ABSTRACT Transformative learning theory is widely considered one of the pre-eminent theories of adult education, and has been adopted as a means of developing and understanding adult learning across a range of disciplines. While the representation and conceptualisation of transformative learning experiences has grown within Australian Indigenous studies curriculum contexts, significant differences are apparent in the means of engagement with Mezirow’s theoretical framework. This article adopts Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology to establish what is known about non-Indigenous student transformative learning within the Australian Indigenous studies literature, and provide recommendations for future research that can inform the use of Mezirow’s theory within Indigenous Australian studies curricular contexts. Four databases were systematically searched for papers focusing on transformative learning experiences of non-Indigenous students within Australian tertiary Indigenous Studies contexts, with 17 papers published between 1978 and 2019 included in the final analysis. While findings suggest the fundamental building blocks of Mezirow’s theory are quite well understood, they also highlight gaps in the literature. First, questions remain around the enduring effects of transformative learning outcomes. Second, associations between transformative learning theory and cultural capability development appear to lack clarity. Third, associations between transformative learning and Indigenous health outcomes are unclear. Finally, there is a need for more diverse paradigms, methods and methodologies within transformative learning research.

中文翻译：

---

澳大利亚土著研究中的变革性学习：对非土著学生在高等教育土著研究教育中的经历的范围审查

摘要 变革性学习理论被广泛认为是成人教育的杰出理论之一，并已被用作跨学科发展和理解成人学习的一种手段。虽然在澳大利亚土著研究课程背景下，变革性学习经验的表现和概念化已经发展，但在与 Mezirow 理论框架的参与方式上存在显着差异。本文采用 Arksey 和 O'Malley 的范围审查方法来确定澳大利亚土著研究文献中关于非土著学生变革性学习的知识，并为未来的研究提供建议，这些建议可以为 Mezirow 的理论在澳大利亚土著研究课程环境中的使用提供信息. 我们系统地搜索了四个数据库，以寻找专注于澳大利亚高等教育土著研究背景下非土著学生变革性学习经历的论文，最终分析包括 17 篇发表于 1978 年至 2019 年之间的论文。虽然研究结果表明 Mezirow 理论的基本组成部分已经很好理解，但它们也突出了文献中的空白。首先，问题仍然围绕着变革性学习成果的持久影响。其次，变革性学习理论与文化能力发展之间的关联似乎不够明确。第三，变革性学习与土著健康结果之间的关联尚不清楚。最后，在变革性学习研究中需要更多样化的范式、方法和方法论。