Instructional Techniques and Environmental Considerations in Family Life Education Programming for Midlife and Older Adults*

• Author: Sharon M. Ballard,Michael Lane Morris
• Date: 01 April 2003
• Published date: 01 April 2003
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00167.x

2003, Vol. 52, No. 2 167

Instructional Techniques and Environmental Considerations in

Family Life Education Programming for Midlife and

Older Adults*

Michael Lane Morris** and Sharon M. Ballard

We review the theory and practice of education with midlife and older adult populations and empirically address two theoretically

guided research questions: (a) What are older adults’ preferences for instructional strategies and techniques in programs? (b) What

environmental considerations (e.g., lighting) do older adults perceive as important in inf‌luencing their attendance, participation, and

satisfaction with programs? Data were collected from and compared among 264 adults representing four age groups: 50–64 (midlife),

65–74 (young old), 75–84 (old old), and 85 and over (oldest old). Recommendations for family life education practices with older

adults are addressed.

Current demographic trends suggest that members of the

‘‘baby boom generation’’ (i.e., those born between 1946

and 1964) are making the transition into later life in large

numbers (Morgan, 1998). Compared with other age groups, baby

boomers are generally considered one of the fastest growing co-

horts in the United States. Midlife and older Americans (i.e.,

aged 50 and over) are part of a unique demographic phenomenon

called the ‘‘50–50–50 principle,’’ which refers to the fact that

every 50 seconds another 50 baby boomers celebrate their 50th

birthdays (Gonyea, 1998). Demographic projections estimate that

by 2030 the number of people aged 50 and over will reach 127

million (about 36% of the population; U.S. Census Bureau,

2000). These projected trends indicate that the baby boom gen-

eration will dominate the elderly population.

An operating principle among family life educators is that

individuals of different ages have different needs in terms of

family life education programs (Arcus, Schvaneveldt, & Moss,

1993). As a rapidly growing cohort, older adults pose two spe-

cif‌ic challenges to family life educators: (a) understanding how

cognitive and physiological development inf‌luence environmen-

tal considerations associated with program design and imple-

mentation, and (b) understanding what instructional approaches

are needed to be effective in affecting older adults’ participation

and learning. Arcus (1993) advocated that older adults receive

more attention from family life educators seeking to establish

and address the educational needs and learning environments of

older populations. She suggested that a signif‌icant educational

gap in the f‌ield of family life education is the narrow focus on

the study of individuals and families, with limited attention being

given to the educational principles inf‌luencing them across the

life span. Furthermore, Arcus and Thomas (1993) suggested that

little consideration has been given to the specif‌ic characteristics

of family life education audiences.

Educational programs specif‌ically targeted for older adults

began after 1950 as an extension of existing adult higher edu-

*For the signif‌icant f‌inancial support of this project, the authors wish to thank The

B.E.S.T. (Building and Enriching Stronger Tennessee) Families programat The University

of Tennessee and St. Mary’s Health Systems of Knoxville, Tennessee. Authorship respon-

sibilities on this manuscript were equally shared.

**Department of Human Resource Development, College of Business Administration,

University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.

Key Words: educational gerontology, environment, family life education, instruction,

older adults.

(Family Relations, 2003, 52, 167–173)

cation programs (Hiemstra, 1998). In characterizing adult edu-

cation over the past 20 years, there has been a notable increase

in the number of educational programs for older adults, with

these programs moving beyond recreational activities. Programs

are offered in a variety of settings, are experiencing increased

participation rates, and often are focusing on contributions to life

and self-fulf‌illment (Manheimer & Moskow-McKenzie, 1995).

Some of these existing programs could be loosely characterized

as a category of family life education (e.g., as def‌ined by Avery

& Lee, 1964, or Tennant, 1989); however, as previously stated,

there has been limited attention given to the specif‌ic family life

education needs of older adults through these programming ef-

forts (Arcus, 1993). The main purpose of family life education

is to build strengths within families by helping individuals and

families ‘‘learn about human growth, development, and behavior

in family settings throughout the life cycle’’ (National Commis-

sion on Family Life Education, 1968, p. 211), with the primary

goal of ‘‘strengthening and enriching individual and familywell-

being’’ to its fullest potential (Thomas & Arcus, 1992, p. 4).

In general, family life education for older adults integrates

more practical and life experiences than do educational efforts

typically discussed for older adults in higher education. Family

life education for older adults is worthy of consideration because

it provides needed assistance to those who are struggling with

later life transitions such as shifting roles within their family,

becoming the primary caregivers of grandchildren, the death of

a spouse, changing health and wellness issues, retirement, sex-

uality, increased divorce and remarriage, the lack of available

positive role models for successful aging, and the overall nega-

tive societal attitude toward older people. There is an expanding

societal need for family life educators to design and implement

programs that promote growth as older adults negotiate their

changing family structure and roles, but that also address the

changes and challenges they are facing on an individual level.

According to Arcus (1993), ‘‘there is no shortage of issues and

transitions where family life educators could be of assistance’’

to older adults and their families (p. 187).

Therefore, our twofold purpose is to review brief‌ly the the-

ory and practice of education with midlife and older adults and

to empirically address the following theoretically guided ques-

tions: (a) What are older adults’ preferences for instructional

strategies and techniques in family life education programs? (b)

What are the environmental considerations (e.g., time of day,

lighting) that older adults perceive as important in inf‌luencing

their attendance, participation, and satisfaction with family life

education programs?