LEARNING THROUGH DIALOGUE - A look at a set of skillful interactions through dialogical practices. Gillian G Edube.

 

DIALOGUE LEARNING 

Introduction

Humans have a powerful effect on each other. Sabates defines social influence as the "process by which individuals alter each other's attitudes, feelings, and behaviors due to their interactions" (Sabates 2012, 191). In his social facilitation description, Floyd Henry Allport completed six experiments with how individuals performed in social isolation and compared how they completed the task in a group. He found that individuals perform better in a group setting than when undertaking the same task on their own (Allport 1920, 181-182).

Levine and Moreland (2006) explore the use of small groups' capturing the diversity and conveying their breadth. They offer helpful ways to conceptualize groups with regard to meeting individual needs. Their review suggests four fundamental needs that groups fulfill (Levine and Moreland 2006, 610-616).

·                Survival needs

·                Psychological needs

·                Informational needs

·                Identity needs 

No wonder Sabates concludes that "the drive for social inclusion is compelling." From the CFR (Creation Fall Redemption) view of humans, Sabates argues that one main reason humans' intrinsic relational nature exists both at an interpersonal level and on a group level is that humans are made for community; we are both intrinsically relational and intrinsically affiliate. Therefore, groups are a significant part of God's redemptive plan (Sabates 2012, 195-197).

Group work and dialogue are contexts and means for personal and social transformation. Schapiro, Wasserman, and Gallegos in the “Handbook of transformative Learning” illustrate how group work and dialogue are usually taken as givens, but they are often used in varied and often imprecise ways (Taylor and Cranton 2012, 355). They argue that a dialogic group's qualities provide a unique container for transformative learning; the norms and directional force of the relationships foster critical self-reflection, brought on by members committed to the group. Groups provide a container or holding environment to hold the complexity of seemingly incompatible narratives or ideas (Taylor and Cranton 2012, 357).

Definition

Bohm and Nikol defines the word dialogue by looking to its Greek origin dialogos, which means "through the word" or "through meaning" (Bohm and Nikol 1996,6). According to Freire, “the word is more than just an instrument, which makes dialogue possible; accordingly, we must seek its constitutive elements.” He introduces the two dimensions, reflection, and action, in such radical interactions that if one is sacrificed even in part, the other immediately suffers. Dialogue being the encounter of reflection and action, Freire argues that dialogue learning cannot be one person “depositing”  their ideas to others; neither can it be just an exchange of ideas for the learner's consumption (Freire 1970, 89).

 

Relevant Theories

Freire 1970 argues that dialogue cannot exist without a profound love for the world and people. Upon love, humility, and faith in humankind, Freire says dialogue becomes a horizontal relationship where mutual trust must be cultivated between the dialogue in the logical consequence. He argues further that dialogue exists with a hope rooted in men's incompletion and finally that genuine dialogue cannot exist unless the dialogue engages in critical thinking, which contrasts with naïve thinking (Freire 1970,91-92).

 Freire also argues that dialogue does not involve one person acting on another, but people working together where the learner is the subject rather than the object of the world. He argues that this would be achieved by allowing students to think democratically and make meaning from everything they learn. He says that dialogue is about deepening understanding and making a difference in the world (Freire 1970,165).

Vella introduced the dialogue education approach to adult education in the 1980s. She borrows her thoughts from Paulo Freire's "banking" approach to education, which described learners as empty vessels ready for teachers to deposit information instead of communicating. Freire recognizes the need for reform in adult education practice appreciating equity in adult learners' and teachers' relationships (Freire 1970,72).

Vella draws various other theorists like Kurt Lewin, Malcolm Knowles, and Benjamin Bloom. Like Freire, Vella describes learners as subjects or decision-makers in their own lives and considers dialogue as the primary means of learning. She further synthesizes the different theories by giving practical structures and design, especially Freire's ideas. She introduces the importance of a highly structured approach in learning activities that incorporate the twelve principles  which she has determined  result in adult learning, eight design steps, and six quantum thinking considerations (Vella 1995, 193).

Vella’s central theoretical components are as follows:

a)     Learners are subjects or decision-makers in their own lives (Vella 1995, 193).

b)    Dialogue assumes two human beings as subjects of their learning (Vella 1995, 162).

c)     Learning tasks contain questions that learners who have all the resources need to respond to or answer (Vella 1995, 178).

From her long experience teaching in different parts of the world, but especially in Tanzania, Vella says that effective adult learning and teaching are (Vella 2002, 77-78):

1)    Political: This is power and power distribution, both in the process and in the content selected.

2)    Problem- posing: It is a dialogue around adult themes using adult materials evoking affective psychomotor and cognitive responses.  

3)    Part of a whole:  Dialogue must-have follow-up and continuity.

4)    Participative: Everyone involved must have time to speak, listen, and be actively engaged in the learning.

5)    Person-centered: The purpose of dialogue is to develop all people involved.

6)    Prepared: From the initial learning needs and resources assessment of the use of the eight steps of material design  the learning is prepared for a particular group of learners, and adequate time provided.

 Vella's theory concurs with Knowle's theory of andragogy, emphasizing adults as self-directed and expected to take responsibility for their decisions. In practical terms, Knowles and Vella promote respect for learners, immediacy, relevance, and the importance of learning style.

Knowles presents four principles of andragogy, which have similar themes as Vella and Freire. (Knowles, 1984). The four principles include:

a)     The need to have adults involved in the planning and evaluation of their instructions.

b)    That experience provides the basics for any learning activity.

c)     Adults are keen on learning subjects that have immediate relevance to their jobs or personal lives.

d)    Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented.

According to Knowles, the instructor adopts the role of a facilitator or resource. While Knowles focuses on preparing the learner, Vella focuses on the instructor as a designer for learning.

Vella approaches the learning process in a highly structured format, incorporating the twelve principles of effective adult learning, seven design steps, and six aspects of quantum thinking. Vella's the assumption all through is that adult learning is best achieved in dialogue, and the twelve principles are ways to begin, maintain, and nurture the dialogue (Vella 2002, 3-4).

1)    Needs assessment: Learners' participation in deciding what is to be learned. Vella argues that this is both standard practice and a fundamental principle of adult learning. Vella argues that different people who apply to a learning program have different experiences and expectations (Vella 2002, 5).

2)    Safety in the environment: This is a principle linked to respecting learners as decision-makers of their learning. The atmosphere and design of learning tasks convey to adult learners that this experience will work for them. Vella advocates for, among other things allowing small groups to find voices; this enhances safety (Vella 2002, 8).

3)    Sound relationship: This ensures respect and open communication between teacher and learner, and among learners. In order to be sound, Vella argues that this relationship must transcend personal likes and dislikes and apparent differences in wealth and power (Vella 2002,10)

4)    The sequence of content and reinforcement: Though overlooked, the principle of the sequence of content and reinforcement is vital. It is the programming of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that go from simple to complex and from group supported to solo efforts, while reinforcement means the repetition of facts, skills, and attitudes in diverse, engaging, and interesting ways in which they are learned. (Vella 2002, 13)

5)    Praxis: Doing is the way by which adults learn anything; concepts, skills, or attitudes. Praxis means action with reflection.  (Vella 2002,14)

6)    Respect for learners as decision-makers: This involves recognizing that adults are decision-makers in large parts of their lives. Healthy adults desire to be subjects or decision-makers and resist being treated as objects, which someone else can use. Adults need to understand what happens to them in the learning event. Vella proposes a practical guide for adult learning; "Do not ever do what the learner can do; do not ever decide what the learner can decide" (Vella 2002,16).

7)    Ideas, feelings, and actions: Though neglected, learning with the mind, emotions, and muscles and giving attention to cognitive, affective, and psychomotor aspects of adult learning is a vital principle. Vella challenges the readers to study their educational projects in terms of ideas, feelings, and actions that address the whole person, not as a machine but as a developing man or woman, with incredible potential (Vella 2002, 17).

8)    The immediacy of the learning: Research recognizes that adult learners need to see the immediate usefulness of new learning (Vella 2002,20).

9)    Clear roles: This is recognizing the impact of clear roles in the communication between the learner and the teacher (Vella 2002, 21).

10) Teamwork: This is a process and a principle. Vella argues that teams provide in the adult learning experience a quality of safety that is effective and helpful (Vella 2002, 22).

11) Engagements: Through learning, learners are invited to engage actively in the strategic issues of their community (Vella 2002, 25).

12) Accountability: the design of learning events must be accountable to the learners (in teams) who are accountable to their colleagues and the teacher.

Vella ascertains the success of adult learning with "energy rise" during the process. Her emphasis on the process of adult learning is as if it is the method itself, which is the key to adult learning. (Vella, 2002, 30).

Vella demonstrates how the twelve principles inform the development and the content design of adult education in the eight design steps.

 http://globallearningpartners.com/about-dialogue-education/the-8-steps-of-design/

1.      There must be a deep understanding of who will participate in the learning program and who will lead.

2.     There must be a description of the situation (content) of this learning event.

3.     There must be a casting of a realistic vision of what will be different from this collective learning experience.

4.     There must be a detailed description of the time available for the learning, noting how this influences the possible amount and depth of content to be taught.

5.      A decision must be made on the best location to support the learning and a description of the limitations of the places.

6.     There must be a carefully constructed set of skills, information, and perspectives to focus on learning.

7.     There must be a specific description of what learners will do during the program.

8.     There must be a flexible yet structured process through which all learners build their skills and share their learning (Vella 2002 37-52).

By its very nature, Colwill says dialogue is an iterative process, where a process is repeated, applying it each time to the previous application's result. She implies that what is learned from previous gatherings can be applied and occurs at multiple levels: (Colwill 2015,138).

a)     Learning about the actual process and practice of dialogue itself or "meta-communication."

b)    Learning that emerges from the collective interaction in dialogue.

c)     Learning that affects the individuals at the dialogue table significantly.

Dialogue is a two-way or multi-way communication process; the two or more underscores the collaborative nature of learning in dialogue. Human beings created in the image of God are designed to dwell richly in the community. Dialogue creates an opportunity for participants to cultivate mutual understanding, foster unity, and create new avenues of learning in the community. (Colwill 2015,139)

Dialogue routinely confronts people with the choice to turn towards or away from others. As observed by Colwill, the risk to turn towards another seems greater when the person is very different from us. She introduces us to "skillful interaction," which is the;  knowledge, attitudes, skills, and practices that encourage effective dialogue. She suggests a set of skillful practices that lead towards skillful interactions (Colwill 2015,140);

a)      Respect: Implies treating other persons with honor.

b)      Listening: Requires conscious, focused attention on what another is saying.

c)     Voicing: Involves speaking authentically about what is essential to people, yet maintaining others' awareness and opinions.

d)     Suspending: Involves self-control in delaying one's hasty judgments of other persons, their opinions, or their behaviors.

Though simple in concept, these skillful practices are challenging to enact; Colwill suggests that the process can be messy, yet the power of God working in a dialogical community can be life-giving. She demonstrates how, through the space for collaborative dialogue, both individual and group growth are nurtured (Colwill 2015,142).

In his argument on social influence in groups, Levine holds that consensus the response is only valid if each individual asserts his /her relation to facts and retains the individuality of their experience. He further argues that shared understanding is a necessary precondition for group action. He proposes that a group member’s ability to assert their independent viewpoint while paying attention to others is also necessary (Levine 1999, 360).

 Larry and Ortega 1995, discuss some of the factors that affect social influence; and argue that brainstorming in groups can be counterproductive.  Brainstorming can reduce idea generation due to production blocking, which happens as individuals have to wait for their turn to provide answers during which they get distracted, and due to social loafing, which is the tendency to work less in a group (Larry and Ortega 1995, 251 -254).

 Sabates describes the process of deindividuation on group processes; she argues that individuals could have reduced self-awareness and evaluation when attention is drawn away from the self. This loss is often a result of non-normative or risk-taking behavior. She also describes social loafing or the tendency to work less in a group as a factor that affects group processes (Sabates 2012, 197-201).

Is there any level of conformity that happens during group dialogue?

One of the manifestations of the significance of social influence that groups can exert is conformity.  Sabates defines conformity as the act of changing one's behavior in response to real or imagined social pressure, which results in a change in behavior or attitudes that match others' responses. Sabates argues that psychologists believe that conformity can have destructive outcomes, assuming that conformity has negative connotations. (Sabates, 2012, 212-214).

Asch (1952) did not argue that conformity always produces a valid or correct response. Instead, he suggested that a consensual response is valid only if "each individual asserts his own relation to facts and retains his individuality; there can be no genuine agreement about facts or principles unless each adheres to the testimony of his experience and steadfastly maintains his hold on reality"; conformity is socially useful only if it is based on independence. (Asch, 1952, 494).

In a bid to establish what to do with the differences in the space of dialogue, Wasserman 2004, through her research on dialogue and the engagement of social identity group differences, identified four overlapping factors that enable and constrain transformative dialogic moments in groups, as just defined (Taylor and Cranton 2012. 357).

1)    Continuity in members’ commitment and motivation: The common motivation in group dialogues is engaging in critical reflection (holding space).

2)    Curiosity and openness: Learners need to suspend judgment and certainty and be prepared to discover something new about others and oneself. The challenge is not to assume that our fellow human beings inhabit the same reality that we do.

3)    Emotional engagements through storytelling: Storytelling plays a crucial role in creating emotional engagements. Connection occurs not merely in sharing the story but also in what happens once we share our story. When we feel heard and met by group members, deep emotions and a felt sense of cohesiveness often merge.

4)    Reflection and mutual sense-making: Reflection provides supplemental action to the stories. Reflection in the group provides a new episode for the group. The inquiry is a catalyst for groups to think about their norms process and take a third-person perspective on their own experiences.

Colwill's thoughts are similar to Levine's and Wasserman's in that she holds that dialogue becomes much richer when all the members come ready to discover and learn. She frames the idea of learning as stewardship, reminding students and teachers alike that all of the members at a dialogue table are to be active stewards of learning. She suggests several aspects that help students come to the dialogue table ready to discover and learn:

a)     Completing the pre-class assignment and required reading ahead of time.

b)    Reflecting on the course subject matter in order to bring comments, questions, and examples to contribute to collaborative learning.

c)     Demonstrating a willingness of one's mind and heart to participate as an active steward of learning in dialogue; requires humility, a spirit of inquiry that seeks wisdom, a grateful heart, and a desire to work unto the Lord (Collwil, 2015, 146).

These aspects facilitate individuation, critical thinking, and reduce social loafing and intellectual independence in groups. Vella 2002 acknowledges that while people may register for the same program, they all come with different experiences and expectations. (Vella, 2002, 5). Their experiences and expectations shape how they come to the dialogue table.

Guthrie 2015 outlines an approach named facilitated agency and outlines its biblical foundations core values and basic structure. Facilitated agency means wisely guided responsible image-bearing (Guthrie 2015,163). Through biblical foundations, he demonstrates five great callings (Guthrie 2015,164):

1.     The Great Commission (Part I): This conveys the lush the richness of God’s privileged blessing to humanity’s parents to steward all creation. Though distorted by the  fall’s pernicious rebellion, this calling is redeemed by Jesus Christ, the one true image bearer, so that the Christian may respond in all of life’s endeavors to God's invitational directive

2.     The Great Invitation: Only in Jesus Christ do Christians discover their contentment in time and eternity.

3.     The Great Belonging: The rest Christians enjoy in Jesus Christ also provides secure assurance of God’s favor, blessings, and adoption as God's people.

4.     The Great Commission (Part II): The Great Commission’s second installment echoes the recognized agency of the first from Genesis to Mathew 28:18-20.

5.     The Great Commandment: Jesus summarizes his invitation directive is to love God and neighbors without calculation or reservation.

These provide a strong base on which groups educators and students may stand together to pursue fruitful learning. In light of the five great callings, he argues that the facilitated agency's core value must acknowledge the triune God as creator, sustainer, redeemer, and restorer of all creation. (Guthrie, 2015, 163). For dialogue to happen, there must be agency and a recognition that we are image-bearers.

As learners and educators practice facilitated agency, Guthrie suggests that each should participate in their Christian formation. Such formation contributes to the secure identity needed to promote others' maturity—facilitated agency at its best breeds neither dependence nor autonomy among participants in the teaching and the learning process. Instead, there is the freedom to learn rooted in the Christian community's identity in Jesus Christ (Guthrie, 2015, 175). 

How can Christian constructivism guide educators who are Christians towards an integral engagement with the social sciences that are critically reflective and humbly teachable? Guthrie 2019 responds by affirming the need to recognize that all image-bearing human beings may contribute insights about the human condition, responsibly stewarding knowledge with Christ's mind and Spirit’s guidance. This security in Christ enables a teachability that includes learning from those with whom the Christian shares humanity but not redemption (Guthrie 2019, 1)

This environment  provides holding spaces that promote dialogue across all levels, and as  Guthrie explains, it enables the Christian to ask such questions as “From whom are we willing to learn?”, “From whom is it wise to learn?” “What are we learning?” and “How are we stewarding what we learn to God’s glory and our neighbors good?”He suggests three elements(Guthrie 2019,2):

1.     Recognize God as the creator who makes humans in His image.  Human beings, even though fallen, discover and contribute proximate insights into the human condition.

2.     Cultivate one another’s formational maturity in Christ by the Spirit's power in a way that embraces the gospel freedom. This embrace leads to responsible stewardship of knowledge, character, and activity within Christ’s body as it bears witness to God's world.

3.     Adopt a Christian constructivism framework that believes God empowers His people to take His gospel's full implications towards His creation in a spirit of delighting inquiry. Thus, it is rooted in an eschatologically hopeful theology of God restoring His creation. This framework empowers the Christian to employ gospel-directed critical realism with the social sciences that are neither fearful nor uncritically accepting of social science perspectives.

Mature Christian educators blend their participation in the body of Christ to contribute their insights and receive insights from colleagues. (Guthrie, 2019,3).

Having learned that the learning task is a task for learners, Vella indicates that the learning task is not an activity that follows a lecture to ascertain that the lecture was heard and understood. Instead, it is an overarching system that can include; first, inductive work, second, anchoring of learners in their context about new content. Third, input that presents the new content is added to their learning fourth implementation tasks that invite learners to apply this new content; and fifth, integration tasks that project their use of the new content away from the learning site (Vella, 2008, 53). Vella suggests that small groups are significant holding spaces; she argues that more than six people in a small group can lead to some members feeling excluded. The purpose of dialogue education is to include minority voices, each and all (“learning-centered” not “learner-centered”), and the design suggested by Vella diligently opposes any kind of exclusion. (Vella 2008 59)

Vella advances this thought by introducing four parts of the learning a task that indicates a flow (four I’s) as illustrated below (Vella 2008, 62):

a) Inductive/ anchoring: This connects learners to what they already know and allows them to reflect on those experiences. This inductive work is similar to anchoring the new content into their context. It is moving from the familiar to the unknown. Dewey 1938 affirms this and suggests an intuitive process that is separate from action. He advocates for creating an environment that provides continuity within a contextualized experience-based assimilative model of student learning. Dewey, though, notes that not all experiences are educative. He argues that some experiences can be mis-educative. Therefore, experience-based learning's central challenge is to create fruitfully experiences and organize them in progression to guide students' learning (Dewey 1938, 26-40).

 b) Input/adding -The new content presented to learners correlates to the “what?” content. Putting the learners in touch with this new content is not teaching, nor is it learning. Learning involves their engagement with that content. It is much more than handing information, as argued by Freire’s “banking concept.” (Freire 1970, 73).

 c) Implementation/ applying – This invites the learner to apply this new content, the input. The teacher's task here is to deepen the learning through provocative, open questions, not fishing questions that evoke a predetermined response that fits the teacher's context. The open questions have no skin of judgment on top of them. John Dirkx’s meaning-making speaks into this when he says, “learning is life -and not a preparation for it” His transformational learning focuses on the here and now with intuition to awareness of extra-rational methods within the learning settings (Dirkx 2008, 10).

 d) Integration/ taking away- Every learning task must move to integration; this involves taking the new content away into a worksite, home, or community.

In determining adult learning's specific indicators, Vella shares three specific indicators that measure adult education: learning, transfer, and impact. “Learning is what occurs within the event, the transfer is taking that learning to a new context, and impact is the change in organizations and systems caused by that learning” (Vella 2008, 129).

Behavior learning indicators are seen within the learning event; transfer indicators are visible as learners use new knowledge and skills in their context; impact indicators show changes in systems or organizations' behavior due to learning and transfer.

Amid the interdependence and cross-cultural interactions we experience in our times, Freire and Macedo 1983 put forth perspectives we must contemplate when considering adult education. Intercultural differences exist due to the presence of race, class, gender, and national differences. These differences generate ideologies that can create resistance (Freire and Macedo, 1983, 394-395).

 

Conclusion

The perspective of welcoming the dialogue approach into traditional teaching methods (mechanistic and hierarchical) contexts, that are still very common in many developing world culture settings is scary. Vella's practical ideas on developing dialogue education provide a comprehensive framework applicable across cultures.

Traditional teaching methods in third world countries discourage critical thinking and do not provide holding environments but instead raise suspicion between teachers and students. With suspicion, there is a lack of trust. How do we provide an environment where these students feel safe and free to hold individual opinions and be ready to dialogue, not just conform?

Bond and Smith's meta-analysis investigates whether the level of conformity has changed over time and whether it was related cross-culturally to individualism and collectivism. They discovered that individualistic cultures tend to be independent in their decisions while collective cultures seem to conform easily to others in a group. Individuals matter more in individualistic cultures, while consensus matters more in collective cultures.  How do we hold those tensions? Bond and Smith argue that further research must attend more to cultural variables and their social influence roles (Bond and Smith 1996, 111).

Further research could address the following: Is dialogue education an approach to cross-cultural learning? Does it expose the inequalities produced by cultural differences, orientations, language, ignorance, and ethnocentricity? How would intercultural dialogue be enhanced? In what ways does using dialogue and collaborative frameworks influence transformative learning in African minded educational perspectives?

 

Reference List

Allport, Floyd Henry. “A Mead Project Source Page.” Floyd Henry Allport: The Influence of the Group Upon Association and Thought, 1920. https://www.brocku.ca/MeadProject/Allport/Allport_1920a.html.

 

Bond, Rod, and Peter B Smith. “Culture and Conformity: A Meta-Analysis of Studies Using Asch’s (1952b, 1956) Line Judgment Task.” Psychological Bulletin 119, no. 1 (January 1, 1996): 111–137.

 

Cialdini, Robert B, and Noah J Goldstein. "Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity." Annual review of psychology 55, no. 1 (February 2004): 591–621.

Colwill, Deborah. “An Invitation to a Dialogue Table: Will You Come and Join Us?” Christian Education Journal: Research on Educational Ministry 12, no. 1 (2015): 137–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/073989131501200110.

Dewey, John. 1997. Experience and Education. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0684838281

Dirkx, John M. Adult Learning, and the Emotional Self. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008.

Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-0826412768

Freire, Paulo, and Donaldo Macedo. “A Dialogue: Culture, Language, and Race.” Harvard Educational Review 65, no. 3 (1995): 377–403. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.65.3.12g1923330p1xhj8.

Guthrie, Donald C. “Facilitated Agency: A Promising Pedagogy.” Christian Education Journal: Research on Educational Ministry 12, no. 1 (2015): 162–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/073989131501200112.

Guthrie, Donald. “Christian Education Journal.” Integral Engagement Christian Constructivism and social science, 2019. https://journals.sagepub.com/home/cej.

  Knowles, Malcolm S., Elwood F. Holton, Richard A. Swanson, and Petra A. Robinson. 2015. The Adult Learner. 9th ed. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0367417659

  Mezirow, Jack & Associates. 2000. Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0787948450

  Levine, John M. “Solomon Asch's Legacy for Group Research.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 3, no. 4 (1999): 358–64. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0304_5.

Levine, John M., and Richard L. Moreland. Small Groups: Key Readings. New York: Psychology Press, 2006.

Sabates, Angela M. Social Psychology in Christian Perspective: Exploring the Human Condition. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2012.

 Taylor, Edward W., and Patricia Cranton, eds. 2012. The Handbook of Transformative Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0470590720

Vella, Jane. 2008. On Teaching and Learning: Putting the Principles and Practices of Dialogue Education into Action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 978-0787986995

Vella, Jane Kathryn. Training through Dialogue: Promoting Effective Learning and Change with Adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.

———. Training through Dialogue: Promoting Effective Learning and Change with Adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995.