COVID-19 has done significant damage to individuals, families, workers and the economy. What is not known about the virus is part of the problem, and the knowledge gap drives an unprecedented and urgent search for knowledge. This article explores the challenges for lifelong learning and the relevance of transformative learning. Disorientation, disorienting dilemmas and critical reflection are the ingredients of such learning, since we can only learn our way out of this situation. The authors present American adult educator Jack Mezirow’s theory of transformative learning (TL) as an appropriate learning framework for lifelong learning. They draw on the work of American philosopher Richard Rorty and German philosopher and sociologist Jürgen Habermas to re-shape TL so that it supports the kind of learning that is sufficiently complex and nuanced to enable us to deal with contradictions, ambivalence and meaning-making in a world where not-knowing is the new normal.

This article aims at expanding transformation theory through the work of the philosopher Richard Rorty. His concept of redescription allows us to distinguish between good learning and transformative learning and to counteract the critique of conceptional looseness. In addition, Rorty’s thesis of contingency and his notion of irony are going to be explored in respect to their implications for transformative learning theory.

This paper introduces the concept of transformative conversation inspired by Arcilla's concept of edifying conversation, as an extension of TL theory's notion of discourse, in the context of adult education and migration. By contrasting the idea of exchanging arguments with opening space for conversation and one's private quest for meaning and self-understanding, I introduce the idea of becoming a fellow transformative conversationalist as an appropriate attitude for promoting TL. I will (1) differentiate between an instrumental and a transformative notion of learning in the context of migration; (2) engage Rorty in a conversation with TL theory; (3) introduce Arcilla's concept of edifying conversation to join and broaden the ongoing conversation and develop the concept of transformative conversation.

The multiple crises of unsustainability are provoking increasing stress and unpleasant emotions among students. If higher education is to fulfill its mission to support transformation processes toward sustainable development, it must adapt its pedagogical approaches to help students deepen their critical thinking and empower them to engage in these transformation processes. For this reason, emotions – which can also prevent critical thinking – should be carefully addressed within transformative learning journeys. However, these journeys are themselves challenging for learners and educators. They push them to abandon stable meaning perspectives, causing feelings of incoherence and tension. Learners need safe enough spaces to navigate these situations of uncertainty. The central questions of this manuscript are: What is meant by safe enough spaces? How can learners, educators, and higher education institutions create and hold such spaces? These questions are explored on three different levels: (1) the intrapersonal level, (2) the interpersonal level, and (3) the organizational and systemic level of discourses in higher education. For the intrapersonal level, perspectives inspired by neurobiology are used to discuss reaction patterns of our autonomous nervous system and present insights into stress development. Learners should feel bodily safe when engaging in transformative learning processes. This is supported by balancing the challenges learners face with the resources they have. For the interpersonal level, the manuscript argues that focusing solely on rational discourse is insufficient to support safe enough spaces for transformative learning. We call for a culture of edifying conversations supported by respectful relationships among learners, as they are more adequate for regaining self-direction. For the organizational and intertwined systemic level, the ambition is followed to make higher education institutions offer learning environments that feel safe enough for all involved. However, as these institutions are strongly influenced by dynamics of economization and competition, they do not necessarily empower learners to challenge and disrupt unsustainable and neoliberal discourses. The manuscript explores how learners and educators can cultivate engaged critique by acknowledging their own embeddedness in neoliberal dynamics and opening up so-called transformative spaces for institutional change. Finally, recommendations for educational practices in higher education for sustainable development are offered.

Transformative learning is 'an approach to teaching based on promoting change, where educators challenge learners to critically question and assess the integrity of their deeply held assumptions about how they relate to the world around them'. While it seems to be clear what is subject to change (assumptions), apparently it is less obvious how we can (critically) reflect on assumptions, especially since most of them operate outside of our awareness. The question that follows is: How can we bring these hidden assumptions into our awareness, so that it can be subject to change and transformation? Therefore, the purpose of this paper is threefold: We need to (1) have a more nuanced understanding of how we can help adult learners in practice to explore their 'assumptive clusters', to (2) better understand what helps or prevents learners from transforming their existing assumptions and therefore fosters or inhibits processes of transformation, and to (3) provide some concrete tools, that practitioners can use to enhance their (reflective) practice, teaching transformatively.