The history of transformative learning theory

Transformative learning theory provides some insight into the conditions that foster profound learning and development in students.  This theory emanated from the work of Mezirow (1978), who studied women who had decided to return to work or enroll in tertiary education after a break. The study was designed to explore the conditions or circumstances that facilitated or impeded this goal of women.  An analysis of their experiences, derived from interviews and telephone surveys, revealed the women had experienced a personal transformation.  This transformation, according to the data, could be divided into ten phases:

• a dilemma or event that disorientates these individuals, called a disorienting dilemma

• a period of reflection or examination about themselves, coupled with feelings of guilt or shame

• a tendency to appraise and question assumptions about their knowledge, priorities, preferences, and society

• a recognition that other individuals have changed and transformed to address this discontent

• an exploration of alternative roles, relationships, and actions

• a plan to pursue some course of action

• the acquisition of knowledge and skills to implement this plan

• initial attempts to embrace these roles and relationships

• developing competence and confidence in these roles and relationships

• reintegrating these changes into their lives.

The upshot of this theory is that specific conditions can foster significant changes in the foundational beliefs, assumptions, and perspectives of students.  In particular, to experience these significant changes, individuals need to experience some event that challenges some of their fundamental assumptions and beliefs—assumptions and beliefs that underpin many facets of their lives—and then receive the support and opportunity they need to reflect upon these challenges, in a safe environment (e.g., Meerts-Brandsma et al., 2020).  If students do not experience these conditions and do not complete the 10 stages, their learning and development is likely to be stifled.  They might be able to refine their existing skills or beliefs but cannot transform their perspective fundamentally.      

The history of transformative learning theory: Contributions of paradigm shifts

Several previous theories shaped transformative learning theory (for a discussion, see Kitchenham, 2008).  An understanding of these theories can, therefore, help individuals appreciate the nuances of transformative learning theory.  For example, some principles of transformative learning theory partly originated from the work of Kuhn (1962) on paradigm shifts.  Specifically, Kuhn recognized that natural scientists and social scientists conflicted on which scientific practices they believed should be considered legitimate.   As he explored this conflict, he recognized distinct scientific communities.  Members of each community tended to value a particular set of scientific achievements, and these achievements shaped which problems they prioritized and which solutions addressed these problems. That is, each community embraced a distinct paradigm—representing the problems and solutions they value. 

Kuhn observed how these paradigms evolve.  Specifically, these paradigms emanate from an intriguing and unprecedented scientific discovery that entices researchers from other pursuits—coupled with unanswered questions that scientists can strive to resolve.  Accordingly, members of this scientific community could pursue distinct questions, depending on their interests and skills, but shared a common worldview on the problems and solutions that mattered.

Many of the terms that Mezirow deployed, as he refined his theory, originated from this notion of paradigms.  To illustrate, Mezirow (1985) borrowed the notion of paradigms to define a term called meaning perspectives. A meaning perspective is the assumptions of individuals, derived from their personal experiences and cultural environment, about which problems or issues are important and which solutions or actions are beneficial.  Thus, a meaning perspective is like a paradigm or frame of reference, but applicable to individuals, that guides their choices and actions.

Kuhn delineated how these paradigms shift or evolve over time.  Similarly, according to Mezirow (1991), when individuals experience transformative learning, their meaning perspective—their assumptions about the world—also evolve, sometimes called perspective transformation.  Earlier in life, these meaning perspectives are relatively crude.  They exclude problems and solutions that could be helpful to their lives.  They blend problems that could benefit from distinct solutions and thus should be differentiated.  And they separate problems or solutions that could be related and integrated.  As they learn, these limitations in their meaning perspectives subside.     

The history of transformative learning theory: Contributions of conscientization

Other principles of transformative learning theory, such as disorienting dilemmas and critical self-reflection, partly emanated from the work of Freire (1970) on conscientization.  Freire (1970) was concerned that teachers act like bankers, merely depositing information to students, diminishing the capacity of students to think independently and to challenge or to change society.  To address this concern, Freire (1970) advocated conscientization—in which individuals learn to recognize, and ultimately attempt to address, the contradictions and injustices that pervade society.  The role of teachers is to inspire this mindset.  Rather than perceive themselves as the font or conveyer of knowledge, teachers need to welcome the insights of students and foster critical discussion.

Specifically, Freire (1970) argued that individuals can experience three stage of consciousness growth. First, they experience intransitive thought, in which they feel that fate or some other uncontrollable being, such as a deity, governs their live.  They do not recognize they can change their conditions.  Second, they experience a semi-transitive stage: They recognize they can address some of their more immediate problems but not society more generally.  Rather than attempt to shift their society, they are more inclined to follow a leader.  Finally, individuals may experience critical transitivity. During this phase, individuals recognize the problems can be ascribed to broader patterns in society or their lives rather than specific events.  Accordingly, individuals plan, as well as initiate, actions to change their conditions in general rather than merely solve immediate problems.

The work of Freire (1970), and specifically the notion of critical transitivity, significantly shaped the writing of Mezirow.  For example, like critical transitivity, Mezirow (1978, 1981) discussed how individuals, may recognize their problems cannot be ascribed to specific events, but to inherent contradictions across the values or priorities.  The ensuing discomfort or awareness is called a disorientating dilemma—a feeling that initiates the transformation.  To resolve this dilemma, individuals reflect upon themselves and the assumptions that guide their choices and actions, called critical reflection.      

The history of transformative learning theory: contributions of Habermas

Finally, many principles of transformative learning theory can be traced to the work of Habermas (1971, 1984).  In particular, one framework that Habermas (1971) proposed, called the three domains of learning, was especially helpful to Mezirow. Habermas (1971) differentiated three kinds or domains of learning: technical, practical, and emancipatory.  The technical domain revolves around learning the rules of a specific task.  For example, PhD candidates might learn how to complete a statistical test.  The practical domain revolves around the social norms that are relevant to this task.  To illustrate, PhD candidates might learn how to justify these statistical tests as well as how these justifications might vary across communities or disciplines.  Finally, the emancipatory domain revolves personal reflection and change.  That is, individuals consider their own experiences or perspectives about some topic, such as statistics, and then consider how they could shift their practices to resonate with their goals.  They do not merely comply with social norms.

Mezirow (1981) invoked these principles to formulate the notion of perspective transformation. Specifically, reminiscent of emancipatory learning, perspective transformation refers to the circumstance in which individuals become aware of how their personal assumptions and social norms may constrain their perceptions, relationships, and behaviors.  This awareness enables individuals to establish beliefs that overcome these limitations and broadens their perspectives.  The ten phases that Mezirow (1978) articulated essentially underpin this perspective transformation.

In 1985, Mezirow adapted the three kinds of learning that Habermas (1971) differentiated. Specifically, the technical, practical, and emancipatory domains were translated to instrumental, dialogic, and self-reflective learning

The history of transformative learning theory: Refinements over time

Mezirow (1978, 1981, 1985, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1995, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2003) gradually refined transformative learning theory over time, as outlined by Kitchenham (2008).  In 1985, Mezirow distinguished meaning perspectives from meaning schemes.  In essence, meaning perspectives are broad frames of reference that comprise a set of meaning schemes.  Whereas meaning perspectives are overarching assumptions that shape which problems and solutions are prioritized, each meaning scheme is a cluster of concepts, beliefs, judgments, and feelings that guide specific actions.  To illustrate

• PhD candidates might feel their primary goal is to develop a suite of skills that are likely to be valued and scarce in the future—an overall meaning perspective

• to develop this suite of skills, PhD candidates might develop a skill in research design, research methods, and communication—each corresponding to a distinct meaning scheme.  

This distinction enabled Mezirow to differentiate three kinds of learning.  The first kind is called learning within meaning schemes.  Specifically, individuals can revise, extend, or integrate their existing meaning schemes.  PhD candidates might, for example, extend their knowledge of research designs and thus refine the concepts that are embedded in this scheme.

The second kind is called learning new meaning schemes.  That is, individuals develop a novel set of concepts, beliefs, judgments, or feelings—but a set that is compatible with their other meaning schemes.  They might develop a skill that is likely to be valued and scarce in the future, and thus consistent with their overall meaning perspective, but unrelated to research design, research methods, and communication.

The third kind is called learning through meaning transformation.  This kind of learning evolves after individuals are exposed to a problem they cannot solve.  This impasse indicates their meaning schemes might be founded on misguided assumptions about which problems and solutions to prioritize, suggesting they might need to revise their meaning perspective.  The individuals then challenge the assumptions that underpinned their meaning perspective.  For example, PhD candidates might, for example, recognize their goal should not only be to develop a suite of skills that are likely to be valued and scarce in the future—but to learn how to collaborate with communities to design and to conduct research.

According to Mezirow (1991), this meaning transformation is predicated on critical self-reflection.  That is, during self-reflection, individuals become aware of their deep feelings about some problem and corresponding solutions.  They contemplate and question the assumptions that underpin these feelings and beliefs.  If these individuals merely listened to a leader or teacher, but without a concerted reflection on their own feelings and assumptions, they would not experience meaning transformation.

In 1991, Mezirow (1991) argued that, to transform their perspectives, individuals do not only experience the 10 stages, first delineated in 1978, but also experience another stage.  In particular, between their initial attempts to embrace updated roles and the development of competence and confidence in these roles, individuals tend to initiate another activity.  Specifically, they renegotiate their relationships as well as establish new relationships. 

As Mezirow (1991) recognized, meaning transformation is not contingent upon all 11 stages.  Yet, individuals are more likely to experience this transformation whenever they discuss their disorientation, reflections, and changes with other people, such as teachers.  These discussions should not only revolve around accurate information, unbiased evidence, and objective arguments, but also embrace alternative perspectives, fairly and equitably, devoid of coercion or prejudice.

In 1995, Mezirow distinguished three kinds of self-reflection: content, process, and premise.  First, when individuals engage in content reflection, they consider their past beliefs, behaviors, or experiences about some matter, such as how to conduct a research method.  These reflections might unearth deficiencies and help individuals refine an existing meaning schema.  Second, when individuals engage in process reflection, they consider the causes of various actions or consequences. These reflections might unearth patterns that enable people to refine an existing meaning schema or perhaps develop a meaning schema.  Finally, when individuals engage in premise reflection, they consider the values or assumptions that underpin their choices and actions.  They might, for example, question why they need to develop a skills that is scarce.  These premise reflections may transform meaning perspectives rather than only meaning schemes.   

Other refinements to transformative learning theory

Besides Mezirow, many other scholars have introduced refinements and insights to enhance the utility of transformative learning theory.  For example

• according to Merriam and Bierema (2013), before individuals can engage in the critical reflection and discourse that is necessary to ignite transformations in perspective, they need to have developed the capacity to think abstractly—a capacity that students have not always developed

• as Brookfield (2005) advocated, to reflect critically, individuals should consider the social norms of their society that sustain injustice and inequality in power, appreciate the effect of this inequality, and initiate actions that could redress this injustice.

• indeed, according to Dirkx (1997), unemotive reflection is not usually sufficient to elicit changes in meaning perspectives; instead, to experience profounf change, individuals need to immerse themselves in the arts, museums, or in other settings that elicit emotional, spiritual, primal responses as well as strong images.

Practices that facilitate transformative learning: Edge emotions

Central to transformative learning theory is the notion that meaning perspectives shift only after individuals engage in deep and critical reflection.  Yet, as Mälkki (2019) underscored, people naturally resist this reflection.  Instead, Mälkki (2019) introduced the notion of edge-emotions—the emotions that individuals experience when they feel their assumptions are threatened—to offer insights on how to overcome this resistance.  Specifically, when people experience or remember an episode that challenges their assumptions about the world, they sense their understanding or predictions of future events may be misguided.  They feel, on some level, that unexpected problems and dangers might unfold, manifesting as anxiety, fear, or other unpleasant emotions.  To overcome these unpleasant emotions, individuals often invoke a range of defensive responses, designed to reinforce their assumptions and prevent transformative learning.  For example, they might

• re-appraise the episode so this event is consistent with their assumptions

• denigrate individuals who share information that deviates from their assumptions—or even withdraw from interactions, and so forth.

According to Mälkki (2019), after individuals learn to embrace these edge-emotions, they are more able to reflect and to adapt their assumptions effectively.   Specifically, individuals should first, in a safe environment, contemplate times in which their edge-emotions governed their responses—instances in which they felt threatened and experienced the urge to act immediately to overcome these feelings.  They may even consider now how they could have acted differently.  They could have considered other perspectives or beliefs.  They could have acquired greater wisdom.    

Consequently, in the future, when these individuals experience these feelings, they recognize the edge-emotions.  This recognition can enable individuals to contemplate their assumptions—and not to respond defensively and to eradicate these emotions instantly.  These individuals learn to recognize edge-emotions as opportunities to revise their assumptions about the world and develop a more nuanced, accurate understanding of their surroundings. 

Applications of transformative learning theory: Application to art museums

Chisolm et al. (2020) discussed how transformative learning theory can explain how immersion in art museums can enhance the clinical skills of nursing students and other health students. Art museums offer patrons some unique experiences.  They may expose students to unfamiliar perspectives and diverse cultures.  The art and surroundings may elicit reflection as well as a feeling of connection with other times, locations, and communities. 

According to Chisolm et al. (2020), art museums may elicit disorienting dilemmas, ultimately culminating in transformation.  Specifically, to elicit disorienting dilemmas, Chisolm et al. (2020) recommended that educators should not impose detailed instructions.  Instead, educators should encourage students merely to embrace the unfamiliarity and ambiguity they might experience. 

Interactive and team activities in these museums may also promote the reflection and discourse that facilitates the critical reflection of assumptions and meaning transformation.  For example, students might be granted opportunities to experience some activity, such as interact with some art or observe some artefacts. Then, educators could facilitate discussions with students on their perceptions of art and encourage reflection. These discussions show that multiple perspectives may be valid but also grant students autonomy to develop their own beliefs.

Chisolm et al. (2020) delineated a series of activities, feasible in arts museums, that might facilitate the development of clinical skills.  For example, teams of students might complete collective poems.  Specifically, the students are exposed to a work of art that depicts one or more figures. Next, each student writes, and then reads aloud, a phrase they feel one of these figures might express.  These comments are then collated to generate a poem they share with other teams. Exposure to diverse perspectives can encourage reflection and growth as well as teamwork, empathy, and communication.    

Another activity that educators might arrange is called a personal response tour.  Participants individually attempt to locate a work of art, somewhere in the gallery, that relates to a unique prompt—such as a work that shows conflict.  Participants then reconvene to share their selections, prompts, and reflections.  This task can promote empathic listening and appreciation of multiple perspectives. 

In addition, educators might consider an approach called visual thinking strategies or VTS.  Educators ask a group of students a series of questions about various works of art, especially art that is particularly ambiguous and thus likely to elicit a range of perspectives.  The questions are designed to immerse these students in the art and to prompt collective inquiry.  Specifically, the educator asks three questions: “What is happening in this picture?” “What do you see that prompts this response?” and “What more can we find in this picture?”  The facilitator then paraphrases, integrates, and compares the responses of students.  As studies reveal, the critical thinking that students show during this task are often generalized to activities beyond art.  

Applications of transformative learning theory: Study abroad programs

Chwialkowska (2020) applied transformative learning theory to improve the benefits of study abroad programs.  Many tertiary education institutions arrange programs in which students can study abroad, partly to develop the capacity of these individuals to interact effectively with diverse cultures.  Yet, many students who attend these programs do not immerse themselves in diverse cultures and, therefore, do not acquire these capacities.

To override this problem, Chwialkowska (2020) developed a model, derived from transformative learning theory, to predict the conditions, circumstances, and characteristics that increase the likelihood that students will develop cultural competence from study abroad programs.   Specifically, Chwialkowska (2020) distilled some key principles of transformative learning theory—as proposed by Mezirow as well as other exponents of this model, such as Chinnappan et al. (2013), Santoro and Major (2012), Pence and Macgillivray (2008), as well as Van de Berg et al., 2009).  For example, according to Chwialkowska (2020), transformative learning theory implies that individuals will develop this cultural competence if

• they experience a sense of dissonance or discomfort—in which they recognize their existing assumptions diverge from their experience

• they receive the support and guidance these need to resolve this dissonance and discomfort

As these premises imply, Chwialkowska (2020) proposed that cross-cultural learning, during study abroad, should be more pronounced if

• students are encouraged to reflect upon their experiences with other cultures, such as reflective journals or guided reflections, in which they answer a series of questions

• students share accommodation with diverse peers, because they are more likely to immerse themselves in diverse cultural activities

• students collaborate with diverse peers on assignments

• students participate in community projects, such as fieldwork, volunteering, and other structured experiential activities

• students attend cross-cultural orientation, in which they learn about cultural norms, biases, and assumptions, enhancing awareness

• students receive mentoring and emotional support during these exchange programs to facilitate this reflection

To assess these hypotheses, 719 students who had participated in exchange programs, across a range of nations, completed a survey.  To assess cross-cultural competence, the survey included questions that gauge the degree to which students are aware their culture shapes their beliefs and behaviors, feel comfortable interacting with diverse people, and seek information about diverse cultures.  All the hypotheses were supported.

Applications of transformative learning theory: Education in sustainable development

Rodríguez Aboytes et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review to explore how transformative learning theory has informed education in sustainable development.  The researchers extracted 226 publications in which the keywords referred to both transformative learning and sustainable development or sustainability.  As this review showed

• 34% these publications referred to transformative learning but do not invoke the theory precisely; the term is primarily used as a buzzword

• 23% of these publications invoked transformative learning to generate or to justify their own theoretical model

• 7% of these publications invoked transformative learning to highlight the limitations of teachers who merely transmit information to their students

• 37% of these publications utilized transformative learning theory as the primary framework, often to guide case studies or interventions.  

Many of these publications referred to the notion of disorienting dilemmas.  These researchers showed three sources of disorienting dilemmas.  First, students may experience dilemmas in their daily lives naturally, such as a challenging moral decision.  The educator does not contrive the dilemma or setting in this circumstance.  Second, educators might arrange a learning activity, such as an interdisciplinary setting, in which students experience a dilemma.  The educator did not contrive the dilemma but exposed students to circumstances in which dilemmas are more likely.  Finally, educators might expose students deliberately to events that are likely to challenge the frame of reference or perspective of learners, such as asking critical questions or exposing students to settings or activities that diverge from the norm. 

In addition, some publications referred to the conditions that foster critical reflection and transformative learning.  These conditions include

• enough time and a supportive environment to encourage discussions as well as reflection around sustainability—enabling individuals to express and to contemplate their emotions, narratives, and assumptions  

• education experiences outside formal classrooms, such as in nature, in art projects, or in other settings in which students can experiment with sustainable practices.

To facilitate the final stages of transformative learning—such as developing competence and confidence in the new roles and reintegrating these changes into their lives—many interventions encouraged students to adopt sustainable behaviors that are consistent with their transformative experience.  These behaviors included a set of habits that students can develop or some collective actions, in teams, to facilitate sustainability, such as campaigns and events to raise awareness.

Applications of transformative learning theory: Nursing education

Ryan et al. (2022) conducted an umbrella review—or review of reviews—to explore how transformative learning theory has been applied to improve the education of nurses.  First, this review uncovered the range of strategies that nursing teachers apply to facilitate transformative learning. These strategies included discourse or discussions about disorienting dilemmas and assumptions, stories about learning from disorienting dilemmas, work in marginalized communities, writing about critical reflections, and creative arts.   The most common strategy was discourse or discussions about disorienting dilemmas and assumptions.  Indeed, as McLeod et al. (2015) observed, these discussions were more likely to promote critical reflection than were written reflections.   

Nursing educators applied transformative learning theory to fulfill several goals.  For example, Essa and Hoffman (2014) suggested that transformative learning theory could facilitate leadership development.  Specifically, nursing students should first learn about the 10 or 11 stages of transformative learning.  Next, they could be granted opportunities to challenge their assumptions about leadership—an opportunity that could accelerate their leadership development.

Challenges of transformative learning theory

As Ryan et al. (2022) revealed, some features of transformative learning theory are hard to substantiate empirically.  For example,

• studies cannot readily establish whether meaning perspectives have actually transformed, because participants might inflate the degree to which their assumptions have changed

• researchers tend to assume that changes in meaning perspectives endure—but this assumption is hard to substantiate empirically.

References

• Briese, P., Evanson, T., & Hanson, D. (2020). Application of Mezirow’s transformative learning theory to simulation in healthcare education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 48, 64-67.

• Brookfield, S. D. (2005). The power of critical theory. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

• Chinnappan, M., McKenzie, B., & Fitzsimmons, P. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards overseas professional experience: Implications for professional practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(12), 36–54

• Chisolm, M., Kelly-Hedrick, M., Stephens, M., & Zahra, F. (2020). Transformative learning in the art museum: A methods review. Family Medicine, 52(10), 736-740.

• Chwialkowska, A. (2020). Maximizing cross-cultural learning from exchange study abroad programs: Transformative learning theory. Journal of Studies in International Education, 24(5), 535-554.

• Dirkx, J. M. (1997). Nurturing soul in adult learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 79-88.

• Essa, I., & Hoffman, J. C. (2014). Exploring development of leadership capacities in undergraduate nursing students through transformative learning: a narrative review. African Journal for Physical Health Education, Recreation and Dance, 20(sup-1), 217-224.

• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herter and Herter.

• Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge of human interests. Boston: Beacon.

• Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon.

• Kitchenham, A. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow's transformative learning theory. Journal of transformative education, 6(2), 104-123.

• Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

• Mälkki, K. (2019). Coming to grips with edge-emotions: The gateway to critical reflection and transformative learning. European perspectives on transformation theory, 59-73.

• McLeod, G., Barr, J., & Welch, A. (2015). Best practice for teaching and learning strategies to facilitate student reflection in pre-registration health professional education: An integrative review.

• Meerts-Brandsma, L., Sibthorp, J., & Rochelle, S. (2020). Using transformative learning theory to understand outdoor adventure education. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 20(4), 381-394.

• Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2013). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons.

• Mezirow, J. (1978). Education for perspective transformation: Women’s re-entry programs in community colleges. New York: Teacher’s College, Columbia University

• Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education Quarterly, 32(3), 3-24.

• Mezirow, J. (1985). A critical theory of self-directed learning. In S. Brookfield (Ed.), Self-directed learning: From theory to practice (New Directions for Continuing Education, 25). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Mezirow, J. (1989). Transformation theory and social action: A response to Collard and Law. Adult Education Quarterly, 39(3), 169-175.

• Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions in adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Mezirow, J. (1992). Transformation theory: Critique and confusion. Adult Education Quarterly, 42(4), 250-252.

• Mezirow, J. (1995). Transformation theory of adult learning. In M. R. Welton (Ed.), In defense of the lifeworld (pp. 39-70). New York: State University of New York Press.

• Mezirow, J. (1996). Contemporary paradigms of learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 46(3), 158-172.

• Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. In P. Cranton (Ed.), Transformative learning in action: Insights from practice – New directions for adult and continuing education, No.74 (pp. 5-12). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(1), 58-63.

• Mezirow, J. (2006). An overview of transformative learning. In P. Sutherland & J. Crowther (Eds.), Lifelong learning: Concepts and contexts (pp. 24-38). New York: Routledge.

• Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experience on preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 14–25.

• Rodríguez Aboytes, J. G., & Barth, M. (2020). Transformative learning in the field of sustainability: a systematic literature review (1999-2019). International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 21(5), 993-1013.

• Ryan, C. L., Cant, R., McAllister, M. M., Vanderburg, R., & Batty, C. (2022). Transformative learning theory applications in health professional and nursing education: An umbrella review. Nurse Education Today.

• Santoro, N., & Major, J. (2012). Learning to be a culturally responsive teacher through international study trips: Transformation or tourism? Teaching Education, 23(3), 309–322.

• Van de Berg, M., Connor-Linton, J., & Paige, R. M. (2009). The Georgetown consortium project: Interventions for student learning abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 18(1), 1–75.