Heutagogy: A Holistic Framework for Creating Twenty-First-Century Self-determined Learners

  • Lisa Marie BlaschkeEmail author
  • Stewart Hase
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)


Heutagogy, a form of self-determined learning, is a holistic, learner-centered approach to learning and teaching, in formal and informal situations. The theory is grounded in humanistic and constructivist principles and brings together numerous threads of early learning theories into a composite picture of learning that is suitable for and much needed in today’s educational systems. With its learner-centered approach, heutagogy shifts the focus from the teacher back to the learner and learning. This chapter discusses the principles, processes, and design of heutagogic learning environments with a specific emphasis on digital technologies.


Heutagogy Self-determined learning Learner-centered teaching 


  1. Ackoff, R. L., & Greenberg, D. (2008). Turning learning right side up: Putting education back on track. New Jersey: Wharton School.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, T. (2010). Theories for learning with emerging technologies. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Emerging technologies in distance education. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press. Retrieved from
  3. Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  4. Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentley University. (2014). The PreparedU Project: An in-depth look at millennial preparedness for today’s workforce. [White Paper]. Retrieved from
  7. Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 56–71. Retrieved from
  8. Blaschke, L. M. (2013). E-learning and self-determined learning skills. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. Bloomsbury Academic: London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  9. Blaschke, L. M. (2014). Moving students forward in the PAH continuum: Maximizing the power of the social web. In L. M. Blaschke, C. Kenyon, & S. Hase (Eds.), Experiences in self-determined learning. United States: Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Blaschke, L., & Brindley, J (2011). Establishing a foundation for reflective practice: A case study of learning journal use. European Journal of Open, Distance, and E-Learning. Available from
  11. Blaschke, L.M. & Brindley, J (in press, 2014). Using social media in the online classroom. In M. Ally & B. Khan, The international handbook of e-learning. Athabasca, Canada: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Blaschke, L. & Hase, S (in press, 2014). Heutagogy, technology and lifelong learning: curriculum geared for professional and part-time learners. In A. Dailey-Herbert (ed.), Transforming processes and perspectives to reframe higher education. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Brandt, B. (2013). The learner’s perspective. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. Bloomsbury Academic: London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  14. Cairns, L. (1996). Capability: Going beyond competence. Capability, 2, 80.Google Scholar
  15. Cairns, L. (2000). The process/outcome approach to becoming a capable organization. In Australian Capability Network Conference, Sydney (pp. 1–14).Google Scholar
  16. Chattopadhyay, S. (2014). Heutagogy, self-directed learning and complex work.
  17. Cochrane, T., Antonczak, L., Gordon, A., Sissons, H. & Withell, A (2012). Heutagogy and mobile social media: Post Web 2.0 pedagogy. Retrieved from,_thomas_-_heutagogy_and_mobile.pdf
  18. Conole, G (2012). Designing for learning in an open world: Explorations in the learning sciences, instructional systems and performance technologies. New York, Heidelberg: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  19. Davis, L., & Hase, S. (2001). The river of learning in the workplace. In Proceedings of Research to Reality: Putting VET Research to Work. Australian Vocational Education and Training Research Association (AVETRA), Adelaid, SA, March 28–30, 2001, Crows Nest, NSW. Retrieved from
  20. Deci, E. L., & Flaste, R. (1995). Why we do what we do: Understanding self-motivation. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  21. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). The handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dick, B. (2013). Crafting learner-centred processes using action research and action learning. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. Bloomsbury Academic: London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  23. Doll, W. E. (1989). A post-modern perspective on curriculum. New York: New York Teachers College.Google Scholar
  24. Doolittle, P. E. (2000). Complex constructivism: A theoretical model of complexity and cognition. Retrieved from:
  25. Eberle, J. (2013). Lifelong learning. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. Bloomsbury Academic: London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  26. Eberle, J., & Childress, M. (2009). Using heutagogy to address the needs of online learners. In P. Rogers, G. A. Berg, J. V. Boettecher, & L. Justice (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance learning (2nd ed.). New York: Idea Group Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Emery, F. (1974). Educational paradigms. Unpublished Paper.Google Scholar
  28. Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18(21), 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gardner, A., Hase, S., Gardner, G., Dunn, S. V., & Carryer, J. (2008). From competence to capability: A study of nurse practitioners in clinical practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(2), 250–258.Google Scholar
  30. Gerstein, J. (2013). Education 3.0 and the pedagogy (andragogy, heutagogy) of mobile learning. [Blog post.] User generated education.
  31. Gerstein, J. (2014). The other 21st century skills. [Blog post.]
  32. Hart Research Associates. (2013). It takes more than a major: Employer priorities for college learning and student success. Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) 99:2. Retrieved from
  33. Hase, S. (2009). Heutagogy and e-learning in the workplace: Some challenges and opportu-nities. Impact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace E-learning, 1(1), 43–52. doi: 10.5043/impact.13.Google Scholar
  34. Hase, S. (2013). Learner defined learning. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. Bloomsbury Academic: London, UK.Google Scholar
  35. Hase, S. (2014). Skills for the learning leader in the 21st century. In L. M. Blaschke, F. Garnett, C. Kenyon. & S. Hase (Eds.), A practical guide to heutagogy. Amazon.Google Scholar
  36. Hase, S., & Davis, L. (1999). From competence to capability: The implications for human resource development and management. In Proceedings of Millennial challenges in management, education, cybertechnology, and leadership: Association of International Management, 17th Annual Conference, San Diego, 6–8 August 1999.Google Scholar
  37. Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. UltiBase. Retrieved from
  38. Hase, S. & Kenyon, K. (2003). Heutagogy and developing capable people and capable workplaces: strategies for dealing with complexity. In Proceedings of the Changing Face of Work and Learning Conference. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta. Retrieved June 23, 2014, from
  39. Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 111–119.Google Scholar
  40. Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2013a). Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  41. Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2013b). The nature of learning. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  42. Helmer, J. (2014). Heutagogy: Designing for self-directed learners. Inside Learning Technologies and Skills, 131–135. Retrieved from
  43. Kenyon, C., & Hase, S. (2013). Heutagogy fundamentals. In S. Hase & C. Kenyon (Eds.), Self determined learning: Heutagogy in action. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  44. Kozol, J. (1975). The night is dark and I am far from home. Boston: Houghton Miflin.Google Scholar
  45. Long, D. (1990). Learner managed Learning: The key to life long learning and development. New York: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  46. Lillard, A. S. (2005). Montessori: the science behind the genius. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Lillard, A., & Else-Quest, N. (2006). Evaluating Montessori education. Science, 313, 1893–1894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. J. W. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. In Proceedings from ascilite, December 2–5, 2007, Singapore. Retrieved from
  49. Mezirow, J., & Associates. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  50. P21. (no date). 21st Century student outcomes and support systems framework. Retrieved from:
  51. Peters, O. (2002). Distance education in transition: New trends and challenges (4th ed). Oldenburg, Germany: BIS-Verlag der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg. Retrieved from
  52. Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. Great Britain: Cannongate Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  53. Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  54. Robinson, K. (2010). Sir Ken Robinson: Bringing on the learning revolution! TED Talk. Accessed 30 May 2014.
  55. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. United States: Basic Books Inc.Google Scholar
  56. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  57. Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., & De Freitas, S. (2010). Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Stephenson, J. (1996). Beyond competence to capability and the learning society. Capability, 2(1), 60–62.Google Scholar
  59. Stephenson, J., & Weil, S. (1992). Quality in learning: A capability approach in higher education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  60. Snowden, D. (2000). Cynefin: a sense of time and space, the social ecology of knowledge management. In C. Despres & D. Chauvel, (eds.) Knowledge Horizons: The present and the promise of knowledge management. London: Butterworth Heinemann.Google Scholar
  61. Sumara, D. J., & Davis, B. (1997). Enactivist theory and community learning: Toward a complexified understanding of action research. Educational Action Research, 5(3), 403–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. United States: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.Google Scholar
  63. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Franciso, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  64. Woods, P., & Woods, G. (2005). Steiner schools in England. Bristol: University of West England.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carl von Ossietzky Universität OldenburgC3L—Center für lebenslanges LernenOldenburgGermany
  2. 2.Stewart Hase and AssociatesIlukaAustralia

Personalised recommendations