This article was downloaded by: [142.177.67.90]On: 08 July 2015, At: 12:38Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Click for updates

International Journal of LifelongEducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tled20

Transformative learning and conceptsof the self: insights from immigrant andintercultural journeysElizabeth Langea

a St. Francis Xavier University, CanadaPublished online: 08 Jul 2015.

To cite this article: Elizabeth Lange (2015): Transformative learning and concepts of the self:insights from immigrant and intercultural journeys, International Journal of Lifelong Education,DOI: 10.1080/02601370.2015.1036944

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2015.1036944

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

Transformative learning and concepts of theself: insights from immigrant andintercultural journeys

ELIZABETH LANGESt. Francis Xavier University, Canada

This article examines Canadian immigrant and intercultural learning as an insightful con-text for examining transformative learning. Theories of intercultural communication areexplored, particularly the concept of transculturality and Bhabha’s concept of ‘ThirdSpace’. Various concepts of the self are also compared, particularly two conceptions impli-cit in theories of transformative learning, the autonomous self and the relational self.Finally, three empirical studies from Canada are reviewed and findings discussed regard-ing the transformative process of learning into transculturality as well as the relational selfand relational knowing in transformative learning.

Keywords: concepts of the self; transformative learning; immigration; interculturalcommunication; transculturality; relational self; relational knowing

Introduction

As a contribution to the ongoing transatlantic dialogue on transformative learn-ing, particularly criticisms of the overly individualistic, psychological, decontex-tualized and North American orientations of Jack Mezirow’s seminal theory(Formenti & Dirkx, 2014; Kokkos, 2014; West, 2014), this article explores learn-ing into transculturality and relational knowing, addressing self/society duality anddecontextualization in transformative learning theory.

While scholars explain the diversity of nationalities and theorizing inEuropean adult education networks, too often the term ‘North American theo-rizing’ is used in a homogenizing way to refer to the USA without distinguishingthe 23 countries that comprise North America or the distinctiveness of theoriz-ing across them. The context discussed here is Canada, a settler nation whosehistory has been continually shaped by waves of immigration and settlement onIndigenous lands. This context has led to unique theoretical development inrelation to adult education (see Cranton & English, 2009) and transformativelearning (see Lange, 2013). While Canada shares some similar ideological

Elizabeth A Lange is an associate professor of Adult Education, St. Francis Xavier University, NovaScotia, Canada. She has over 30 years of experience as an educator and facilitator of transformativelearning in formal and non-formal settings. Her research focuses on transformative learning, sustain-ability education for adults, pedagogies for social change and transcultural learning and immigration.The introductory text The purposes of adult education, 3rd Edition, 2014, was co-written with Brucepencer (Thompson Educational Publishing). Correspondence: Department of Adult Education,St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Canada. Email: elange@stfx.ca.

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

INT. J. OF LIFELONG EDUCATION, 2015

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2015.1036944

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

struggles with the USA, Canada has a stronger collectivist heritage, moredeveloped social welfare state, well-established multicultural discourse and largerspaces for the critical theory tradition. This is due in part to its sizable geo-graphic reality but also its ongoing ties with the Commonwealth, UN/UNESCOand Quebec with France.

Today, immigrants account for 60% of Canada’s population growth. Immigra-tion policy has been used for diverse historical purposes—from nation-building,border protection and economic growth to demographical renewal and humani-tarianism. The purposes emphasized are dependent on Canada’s preferredimage of itself at any historical moment, as well as what emerges from ideologi-cal contestations, culminating in a fluid narration of nation (Bhabha, 1990).Thus, Canadian immigration is as an insightful context to critically examinetransformative learning dynamics. This context is described first.

Second, the intersection between theories of intercultural communicationand concepts of the self in relation to transformative learning will be explored.The dominant concept of intercultural competency and the newer concept oftransculturality will be discussed as two approaches to cultural interaction. Vari-ous conceptions of the self will also be compared, concentrating on two implicitconceptions of the self in transformative learning theory—the autonomous selfand relational self. Third, extrapolating from this theoretical exploration, datafrom three empirical studies are examined regarding immigrants and their ser-vice providers. The most successful examples of immigrant integration andinclusive community building are characterized by transculturality, where cul-tural meanings are dynamically negotiated in a ‘Third Space’ (Bhabha, 1994).As Ikas and Wagner (2009) elaborate, in such spaces, cultural traditions are notonly narrated to others, but cultural translation and contestation bring aboutnew hybrid identities. Learning into transculturality occurs in this Third Space, atransformative learning space. Immigrant research participants exemplify a senseof self as relational and self as perpetual learner, with important implications fortransformative learning theory.

Canadian context

Canada accepts approximately 250,000 immigrants annually and is one of themost ethnically and racially diverse population, per capita (OECD, 2013). JohnRalston Saul (2008) argues that the multiculturalism ideal of Canadians emerged,first, from negotiations with First Nations and indigenous governance ideas ofinclusivity and partnership. Yet, the colonial mindset more often enacted virulentracism, oppression and violent conflict against First Nations, now the subject of anational truth and reconciliation process. Canada’s tolerance emerged, second,from the uneasy truce between the British and French colonists, and third, fromconstant adaptation to newcomers throughout its settler history.

In Canada, Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand, the discourse of multicultural-ism became widely used in the 1970s, as an alternative to policies of assimilation,recognizing the rights and identities of racial and ethnic minority groups (Piller,2011). In the 1980s, the United Nations acknowledged Canada for exemplaryimmigration practises, yet its racist, classist and gendered practises cannot beignored. Today, immigration is characterized by increasing securitization policies,

2 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

racial profiling, deterrence policies, shrinking settlement services and reliance ontemporary foreign workers, in addition to ongoing structural racism and genderdiscrimination (Crocker, Dobrowolsky, Keeble, Moncayo, & Tastsoglou, 2007).There has been a significant shift towards ‘designer immigrants’ selected for eco-nomic potential (Simmons, 2010); yet, neoliberal policies have led to less success-ful integration experiences in the last 20 years (Wayland, 2006).

A ‘landed’ or newcomer immigrant has come to Canada up to five years priorto a given census year (Statistics Canada, 2006). After complex and stressfulmigration journeys, they struggle to redefine relationships and identities, typi-cally experiencing reduced job opportunities and shifting gender and genera-tional roles in the family. Loneliness and isolation arise from absent kinship/social networks and language unfamiliarity (Creese, Dyck, & McLaren, 1999).Research indicates that the integration of immigrants is most effectively fosteredthrough social interaction, civic engagement, labour market participation andcommunity connections. In Canada, income parity is often reached in 10 yearsdepending on settlement location, but two other measures are the level of socialinteraction with dominant ethnocultural groups and levels of social efficacy andtrust (Driedger, 2003; Li, 1999).

It is clear that ‘Canada has transformed its immigrants, but they too have trans-formed Canada’ (Li, 1999). Government of Canada policy documents (2001)define successful integration as the ability to contribute, free of barriers, to everydimension of Canadian life—economic, social, cultural and political, but it is notone-way. Successful integration is understood as reciprocal, an ongoing processof mutual accommodation between an individual and society (Government ofCanada, 2010). This acknowledges that change is required amongst theCanadian-born, not just the adaptation of newcomers, an ideal Canada strivestowards. Thus, learning to become a welcoming community assumes a partner-ship amongst all societal groups (Esses, Hamilton, Bennett-Abu Ayyash, &Burstein, 2010) and implies the need for transformative learning spaces.

Relevant literature

There has been a surge in literature addressing adult education and transna-tional migration (see Volume 29, Number 2) that advocates for transnationallifelong learning for recognitive justice and inclusive citizenship (Guo, 2010).Contributions to transformative learning theorizing have also come from transat-lantic analyses of intercultural interaction, anti-racist education and postcolonialrealities (Bron, 2006; Garson, 2009; Jackson, 2008; Sefa Dei & McDermott, 2013;Tan, 2003; Taylor, 1994). This following review of literature compares conceptsof intercultural communication and transculturality and then reviews variousconcepts of the self that are largely implicit in transformative learning theory.

Intercultural communication

In the 1970s, the field of intercultural communication developed in the USA toaddress the needs of foreign diplomats, military personnel, missionary societiesand corporate business, in terms of both language training and non-verbalcommunication. With its roots in anthropology, the initial focus was on

3TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

micro-level cultural details, such as speech patterns, use of space, approaches totime and body language. The field grew exponentially from the 1990s, as neolib-eral capitalist business went searching for markets, new production sites and acompetitive edge (Piller, 2011; Sorrells, 2013). The impacts of globalizationyielded unprecedented migrations of people.

The first wave of theorizing about intercultural communication was foundedon the idea that ‘all cultures have an identity of their own, which guaranteesthat people refer to a common set of values and beliefs’ (Kalscheuer, 2009,p. 29). In this view, culture is patterns of shared meaning embodied in symbolsthat yield a particular way of life, largely unconscious and therefore part of ‘cov-ert culture’. A constellation of cultural values and beliefs becomes a centralcomponent of identity when it is internalized into relatively stable mental mapsand a sense of self. Early theorist Hall (1959) suggested that each culture has ahidden code of behaviour and that a code breaker is required to reveal themeaning implicit in this ‘silent language’.

Many people expect their cultural beliefs and behavioural patterns to be uni-versal, given the predictability they experience inside their own culture. Whenpeople of different cultural backgrounds come into contact, their communica-tion acts are infused with non-verbal culturally based knowledge and behaviour.When communication is unsuccessful and differences are realized, universality iscalled into question and the self is ‘denaturalized’ (Gergen, 2011). The hithertoinvisible is revealed.

The second wave of theorizing, informed by cultural studies and postcolonialtheory, identified numerous problematic assumptions in the field of intercul-tural communication. The first is culture as a natural and stable system of sym-bols. This essentializing of culture does not see culture as fluid, interactive andthus dynamic over time. It is simply expected that people learn cultural ele-ments through curiosity, politeness and flexibility, as a form of ‘cultural enrich-ment’. This is an additive notion of culture where, as Bhabha suggests(Rutherford, 1990), we have a museum in the imagination where we collect cul-tural experiences. Such learning is often temporary and does not impact theoriginal culture. In these views, culture is considered ‘pure’ and homogeneousrather than ambiguous and heterogenous (Kalscheuer, 2009).

The second problematic assumption is that change occurs at the individualmicro-level, ignoring meso- and macro-levels, particularly the hierarchy of powerand privilege in which cultural groups are positioned. Naively, it considers allcultures equal, potentially legitimizing Western hegemony (Kalscheuer, 2009).Third, while intercultural communication assumes the need for self-understand-ing, it does not problematize race, ethnicity, class, gender, nationality, sexual ori-entation, religion and other axes of difference. Fourth, this view often conflatesculture, nation and language thereby ignoring intra-nation diversity and perpet-uating national stereotyping (Piller, 2011). Fifth, culture is no longer closelybound to place given the displacement of people, cultures and cultural spaces.The world is now ‘a world in motion’ where the global flows of ‘capital, people,commodities, images and ideas—have become unhinged from particularlocalities’ (Inda & Rosaldo, 2001, p. 11).

4 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

Transculturality

A seminal voice in postcolonial theory, Bhabha (1994) asserts there is no origi-nal or pure culture, as all cultures are permanently shifting and hybridizing.Moreover, culture is a site of contestation where meanings are constantly chal-lenged, negotiated, renewed and replaced. This negotiation occurs within a his-torical and political context, in which every day cultural practises are situated. Aspeople migrate, ‘a person’s or group’s sense of identity … is reinscribed in newand different cultural contexts, altering, fusing and sometimes transforming thatidentity’ (Sorrells, 2013, p. 43). Bhabha (Rutherford, 1990) states, ‘for me theimportance of hybridity is not to be able to trace two original moments fromwhich the third emerges, rather hybridity to me is the “Third Space” whichenables other positions to emerge’ (p. 211). Born in postcolonial India,Bhabha’s intent has been to disrupt colonial power and displace ‘othering’narratives that perpetuate relations of power, particularly within Western nationstates. He charges that multiculturalism encourages cultural diversity but alsocontains it, masking ethnocentric norms as well as liberal pluralism, which is aculturally situated set of beliefs itself (Rutherford, 1990). For Bhabha, culture isfragmented as groups compete for power and recognition within colliding, occu-pied and overlapping cultural spaces. Resistance to dominance occurs in thesespaces, such as the protests of French–Algerian youth in 2005. Importantly,then, marginal groups can contribute to new narratives of belonging and arenewal and reconstitution of nation.

Bhabha’s (1994) concept of Third Space is not the space between two fixedidentities or the blending of multiple cultural traditions and practises, but anunstable border zone where multiple identities rub and engage in communica-tive practises. Meaning is constructed within a dialogical context cognizant ofpower relations. The truth commission and reconciliation process betweenindigenous and non-indigenous people in Canada is an example of such adialogical space. Similarly in Rwanda, it is a,

site of inbetweenness [that] becomes the ground of discussion, dis-pute, confession, apology and negotiation through which Tutsis andHutus together confront the inequities and asymmetries of societaltrauma not as a ‘common people,’ but as a people with a commoncause. (Bhabha, 2009, p. x)

It is in this space that new cultural identities, personal and collective, can betranslated and negotiated, perhaps involving a profoundly transformative processof redefinition that is transcultural (across multiple cultural spaces).

Cultural forms and identities can be hybridized into new creative combina-tions both as a means of cultural maintenance but also for the creation of newpower structures, with potential to manifest social justice. These can be locationsof enunciation or positions from which to speak and be heard (Bhabha, 1994).In terms of political agency, he suggests that:

hybridity is precisely about the fact that when a new situation, a newalliance formulates itself, it may demand that you should translate

5TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

your principles, rethink them, extend them. On the Left there’stoo much of a timid traditionalism—always trying to read a new situa-tion in terms of some pre-given model or paradigm. (Rutherford,1990, p. 216)

Hybrid cultural spaces are active and improvisational as a way to assert as well asreinterpret one’s cultural identity in the current context of global deterritorial-ization and reterritorialization.

Concepts of the self and transformative learning

Self/society has been a key problematic in the social sciences, including in trans-formative learning theory where concepts of the self are more implicit thanexplicit. For this article, three models of the self—the traditional, modern andpostmodern—as discussed by Hermans and Hermans-Konopka (2010) will bereviewed. It is important to note that this is a profound simplification as eachmodel is a constellation of perspectives. In terms of transformative learning, twoconcepts prove important, the autonomous and relational self.

Self as embedded in a sacred whole: the traditional view. Whether one considers theprimordial unitary consciousness of the indigenous cultures, the metaphysics ofClassical thinkers such as Socrates and Plato, or the divine salvific theology ofthe European mediaeval peoples, people acknowledged a larger unseen realitywhere one attempted to align with a higher self and ‘one’s proper telos or pur-pose in the cosmos’ (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 84). These beliefsystems have been founded on a view that reality is one totality with an overarch-ing unity. The self in this traditional view, then, is ‘an integral part of a sacredwhole which is greater than and even more valuable than its parts’ (p. 84). Thisview was expressed through many myths and rituals, imbued with sacredness,whether it was honouring the cycles of the seasons, the procreation of Earth/animals/humans, or a salvation plan for humanity. In some traditional societies,society and human nature were considered fixed by a sacred being and there-fore unchangeable. For instance, in the feudal Christian cosmology, there was aGreat Chain of Being where all beings were part of the divine salvation plan,from stones up to angels. Truth-seeking was through revelation and faith, but inthis case was mediated by Church leaders and the monarchy, and systematizedinto theology and law. Authority was patriarchal and hierarchical.

Self as rational and autonomous: the modern view. In a dramatic shift, modern free-dom was breaking loose from these old horizons of meaning. Modernity becamean age of inwardness and self-madeness, where people decide their own convic-tions and the ways in which they will live, a process of self-authorship. The modernview is of a ‘container self’ where an autonomous individual with an internal,mental mind interacts with an external, material world (Gergen, 2011; Hermans& Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 87). Individuals are guided by personal conscienceand private reflection, so that morality and meaningfulness emanate from aninternal locus rather than external dogma. In such a self-governing individualism,

6 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

humans are what they make of themselves, not beings with any ultimate end orteleological purpose. In sum, the modern self uses rationality, reflection andagency to guide their pursuit of freedom and personal achievement.

Society itself would come to be conceived as atomistic individuals all pursuingtheir own fulfilment, with no greater purpose than the freedom of doing so.Taylor (1991) traces how the larger horizons of meaning were lost, such as dutyin worldly affairs as the highest moral activity. No longer would the ability to actaccording to a common purpose or in the democratic public square be a given,particularly in the context of egoistic preoccupation with one’s private world. Inthe ultimate ethical reversal, money, work and consumption were propagated asmeasures of individual expression, self-fulfilment and identity.

The most commonly recognized theory of transformative learning theoryreflects some of these precepts of modernism and the tensions therein.American Mezirow (1991) assumed that the task of individuals is to determinetheir own meaning in relation to the world around them. For Mezirow, theexplicit purpose of transformative learning is to develop a more autonomousindividual, whom he defines as becoming increasingly inclusive, discriminatingand self-reflective towards more integrative frames of reference. Mezirow (1994)was aware that contradictions arise when traditional authority structures breakdown and social diversity increases. For this reason, Mezirow (1991) understoodthat adults would need to acquire new perspectives through transformativelearning, rather than try to apply old ways of knowing resulting in rigid andhighly defended thought patterns.

Further emblematic of Enlightenment thought, Mezirow considers criticalreflection and rational discourse as two primary conditions through which indi-viduals reinterpret their experiences to develop new meaning structures. In theModern heritage, reason is a method of thinking considered liberatory.Transformation, then, can be precipitated by metacognitive thinking about one’sthinking frameworks as well as the contents of one’s thoughts, assessing themrationally and reflectively for their dependability, ostensibly freeing them fromself-deceptions and social conventions. The self then is a product of the brain ormind, in an interesting contrast to the classical and mediaeval understanding ofself as soul or psyche (Barresi & Martin, 2011). While a reflective process can bedone individually, Mezirow (2003) argues it is best done in group ‘dialogue involv-ing an assessment of beliefs, feelings and values’ where individuals need toprovide reasons and account for their logic and frames of reference (pp. 59, 61).

In his discussion of transformative learning and identity, Illeris (2014) elabo-rates on Mezirow’s work by differentiating between self and identity. He suggeststhat the self is the ‘the experience and understanding of being a separate andindependent individual’ that is largely an internal, self-contained phenomena(p. 37). For Illeris, the concept of identity, based on Erik Erikson’s work, con-tains both an internal psychological side but also an external social side in howwe present ourselves to others, comprising a social psychological perspective.Thus, Illeris (2012) adopts the concept of identity, explaining that it more ade-quately captures the psychosocial processes of how one experiences the self aswell as how one is experienced by others.

In Illeris’ (2014) framework, identity is comprised of three layers. First, thecore identity layer is ‘the experience of being a distinct and particular

7TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

individual’ (p. 70) and, as the mental core, is usually developed very early inones’ life and matured during adolescence, providing a sense of stability overtime. The personality layer corresponds to Erikson’s idea of ego-identity which is‘who and how the person wants to be and appear in relation to others and thesurrounding world’ (p. 72). Illeris suggests that transformative learning generallyoccurs in this layer, as the site of meaning perspectives in Jack Mezirow’s lan-guage. The third layer is the preferences layer which is equivalent to whatMezirow describes as meaning schemes, comprised of more changeable everydayroutines and behavioural responses.

One tension that remains in Mezirowean theorizing is the relation betweenindividual and society and thus the relation between personal and social trans-formation. To address this dualist understanding, Mezirow made an explicit con-nection between reflective dialogue in small groups and preparation fordemocratic processes, where people can learn the skills of deliberating togetherin adult education spaces, anticipatory of the public sphere. The role of educa-tors is to create conditions for transformative learning and foster habits ofreflection and dialogue constitutive of empowerment and democratic processes.However, this assumes transformative change is individual and internal first, add-ing up to societal change through new life choices, perhaps a new worldviewand/or increased dialogical capacity. As Tennant (2012) suggests, this is anapolitical view of transformative learning.

Self as fragmented: the postmodern view. Code (2011) describes that the Anglo-American tradition more commonly speaks about the self and the French tradi-tion speaks about the subject, used interchangeably here. In contrast to Illeris,Australian Tennant (2012) offers different conceptualizations of self, identityand subjectivity. He suggests that the theoretical shift from the concept of selfto identity represents a critique of the apolitical nature of humanistic psychologypredicated on modernist views of the self. In other words, professional psychol-ogy has operated on the ‘self as normative, unitary, coherent and ahistorical’(p. 8), promoting conformity to a specific norm and delegitimizing other waysof being. While humanist psychology was itself a critique of behaviourist psychol-ogy, humanist psychology was critiqued for its ahistorical view of the self, seen tosimply adjust individuals to alienating conditions, often aided by personalityinventories and psychological tests as instruments of social control. Further, slav-ery, colonialism and industrialism revealed the ethnocentrism, androcentrism,anthropocentrism and mechanistic control implicit in the modern project. Theuniversality of a ‘singular, unchanging “self”’ could now be considered a liabilitygiven constant and accelerated change, collapsing boundaries due to globaliza-tion and virtual realities, and multiple identities from unprecedented levels ofmigration.

In sum, the concept of identity began a break with the modernist view of theself, by asserting that the self is socially constructed and subject to change, notan object of knowledge that was static and could be known empirically. As Illerissuggests, the term identity began to be used by symbolic interactionists such asMead to capture the relationship between self and society. Now, rather than anenduring inner stability, an individual adopts and shed many identities overtheir lifetimes and across contexts. For Tennant (2012), the term identity

8 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

represented ‘a politicization of the previously “neutral” psychological term self’(p. 8) emphasizing the social and no longer equating ‘difference’ with ‘“de-viance” from an established norm’ (p. 12). While identity politics has benefittedmany marginalized groups, it can still contain an essentialist view of self andreproduce the duality of self and society.

Tennant sees the postmodern concept of subjectivity as seeking to dissolvethe self/society duality and disrupt the view of the self as unified, coherent andinterior. In the postmodern view, self and knowledge are constituted in relation-ship; thus, the self is ‘solely a sociocultural phenomenon’ (p. 12) and is continu-ously emerging through language, signs and discursive structures in whichpower circulates.

The postmodern self is distributed in a multiplicity of incoherent and discon-nected relationships … The self is simultaneously pulled into different or evenopposed directions and, as a result, it becomes strongly decentralized, losinginner coherence and stability. The self is populated by a plurality of voices thatmake it difficult or even impossible to speak from one single voice … Life is likea story or text that is being written and rewritten constantly (Hermans &Hermans-Konopka, 2010, pp. 92–93).

While Tennant acknowledges this postmodern contribution, he is critical ofthe concept of a fragmented, unstable postmodern self, as it serves capitalistneeds by constantly adapting and reskilling workers rather than generating asense of agency to contest the logic of capital. Therefore, Tennant retains theconcept of self in his work, as I do here, suggesting that some level of continuityand coherence of the self is necessary, yet it is a politicized notion of the self.Feminist psychotherapist Jane Flax agrees that a core sense of self is necessary toavoid psychosis (Thayer-Bacon, 2003) but the discursive and historical dimen-sions of the self are also recognized. While postmodernism acknowledges differ-ence, contingency and multiplicity, it ‘also does not present a solid basis for anengaged agency that is the heart of the dialogical self’ (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 95). Further, continuity and stability are just as important asdiscontinuity and change, particularly as traditional, modern and postmodernviews currently coexist in society. The concept of the relational self builds onsocial constructionism and the insights of postmodernism but seeks to gobeyond, drawing selectively from feminist, postcolonial, ecological, andaboriginal theories and epistemologies.

The self as relational: a way forward. Valuable within this matrix of theories is theassertion of a socially constructed self and the social origins of knowledge, wheremeanings and paradigms are communally negotiated. As Gergen (2011) explains,‘what we take to be knowledge of the world and self finds its origins in humanrelationships’ (p. 635). Human beings are constituted by their relations; frombirth on, their individuality is defined within relations. Noddings (inThayer-Bacon, 2003) and Thayer-Bacon (2003) agree that the relational approachto self avoids the errors of both privileging the individual and privileging thesocial by considering ‘relation [as] ontologically basic … The much celebratedautonomy of individuals may be an illusion; interdependence … better describesthe reality of selves’ (pp. ix, 106). In other words, we are embedded and embod-ied in a particular context which shapes us, but it is not a container-self bounded

9TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

by skin and brain and it is not something inside/outside of self, as in liberalhumanist notions. In the relational view, individuals are fundamentallyindividuals-in-relations, with the human and more-than-human world.

Spretnak (2011) asserts we are undergoing a ‘Relational Shift’, from a mecha-nistic worldview to a relational one. This understanding is reflected in varioustraditions: Gould’s (1978) description of communal individuality from Marxianontology; ecological theorists who call this the ecological self that includes thenatural world; analytical psychologists who call this the transpersonal self wherethe sense of self expands to all of humankind and the collective unconscious asa historical conveyance; or as aboriginal people contend, you are ‘all your rela-tions’. Yet, this is not the same as saying ‘everything is connected’; rather, therelational view recognizes the ‘constitutional nature’ of relationships (Spretnak,2011, p. 12). In sum, what these particular relational views share is that allbeings, human and nonhuman, are mutually dependent and interconnectedwithin a social, ecological and for some, cosmological, world.

A relational view of the self does not negate a core identity, but it is notunderstood in the same way as in a modernist perspective. Each person isembodied, experiences the world in specific ways, and has unique experiences,thereby producing a qualitatively unique self-in-relation with others, experiencedas an enduring self. The socially based and interactive nature of the early yearsin human development, particularly up to age three, helps to establish this coreidentity, within relations of reciprocity. Yet, the self is not unitary and mentalist,it is not about mastery, defined in opposition to others or in response to themirroring of others. Rather it is multiple and fractured as we experience the selfas various voices and changing positions according to context, intertwined withthe minds of other people (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). Nevertheless,there is still a sense that certain aspects of the self are ever present andenduring as well as constantly emerging.

In these ways then, the relational is fundamentally ethical. As Bergum andDossetor (2005) explain, ‘We might describe a relational approach as attendingto the art of ethics, which is tied to the attributes of love, compassion, andnurturance—subjective attributes of feeling’ (p. 11). Beyond rationality, the rela-tional arises out of concern for the other and it is emotions such as love andcaring that constitute our social coexistence. ‘More that resolving ethical dilem-mas through good moral reasoning; it demands attentiveness and responsivenessto our commitments to one another, to the earth, and to all living things’(Austin, 2008). Nurturing a space that promotes this attentiveness and respon-siveness is an ethical task as well as a dialogical one (Bergum & Dossetor, 2005,p. 11). ‘The answer to “How should I act?” is discovered not solely by oneselfbut rather in dialogue’ (Austin, 2008).

Thayer-Bacon suggests that relationality precedes knowing, as well as otherprocesses such as gendering or racialization. ‘All knowers are social beings in-relation-with-others, and therefore separation and detachment is now seen as aparticular [culturally-informed] way of relating to others’ (p. 106). How mighttransformative spaces and learning be understood from the perspective of a rela-tional self and relational knowing? Data from three empirical studies, exploringimmigrant and immigrant service provider relationships, can point to some newunderstandings.

10 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

Research design

The immigration process, particularly amongst visible minority groups, isprofoundly transformative, both positive and negative. Correspondingly, new-comers can deeply challenge existing norms of the receiving country. Such cul-tural encounters are pedagogical entry points for transformative learning.Jezewski (1993) defines cultural brokering as the act of bridging, linking,mediating between groups and persons of differing cultural backgrounds forreducing conflict or producing change. A cooperative of 54 multiculturalbrokers in Western Canada acts as organic leaders and community mobilizers intheir ethnocultural communities, trained to be health educators and advocateswho address service gaps within the health system. The multicultural brokersapproached the researcher wishing to collaboratively reflect on their personaland collective histories to generate knowledge about their lived experience ofcultural hybridity and inclusion.

Participatory action research was chosen for all three studies as it allowedstudy of how understanding and learning develop in the midst of action andinvolved participants in design of the study (McTaggart, 1997). The goal was toundertake a social psychological analysis of individual actors embedded in amacrostructural analysis of social systems (Morrow, 1994). In the first study, wecodeveloped three arts-based workshops that served as iterative data collectionon the successful integration capacities amongst first- and second-generationimmigrants. Eight brokers participated in all three workshops—originating fromCuba, Cambodia, Iraq, Vietnam, Philippines, Lebanon, Pakistan and Japan—byengaging in storytelling, mosaic creation, dialogical mask making and reflectiveco-construction of the immigration journey.

These findings were augmented by findings from a second study examiningthe perspective changes of Canadian-born social workers who work with thesenewcomers. A third study examined the interactions between Canadian-bornparks staff and newcomers in a collaboratively designed English languageprogramme in an outdoor camping context (Lange & Vogels, 2011).

Findings

Participants identified a common incremental three-phase process of transforma-tion in the immigration journey, somewhat dependent on migration age andprior socioeconomic and cultural context. Participants considered the thresholdsor ‘gates’ into each phase as transformative crucibles. As they identified thecapacities they developed and the learning involved in each phase, they alsodescribed the phases as perforated, dynamic and iterative.

Gate one: disorientation

Gate One was the phase of disorientation, as arriving families experiencedculture shock and a growing recognition of difference. For children, thecomparison process in school was subtle—from the clothes they wore to lunchfood to cultural celebrations. For some, the difference was ‘in your face daily’through bullying, physical abuse and offensive remarks. Witnessing their

11TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

parents’ mistakes in the new culture as well as negotiating one culture at homeand one at school creates a conflicted self. One woman explained,

I have two faces … when I come home I be a Vietnamese girl … justto please them. But when I’m at school, I dress differently, bring myclothes extra. I put some make-up on. Just to feel like I’m belongingto them.

Another woman said she learned how to comfort herself and deal with heranger and emotional turmoil, yet, she began to reject her home culture to fitinto the Canadian culture, common amongst many child and young adult new-comers. The Filipino community told her that,

I was a coconut: brown on the outside, white on the inside. And thenyou’re kind of rejected from your home culture … you kind of don’tbelong to either … you don’t feel like you have the same values asyour own culture.

One woman explained that her biggest struggles as a child were her emotionalfeelings,

I was always so confused … trying to build your confidence up soyou’re not emotionally stressed out, that was hard … feeling angry …why can’t we be the same? … I wasn’t ready to always kind of clarifywho I was and where I came from … and I got sick of it as a child.

One young man was instructed by his parents to not refer to Cambodia in con-versations, not to label Canadian-born people as racist or discriminatory, andnot to get into situations of victimization. Rather he was instructed to see thegreater good in people and rely on translating their culture, so others wouldunderstand. A young Japanese man felt shame about his parents and dissociatedfrom the culture, causing severe family tension. He joined a musical subculturebringing him into contact with bicultural musicians but an unhealthy ‘under-ground society’. Cultural conflict, then, deeply shaped their initial experiences.

The adult newcomers had high expectations for an easier life, but this wasquickly dashed. They felt loneliness and shame in not understanding the lan-guage and customs of Canada, particularly in front of their children, and some-times not being able to provide appropriate food and shelter. While theyunderstood there would be significant challenges, their social unsureness andthe degree of cultural difference was often overwhelming, which led to a loss ofconfidence: ‘Here in many cases I don’t know if what I’m doing is correct ornot … that get me frustrated … you are receiving feedback but you aren’t ableto decode it … you feel disoriented’. An Iraqi woman agreed, ‘So the parentingwas very different … from what I learned to do … I start to find out that I amnot a good mom. I was very confused. I was not knowing what to do’. There is aprofound sense of loss on many fronts. One man said, ‘I lost my job, I lost mystatus … I had to deal with my poverty, not employing, not having good socialskill, how to deal with the culture and no language’. Even though a Cuban man

12 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

came with an innate trust of people, strong professional skills and significantself-knowledge, this was dislocated as:

we have value in our country; but when you are here in this labourmarket, you have different value … a very, very low value … my firststrategy was to increase my value … but it doesn’t depend on yourskills. You have to have some kind of certificate.

In sum, the descent from honeymoon expectations into a bewildering world—that generated feelings of anxiety, frustration, fear, helplessness, irritability,negativity, confidence loss, ineffectiveness and the desire for a more predictableenvironment—all constitute culture shock (Church, 1982; Oberg, 1960). This isakin to a disorienting dilemma in Mezirowean terms (Taylor, 1994). These dataalso demonstrate the importance of overwhelming emotion in triggering a trans-formative learning process (Dirkx, 2008; Taylor, 1994).

Gate two: liminal space

From the initial shock, newcomers moved into a process of responsive adapta-tion. Yet this only emerged from a liminal space of deep cultural questioningand battles with emotions, desires and values. They were evolving ‘from a stateof low self- and cultural awareness to a state of high self- and cultural awareness’(Adler, 1975, p. 15). Eventually, the young people were able to find biculturalpeer groups and explore the nature of values in each culture. One participantsaw the generosity of her family as motivated by the desire for community status.So she reinterpreted her parents’ teachings to assume a more magnanimousmotivation. She listened deeply to other cultures and sought to understand whathatred and anger yielded. She transmuted negative experiences by ‘mak[ing] itinto positive, more understanding and accepting, and be tolerant instead ofhold onto something that you hate or you angry about’. Staying rooted in herculture of origin, she opened to new ways of being, a syncretic approach. Sheowned her culture but on her own terms. The Iraqi woman explained howproud she was of her youngest son,

He is the most Canadian one in our house … he know how to findhis way between the two cultures. He’s a very smart boy. He knowhow to be Kurdish, Iraqi, Muslim … and he know how to navigatehimself to be fully Canadian … in his own way of course.

From trying on different identities, each newcomer inhabits additional identitiesand transforms earlier identities within overlapping webs of culture.

The participants described this process as learning; learning to constantlyadjust strategies, be sensitive and decode meanings, all through a reflective pro-cess. The young Vietnamese woman explained that she also began to identifyrole models, someone to ‘look up to … to lead me’ in learning. As Taylor(1994) found in his study on intercultural competence, friends from the hostculture were crucial for accessing tacit cultural knowledge, as was a pattern ofconsistent learning. This sense of self as learner was undergirded by self-accep-

13TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

tance, ‘… we’re okay with who we are … you accept who you are right now’.The Lebanese woman explained the turning point was ‘the whole learningexperience, accepting who I was, accepting being different, and then beingproud of it … and then teach others that’. In this second phase, newcomerslearned how to decode the new culture/s, find some solid ground for communi-cating effectively as well as negotiate and assert multiple identities. Importantly,they accepted the ambiguity and hybridity of their new reality. They eachassumed a powerful learner identity from which they could take a witness posi-tion … witnessing themselves and others constantly in relation. This reflectivedistance created the ability to expand the realm of their choices. Still, for them,it was not yet the full transformative moment.

Gate three: integration and generativity

In Gate Three, participants entered a stage of integration and generativity bybecoming mentors. Erikson (1950) considers generativity as the desire to con-tribute to society and benefit future generations by caring, creating and accom-plishing lasting things. In this study, integration had a spiritual facet thatreflected the ethical aspect of relationality.

As members of a multicultural cooperative who work together across manycultures, they in turn supported newcomers seeing themselves as ‘learners’,through ‘being present to others’ as part of ‘human literacy’. The Cambodianman explained, ‘I believe everyone is learning … [our job is] supporting peopleunconditionally with no judgment’. After the pain each had experienced overyears, they agreed ‘We know that people are good beyond anything they can doto us’ and that ‘my journey [has] so many sweetness, so many love that flow into[it], make me who I am today’. Many of them lost the need for ego space whichcreated more room for the other, an aspect of spiritual development. Similar toTaylor’s (1994) study, rather than working from a power base, they chose to livein a harmony of tensions, with a heightened sensitivity to cultural differences.

In some cases, the spiritual facet was linked to religious practises, but inothers it was more a moral and ethical sensibility of non-judgment and mindful-ness that integrated previous experiences and shaped how they related. ThePakistani man said, in ‘meeting people … seeing how they incorporated reli-gion, values, and culture in their life and did it in a seamless way … thatprompted me to embrace faith’. The Cambodian man began a spiritual practiceof meditation, building on the example of his Buddhist parents. ‘I [didn’t] seehow sitting quietly for an hour will help you. Now I’ve learned … the deepquietness and listening is helping … I can forgive other people’. The Japaneseman gravitated towards Christianity, ‘I start to explore society with a new senseof something spiritually that guides me, that grounds me and that I can facesociety with. I really opened up my eyes … I realized I wanted to help people’.He saw the beauty in his own Japanese traditions, ‘creating a different relation-ship to it’. He moved beyond blaming his parents, ‘Mistakes needs to be for-given is my main point’.

The transformative moment was not only attending to interpersonal relation-ships but contributing to society by becoming mentors. The Japanese manexpanded, ‘That was probably the most transformational part of my life … start-ing to work with people that probably experienced things in some similar ways

14 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

to myself’. Another agrees, ‘Yeah, that transformation was basically learning anownership state and building a community on my own terms with people in thesame boat as myself … and teaching this to children’. Letting go of the hate,anger and disassociation was most possible by ‘discovering faith, God, forgive-ness and love … to heal … Transformation was finding a new purpose and sup-port for my life … I wasn’t trying to do it for me anymore’. As Eriksonexplained generativity, these participants made the choice to take up leadershipin their communities by helping others who struggle as newcomers and to dothis by living out of a sense of relational integrity. When in a position of assistingothers, they were able to integrate their learning further.

Identifying their special ability to navigate multiple cultural realities led natu-rally to ‘this kind of Third Space—of shifting to helping others’. They talkedexplicitly about the Third Space as a co-arising field created through their dia-logue. It goes beyond empathy to ‘thirdness’ that is a space and process, some-times ‘momentary’, that ‘is neither I nor you, but we’ (Alton & Massing, 2014,p. 4). One of the leaders describes a ‘magnified sense of “beauty hunting”’ inthe brokers, ‘it’s not even guided. It just comes out … we cannot describe it inlanguage but we know what it’s like and we try to draw it out, we try to supportit’. The capacities of forgiveness, flexibility, empathy, multiple perspective-taking,and ego loss as well as mentoring capacities for them are spiritual capacitieswhich help create Third Space dialogue. For them, this is holding ‘a tiny “Idon’t know” space’. Bhabha describes it almost as a vibration or holding a toneside-by-side yielding a ‘synchrony of different voices’ (2009, p. ix). Moreover,these participants name their ethical stance or ‘principles of right conduct’ asemanating more from Eastern ethical frameworks than Western, in the affirma-tion of interdependency, holism, balance of opposing forces, and mutualrespect.

Implications: transformative learning, transculturality and therelational self

As the newcomer adults and children faced a new life in Canada, a very differentself was mirrored back to them than who they knew themselves to be in theircountry of origin, producing shame and loss, particularly loss of social belongingand professional status. In this newcomer context, we witness how the self issocially constructed and profoundly embedded in relationships, including multi-ple and shifting identities. As their identities conflicted in the new context, theyentered a liminal space of questioning cultural and family socialization andnegotiating battles with emotions and desires. For them, these losses and con-flicts were disorienting but also created the ground for growth.

Similar to Bhabha’s conceptualization, the transformative process involvedthe dynamics of identity displacement, rejection, replacement and reassertion.To develop new narratives of self, the negative mirroring and trauma wastransmuted into a different way of being, eventually based on a hard-wonself-acceptance. Mainstream belonging was important but they chose a harderroad of positive bicultural peer groups and mentors who granted themrecognition. This was part of shaping a cultural hybridity and a growing inclu-siveness that replaced the sense of rejection. These newcomers shifted towards

15TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

regarding culture and identity as flowing and syncretic, constantly hybridizingthrough the translation and invention of cultural codes with others, evidence oftransculturality.

The multicultural centre where they worked is a cultural space that dialogi-cally engages the multiple identities of the brokers, colleagues and clients. Thisspace is a border zone where identities were negotiated daily in relation to eachother. A conscious dialogue of meaning creates this as a Third Space fornegotiating transculturality. For instance, a sharing of an Ethiopian coffee cere-mony became a pretext for discussing the cultural processes for resolving inter-personal and family conflicts. Examples of table settings in different culturaltraditions led to discussions of gender, age and class differences within andacross cultures. Identities no longer relevant are displaced and replaced withnarratives that were more meaningful. In some cases, aspects of identity wereasserted, such as the power of women to change subordinate status by relyingon the Canadian legal framework. These exemplary newcomers developed flexi-ble strategies according to various contexts, progressively engaging in deeperself-reflexivity, and finding role models to emulate.

Importantly, they exemplify a relational sense of self that is deeply ethical. Asone leader expressed it, they were ‘beauty-hunters’ looking for the best in eachother, always considering their interdependence, and consistently encouragingrespectful dialogue, particularly in conflict, as a way to build their work as acooperative. In this way, there was a strong sense of individuality within the col-lectivity. Yet, they saw themselves as perennially emergent and responsive tothose around them. They understand that their personal energy and state ofbeing enhances or detracts from the collectivity.

Most intriguing was the developing sense of self as learner. Positioning them-selves as perpetual learners rather than as a defended identity created an open-ness to difference and spaces of cultural negotiation. They each adopted asyncretism towards culture, evaluating what was of value and what was no longerof use. For instance, in designing parenting education for this transcultural set-ting, they openly weighed traditions and expectations across cultures andencouraged their participants to do the same, rather than simply reject patternson the basis of difference.

Most important, they did not recognize their transformative learning, particu-larly within the transmutation of negative experiences and reinterpretation ofcultural roots, until they were positioned in a teaching/mentoring relationship.Clearly, part of a transformative learning process is a new identity as a perpetuallearner and the moment of taking up their own role as mentor, an epistemologi-cal and ontological shift. Further, from an Eastern spiritual perspective, theyunderstood themselves to be deliberately shifting the energy field amongstthemselves, creating a collective context for people’s higher self to emerge.

Interestingly, as Canadian-born settlement workers and government workerssuch as social workers and parks staff came into contact with newcomersthrough their professional work, their sense of identity was also called into ques-tion. Social workers, often White and middle class, pondered ‘what is Canadianculture?’ and ‘what is my own family immigration story?’. They recounted theloss of religious and cultural observances and homogeneous family identities inthe space of two generations. They asked, ‘who really am I; what defines me …my consumption?’ Humbled by the rich traditions of newcomers, the Canadian-

16 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

born were inspired to rethink, reinvigorate or invent their own traditions andidentities, borrowing from their own inherited culture/s as well as those aroundthem, a transculturality that emerged from the reciprocity of this nonformal andinformal learning dialogue.

Further, service providers realized that the taken-for-granted meaningsembedded in government-protected parks and state-provided social services werenot self-evident for all newcomers. Newcomers did not necessarily share theassumptions or realities of a white, middle class lifestyle—whether car mobility, anuclear family home, well-paid jobs with benefits, literacy, independent leisureactivities, freedom of political expression, or trust in public services. With thisgap in assumptions, Canadian-born service providers experienced a sense of dis-orientation, not knowing how to do their job in this crosscultural context. Thistriggered self-examination, a critical review of their assumptions and eventually adeep listening to newcomers. This deep listening was the most important shift,from an expert role to a learning stance, exploring new options for their prac-tice. It began to foster new ways of being and relating, such as reciprocal story-telling rather than generic programme delivery. A mutual meaning-makingdialogue increased the sense of belonging for all and represented the develop-ment of a welcoming community. The Canadian-born shifted from a performa-tive identity as a professional ‘doing their job’ to a relational identity, wherepersonal crosscultural relationships of caring began informing their professionalpractice.

In the case of both newcomers and service providers, these were the first stepsin the dance of transculturality where the sense of self in relation to culturebecomes dynamic and creative and learning is reciprocal and mutual. Ideally,this conscious and fluid negotiation between cultures can also be consideredpart of creating a just learning society (Welton, 2006). The Canadian experiencecan help illustrate the fluidity of ‘nation’, where society itself becomes a learningbeing by providing Third Space contexts for enabling interactions that fostermutual transformation and recognitive justice (Fraser, 2009; Guo, 2010).

In conclusion, transformation is profoundly relational and ripples throughwebs of connections, as a continuously social referential process. Third Space liv-ing is fluid but can be fostered by special places of liminality, where peopleenter a place apart to learn, to face the dark side of emotions, to find allies andguides, and aspire to higher moral and ethical qualities. Through these pro-cesses, the core identity is strengthened as a form of restorative learning whichin turn expands the bounds of relationality and moral-ethical sensibility (Lange,2004). Yet, the sense of self is also transformed, particularly as spiritual practisesand the attributes of forgiveness, flexibility; empathy and multiple perspective-taking are developed. Most participants described the process of ego loss into anexpanded sense of self as an openness to the other and to the ‘notknowingness’of Third Space dialogue. Importantly, the newcomers did not recognize theirtransformation until the stage of generativity when they assumed an elder ormentoring role in their ethnocultural communities, integrating their learning.This points to a non-Western, relational ontology of transformation whichmanifests a learning way of being, including fostering character cultivation,ethical conduct and individuality within communality (Green Fareed, 2009;Yang, 2011).

17TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

Acknowledgements

I offer deepest thanks to my colleagues at the immigrant serving collective whorequested this research, who brought voice to their learning journeys, and whocontributed to the knowledge creation herein. For ethical reasons, the organiza-tion and colleagues will not be named, but I hope their inspiring courage anddetermination to shift to a new way of individual and collective being, shinesthrough. My intent has been to be a vehicle through which their cutting-edgeknowledge and practice is highlighted and to understand this through dialoguewith contemporary theory.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Funding

This work was supported by Norlien Foundation, Women and Children’s Health Research Institute(WCHRI), Edmonton Community Adult Learning Association and Alberta Government - Tourism,Parks and Recreation. The project lead was Rebecca Gokiert.

References

Adler, P. (1975). The transitional experience: An alternative view of culture shock. Journal ofHumanistic Psychology, 15, 13–23.

Alton, S., & Massing, D. (2014, March 22). Power in the third space. Presentation to the Albertacommunity of social workers annual conference, Edmonton, Alberta.

Austin, W. (2008). Relational ethics. In L. Given (Ed.), SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods(pp. 748–749). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

Barresi, J., & Martin, R. (2011). History as prologue: Western theories of the self. In S. Gallagher(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the self (pp. 33–56). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bergum, V., & Dossetor, J. (2005). Relational ethics. Hagarstown, MD: University Publishing Group.Bhabha, H. (Ed.). (1990). Nation and narration. London: Routledge.Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. London: Routledge.Bhabha, H. (2009). In the cave of making. In K. Ikas & G. Wagner (Eds.), Communicating in the third

space (pp. ix–xiv). New York, NY: Routledge.Bron, A. (2006). Immigrants entering civil society in the European context. In A. Antikainen,

P. Harinen, & C. Torres (Eds.), In from the margins: Adult education, work and civil society(pp. 89–100).

Church, A. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 540–572.Code, L. (2011). Self, subjectivity, and the instituted social imaginary. In S. Gallagher (Ed.), The

Oxford handbook of the self (pp. 715–737). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Cranton, P., & English, L. (2009). Reaching out across the border: Canadian perspectives on adult

education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (Vol. 124). San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

Creese, G., Dyck, I., & McLaren, A. (1999). Reconstituting the family: Negotiating immigration and settle-ment (Working Paper Series No. 03-03). Vancouver, BC: Metropolis British Columbia.

Crocker, D., Dobrowolsky, A., Keeble, E., Moncayo, C. C., & Tastsoglou, E. (2007). Security and immi-gration, changes and challenges. Ottawa: Status of Women Canada.

Dirkx, J. (2008). The meaning and role of emotions in adult learning. In J. Dirkx (Ed.), NewDirections for Adult and Continuing Education, Adult learning and the emotional self, No. 120(pp. 7–18). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ace.311

Driedger, L. (2003). Race and ethnicity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Erikson, E. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton.

18 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

Esses, V., Hamilton, L., Bennett-Abu Ayyash, C., & Burstein, M. (2010). Characteristics of a welcomingcommunity. Ottawa: Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Retrieved from http://p2pcanada.ca/library/characteristics-of-a-welcoming-community-report/

Formenti, L., & Dirkx, J. (2014). A dialogical reframing. Journal of Transformative Education, 12,123–133.

Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of Justice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Garson, K. (2009). Applying transformative learning to cross-cultural training endeavours. Saarbrucken:

VDM Verlag.Gergen, K. (2011). The social construction of self. In S. Gallagher (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the self

(pp. 633–653). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Gould, C. (1978). Marx’s social ontology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Government of Canada. (2001). Pursuing Canada’s commitment to immigration. Ottawa: Citizenship and

Immigration Canada.Government of Canada. (2010). Annual report to parliament on immigration. Ottawa: Citizenship and

Immigration Canada.Green Fareed, C. (2009). Culture matters. In B. Fisher-Yoshida, K. Geller, & S. Schapiro (Eds.),

Innovations in transformative learning (pp. 117–132). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Guo, S. (2010). Lifelong learning in the age of transnational migration. International Journal of Life-

long Education, 29, 143–147. doi:10.1080/02601371003616509Hall, E. (1959). Silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Hermans, H., & Hermans-Konopka, A. (2010). Dialogical self theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Ikas, K., & Wagner, G. (2009). Communicating in the third space. New York, NY: Routledge.Illeris, K. (2012). Transformative learning and identity. In M. Schwarz, C. Lubell, R. Gall, & A. Omar

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international transformative learning conference (pp. 223–227). SanFrancisco, CA: Meridian University.

Illeris, K. (2014). Transformative learning and identity. London: Routledge.Inda, J., & Rosaldo, R. (Eds.). (2001). The anthropology of globalization. Cambridge: Blackwell.Jackson, M. (2008). Transformative learning for a new worldview. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Jezewski, M. (1993). Cultural brokering as a model of advocacy. Nursing & Health Care, 14, 78–85.Kalscheuer, B. (2009). Encounters in the third space. In K. Ikas & G. Wagner (Eds.), Communicating

in the third space (pp. 26–48). New York, NY: Routledge.Kokkos, A. (2014). Could transformative learning be appreciated in Europe? Journal of Transformative

Education, 12, 180–196.Lange, E. (2013). Interrogating transformative learning: Canadian contributions. In T. Nesbit,

S. Brigham, N. Taber, & T. Gibb (Eds.), Building on critical traditions: Adult education and learn-ing in Canada (pp. 107–118). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.

Lange, E., & Vogels, P. (2011). A transformative dance through “language mountains” and “blindspots”: Nonformal adult educators learn responsiveness to newcomers. In S. Carpenter,S. Dossa, & B. Osborne (Eds.), Proceedings of the 52nd national conference of the adult educationresearch conference and the 30th national conference of the Canadian Association for the Study of AdultEducation (CASAE) (pp. 394–400). Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Lange, E. A. (2004). Transformative and restorative learning: A vital dialectic for sustainable societies.Adult Education Quarterly, 54, 121–139. doi:10.1177/071713603260276

Li, P. (1999). Race and ethnic relations in Canada. Oxford: Oxford University Press.McTaggart, R. (1997). Participatory action research. New York, NY: SUNY.Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Mezirow, J. (1994). Understanding transformation theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 44, 222–232.Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1, 58–63.Morrow, R. (1994). Critical theory and methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Oberg, K. (1960). Culture shock: Adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology, 7,

177–182.OECD. (2013). International migration outlook 2013. Paris: Author.Piller, I. (2011). Intercultural communication. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Rutherford, J. (1990). The third space: Interview with Homi Bhabha. In J. Rutherford (Ed.), Identity,

community, culture, difference (pp. 207–221). London: Lawrence and Wishart.Saul, J. R. (2008). A fair country: Telling truths about Canada. Toronto, ON: Viking Canada.Sefa Dei, G., & McDermott, M. (2013). Politics of anti-racism education: In search of strategies for trans-

formative learning. New York, NY: Springer.Simmons, A. (2010). Immigration and Canada. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press.Sorrells, K. (2013). Intercultural communication. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Spretnak, C. (2011). Relational reality. Topsham, ME: Green Horizon Books.Statistics Canada. (2006). Canada’s ethnocultural mosaic, 2006 census. Retrieved from http://www12.stat

can.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-562/p5-eng.cfm

19TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING AND CONCEPTS OF THE SELF

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015

Tan, S. (2003). Anti-racist environmental adult education in a trans-global community. In D. Clover(Ed.), Global perspectives in environmental adult education (pp. 3–21). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Taylor, C. (1991). The malaise of modernity. Concord: House of Anansi Press.Taylor, E. (1994). Intercultural competency: A transformative learning process. Adult Education Quar-

terly, 44, 154–174. doi:10.1177/074171369404400303Tennant, M. (2012). The learning self. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Thayer-Bacon, B. (2003). Relational “(e)pistemologies”. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Wayland, S. (2006). Unsettled. Ottawa: Law Commission of Canada and Community Foundations of

Canada.Welton, M. (2006). Designing the just learning society. Leicester: NIACE.West, L. (2014). Transformative learning and the form that transforms: Towards a psychosocial the-

ory of recognition using auto/biographical narrative research. Journal of Transformative Educa-tion, 12, 164–179.

Yang, S.-y. (2011). East meets west. In E. Tisdell & A. Swartz (Eds.), New Directions for Adult andContinuing Education, Adult education and the pursuit of wisdom, No. 131 (pp. 45–54). SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

20 ELIZABETH LANGE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

142.

177.

67.9

0] a

t 12:

38 0

8 Ju

ly 2

015