Richard E. Mayer, in “An Interview with Richard Mayer”, on the nature of human learning:

How can we help people learn in ways that promote transfer, is a classic question in psychology and education that dates back to the beginning of our field . . . if we could understand how people learn—and in particular, how to help people learn—this would greatly contribute both to psychology and to education. Learning is at the heart of education. The goal of education is to promote learning, that is, to promote cognitive change in learners. I am interested in the question of how to facilitate this process of cognitive change in learners. (Veronikas & Shaughnessy, 2005, p. 189)

In “Self-Directed Learning. Myths and Realities” (1994), Sandra Kerka identifies 3 myths about self-directed learning in androgogy, that are still commonly espoused today, and counters them with reasoned and moderative considerations:  

1. Adults are naturally self-directed.

She posits that preference for self-direction may be a matter of degree as relevant factors on a continuum. These factors include but not limited to “learning style, exposure to self-direction, familiarity with subject matter, expectations of schooling and learning, motivation, length of time away from formal schooling, social and political context.” (p.3)

2. Self-direction is an all or nothing concept.

Kerka identifies that SDL is a learner-controlled instructional process that can seem incompatible with formal education, but again posits that the degrees of responsibility adults will take is on a continuum, and this varies with specific personalities, situations, and specific learning project.

“Responsibility for acquiring knowledge may be shared by accepting the guidance and support of others, but the learner retains responsibility to make sense of new information and structure that knowledge so it is personally meaningful.” (p.3)

3. Self-directed learning means learning in isolation.

Kerka cites Candy (1991) with “humans are all independent learners in the sense that people individually process information and relate it to their unique experiences to make personal meaning of it. However, learning is increasingly being viewed as meaning that is personally constructed within a social or cultural context” (Candy as cited in Kerka, p.4) and points to informal ‘social networks’ that learners can access for supports. At her time of writing, online social supports would not have been as much of a factor in regards to content availability, content curation, learning supports, and ‘help’ networks as they are at this point. Social presence can now be tied to a subject matter rather than a classroom; with a  ‘vast amount of learning that takes place in informal social networks. (p.4) and

“the learner is neither independent or dependent, but interdependent, forming new understanding through dialogue, feedback, and reflection with fellow learners and facilitators.” (p.4)

Certainly there are many other criticisms of SDL. In their work “Self-Directed Learning: A Cognitive and Computational Perspective”, Gureckis and Markant (2012, p. 474), while pointing out some disadvantages of self-direct learning, remind us of Atkinson’s oft cited caution:

Using the learner’s judgement as one of several items of information in making an instructional decision is quite different from proposing that the learner should have complete control. Our data, and the data of others, indicate that the learner is not a particularly effective decision maker. Arguments against learner-controlled programs are unpopular in the present climate of opinion, but they need to be made so that we will not be seduced by the easy answer that a theory of instruction is not required because, “who can be a better judge of what is best for the student than the student himself.” (Atkinson, 1972, p.21)

Ouch.

Kohan et al. delineate even further ‘barriers’ they believe are evident in the SDL online educational environment  in “Self- directed learning barriers in a virtual environment: a qualitative study” [sic]:

1. Cognitive barriers including

a.) information overload and b.) lack of focus on learning (mind wandering)

2. Communication barriers including

a.) role uncertainty or role ambiguity – referring to the confusion surrounding teacher presence or teacher role and b.) inadequate writing skills

3. Educational environment barriers including

a.) inadequate coping skill – difficulty finding supports and not yet developed problem solving competencies and b.) heavy workload as a result of more responsibility

Well this all sound fairly unfortunate. As Gureckis and Markant (2012) point to Klahr & Nigam and Mayer with:

“the fundamental dilemma regarding self-directed learning that lies at the heart of recent debates in the educational literature: When does self-directed learning improve learning, retention, or transfer, and when do learners fall prey to biases that limit their ability to effectively gather information?” (Klahr & Nigam, 2004; Mayer, 2004, as cited in Gureckis and Markant, p. 465)

And further, educational psychologist Richard Mayer’s views (2005) on discovery learning significantly impact attitudes regarding SDL with published statements (“Should There be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning?”):

“Pure discovery—even when it involves lots of hands-on activity and large amounts of group discussion— may fail to promote the first cognitive process, namely, selecting relevant incoming information. In short, when students have too much freedom, they may fail to come into contact with the to-be-learned material. (p.17)

The debate about discovery has been replayed many times in education, but each time, the research evidence has favored a guided approach to learning.

Pure discovery did not work in the 1960s, it did not work in the 1970s, and it did not work in the 1980s, so after these three strikes, there is little reason to believe that pure discovery will somehow work today. (p.18)  

Is pure discovery learning at the core of self-directed learning? Does the choice of direction and learning tools and content equate with knowledge construction or is it more aptly considered to be selective curation? Is there a difference? Mayer does acknowledge that “meaningful learning is cognitive activity (e.g., selecting, organizing, and integrating knowledge) . . . the most genuine approach to constructivist learning is learning by thinking”  (p.17), and Gureckis and Markant acknowledge that there is the belief that learners learn ‘better’ when they are in control of the pace or the flow of the experience. (p. 464)

“The study of self-directed learning opens new, relatively underexplored avenues for psychological research. However, progress on these issues will require experimenters to relinquish the control they are accustomed to exerting over the learning process and let individuals freely explore and sample information in their own environment.” (Gureckis and Markant, p. 476 )

Recommendations ⇒