Three “Gogies”: Pedagogy, Andragogy, Heutagogy

  • Amnon GlassnerEmail author
  • Shlomo Back


This chapter begins with a brief description of andragogy and its basic principles, and their contrast to pedagogy. Then, following Hase and Kenyon (2000) and Blaschke (2012), we focus on the main differences between andragogy and heutagogy. Blaschke contrasts andragogy, which she views as “self-directed learning”, with heutagogy, or “self-determined learning”. Unlike andragogy, heutagogy emphasizes double and triple-loop learning, “capability development, non-linear design and learning approach. It is learner directed, and its aim is getting students to understand how they learn” (Blaschke, 2012). We shall deal with these features, and devote a critical discussion to the proposal that the three “gogies”—pedagogy, andragogy, and heutagogy—constitute a continuum. We shall conclude the chapter by presenting heutagogy’s design principles.


  1. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  2. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Aristotle. (1984). Nicomachean ethics (Ross, W. & revised by Urmson, J., Trans.). In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of aristotle (The Revised Oxford Translation edition, Vol. 2, pp. 1729–1867). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Back, S. (2002). The aristotelian challenge to teacher education. History of Intellectual Culture, 2(1), 1–5.Google Scholar
  5. Back, S. (2016). The journey of ACE: The hermeneutical-phenomenological approach to teacher education. In J. Barak & A. Gidron (Eds.), Active collaborative education: A journey towards teaching (pp. 121–148). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-directed learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13, 56–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blaschke, L. M. (2016). Strategies for implementing self-determined learning (Heutagogy) within education: A comparison of three institutions (Australia, South Africa, and Israel) (MA), Oldenburg: Carl von Ossietzky Universitat.Google Scholar
  9. Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2016). A holistic framework for creating twenty-first-century self-determined learners. In B. Gros, Kinshuk, & M. Maina (Eds.), The future of ubiquitous learning: Learning designs for emerging pedagogies (pp. 25–40). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Blaschke, L. M. (2018). Self-determined learning (heutagogy) and digital media creating integrated educational environments for developing lifelong learning skills. In D. Kergel, B. Heidkamp, P. Telléus, T. Rachwal, S. Nowakowski (Eds.), The Digital Turn in Higher Education. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  11. Booth, M., Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2017). Practicing the practice: The heutagogy community of practice. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Implementing communities of practice in higher education (pp. 549–572). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dewey, J. (1897). Creed. School Journal, 77–80.Google Scholar
  13. Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chigago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
  15. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think (2nd ed.). Boston: D.C. Heath and Company.Google Scholar
  16. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Kappa Delta Pi. Touchstone Book.Google Scholar
  17. Dick, B. (2013). Crafting learner-centred processes using action research and action learning. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action (pp. 39–53). London & New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Eberle, J. (2009). Heutagogy: What your mother didn’t tell you about pedagogy and the conceptual age. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual European Conference on eLearning (pp. 181–188).Google Scholar
  19. Gardner, A., Hase, S., Gardner, G., Dunn, S., & Carryer, J. (2008). From competence to capability: A study of nurse practitioners in clinical practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 7(2), 250–258. Scholar
  20. Gerstein, J. (2014). Moving from education 1.0 through education 2.0 towards education 3.0. In L. M. Blaschke, C. Kenyon, & S. Hase (Eds.), Experiences in self-determined learning (pp. 84–96). Kindle Edition: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.Google Scholar
  21. Hase, S., & Davis, L. (1999). From competence to capability: The implications for human resource development and management. Paper presented at the Association of International Management, 17th Annual Conference, San Diego.Google Scholar
  22. Hase, S. (2009). Heutagogy and e-learning in the workplace: Some challenges and opportunities. Impact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace e-learning, 1(1), 43–52.
  23. Hase, S. (2014). Introduction to self-determined learning (Heutagogy). In L. M. Blaschke, C. Kenyon, & S. Hase (Eds.), Experiences in self-determined learning. Kindle Edition: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.Google Scholar
  24. Hase, S. (2016). Self-determined Learning (heutagogy): Where have we come since 2000?. Southern Institute of Technology Journal of Applied Research. Special edition. Retrieved from research gate.
  25. Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. Ultibase Articles, 5(3), 1–10.,
  26. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Geelong: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Knowles, S. M. (1970). The modern practice of adult education. New York: Association Press.Google Scholar
  28. Knowles, S. M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education (revised and updated ed.). Chicago: Follett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  29. Knowles, S. M., & Associates. (Eds.). (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Korthagen, F. A. J., in cooperation with Kessels, J., Koster, B., Lagerwerf, B., & Wubbels, T. (2001). Linking theory and practice: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lindeman, E. (1926). The meaning of adult education. New York: New Republic Inc.Google Scholar
  33. Luckin, R., Clark, W., Garnett, F., Whitworth, A., Akass, J., & Cook, J. (2010). Learner-generated contexts: A framework to support the effective use of technology for learning. In M. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 70–84). Hershey: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  34. McGill, I., & Beaty, L. (2001). Action learning: A guide for professional, management & educational development (2nd revised ed.). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  35. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Garden City: Doubleday & Company Inc.Google Scholar
  36. Reynolds, J., Laton, D., Davis, T., & Stringer, D. (2009). From pedagogy to heutagogy: A teaching-learning continuum. Paper presented at the selected papers from the 20th international Conference of College Teaching and Learning, Jacksonville, Florida.Google Scholar
  37. Rogers, C. (1969). Freedom to learn. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Company.Google Scholar
  38. Rogers, C. (1983). Freedom to Learn for the 80’. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Company.Google Scholar
  39. Rousseau, J.-J. (1977). Emile (trans: Foxley, B.). London and Toronto: Dent, Everyman’s Library.Google Scholar
  40. Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.Google Scholar
  41. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books Inc.Google Scholar
  42. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  43. Stephenson, J., & Weil, S. (Eds.). (1992). Quality in learning: A capability approach in higher education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  44. Wenger, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Communities of practice a brief introduction.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kaye Academic College of EducationBeer-ShevaIsrael

Personalised recommendations