Defining Adult Learners

Clarifying the concept of adultness represents a challenge. The concept might be conceptualized lawfully or biologically, yet turning into a grown up goes way beyond voting or reproducing. The majority of short or long-time studies as to age in L2 acquisition are far more oriented towards little kids, toddlers, and teens. Despite the established concepts of a critical period and ultimate attainment, ^{Larsen-Freeman and Long (2014}) affirmed that “a good deal of controversy has been generated around whether the age at which someone is first exposed to a SL… affects acquisition of that language in any way” (p. 274). Most SLA researchers hardly ever clarify about the exact age and the profile of an adult learner. Regardless of compiling age differences in L2 acquisition, ^{Saville- Troike and Barto (2016)} certainly abstained from defining an accurate age for a learner to be regarded as an adult.

This bibliographic report verbalizes the difficulty of defining the concept of an adult learner, but the establishment of age categories would offer some guidance. First, the United Nations confirmed in the 1985 General Assembly that young adults range ages between 15 and 24 years. Such description mirrors ^{Arnett’s (2000}) proposal regarding the concept of emerging adults for people whose age falls into that span. Second, Costa Rican citizens over 65 years are declared senior citizens, so plenty of discussion is likely to happen as to defining the age for a person to officially be considered an adult, both in and out SLA investigation. Tracing an age scope is an estimate since the social notion of adultness involves aspects related to economic autonomy, conjugality, parenting, and so forth (^{SNTCWebinars, 2019}). In this literature review, L2 adult learners are those individuals whose ages range between 25 and 64 years at the time of attending ESP lessons. Their exact age of onset of acquisition (AoA) (Herschensohn, 2013) is omitted.

Adult Learning Theoretical Considerations

Research over the ways adults learn began over a hundred years ago. ^{Knowles et al. (2005}) stated that Harry Overstreet’s publication, The Mature Mind, in 1949 represents the earliest integrated framework in adult learning. One of Knowles’ first contributions entitled Informal Adult Education in 1950 highlighted that adults would welcome informality and flexibility while studying. Then, the term andragogy was introduced by Dusan Savicevic in 1967, and just a year later Knowles published Andragogy, Not Pedagogy. The study of the unique characteristics of adult learners has gone steady progress for several decades, but their repercussion in ESP deserves more attention.

Much controversy has risen over the issue of whether andragogy should be labeled as a theory of adult education or not. The fact is that this term has been employed to refer to the teaching adults as to their preferences and encouragement to internalize knowledge. In sharp contrast, andragogy’s tenets differ notoriously from pedagogy. ^{Knowles et al. (2005}) explained that the andragogical model is grounded in six didactic notions: the need to know, the learners’ self-concept, the role of the learners’ experiences, readiness to learn, orientation to learning, and motivation (pp. 64- 68). Indeed, the implications of these characteristics of andragogy in EFL were already analyzed by ^{Purwati et al. (2022}), for adult EL learners need an adaptable teaching-learning environment guided by self-direction whereby relating personal experiences with new pieces of knowledge. How to implement, adjust, or reconsider andragogical principles in ESP remains relatively unexplored.

These postulates of andragogy vary as to the tenets addressed to children or adolescents whereby conventional pedagogy is claimed. ^{Hägg and Kurczewska (2019}) recommended that a dual notion of both pedagogy and andragogy be required for novice adult learners whose ages range from 18 to 29, as determined by ^{Arnett (2000}). However, this paper focuses on adult learners (25 to 64 years old) because ^{Bocianu and Radler (2018}) highlighted “the importance of making the difference between pedagogy and andragogy in the instruction process for adult education in general and ESP in our case… to meet both their needs and those of national and international labour markets (p. 70)”. A comparison of pedagogy and andragogy led ^{Knowles et al. (2005}) to emphasize differences in terms of eight process elements. By reviewing these differences, ESP practitioners would comprehend the importance of restraining from pedagogical and teacher-centered mindsets when working with adults. Younger learners ponder very little about tracing instructional objectives, contributing to lesson planning, targeting specific language needs, or becoming passive recipients of what knowledgeable teachers signal as worthy of learning. On the other hand, adult learners resent not being involved in those processes and encountering formal, authoritarian, and teacher- centered class environments.

One of the main differences between pedagogy and andragogy is what triggers the process of instructional or curriculum design: the diagnosis of needs. In andragogy and ESP contexts, a Needs Analysis (NA) often takes place before curriculum design and classroom instruction, and the adult learners and their stakeholders play an active role in determining what their needs are. Whereas pedagogy places the entire responsibility of diagnosing needs on the teacher, andragogy and ESP welcome the involvement of adults in assessing their needs, arranging the curriculum, negotiating the objectives, consulting with subject matter experts (SMEs) (^{Ghafar, 2022}) or specialists (^{Woodrow, 2018}), collaboratively overcoming in-class subject knowledge dilemmas (ISKDs) (^{Anthony, 2018}), among other issues. ESP holds a quite close learner-instructor affinity named shared expertise since “learners are likely to have more experience than the teacher in the specific area being targeted” (^{Hall, 2012}). Such shared knowledge allows ESP scholar instructors to conquer burdens during language instruction (^{Bocanegra-Valle & Basturkmen, 2019}, p. 137).

Needs of Analysis in ESP and Adult Education

EFL classroom environments in K-12 or tertiary education are adhered to a rigid standard course of study. However, a similarity between andragogy and ESP is the concern over the diagnosis of students’ needs that would shape the curriculum. In fact, the field of Instructional Design (ID) also addresses the participants’ needs from the very beginning (^{Seel et al., 2017}). When ESP practitioners conduct an NA, they follow a backward-design process or ecological approach to curriculum design (^{Richards, 2017}) that clearly resembles both an andragogical principle and a step in ID. Lindenman and Dewel (1926) affirmed,

In conventional education the student is required to adjust himself to an established curriculum; in adult education the curriculum is built around the students’ needs and interests. Every adult person finds himself in specific situations with respect to his work, his recreation, his family life, his community life, and other situations which call for adjustments. (as cited in ^{Knowles et al., 2020}, p. 37)

While conducting the NA, ESP practitioners would gather as many insights as possible about the participants and their language needs.

The NA is also a strategic occasion to discover other details about the adult learners, their motivations, life experiences, agendas, academic backgrounds, etcetera (^{Anthony, 2018}; ^{Brown, 2016}; ^{Woodrow, 2018}). Even with this initial consideration of the participants’ needs, wants, lacks, and target communicative tasks, the following stages of instructional design and implementation can defy ESP teachers who fail to acknowledge andragogical principles with their adult learners. Thus, the NA should also be conducted with a set of theoretical considerations on how pedagogy differs from andragogy to embrace the dimension of principles in ^{Macalister and Nation’s (2019}) model of language curriculum. Their model accounts for needs analysis, environmental analysis, and principles as outer circles that influence the inner sphere traditionally viewed as the language syllabus.

When ESP teachers carry out a NA, design a highly tailored course, and approach the beginning of classroom instruction, they may encounter the following challenges. First, precise need identification varies while conducting a NA in an adult education context, for needs could be labeled as latent, manifest, intrinsic, and extrinsic. Second, some ESP practitioners may inaccurately regard some needs as “urgent” (^{Guerid & Mami, 2017}, p. 775). As a third challenge, ^{Sava (2012}) warms on “determining the right dimension of a need in a given context” (p. 17) because contextual factors do influence what is perceived as a need. A fourth peculiarity is that “ESP language classes are usually mixed-level classes, where some students might be left behind” (^{Benmassoud & Bouchara, 2021}, p. 177). Fifth, other individual differences (^{Brown & Lee, 2015}) ought to shape the strategic stages of an NA, instructional or curriculum design, and lesson planning (^{Damayanti, 2020}). A sixth challenge is that the expectations about instructional tasks and course arrangements differ among participants with different ages greatly (^{Cozma, 2015}). Indeed, a thoughtful NA could be the main departure to embrace adult learning principles in ESP despite the numerous challenges to conduct it.

Although andragogical principles may have already been implemented in ESP through a NA, further educational research is needed on how andragogy can explicitly nurture the ESP field. Indeed, the age factor in Second Language Acquisition (^{Saville- Troike & Barto, 2016}) could lead to diverse research initiatives in ESP. Thanks to an NA, adult learning and andragogy principles are implemented in ESP contexts by placing participants’ needs as top priorities in a model of language curriculum (^{Macalister & Nation’s, 2019}). However, this literature review indicates that clear guidelines on how to conduct an NA in ESP with a full reference to adult learning principles are pending.

More Elaboration on Adult Learning Principles

Andragogical tenets also differ from the pedagogical model in terms of how learning occurs and what the students’ and teachers’ roles are. ESP practitioners seem to have followed unconsciously andragogical principles by considering participants’ needs and motivations, but further scrutiny is needed to gain insights on how adult learners respond and make progress in their L2 skills (^{Manangsa et al., 2020}) while independently handling their employment, finances, marriage, parenting, and studying all at once. Although ESP differs from GE because of the careful consideration of students’ needs and motivations to “determine the curriculum” (^{Kakoulli Constantinou & Papadima-Sophocleous, 2021}, p. 94), a full consideration of adult learning principles implies more than an NA. For instance, ^{Holton et al. (2008}) paraphrased the six assumptions or principles of andragogy into the following statements:

Self-Directed Learning and Experiential Learning Theories

After listing some andragogical principles, this bibliographic review now briefly addresses two learning theories that would offer ESP practitioners a better understanding of adult learning: self- directed learning and experiential learning. First, self-direction is fundamental in adult education because “self-directed learning entails individuals taking initiative and responsibility for their own learning” (^{Loeng, 2020}, p. 2). If adults became self-driven in their studies, their growth and progress would have higher chances to be notorious and meaningful. One of the main differences between pedagogy and andragogy is the learners’ role, for younger students often remain more passive and dependent upon their teachers. Adult students could be far more independent, while young learners rely on their target language instructor “to take full responsibility for making the decisions about what is to be learned” (^{Knowles et al., 2005}, p. 61). This fact reflects the adults’ deep sense of self-direction despite “a number of factors affecting the propensity and ability to self-direct” (^{Loeng, 2020, p. 10}). Self- directed learning is a key goal in ESP settings where the EL teachers are mainly facilitators. Self-directed learning is intrinsically linked to the second principle of andragogy.

Second, what adults experience and how they feel during mediation determine the extent to which meaningful learning occurs. Thus, ESP teachers should be meticulous when designing instruction, selecting learning tasks, and devising adult-oriented lesson plans. Experiential learning became “a stand-alone theory referring to a particular relationship between cognitive and emotional processes, action-reflection cycles, and ideas of personal transformation” (^{Seaman et al., p. 15}). Out of the six propositions listed by ^{Kolbe and Kolbe (2005}) about experiential learning, three key implications in ESP include the focus on the process instead of the outcomes, learning as relearning, and an adaptation to the world (p. 194). Therefore, adults could fulfill their specific communicative needs in the target language if their ESP teachers enrich the learning experiences, include the participants’ previous life situations, acknowledge their diverse learning styles, target specific needs, and offer problem-solving tasks. Within EFL settings, ^{Purwati et al. (2022}) claimed that “teachers should explore and understand adults’ experiences as this information plays an essential role in assisting adult learners to meet their needs” (p.3). In short, motivation towards language learning in the ESP niche may be further enhanced if adult learners adopt a dynamic position when introspecting and sharing their life experiences and professional expertise.

Self-directed learning, experiential learning, and andragogy incorporate various recurring steps, and ESP practitioners should follow these cyclical processes. ^{Knowles et al. (2005}) stated that an andragogical practice involves the following procedures

preparing the learners, considering the physical and psycho- logical climate setting, involving the learners in planning for their learning, involving their learners in diagnosing their own needs for learning, involving the learners in formula- ting their own learning objectives, involving the learners in designing learning plans, helping the learners to carry out their learning plans, and involving the learners in evaluating their own learning outcomes. (p. 295)

In such manner, ESP instructors ought to consider grown- up learners’ life adventures, preferences, and necessities. Such elements certainly center on devising, assessing, and evaluating the ESP curriculum and lesson plans through interdisciplinarity and collaboration since both teachers, adult learners, and SMEs openly contribute to the instructional design and lesson planning. In fact, this cooperative work is fundamental in ESP because the parties can discuss mediation activities, elaborate on didactic material, promote a productive classroom environment, and evaluate the entire process while “construct(ing) social roles and identities in relation to one another through active participation in particular communities of practice” (^{Warriner, 2010}, p. 23). In that regard, ESP practitioners, ESP customer populations, and SMEs display a clear example of what an andragogical process looks like when they collaborate as a community of learners.

Instructional Design (ID): Devising Lessons for Adults

Both andragogy and ID contain tenets that are compatible with ESP. ID also favors a needs analysis before designing any instructional or curriculum proposal (^{Seel et al., 2017}). For example, some researchers have already explored the implementation of the ADDIE model in diverse ESP fields and contexts such as aeronautical English training in Korea (^{Park & Huffman, 2020}) and business college courses in Indonesia (^{Iswati, 2019}). Although ID embraces several models, ^{Molenda (2015}) concluded that there is “a tendency to accept the ADDIE term as an umbrella term” within ID (p. 41). The five processes this acronym stands for are the following: (needs) analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. The ADDIE model clearly suits ESP projects with adults because practitioners often follow these five processes.

The ID of ESP courses should appeal to the adult participants’ skills, motivations, behaviors, and “(language learning) strategies” to plan instruction that can contribute to task operationalization within their daily life duties (^{Hashim et al., 2018}, p. 40). However, a challenge ESP practitioners may encounter is that “adult learners come to the English lesson with lots of expectations about the learning procedures, and in the case these expectations are not accomplished, they may become critical towards the new environment of instruction” (^{Cozma, 2015}, p. 1211). This type of student rejection must be avoided at all costs because adults are prone to drop out and stop attending classes.

Table 2: Fields Serving Adult Learning 

Source: Own elaboration

This bibliographic review has identified four fields that ESP practitioners can draw from while catering adult learners. ESP settings tend to be adult-oriented, so ESP instructors should deeply regard andragogy, experiential learning, instructional design, and self-directed learning in the work with adult. Clearly, other teaching methodologies and principles can be added to this list.

Other Cognition, Affection, Attitude and Behavior Distinctions

This last section of the bibliographic review explores some differences among toddlers, teenagers, and adults that ^{Cozma (2015}) sorted them into three groups: cognitive, attitudinal, and behavioral characteristics. ^{Park and Reuter-Lorenz (2009}) and ^{Reuter-Lorenz and Cappell (2008)} recommended the scaffolding theory of aging and cognition as “a process present across the lifespan that involves the use and development of complementary, alternative neural circuits to achieve a particular cognitive goal” (as cited in ^{Castañeda, 2017}, p. 318). Both attitude and cognition matters are clearly linked and overlapped which makes the STAC method have a strong influence on adult learners’ motivation and predisposition to learn. ^{Leuner and Gould (2010}) advised how structural ductility makes modifications in the brain with the pass of time and recalled that as people age, their capacity to produce new brain cells decreases. This means that ESP teachers need to regard such brain distinctions between young and old learners in their teaching situations.

Adult learners most likely restart English classes to fulfill the emerging professional requirements and employment options. Because younger learners are also applying for such jobs, older applicants should polish their English skills. As a result, their ESP instructors ought to acknowledge the “growing motivational, personal or affective difficulties that unemployed adult learners are currently facing in the English subject when they decide to retake their studies” (^{Castañeda, 2017}, p. 136). Most adult learners seem aware of the relevance of upgrading the communicative skills in this foreign language as a way to meet the high expectations of a competitive labor market. Certainly, the challenges go beyond the educational contexts as ^{Schwarzer (2009}) warns that adults’ “motivation to learn ESL (ESP) also transforms and evolves with the changes they face in their lives outside classroom” (p. 27). There is a clear connection between employment, learning English, and adults’ personal lives.

Besides the challenge of learning English as technological nomads, there are other demands that include accounting for and handling personal issues. These aspects clearly interfere and make adult learners’ “study time fragmented” (^{Yao, 2019}, p. 120). ^{Tarnopolsky (2016}) proposes three assumptions to teach English to adults: considering learner’s attitudes to the methods of teaching English, limited intensiveness of the teaching/learning process, and avoiding home tasks (pp. 10-12). ESP practitioners could plan their lessons following these principles because adults have limited time to study, so there should be fewer classroom and home tasks. Mixed-level classroom settings tend to be the norm in ESP instruction for adult learners (^{Benmassoud & Bouchara, 2021}). When adults embark again on formal English classes after some years, they could have either gained or lost speaking fluency, vocabulary domain, and language accuracy in L2. Their diverse features go beyond language proficiency and include learning styles, paces, strategies, expectations, and previous experiences (^{Quynh-Na, 2007}), so several teaching adjustments should be made, like offering instructional “materials (that) are adapted to their language level” (^{Marcu, 2020}, p. 309). Another consideration to suit adult learners is that instructional exercises and tasks require careful consideration of the difficulty and “sequencing variables” (^{Malicka et al., 2019}, p. 78). Indeed, ^{Kurbanova and Ataeva (2020}) list some of these accommodations: “The methodological basis of multilevel training (for adults) is individualization, a differentiated level of requirements, a high level of the proposed material, a multilevel system for testing” (p. 721). A way to adjust teaching materials and worksheets for students with multi-level proficiency levels includes “tiered tasks” (^{Bowler and Parminter, 2016}, p. 59), but adults may benefit more from teamwork or projects in which they are given a customized or tailored task “that is appropriate for their (English proficiency) level” (Quynh-Na, 2007, p. 311).

Overcoming the challenge of multi-level and heterogenous classes is part of the ESP teacher’s agenda.

A well-known fact is that adults learning a foreign language may be irritated if they experience some kind of obstruction of their affective filter (^{Krashen, 1982}). ESP instructors are to devise and develop lesson plans considering both affective and cognitive elements that contribute to decrease the manifestations of stress such as anxiety, fear, insecurity, or low self-esteem. Even in a mixed learning environment, adult learners can tend to overcome their fear of learning, develop autonomous learning skills, and develop the ability to choose individual learning strategies. To further reduce these negative feelings, it is very important to consider their learning style. Regarding experiential learning theory (ELT), ^{Kolb and Kolb (2005}) state that “learning styles are influenced by personality type, educational specialization, career choice, and current job roles and tasks” (p. 195). For this reason, instructors who pay attention to the styles and characteristics of adult learners will incorporate these aspects into their lesson plans.

As to language learning, working memory (WM) and short- term phonological memory (PSTM) may help young students to cognitively process information faster and become better at pronunciation than adults (^{Mackey & Sachs, 2012}, p. 709). Therefore, ^{Araujo (2018}) recommended that “novice adult learners be encouraged not to do the following: write every idea down before expressing it aloud and analyze every single language component” (p. 66). Furthermore, this author advised that language teachers avoid distressing their adult students with content and information. Adult education can be more effective when classroom activities encourage question-and-answer, problem-finding, and problem-solving (^{Hashim & Othman 2006}, p. 11). Vocabulary memorization tasks and pronunciation drills can quickly bore adults.

Nevertheless, various scholars argue that adult learners are well-equipped to reach competitive levels of target language mastery. Initially, ^{Shevchenko (2015}) concluded that “there is no tough connection between age and success in acquiring a foreign language intonation” (p. 612). Adult learners demand “more repetitive and slow learning” but tend to adopt more steady knowledge (Castañeda, 2019, p. 319). ^{Cozma (2015}) explained that adults are more cooperative learners despite their hectic job and personal agendas. Last, ^{Tripathy (2019}) argued that there is a “distaste of adult learners toward English sounds”, but effective ESP instruction would “boost their confidence in carrying out daily conversations” (p. 103). Despite their age and multiple responsibilities, adults could still polish their English language skills.

The obstacles adults face cannot block completely these participants from learning this foreign language. Younger learners benefit from formal educational settings while adults have more experience and skills within academic contexts. For this reason, ^{Herschensohn (2012}) argued that:

Unlike naturalistic exposure, instructed exposure to an L2 does not show a clear advantage for earlier learners; there is often an advantage for a higher AoA, (Age of Onset of Acquisition), for the older learner has more developed cognitive skills and academic strategies that furnish an advantage in instructed language learning. (p. 323)

ESP teachers should understand that older students are ahead of younger students in terms of previous instructional experiences, higher cognition, self-direction, and studying habits and techniques.

When adult learners make mistakes and even risk fossilization, they tend to encounter emotional or cognitive difficulties reaching language accuracy. Their inaccuracy in L2 affects them emotionally. ^{Castañeda (2017}) highlighted that “this limitation leads to fears of ridicule when speaking in public and a sharp decrease in confidence and self-esteem, which affects the possible satisfactory outcome of any communicative learning strategy” (p. 140). The way ESP practitioners offer adults feedback and work on language accuracy could either harm or boost the emotional well-being. Monitoring language production and accuracy can serve as an informal assessment tool instead of traditional testing (Macalister & Nation, 2020) that adults may feel more afraid or uncomfortable. Recasts and other feedback techniques can be employed to foster a safe and encouraging classroom atmosphere in case reaching language accuracy has been established as a need and a component of the ESP course.

Positive emotional experiences enhance experiential learning. For instance, ^{Zeivots (2016}) studied how lived experiences of emotional highs shape adult experiential learning. Among the discoveries, it was determined as fundamental to offer adults experiences to face the unknown, generate a sense of change, guide them through first-time experiences, lead to unexpected discoveries, and embark adults into the never-ending journey of learning. Certainly, these are valuable considerations that ESP practitioners should examine at any ADDIE model stage. Facing the unknown while learning a foreign language may turn troublesome at first, but proper guidance and planning can ensure adults unexpectedly discovering more insights into their professional or occupational fields.

The emotional factor with adult learners deserves more attention and consideration from how it is approached with younger students (^{Ni, 2012}) in terms of teaching materials. To promote language accuracy and lower the chances of fossilization, ESP practitioners should invest on material adaptation or elaboration that strategically addresses the participants’ target needs, displays accurate language usage, and eases negative emotions (^{Bocanegra-Valle & Basturkmen, 2019}). Developing ESP materials is closely linked to motivation and emotional aspects. Adults expect that instructional materials and tasks clearly aim for their needs, “otherwise they can easily get demotivated” (^{Marcu, 2020}, p. 309). Proper materials lead to meaningful interaction with the target language within the specific contexts where adults seek to effectively participate. Motivation and self-direction are more likely to increase with catered materials. ^{Crawford (2002}) indicated that:

Materials must contextualize the language they present. Without knowledge of what is going on, who the participants are, and their social and psychological distance in time and space from the events referred to, it is impossible to understand the real meaning of an interaction. (p. 84)

ESP course design under the ADDIE model requires careful selection, adaptation, and elaboration of pertinent, genuine, and appealing materials and tasks (^{Iswati, 2019}). Adult learners would gain more exposure to accurate language usage in materials taken from authentic contexts, contributing to error correction, leading to higher self-direction, and handling emotional overload during the learning experiences.