinking and questioning certain notions about the world, while the second focuses on socialisation and basic knowledge that is needed in society.

KEYWORDS:

• Education
• older adults
• teachers
• teaching
• Didaktik

Introduction

Both the goal of older adult education and the role of the teachers have been debated in the field of older adult learning by humanist and critical researchers (e.g., Formosa, 2011). The two rationales have different notions as to why older adults should participate in education. The humanist perspective emphasises personal development and self-fulfilment as the main goal, while social change and empowerment have been outlined by critical researchers (Hachem & Manninen, 2020). The role of the teacher has been discussed in relation to this. Hachem (2020) argues that the humanist perspective highlights the teacher as a facilitator, “who is preoccupied with the limitations of his/her own role” (p. 474), whereas the critical perspective portrays the teacher as an educator, “who is charged with the mission of persuading all older adults to social change” (p. 474). Thus, the role of the teacher varies depending on which purpose researchers emphasise as important in education for older adults.

However, although researchers’ emphasise two clearly different teacher roles, it is important to understand teachers’ own reasoning and thinking about their practices and what they highlight as important. Previous research has mainly focused on methods (e.g., Schiller et al., 2020) and teachers as instructors (e.g., Chiu et al., 2019) and there is a risk that other dimensions of teaching older adults have been overlooked, thus reducing teachers to implementors of certain skills and knowledge. Teaching implies several choices and adjustments, which means that the role of the teacher may take different forms in the educational practice depending on teachers’ general ideas about teaching older adults. There is currently a lack of deeper knowledge about teachers’ reflections on their educational purposes and principles when selecting content and teaching methods.

In the Nordic and German tradition, Didaktik is a research tradition with an interest in teaching and learning (Hopmann & Riquarts, 2000). Didaktik theory particularly stresses question about the meaningful content in education (what) and relates content to the purposes and motives of education (why) and the methods for teaching this content (how). The focus is thus on the reflective practice of teaching and the different choices made regarding the questions why, what and how (Westbury, 2000). Teachers’ different answers to the three main questions forms a certain Didaktik approach. Articulating alternative ideas about teaching approaches is important as they can serve as reference points for planning lessons and for discussion among teachers (Öhman & Östman, 2019). Didaktik theory also enables a conceptual apparatus and theory that contextualise the questions of what, why and how in relation to society and the conditions of the institutional and educational settings (Weniger, 2000). However, Didaktik theory is not used to any great extent and very little research has taken a Didaktik understanding of teachers’ perspectives on older adult education into account (Lemieux & Sauvé, 1999; Villar et al., 2010) This process is crucial in order to strengthen cumulative knowledge about the teaching of older adults and the role of the teacher.

The participants in older adult education in Sweden take part in Swedish Folkbildning activities where aspects like free and voluntary participation are important cornerstones. The learning that takes place in study associations and folk high schools can be referred as Folkbildning (Bjursell, 2019) and defined as non-formal education (see Åberg, 2016), which refers to organised and systematic education outside the formal education system. In non-formal education, the focus is not on assessment and the participants do not receive grades or credentials (Findsen & Formosa, 2011). As there is no national curriculum or formal examination process to follow (Andersèn et al., 2003), teachers have a bigger freedom to teach and form the educational setting. This actualises the autonomous role of the teachers. However, there are questions that teachers need to consider in an older adult education course and it is important to understand the specificity of this setting (Klimczak-Pawlak & Kossakowska-Pisarek, 2018). One challenge for teachers is the participants’ feelings of uncertainty and anxiety (Findsen & Formosa, 2011). Previous research has shown that intrinsic aspects are vital for older adults’ participation in education (Leung et al., 2006; Schoultz et al., 2020) and that it is important to stimulate and engage older participants in their courses. Didaktik theory can provide other insights into teachers’ reflections on their practices (Hudson, 2002).

This study aims to contribute knowledge about teachers’ reflections on their own practice in Folkbildning activities for older adults concerning the three main Didaktik questions of why, what and how. The focus is on the teachers’ own reasoning about their teaching of older adults. Didaktik theory is used to facilitate an in-depth understanding of teachers’ purposes and Didaktik principles. In Didaktik theory, the three questions of purpose and the selection of educational content and teaching methods are seen as mutually interdependent, while the concept of “reflective practice” implies that teachers’ thinking and reasoning on these questions are imbedded in their actions when teaching older adults. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten teachers from different study associations and folk high schools who led courses that were directed specifically at older adults.

Previous research on the teaching of older adults

The role of the teacher has been discussed in the research field of older adult learning (Hachem, 2020). The debate between humanist and critical researchers has actualised questions like what the teacher should focus on and what the main goal should be. The humanist perspective highlights intellectual, social and emotional development, and that the participants’ personal meanings should be the main focus (Findsen & Formosa, 2011). The teacher should be a facilitator who stimulates the learning process (Hachem, 2020). In contrast, critical philosophers like Formosa (2011) outline that education should aim for emancipation and that the teacher should be an educator. Formosa (2011) argues that in relation to the participants, an educator has a deeper knowledge and “a position of authority deriving from their competence” (Formosa, 2011, p. 327). Thus, the role of the teacher differs depending on the goal emphasised by researchers.

Didaktik theory is not used to any great extent in research on the teaching of older adults. Previous research on this topic describes the teacher as an instructor (e.g., Chiu et al., 2019; Ko, 2020). Attention is directed to teaching methods (e.g., Schiller et al., 2020; Villar et al., 2010) and teachers’ behaviour (e.g., Creech et al., 2014). As the circumstances around older adult education differ from the education of younger students, it is important to understand the specificity of older adult education (Klimczak-Pawlak & Kossakowska-Pisarek, 2018). More responsibility for the learning and the content can be given to these participants because no learning goals need to be checked off (Villar et al., 2010). Research outlines different strategies for the teaching of older adults.

Schiller et al. (2020) explore how teachers’ instructional methods can support the development of seniors’ autonomy in language learning. They report that teachers use a modern communicative language that involves authentic material and listening comprehension. Adapting the content of the topic to the participants’ interests, needs and cognitive abilities is important (Villar et al., 2010). In Villar et al.’s (2010) research, teachers describe that their teaching of older adults is more dialogical and less lecture-orientated compared to their teaching of younger university students, where the focus is on instruction and evaluation. The teachers pitch the content to fit the capabilities of the older participants (Ko, 2020). Chiu et al. (2019) outline a strategy in which the teacher reserves some of the content so there is a possibility to continue teaching the topic later if participants choose to continue in the same class.

Hallam et al. (2016) outline that a challenge for the facilitators of older adult learning is maintaining engagement in a diverse group. The learning environment is crucial here in that the participants have different backgrounds, physical status and experience with the studied subject. Empowerment has also been outlined as important. Ko (2020) focuses on an instructional design that highlights the progressive empowerment of the learners. Successful instructors engage older participants in a process involving empathising, engaging and empowering. Aspects like understanding the older participants’ emotions, cultures, psychological, physical and social needs are crucial (Ko, 2020). Creech et al. (2014) focus on teachers’ behaviour and stressed that attributional feedback could be used more to empower the participants to control their own learning. They further highlight the value of varying the organisational structure and style to meet the various needs of a diverse group of older learners (Creech et al., 2014).

Based on the above, we can summarise that in relation to the formal educational school system, Swedish Folkbildning activities are characterised by a certain freedom without the control of a national school curriculum (Andersèn et al., 2003), which means that study associations and folk high schools are free to create their own programmes and courses (Fejes et al., 2021). As the role of the teacher involves more than imparting certain skills and knowledge, it is crucial to know more about the teachers’ reflections on their practices in that several choices and judgements about the why, what and how of teaching are involved. There are various answers to these questions, which in a tradition of Didaktik theory are further elaborated on and can be considered as the frameworks and rationales that teachers can make use of in their teaching practices (Westbury, 2000). Didaktik theory supports a deeper understanding of this process because it highlights teachers’ autonomous roles and shifts the attention from methods to the selection process of content and the purposes of a course.

Didaktik theory

This study builds on the Nordic and German tradition of Didaktik theory, where attention is given to the theories and practices of teaching and learning (Gundem, 2011). Didaktik theory is mainly established in continental European educational research compared to American educational research (Hopmann, 2007; Hudson, 2002; Meyer & Hudson, 2011). The history and common core of Didaktik theory and the basic differences compared to American curriculum theory are outlined in brief below in order to show how it can contribute to an understanding of the teaching of older adults.

There are fundamental differences between the theoretical tradition of Didaktik and the American curriculum theory tradition when it comes to the understanding of content, teaching goals, organisational forms, evaluations and prerequisites (Westbury, 2000). In the American curriculum theory tradition, the dominant idea is organisational, with a focus on the task of building school systems with “curriculum as a manual”. A curriculum containing templates for coverage and methods is seen as guiding and controlling a school’s classroom routines, or even the entire school system (Hudson, 2002). Here, teachers are expected to implement the curriculum like “pilots are expected to follow their airlines’ rules governing what they should do” (Westbury, 2000, p. 17). The theoretical tradition of Didaktik emphasise teachers’ freedom to teach and form their practices.

One of the cornerstones of the Nordic and German tradition of Didaktik theory is the aspect of Bildung. Bildung is concerned with the process of seeking knowledge and its relation to the shaping of the personality. It highlights the individual’s unique self by focusing on questions of a more existential character, personal development and growth (Hopmann, 2007). As indicated above, the tradition of Didaktik theory highlights teachers’ freedom to form their practices. Thus, teachers’ professional autonomy is emphasised as crucial and in a tradition of Didaktik theory is directed by the concept of Bildung. Content “can only become educative as it is interpreted and given life by the teachers” (Hudson, 2002, p. 45).

Teaching is more than a transfer of information or the mastery of certain skills and competencies. The purpose of teaching is rather “the use of knowledge as a transformative tool of unfolding the learners’ individuality and sociability, in short: the Bildung of the learners by teaching” (Hopmann, 2007, p. 115). However, Bildung cannot be achieved by teaching alone. It is the students themselves who have to open up to the world. Didaktik theory can support teachers to restrain their teaching and enable space for individual growth. The teaching should deal with the content in a certain way, where the focus is not on the subject matter but on how meaning emerges for the students in the learning process. This meaning depends on the meeting of a unique individual and the subject matter at hand, and many different meanings can emerge for a given matter (Hopmann, 2007). Teaching also implies an “understanding of how a student meets this knowledge based on his or her own being” (Hopmann, 2007, p. 112). A fundamental purpose with teaching in the tradition of a Didaktik theory is to create opportunities for meaningful encounters between students and a specific content (Klafki, 2000). A meaningful content has the potential to be a resource for Bildung. This is in line with the tradition of Swedish Folkbildning activities. The outcomes of education are not evaluated in relation to its usefulness in a specific practice but rather in relation to Bildung.

The art of teaching actualises the Didaktik questions of why teach something, what content is important and how to teach it (Quennerstedt, 2019). The what question is especially important in the Nordic and German tradition of Didaktik theory. In order to acquire a deeper understanding of meaningful content in education, I turn to the German Didaktik theorist Wolfgang Klafki and his basic model. Klafki discusses the meaning of Didaktik theory and emphasises the content as essential for Didaktik analysis (Klafki, 2000). From his perspective, the content is formed in the actual educational situation and the student gives the content meaning depending on the circumstances in this practice (Öhman & Sund, 2021). Klafki’s basic model consists of five questions that the teacher can use to select the content for the education, which then form the basis for their lessons (Klafki, 2000). The first question focuses on generality and how the content can open up basic phenomena or fundamental principles for the learner. The second question directs attention to the meaning of the content and what kind of significance it already has for the learner. What does the learner already know about that content? The third question is about the future meaning of the content. How does the content play a vital role in the future life of older adults? The fourth question deals with the structure of the content and is affected by questions 1, 2 and 3 that then set the context for the pedagogical perspective. Finally, the fifth question focuses on how the content can be made interesting and available for the learner. Are there any phenomena, situations or experiments that could make the content interesting? How might the content be structured in order to be interesting and stimulating? These five questions can guide teachers’ reflective practices about the content and how to make it approachable (Hudson, 2002).

Didaktik theory accordingly underlines that several elements are involved in education and learning (Öhman & Östman, 2019). Here, the attention is on aspects like actors, aims, content, context and the relations between the teacher, the content and the participants (Hudson, 2002). Didaktik theory can facilitate teachers’ reflective practices in considering the essential why, what and how questions. These key questions illuminate the importance of the teacher as an autonomous, reflective, educational practitioner. There are various answers to these questions and the focus is on the forms of reasoning about teachers’ freedom to develop their own approaches (Westbury, 2000). The non-formal educational context for older adults actualises the autonomous role of teachers and their reflective practices.

Öhman and Östman (2019) argue that the three basic questions of why the motives of education, what the content of education and how the methods used in education can be helpful in structuring Didaktik analysis. The question why is comprehensive in that it covers the purpose of the content in society and addresses the purpose of the role of education for preparing the participants for life in a democracy. A course’s function in society actualises our ideas of what a good society is. Should a course emphasise changing society, or is the focus on maintaining certain values, norms and knowledge? The question of what raises the importance of the content and what should be taught and learned. Here, the reasons for the selection of the material are dealt with. The question of how deals with the choice of teaching methods, the nature of the participants’ learning processes, as well as the role of the teacher and the participants. The analysis in this article is based on these three main questions and the relationship between them. Teachers’ different answers to the three main questions form a certain logic, which can be viewed as an intended teaching approach. Differences in factual teaching approaches in practice provide the participants with diverse opportunities to learn and engage as suggested by Öhman and Östman (2019).

Method

The empirical material was generated by means of qualitative, semi-structured interviews with ten teachers. Most of the teachers had retired from a teaching background in the Swedish compulsory and upper secondary school system. All the interviewees had several years of experience of teaching older adults. A purposeful sampling strategy was used (Patton, 2015) and the teachers were included because they taught courses described as non-formal education directed at older adults. Five of them worked with the Senior University and the other five with the adult education associations ABF, SeniorNet, Bilda and Pro folkhögskola. The organisations and the teachers were contacted between 2019 and 2021. Contact was made with teachers from different learning environments to acquire variable empirical material. One teacher ran courses on “literature and religion” and “religions in the world”, two teachers taught “music and poetry” together, one teacher ran a course about “third ageing”, one teacher taught languages (German and English), two teachers ran a course on digital devices together, one teacher offered a course on art, one teacher taught about ageing and one taught a course on “travelling and reading”.

Nine interviews were held with ten teachers and lasted approximately one hour each. The interviews were individual, except for one with two teachers (“music and poetry”). Because of the diffusion of COVID-19 two of the interviews were held by phone and two thru Zoom. The focus in the interviews was on the teachers’ reflections on their practices and the three main questions why, what and how. The interviews were semi-structured to allow for follow-up questions. The research project has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (dnr-04732). The teachers were informed about the study verbally and in writing, including information about the purpose of the study and the voluntary and confidential nature of their participation. All the interviews were transcribed and the names of the teachers were anonymised using pseudonyms. Didaktik theory was used to facilitate an in-depth understanding of the teachers’ reasoning about teaching older adults and their role “as an autonomous practitioner who makes decisive Didaktik choices” (Andersson & Öhman, 2022, p. 87). The next section outlines the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of the analytical procedure.

Analysis of the teachers’ selections of methods and content

The analysis was grounded in the Didaktik understanding of the educational practice and focused on the teachers’ purposes with their courses and their Didaktik principles for selecting educational content and teaching methods. The analysis was a purpose-driven content analysis searching for themes (Patton, 2015) and was conducted in four steps. Firstly, the interview data was coded by focusing on instances in which various aspects of teaching were expressed in order to get an overall picture of the data, e.g., statements about the participants, the role of the teacher or the content. Following Lidar and Lundqvist (2022), the teachers’ statements can be understood as expressions of their teaching habits and the meaning they give to their teaching.

In the second step, the focus was on the teachers’ reflections on their own practice. The coded meaning units were related to one of the three main questions of why, what and how. The teachers’ statements about the purposes of their courses were related to the question of why. The role of the course in society and how it might contribute to the life of the participants was addressed. The what question addressed the educational content selection and what the teachers thought were important and central to their teaching. The reasons why the teachers had chosen certain content and materials were related to this question. Teacher statements about choosing teaching methods were classified to the how question. This question addressed the teachers’ understandings of their participants’ learning processes and their roles as teachers.

The third step contains of two parts. First the codes were grouped into themes by looking for regularities (Patton, 2015). The focus here was on the principles the teachers conveyed when making statements about the different choices they made regarding the Didaktik questions why, what and how. The revealed patterns were sorted into themes and revised and adjusted several times. The themes were placed in relation to the interview data as a whole. The classification of themes was discussed and verified by two independent researchers, both of whom analysed the transcripts. Further, observations of four of the included teachers in the study were used in the verification process. Different themes of the teachers’ purposes with a course were generated in relation to the why question. Themes about the teachers’ Didaktik principles for choosing content and methods were generated in relation to the what and how questions. In the second part of this step, the themes were named in a way that captured the core content. The most common patterns in the data were identified by means of a synthesis. Each pattern demonstrated a teaching approach, thus forming a certain logic between the three main questions why, what and how.

In the final step, the teaching approaches were named and general descriptions made. Klafki’s (2000) analytical questions described above were used to facilitate a deeper understanding of the approaches. The identified teaching approaches are presented and summarised in the synthesis section.

Table 1. The distribution of themes in the teaching approaches.

Teaching approaches	Why	What	How
Intrinsic values approach	Critical inquiry, enjoyment	Participants’ interests, plurality	Students’ active participation, a permissive environment
Instrumental values approach	Resocialisation	Standards	Teachers’ distinct guidance, individualisation

Findings

In this section, the results of the analysis of how teachers reasoned about the purposes and Didaktik principles for selecting educational content and teaching methods are presented. The results are structured after the three main Didaktik questions why, what and how. Although these questions are connected, separations are made for analytical purposes. The different themes that have been attributed to each Didaktik question are outlined. Illustrative examples of teachers’ reflections on their own practice support the results.

Teachers’ educational purposes

The question of why addresses the reasons for a course and its function. Here, three themes were identified: education as enjoyment, education as critical inquiry, education as resocialisation.

The teachers highlighted that education as enjoyment was important when leading a course. The theme relates to pleasure and whether the courses are enjoyable, interesting and stimulate the participants in a positive way. For example, it was important for the participants to feel that a course was interesting and meaningful. Earl,¹ the teacher of the “language courses” explained that it was crucial to read different novels to stimulate the participants’ interests and said, “It means that hopefully they will want to come back because they feel that I am trying to vary the goodies all the time”. The teacher of the art course, Lorene, emphasised that it was important that the participants felt that a course was pleasurable, especially as they did not have any external goals or motives to work towards, such as tests or certificates. She also emphasised that she wanted her participants to find their own expression and the material they liked to work with when painting, and not just learn a certain technique. The participants were supposed to experience the significance of the content themselves and not simply learn a certain knowledge or skill. Arlene, the teacher in “the digital devices” course emphasised enjoyment and stated that she always tried to show the participants that digital devices could be enjoyable and meaningful to learn and would benefit them in their daily lives.

The theme education as critical inquiry involved critical reflection and broadening perspectives. Being critical and questioning certain aspects of society, such as religion and ageing, was emphasised. Margret, the teacher of the “literature and religion” course explained:

It is those questions that … this is not a school and I don’t give any marks or tests, so I don’t need to check their basic knowledge. It is much more important for the participants to acquire knowledge that will be useful and make them think and question things.

This quotation illustrates that Margret could concentrate on aspects other than evaluation because there was no set goal to reach. The focus was not on estimating and judging the participants’ performances, which provided new possible goals for courses. Thus, Margret reflected on the relationship between the participants and the content and expressed her desire for participants to become more critical and curious about issues of religion. The purpose of the course was to sustain values like tolerance and recognise that different religions shared certain values. Points of difference could, for example, be more significant within a religion than between different religions.

Critical reflection, e.g., on ageing, was also highlighted. Bertha, a “third ageing” course teacher, emphasised that she planned to develop a course in which the participants could discuss and critically reflect on issues around ageing. A broadening of perspectives was also emphasised in this theme. For example, Joanne, teaching “senior conversation”, hoped that the participants would acquire new outlooks on life and start to see things differently, i.e., “that they gain new perspectives on how to counteract ageism in time”. Joanne explained that today society gives older adults certain characteristics, such as being a burden and a risk to society. Instead, older adults have a lot of experience and knowledge that can contribute to the development of society.

Education as resocialisation was highlighted as a purpose by the teachers. This theme was about socialising the participants into a world that has changed and is still changing. Education can be seen as a means that involves, for example, understanding other religions, meeting a new technical world, or acquiring deeper knowledge about a language. The teachers of the “technical devices” course outlined that illuminating a new world for the participants and showing the possibilities with mobile phones were crucial. They emphasised that it was important that for the participants to dare to try different things on their devices, such as security on the internet and how digital devices operated. Thus, the goal was not just to develop technical skills but also to become more comfortable with the internet environment.

This theme entailed that things had changed since the participants left school. The changing world and new circumstances actualised new knowledge. Margret stated that “when the participants went to school they only studied Christianity”. She further explained that many people of different religions are coming to Sweden, it was therefore important to acquire a deeper understanding of different religions. This theme also involved socialising into the norms of a subject such as English. Earl, the language teacher, stated that he wanted the participants to find new ways of expressing certain things and use expressions that native speakers themselves used. This approach involved learning certain skills or acquiring specific knowledge.

Choosing content

The question of what to teach included the basic grounds and principles for the chosen content. Here, participants’ interests, standards and plurality were principles that related to what teachers thought about when selecting content.

The theme participants’ interests was about choosing content according to the participants’ wishes and earlier experiences. It considered how the content already had significance for the participants and that a deeper meaning could be created through continuity between past, present and future experiences. The participants’ interests were consequently an important principle for choosing content. Arlene explained that the participants expressed what they wanted to learn, such as how to take and save photographs with their mobile phone camera. She further outlined that they sometimes adjusted a lesson to reflect the participants’ requests, such as using Google Maps. However, responding to the participants’ requests was not always easy.

Bertha, the teacher of the “third ageing” course explained that she asked the participants if they wanted to elaborate more on anything and that “several of them said death”. The request to talk about death was sensitive and difficult to incorporate, in that the teacher needed to reflect on the content and how to make it approachable. In the “travelling and reading” course, the participants decided together with the teacher what they wanted to know more about before travelling to a country. The participants then focused on different aspects depending on their interests, e.g., history, food, social welfare etc. Carol, who taught the “travelling and reading” course, explained that this was one way of structuring the content so that it was stimulating and approachable.

It was also crucial to connect the content to the participants’ earlier experiences. Joanne, the “senior conversation” course teacher, stated that she adjusted the content in relation to the participants and explained, “then I think about who is there [the participants]. How does this information affect them all individually?” Donald, the “music and poetry” teacher, explained that it was important to listen to the music and poetry that the participants were familiar with. For example, the focus was on popular music from the first half of the twentieth century, rather than more recent works. The teachers thus selected musicians and poets according to how famous or recognisable they were to the participants. He emphasised that the participants relations to music and poetry had change after the course. There was a continuity here that provided the participants with new and extended experiences.

Content based on standards involved choosing content that was understood as factually important and background knowledge. This content was selected according to what the teachers regarded as crucial basic knowledge in order to learn how, for example, literature and compendiums serve as guidelines. Earl stated that grammar was crucial and that he specifically taught English idiomatic expressions: “After all, these are expressions that we use when English is our mother tongue”. Earl outlined that idiomatic expressions were vital parts of the English language. Margret explained that certain sacred texts and anthologies were chosen because they “ … are meant to say something important about Buddhism, for example, that are known and which a Buddhist would regard as important”. This example illustrates that anthologies can serve as indicators of whether a text is valuable or not in the course.

Compendiums and books created specifically for the course topic were also emphasised. In the “senior conversation” course the teacher followed material with topics such as “My life today” and “After working life”. The material was a manual to be followed, even if the teacher reworked the material to fit the participants. The course on “digital devices” made use of a book containing the different competences and skills to be learned. The participants did different tasks in the book and the teachers demonstrated how to proceed. Topics such as surfing the internet and composing and sending emails were dealt with in the book. Thus, the teachers based their selection of educational content on the books and compendiums that covered the basic knowledge about the subject.

Content based on plurality was highlighted by the teachers as a way of nuancing and reflecting on different aspects of a subject. One such way was to be global. Margret explained that she chose books from different parts of the world to “reflect different religions and cultures”. It was crucial for the participants to encounter different kinds of literature and that the content illuminated different aspects of a topic. The teachers also discussed plurality in relation to the breadth of a subject. Earl stated that he worked with different texts so that the participants would experience different ways of doing things. He further explained that variation was important.

Lorene outlined that she wanted the participants to try different techniques and materials. She further stated that the process of painting was more important than the actual act of painting. Margret stated that she had a list of points that they could follow during a lesson. She sometimes marked things in the literature to raise with the group. However, Margret said that it was important to have content to bring up and place in relation to the topics the participants discussed during a lesson but which might not always be used. The content in this theme was understood as examples rather than objects that needed to be learned or mastered.

Choosing methods

The question of how was related to the methods and the learning processes taking place in the educational practice. The teachers had various principles regarding the question of how. Four principles that were identified in this context were: students’ active participation, teachers’ distinct guidance, individualisation and a permissive environment.

In the theme students’ active participation, the teachers wanted the participants to engage in conversation and discussion and to be actively involved in the learning process. Discussion was outlined as crucial in this theme. Bertha emphasised that discussions about existential questions between participants were valuable. However, she explained that this was her first course based on conversation and that it could be quite challenging because she had to guide the discussions, “I felt in this course that I had to be more observant so that everyone had an opportunity to talk”. This quotation illustrates how the teachers reflected on the relationship between the teacher and the participants. The teacher needed to be active and observant to ensure that all the participants had enough space.

Another way of creating active participation was to ask the participants specific questions. This was explained by Earl and Bertha, both of whom had different approaches to discussion. Joanne passed a stone round in the group saying, “when you get the stone, it is your turn to speak, and nobody else can comment”. Margret highlighted that people had different expectations from a course and that there had been dialogues about the balance of speaking time, because some participants wanted her to talk more. She stressed that relations between the participants were a vital part of the course, but the function of the teacher as well. In this case, the teacher had to reflect on the role of the participants in a course and whether they should be passive receivers of knowledge or active in discussions and seek knowledge. However, participation was an important principle that required the teacher to be observant and able to create fruitful relations between the participants.

The theme teachers’ distinct guidance implied lecturing, feedback and demonstration. In this theme, it was crucial that the participants repeated certain skills and information. The teachers of the “digital devices” course highlighted that the participants were asked to repeat what the teachers had demonstrated. The teachers stressed that they explained basic knowledge and demonstrated how the devices worked. Joyce explained: “It’s best if they listen first and look at what we’re going to do. We demonstrate different things and then they get to try them themselves”. In this case, the participants were passive when the teachers demonstrated and became more active when they attempted to copy the teachers’ skills.

Lectures were one way of guiding the participants. Margret, who taught the “literature and religion” and “religions in the world” courses stated that she had different approaches in the two courses depending on the participants’ backgrounds and previous experiences in the subject. In the course “religions in the world”, most of the participants were novices and did not have much experience of the subject. Thus, Margret gave more lectures during which the participants became passive receivers of knowledge. A strategy that was highlighted that supported the learning process was to give the participants direct feedback. Earl explained that some of his participants liked to read aloud, after which he gave them feedback on their reading.

Individualisation was outlined as another principle for choosing methods. This theme involved individual work during the course sessions as well as at home between the lessons. Adaptations, such as the learning tempo in a course, also facilitated individualisation, in that the participant’s different backgrounds and experiences with digital devices could be challenging. The teachers of the “digital devices” course explained that they sometimes had to separate participants from the group and allow them to work with different tasks. They also needed to adapt the participants’ digital devices, such as font size and sound. The teachers of the “digital devices” course also stressed the importance of the tempo. Joyce commented that, “Yes, it is important that you go slowly and do not stress. They must have time to listen and try and to feel that this works”. Thus, a teacher always needed to reflect on the degree of difficulty.

Letting the participants work on their own was emphasised. Lorene explained that she gave instructions in the morning “and then they take care of themselves until the end of the day”.

Thus, in this case the participants were responsible for their learning processes, were active and encouraged to be creative. However, this could also be challenging because sometimes the participants were distracted and started to discuss other things with each other, or make value judgements about each other’s paintings, which could be sensitive. Homework was emphasised by the teachers and the participants were given tasks to take home and work on between sessions. Bertha gave the participants small tasks to work or reflect on for next lesson. Thus, the participants were expected to do some preparation work at home.

The theme a permissive environment was about creating a comfortable atmosphere, emboldening the participants and paying attention to them. In the art course, it was important for the participants to express themselves and used the materials they liked and not simply mimic the teacher. However, it could be difficult to find the courage to be creative and paint. One way was to let the participants paint with their non-dominant hand and thus create a more playful environment. Bertha stated that it was essential to work with the participants’ courage to make them talk and discuss: “To come to a study circle, to dare to talk and dare to share your inner thoughts with the others. That is an opportunity”.

Several of the teachers discussed the importance of personal treatment. The participants should feel that they were seen through eye contact, and that they were given the time and space to talk. Joanne underlined the sensitivity of some topics. It was also vital that the participants felt comfortable, could speak without being interrupted or were not subjected to value judgements from the other participants. The participants in the “digital devices” course had concerns about security on the internet and how such devices operated. Arlene stated that it was important for participants, “To dare to test and think that you can’t make that many mistakes but can always go back. Nobody will come and rap your knuckles”. However, the learning environment was emphasised as important because the participants had to feel that they could make mistakes.

Synthesis

The results demonstrated that there were different answers to the three main questions. Further elaborated, two different approaches to the teaching of older adults emerged from the analysis. Each approach had a certain logic; one highlighting intrinsic values and the other instrumental values. The approaches emphasised different themes (Table 1). The intrinsic values approach emphasised the elements of Bildung. Here, it was important to be critical and question certain notions about the world (the why question) and choose content from the participants’ own experiences and interests (the what question). Through participation and discussion (the how question), experiences of values and personal growth were developed. In the instrumental values approach, the focus was on socialising into a new world (the why question) and learning about the standards and traditions in different subjects (the what question). In this way, the subject matter would become both important and useful in society. The participants were given different tasks and the teacher guided the participants in distinct ways (the how question). Both approaches could be used by a teacher, although it was more usual for one to be emphasised. The two approaches highlighted different aspects of Klafki’s five analytical questions and suggested different responses.

The intrinsic values approach was in line with earlier research, which is that the participants’ interests are important to consider and make use of (Villar et al., 2010). Klafki’s second question about the significance that the content already has for the learner was emphasised as crucial here. For example, the principle participants’ interests for choosing content demonstrated that the teachers reflected on what the content should signify to the students and how they could experience this significance themselves. The participants earlier experiences are crucial for creating a stimulating meeting and could lead to positive future experiences. From a Didaktik perspective, the meaning of these learning experiences was based on the meeting of a unique individual with the specific matter at hand and emerged within the learning process itself (Hopmann, 2007). The intrinsic values approach focusing on Bildung reflected critical inquiry. With Klafki’s third question about the purpose and future meaning of the content, the theme critical inquiry illuminated that the teachers did not primarily focus on what the participants should learn or know. Instead, they wanted the participants to take a critical standing and reflect on what they might learn about human beings. The nature of the content also affected the learning process, and in this approach the teachers tended to focus on students’ active participation, such as discussion. This was highlighted as crucial but not as a method to reach certain goals more effectively. Instead, the relationships between the participants had a value in themselves.

The instrumental values approach tended to emphasise the world as objective. The theme resocialisation implied that certain skills and facts were important to acquire in order to keep up with a changing society and to become part of a subject’s culture. This is in line with Mezirow’s transformative learning theory and the transformation of the participants’ frames of references (Mezirow, 2009). The changing world and new circumstances actualised new knowledge. The future meaning of the content (Klafki’s question 3) was based on standards and the kind of knowledge the teachers thought was crucial in a certain subject or in society, such as being able to use a mobile phone and its various functions. The teachers tried to pitch the content and vary the organisational structure to fit the capabilities of the older adults (Creech et al., 2014; Ko, 2020). This approach highlighted Klafki’s fourth question, in which the structure of the content is a key element. For example, the theme distinct guidance indicated that teachers considered questions about structure and choosing lectures as a way of imparting basic knowledge. This finding was in line with previous research. Ko (2020) outlined that teachers try to engage learners by aligning the content with the participants’ needs and social circumstances.

It is clear that more research is needed to explore the different approaches to the teaching of older adults. This study has provided a deeper understanding of the teachers’ reflections on their practices in education for older adults and how these practices are related to the educational processes.

Discussion

The results of this study indicate that there is reason to talk about a specific Didaktik for the teaching of older adults. However, what separates the teaching of older adults from other students is not just a biological question. The study reveals that the teaching of older adults is embedded in a social and cultural environment. The teachers are influenced by general ideas in society that shape and directly affect the teaching process. A key debate in older adult learning focuses on why we should teach older adults and to what end. Different philosophical strands highlight various goals, such as empowerment, emancipation, personal growth, self-fulfilment and functionality (Findsen & Formosa, 2011; Hachem & Manninen, 2020). The results of this study indicate that a teacher’s purpose for a course reflects these rationales.

The principle critical inquiry is emphasised in the intrinsic value approach. This is in line with Formosa’s argument that it is important for the participants to take a critical standing on the structures in society. Further, the principle students’ active participation is highlighted by the teachers in this approach and regarded as an important aspect of teaching older adults. This follows the argumentation of the humanist perspective, where the role of the teacher is more of a facilitator. Furthermore, the theme resocialisation indicates that there is a connection with the development of society, although not in terms of functionality. The teachers do not emphasise the needs of older adults to the same extent, or how the education of older adults can help to solve societal problems. Rather, attention is given to aspects like a deeper knowledge of the changing society. Thus, there may be a gap between the theoretical discussions in the field about the purposes of teaching older adults and the purposes that the teachers highlight as crucial. As indicated above, more research is needed to unpack this issue further.

A common core for Didaktik theorists is that teaching always involves different questions (see e.g., Klafki, 2000; Westbury, 2000). I argue that the why and what questions are of specific importance in older adults’ non-formal education. Swedish Folkbildning activities are described as free and voluntary in character (Fejes et al., 2021). As there is no national curriculum to follow, there is no predetermined content that must be treated or examined, which means that the teachers have a greater freedom, in relation to the formal educational system, when creating courses. The teaching of older adults in nonformal education actualises other values and goals, and several of the purposes and principles mentioned by the teachers highlight intrinsic values as crucial. Experience is outlined as a particularly important aspect when teaching older adults (Villar et al., 2010) and the principle participants interests confirms this. Further, the intrinsic values approach resonates with the cornerstones of Swedish Folkbildning, where Bildung is highlighted as crucial (Bjursell, 2019).

Intrinsic values are emphasised in older adult education (Leung et al., 2006: Schoultz et al., 2022) and the teachers consider these values in their teaching, such as the principle of a permissive environment. However, attention is often given to behaviour like eye contact or the space to speak. The teachers also discuss these aspects in more personal language. An important consequence of this study is that other aspects of intrinsic values are not always articulated and that there is a need to develop a professional language. Further, the teaching of older adults is claimed to be less lecture-orientated (Villar et al., 2010), and Swedish Folkbildning is outlined as unique with its focus on collective learning (Fejes et al., 2021). The results indicate that there is a tendency to highlight more instrumental values, like distinct guidance, when participants do not have enough experience with the subject. The teachers thus need to reflect on how to create educative encounters that facilitate the growth of the participants, especially when they are inexperienced in a subject. The teaching of older adults should accordingly be organised to create continuity between past, present and future experiences.

It is important to acknowledge that the study does not answer questions about the actual teaching, but only about the teachers’ reasoning and thinking about their teaching practices. Further, it should be mentioned that the particularities of the teachers and the content of these courses could influence the results. Teachers of different courses may highlight other principles and values. The character of courses as “art” and “music and poetry” are different in relation to, for example, courses in computer competence. In this study, the instrumental value approach was emphasised more clearly by the language teacher (German and English) and the two teachers running a course on digital devices together. Thus, the nature of the content can influence the findings, especially when some courses might fall more naturally into one of the two teaching approaches. However, both approaches identified in the study were used by the teachers. This indicates that both intrinsic and instrumental values are actualised in the teaching of older adults in non-formal education.

A deepened learning experience implies questions about the content and its encounters with the participants. Didaktik theory can contribute to this development and support teachers in their practices, thereby creating a fruitful and educative learning environment. Klafki’s five basic questions for Didaktik analysis can enable teachers to include these intrinsic values in their planning. However, Klafki’s five questions are directed to the teaching of youths, in that they focus on how the content can play a vital role in the future life of young people as members of society. The teachers of older adults’ education possibly need to base their analysis on other questions. Here, additional empirical and theoretical research will be needed to explore how a functional Didaktik perspective for the teaching of older adults can take shape.

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Prof. Johan Öhman my thesis supervisor for valuable comments and feedback on previous versions of the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 The name of the person and the course are mentioned the first time the interviewed teacher is mentioned in the text., after which only the name of the teacher is indicated.