Content uploaded by Lisa R. Brown
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lisa R. Brown on Jun 04, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Lisa R. Brown
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lisa R. Brown on Apr 07, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Kansas State University Libraries Kansas State University Libraries
New Prairie Press New Prairie Press
Adult Education Research Conference
Upskilling and the HRD Tripartite Domains for Adult Upskilling and the HRD Tripartite Domains for Adult
Workers:Using Spiral Dynamic Theory (SDT) Workers:Using Spiral Dynamic Theory (SDT)
Lisa R. Brown
Mattyna Stephens
Sohelia Sadeghi
Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/aerc
Part of the Adult and Continuing Education Commons, Adult and Continuing Education Administration
Commons, Civic and Community Engagement Commons, Curriculum and Instruction Commons,
Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, Educational Psychology Commons,
Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations Commons, Higher Education Commons, Humane
Education Commons, Human Resources Management Commons, Instructional Media Design Commons,
Labor Relations Commons, Leadership Commons, Nonpro7t Administration and Management Commons,
Online and Distance Education Commons, Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons, Other
Education Commons, Political Science Commons, Prison Education and Reentry Commons, Psychology
Commons, Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, Public Health Commons,
Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons, Social Justice Commons, and the Teacher
Education and Professional Development Commons
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at New Prairie Press. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Adult Education Research Conference by an authorized administrator of New Prairie
Press. For more information, please contact cads@k-state.edu.
Kansas
State
University
Libraries
New
Prairie
Press
Adult
Education
Research
Conference
Upskilling and the HRD
Tripartite Domains for Adult Workers:
Using Spiral Dynamic Theory (SDT)
Lisa R. Brown
Mattyna Stephens
Sohelia
Sadeghi
Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/aerc
Part of the Adult and Continuing Education Commons, Adult and Continuing Education
Administration Commons, Civic and Community Engagement Commons, Curriculum and Instruction
Commons,
Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, Educational Psychology
Commons,
Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations Commons, Higher Education Commons,
Humane
Education Commons, Human Resources Management Commons, Instructional Media Design
Commons, Labor Relations Commons, Leadership Commons, Nonprofit Administration and
Management Commons, Online and Distance Education Commons, Organizational Behavior and Theory
Commons, Other
Education Commons, Political Science Commons, Prison Education and Reentry
Commons, Psychology Commons, Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons,
Public Health Commons, Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons, Social Justice
Commons, and the Teacher Education and Professional Development Commons
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at New Prairie Press. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Adult Education Research Conference by an authorized administrator of New Prairie
Press. For more information, please contact cads@k-state.edu.
Upskilling and the HRD Tripartite Domains for Adult Workers: Using Spiral Dynamic
Theory (SDT)
Lisa R. Brown1, Mattyna Stephens2, and Sohelia Sadeghi1
1University of the Incarnate Word, 2Texas A&M University
Abstract
As today’s job seekers pursue their need for upskilling, human resource development (HRD) areas must
design innovative training. Instruction must consider the affective use of AI in delivering workforce education.
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Human Resource Development, Spiral Dynamic Theory, Workforce
Development, Upskilling Introduction
We recommend using Spiral Dynamic Theory (SDT) as an adult development framework for navigating the
individual, organizational, and societal (tripartite) complexity of emerging workforce development needs.
SDT is an adult development framework that examines problem-solving capacity among adults, progressing
from simplistic to higher-order thinking. As an increasing capacity to solve problems occurs in stages,
movement along the framework happens in a spiraling manner. Changes oscillate between various conditions
and constructs of individualist or collectivist worldviews. Although there are many life-stage models for adult
development (Erickson 2007; Erikson, 1959; Levinson, 2016), our elaboration of the SDT constructs (Brown,
2016a, 2018, Brown et al., 2013; Brown et al., 2012), presents a deeper understanding of how these stages can
be applied to the upskilling of the adult workforce. It also provides practical suggestions for managers
conducting on-the-job employee training and formulating affective project teams. This paper presents SDT
memes
1
as key elements of adult learners. The SDT theoretical framework uses hierarchical worldview
constructs that interpret how people engage in problem-solving as they navigate their workspace context,
often based on dynamic (subconscious) value systems. Figure 1 presents a visual model of clinical summaries
for each established (and developing) value meme system of context-bounded thinking (Brown, 2016b, 2018;
Brown et al., 2023; Graves, 2005).
SDT Constructivist Theoretical Framework Model
Fig. 1. This figure displays the oscillating zig-zag movement up the spiral representing the changes in SDT
worldview constructs, thinking, and problem-solving abilities (reproduced with permission).
Tier I Color-Coded Value Memes: Worldview Constructs
The first six levels of existence thinking or constructs of developmental problem-solving capacities begin
with (Beige) the Basic Instinctive Worldview. It is rooted in anthropology and is precultural, where the
individual has low self-awareness. Thinking is directed by physiological imperatives and the goal of staying
alive. The locus of control is internal and holds an individualistic thematic orientation.
1
Memes (memetics) are units of culture that are transferred through human and behavioral imitation.
Next, the Magical Mystical Worldview (Purple). This SDT worldview centers on concerns for safety
and security through kinship ties. The construct is characterized by obedience to the desires of magical-
mystical spiritual beings and divine authorities (e.g., priests, shamans, tribe elders). Thinking is associated
with tribal rituals and traditionalism. One seeks protection within a dangerous and unpredictable world.
Allegiance is to the preservation of customs and clans. Sacred artifacts and spaces require protection from
intruders. The locus of control is external and holds a collectivist thematic orientation.
The Power Impulsive Worldview (Red). It centers on an egocentric nature and is often associated
with domination by force imperatives. One views life as a jungle with haves and have-nots and a strong
motivation to be among the haves. Red-coded thinking aims to avoid shame and to defend one’s reputation
by demanding respect, even if it requires deadly force to do so. Thinking and actions are impulsive. The
individual is remorseless about possible outcomes due to simplistic rationalizations, believing that
consequences may or may not ever occur. The locus of control is internal and individualistic in orientation.
The Purposeful and Saintly Living Worldview (Blue). The blue-coded construct represents honor
and a good-versus-evil worldview. Thinking is marked by dogmatic absolutism and requirements to self-
sacrifice to bring order and stability to chaotic spaces. Existential dilemmas require the use of guilt to
enforce divine moral principles. The person/organization/society believes in predestination to specific
stations in life that must be accepted and navigated. Dichotomous right or wrong thinking dominates. The
most extreme version of this worldview is authoritarian and paternalistic with imperatives for obtaining
an idealized betterment of everyone. Rules are to be followed and are non-negotiable. The locus of control
is collectivist in its orientation.
Strategic Materialism Worldview (Orange). The Orange code is marked by manipulation and a
memetic worldview that privileges autonomy and independence. Winning and competition are prevailing
values, such that scheming and cunning strategies to obtain desired outcomes are driving forces.
Achievements that bring praise and material possessions are coveted rewards. Scientific reliability and the
use of technology are believed to offer the best competitive advantages for winning against an adversary.
One is careful not to arouse the disfavor or suspicions of powerful authorities (or open enemies). Thinking
is logical and calculated to achieve planned success. Internal locus of control; individualistic orientation.
Humanistic Consensus-Building Worldview (Green). Believes in human dignity and consensus
building in contrast to obeying religious edicts. Thinking at this stage reflectively explores the inner self
and that of others in supportive communal cooperatives. It prioritizes lives of unity and harmony, as the
group seeks to share societal resources for the benefit of all. It rejects notions of greed and dogmatic
authoritarianism because decision-making is based upon group consensus. Togetherness and acceptance
replace the previous worldview stage (Orange) of materialism and scientific logic. It displays a more
tempered democratic acceptance of authority/leaders. External locus of control; collectivist orientation.
Tier II Color-Coded Value Memes
Creativity and Innovation Worldview (Yellow). This is the first of the more complexity-oriented SDT
constructs. It highlights flexible thinking that is open to change (Brown 2016a). Yellow represents a
departure from the preoccupations of subsistence living that are more evident among the lower Tier 1 SDT
worldviews. It features creative and innovative thinking. The yellow color code is competitive thinking but
attentiveness to concepts of being that advance understanding and a complex awareness of self and others.
Subsistence living issues are recognized but not necessarily under control (Brown, 2023; Graves, 2005).
Adult thinking, at this stage of the framework, welcomes paradoxes and societal uncertainty because it
breeds creativity and innovation. Traits of individual competence, expertise, flexibility, and spontaneity are
highly valued. A more tempered individualism exists than was seen in earlier stages. Learning occurs
through observation and participation (experiential learning) and through the concept of being with ethical
expressions versus moral or religious expression of values. The locus of control is internal, holding to an
individualistic orientation.
Holistic Globalism Worldview (Turquoise). The second Tier is marked by an ability to more easily
navigate complexity. One tends to recognize patterns and trends more immediately than those of the prior
Tier 1 constructs. The Turquoise color-coded worldview holds a belief in the pursuit of good for all living
things. It views the world (earth) as a dynamic living organism, ascribing an anthropomorphic type of
independent energy of mind to it. To address complex problems in life, these adults use both physical and
metaphysical solutions to benefit the masses. The thinking in Turquoise is holistic and intuitive while being
open to concepts of spirituality, morality, and embodied knowing (Tisdell, 2003). This thinking has an
external locus of control and displays a collectivist orientation.
Upskilling and Reskilling the Adult Workforce
As the workforce landscape evolves, lifelong learning will become essential for everyone. Worker capacity
critical for a competitive job market is lacking, leading to a skills gap by 2030 (Hancock et al., 2020). Addressing
the gap requires that at least 40% of workers engage in upskilling or reskilling (Hancock et al., 2020). When
employees develop new skills to improve performance in their current job, it is termed upskilling (Leon, 2023).
Reskilling requires one to gain new knowledge and skills in preparation for a new work role. According to the
World Economic Forum 2020 Jobs Report, it was projected that by 2025, employers globally would need to
offer upskilling and reskilling to approximately 80% of their workforce (Schwab et al., 2020). Secretarial,
clerical, accounting, and bookkeeping jobs that require manual dexterity or labor-intensive work are expected
to become obsolete. Hence, workers will require reskilling. The Future Jobs Report 2023 states that meeting
workforce readiness needs requires skills such as creative and analytical thinking, intellectual curiosity, lifelong
learning, and systems thinking (Zahidi, 2023). Therefore, employees must have the skills to apply innovative
solutions to complex problems while adapting to an ever-changing work environment (Leon, 2023). The area of
workforce adaptation is where using the SDT framework for adult training and development becomes valuable.
Workforce Readiness
According to Hancock (2020), to close the skills gap, 70% of the nation and over 50% of American and
European executives have placed workforce readiness responsibility in the hands of organizations. Li (2024)
asserts that worker participation in upskilling and reskilling programs could take at least six months. Several
authors have outlined learning programs that offer retraining to learn new skills through work organizations that
have developed initiatives to meet the workforce demands. Nonetheless, Li (2020) indicates the need for non-
traditional educational options coupled with higher education, which provides optimal learning for worker
advancement. However, for this learning to occur, he calls for an alliance among universities, governments, and
businesses (Li, 2020). For example, the Standford 2025 project model allows students to extend their college
attendance timeline while blending learning with work experiences. Another higher education model, known
as the Flip Model, prioritizes learning through training rather than discipline-specific topics (Li, 2024).
Experiential learning via internship programs helps students apply theory to solving practical problems.
Additionally, universities have begun to favor certificate programs to incentivize reskilling workers. Technical
or vocational colleges (Hockenos, 2018) can provide individualized professional and re-certification options,
SDT collaborative self-study, open course programs, and company-sponsored on-the-job training (Ellingrud,
2020). While workforce readiness goals through upskilling and reskilling options for adults seem promising,
there are some notable challenges. For example, in a survey conducted by McKinsey & Company in 2017,
executives felt that their organization might be unable to fill the skills gap due to the managers' limited
knowledge of the impact of automation and digitization (Ellingrund et al., 2020). The findings from the survey
indicated that managers could not advocate for retraining workers due to their knowledge limitations about
workforce changes. The findings revealed that HRD departments were not equipped to manage executing
strategies for improving employees' competencies for a future-ready workforce, making addressing the skills
gap more difficult. Ellingrund (2020) indicated that employees in manufacturing jobs tend to have limited
education, making reskilling and upskilling urgent as automation and digitization become the new normal.
Another issue where SDT applications could help is with worker motivation. An employee's unwillingness to
engage in new forms of learning can be due to limited time, money, or a lack of motivation for lifelong learning
and change (Maisiri & Van Dyk, 2021; Li, 2024).
Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) with SDT
As workforce demands evolve in the face of automation, globalization, and digitization, adult learners must
acquire technical skills and adaptive, value-based competencies. Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into
workforce development presents a promising yet complex frontier. AI is defined as a system's ability to
interpret data accurately, learn from it, and adapt this learning to perform specific tasks (Kaplan et al.,
2019). To guide this integration ethically and effectively, the Spiral Dynamic Theory (SDT) framework
(Beck et al., 2006; Brown, 2023; Brown, et al, 2023; Brown et al, 2022; Brown, 2018), which holds to the
constructivist tradition in adult learning offers a biopsychosocial lens for understanding human adaptability
and value systems (Brown, 2016b). However, Poquet and de Laat (2021) expand on concepts held within
the field of adult education by calling to move lifelong learning beyond the simple training of human capital
toward holistic development. Hence, AI has emerged in human resource development (HRD) as an
innovative means to reshape identity and our traditional understanding of learning. The SDT framework
recognizes that adults process information and solve problems based on evolving value systems (vMEMEs)
that allow for more targeted training designs, primarily when supported by AI technologies. The
hierarchical value system’s constructs of the SDT framework—ranging from simplistic basic survival
worldview thinking (Beige) to the higher-order holistic globalism (Turquoise) worldview—can shape or
guide workplace responses (Beck et al., 2006; Brown et al., 2023). The use of AI through adaptive
platforms can adjust content in real-time that recognizes and responds to a vMEME-sensitive environment
for the upskilling and training of adult learners and work teams.
Workforce Development and Ethical Implications
Nonetheless, Poquet and de Laat (2021) emphasize that AI systems must go beyond efficiency to
support learner agency, identity, and growth in alignment with the evolving worldviews at the heart of the
SDT framework (Figure 1). For instance, employees operating within the Orange (Strategic Materialism)
value system may prefer structured, outcome-driven training focused on efficiency and performance metrics,
while those in the Green (Humanistic Consensus-Building) worldview respond better to collaborative,
socially conscious, and inclusive learning. Under the higher-order thinking stage, the Yellow-colored
mnemonically coded construct (Creativity and Innovation), learners thrive in open-ended, reflective, and
systems-oriented tasks that promote autonomy and integrative thinking (Beck et al., 2006; Brown et al., 2013).
A key innovation of SDT for HRD purposes is its application across the individual, organizational, and
societal (tripartite) domains (Brown et al., 2023). Therefore, AI-enhanced workforce development strategies
become optimal when they align with an individual’s upskilling needs and organizational culture. The
framework (SDT) can also support broader goals like equity, sustainability, and civic responsibility. At the
individual level, AI can facilitate self-directed learning, adaptive upskilling, and reflective practice by helping
adults recognize and change their internal value systems. For instance, a manager could tailor training (or
collaborative work projects) that would be optimal for those moving from lower-order thinking at the Blue
(rule-based) to Orange (achievement-based) as compared to those progressing from Green (humanistic) to
Yellow (innovative flexibility). At the organizational level, AI can assess team composition and leadership
dynamics using SDT-informed analytics, recommending optimal groupings, mediating interpersonal
differences, and modeling affective leadership based on value-driven or personality-centered patterns (Zoltan
& Vancea, 2016). For example, while a team of Orange-coded thinkers may lack relational cohesion, a
vMEME-diverse team—intentionally managed—can blend employees who are competition-driven with those
who are collaborative and empathetic, depending on their project roles. When paired with systems thinking,
AI tools support organizational leadership design workspaces that align with the SDT’s tiered framework
constructs.
Lastly, at the societal level, AI-powered workforce training has an equity, access, and social cohesion
imperative when managers or executives bring together adults from unfamiliar cultures. Hence, attention must
be given to training programs that do not skew too individualistic or collectivist. High-performance and
domination worldviews—orange and red, respectively—risk reinforcing inequality and ignoring community-
based knowledge or workplace needs. Eubanks (2018) warns that data-driven systems can perpetuate systemic
discrimination and erode agency among marginalized groups. Therefore, research has recommended
mindfulness when using AI in education to shift, for example, from the outdated factory model of workforce
training to more personalized and inclusive learning systems (Sadeghi et al., 2024; Seldon et al., 2018).
Transhumanism
SDT details a taxonomy of higher-order thinking and worldview constructs worthy of deeper empirical
exploration. More specifically, the last two SDT constructs (vMEME) are poised for more philosophical and
theoretical debates about the limits and guardrails necessary when using AI. This paper offers a juxtaposition
of predictive concerns as it recognizes the strengths and challenges of introducing the SDT framework to offer
prescriptive suppositions for further research.
The Through Era
The Coral-colored coded value meme system reflects the worldview that merges human biology and
technology. At this level, adults have a more mature problem-solving capacity and neuropsychology. The
final two dyads are among the last two value memes Brown et al. (2023) have incorporated into the current
model. Pilot studies are in the research design and planning stages to produce valid empiricism for these two
constructs. In this paper, the authors consider theoretical propositions based on anecdotal patterns, trends, and
secondary source data (Beck et al., 2018; Beck et al., 2006; Brown et al., 2025; Brown et al., 2022; Brown,
2018, 2016a-b; Dawlabani et al., 2013). Transhumanism themes (Winyard 2020) are located within the Coral-
coded worldview concerned with population control and efficient resource management. This thinking details
a strategy for advancing the life and activities of select groups. It advances global society themes where elites
have the highest capacity to engage in economic and political life. Positions of power and privilege are held
by those who hold dominance over Tier 1 thinkers. Coral represents “a secular vision of unlimited
technoscientific progress” where notions of God and faith are minimized (Winyard 2020, p. 67). The locus of
control is internal yet slightly more individualistic.
Integral Wisdom and Human Insight.
The Teal-colored coded value meme system represents a clinical construction grounded in adult
development literature (Erickson 2007; Erikson 1959). The tensions and conflicts between the inherent
horizontal construct conflicts among the adults—typically observed in Tier 1—are less pronounced, leading
to greater possibilities for collaboration success (Brown et al., 2023). The Teal color-coded worldview departs
from the prior Coral-colored systems. It introduces a more tempered reliance on technology and
mechanization to resolve complex human problems. One begins to emphasize how aspects of unique human
traits (e.g., wisdom and courage) and the nature of a sentient
2
Being are not yet possible with AI. Thus,
connections that require the exercise of emotions and empathy become coveted virtues. The Teal construct
has a healthy understanding of reality, knowing that imperfect people—who are motivated by a sense of a
metaphysical eternity—are not to be replaced by mechanized hybrid humanity. The locus of control is integral
yet slightly more collectivist. Conclusion
The adult developmental thinking scholarship introduced by Graves (2005) or his protégés has not sufficiently
addressed the dyad constructs advanced by Brown et al. (2023, 2022). More research grounded in the SDT
framework will increase its validity, reliability, and trustworthiness as a methodological instrument for
studying emerging AI technology applications in HRD, the workforce, and lifelong learning.
References
Beck, D. E., Larsen, T. H., Solonin, S., Viljoen, S. R., & Johns, T. Q. (2018). Spiral Dynamics in action:
Humanity’s master code. Wiley.
Beck, D. E., & Cowan, C. C. (2006). Spiral Dynamics: Mastering values, leadership, and change. Wiley
Blackwell.
Brown, L. & Molina, M. (2025). Activism, race, and online informal learning: Using TWITTER spaces to
explore reparations for Black American descendants of U.S. Freedmen. Dialogues in Social Justice, 10(1).
Article R 1571. DOI: 10.55370/dsj.v10i1.1571
Brown, L. R. (2023). Reparations and adult education: Civic and community engagement for lifelong learners. In
W. A. Darity, L. Hubbard, & K. A. Mullen (Eds.), The Black reparations project: A Handbook for racial
justice (pp. 147-173). UC Berkeley Press.
Brown, L. R., & Guzman-Foster, S. (2022). Online civic engagement, political agency, and sustaining
communities with informal education: Negotiating misogynoir, 71st Annual AAACE Conference Adaptability,
Flexibility and Sustainability: Adult Education in Dynamic Times, Hyatt Regency Milwaukee | Milwaukee,
WI, October 11-14
Brown, L. R. (2018). Comparing graduate student civic engagement outcomes among for-profit and public
university adult learners in Chile. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 22(4), 81–112.
Brown, L. R. (2016a). Spiral dynamic theory an instrument for praxis: Memetic racism and cultural transfer. In
2
able to perceive or feel things
V. Stead (Ed). RIP Jim Crow: Fighting racism through higher education policy, curriculum, and cultural
interventions (Equity in higher education theory, policy, and praxis series volume 6). (pp. 101-115). Peter Lang
Publishing.
Brown, L. R. (2016b). Civic engagement activities and outcomes in Chilean private for-profit and public
graduate education. [Electronic Dissertation]. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia.
Brown, L.R., McCray, P., & Neal, J. (2023). Creating affective collaborative adult teams and groups guided
by Spiral Dynamic Theory. In D. Guralnick et al. (Eds.), Innovative approaches to technology-enhanced
learning for the workplace and higher education, (pp. 81–96). Springer Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007
/978-3-031-21569-8_8
Brown, L. R. & Sandmann, L. R. (2013). Memes and their meaning for the study of adult learners: Civic
engagement in Chilean for-profit graduate education. Paper presented at the 54th Annual Adult Education
Research Conference (AERC), St. Louis, MO. https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2013/roundtables/6/.
Brown, L. R., Sandmann, L. R. & Bliss, A. (2012). Connecting Spiral Dynamic Theory to the study of civic
engagement in for-profit higher education. Paper presented at the 12th Annual IARSLCE (International
Association for Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement Conference, Baltimore, MD.
Dawlabani, S. E. & Beck, D. E. (2013). MEMEnomics: The next generation economic system. Select Books Kindle.
Ellingrud, K., Gupta, R., & Salguero, J. (2020). Building the vital skills for the future of work in operations.
McKinsey & Company, 20.
Erickson, D. M. (2007). A developmental re-forming of the phases of meaning in transformational learning. Adult
Education Quarterly 58 (1), 61–80.
Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers. Psychological Issues 1(1), 5–156.
Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St.
Martin’s Press.
Graves, C. W. (2005). The never ending quest: Dr. Clare W. Graves explores human nature. C. C. Cowan & N.
Todorovic (Eds.). ECLET Publishing.
Hancock, B., Lazaroff-Puck, K., & Rutherford, S. (2020). Getting practical about the future of work. McKinsey
Quarterly, 1, 65-73.
Hockenos, P. (2018). How Germany’s vocational education and training system works. Clean Energy Wire.
Kaplan, A., & Haenlein, M. (2019). Siri, Siri, in my hand: Who’s the fairest in the land? On the interpretations,
illustrations, and implications of artificial intelligence. Business Horizons, 62(1), 15-25.
Leon, R. D. (2023). Employees’ reskilling and upskilling for industry 5.0: Selecting the best professional
development programmes. Technology in Society, 75, 102393.
Levinson, D. (2016). Mid-life transition: A period in adult psychosocial development. Psychiatry 4, 99–122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1977.11023925.
Li, L. (2020). Education supply chain in the era of Industry 4.0. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 37(4),
579-592.
Li, L. (2024). Reskilling and upskilling the future-ready workforce for industry 4.0 and beyond. Information
Systems Frontiers, 26(5), 1697-1712.
Poquet, O., & de Laat, M. (2021). Developing capabilities: Lifelong learning in the age of AI. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 52(4), 1695-1708. https://doi.org/10.1111 /bjet.13123
Sadeghi, S., & Niu, C. (2024). Augmenting human decision-making in K-12 education: the role of artificial
intelligence in assisting the recruitment and retention of teachers of color for enhanced diversity and
inclusivity. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1-21.
Schwab, K., & Zahidi, S. (2020, October 20). The future jobs report 2020. https://www.weforum.org/publications
/the-future-of-jobs-report-
Seldon, A., & Abidoye, O. (2018). The Fourth Education Revolution: Will AI Liberate or Infantilise Humanity?
University of Buckingham Press.
Tisdell, E. (2003). Exploring spirituality and culture in adult and higher education. Jossey- Bass.
Winyard Sr., D. C. 2020. “Transhumanism: Christian Destiny or Distraction?” Perspectives on Science & Christian
Faith, 72 (2): 67–82.
Zahidi, S. (2023, April 30). The future jobs report 2023. https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-
report-2023/
Zoltan, R., & Vancea, R. (2016). Work group development models €“the evolution from simple group to
effective team. Ecoforum Journal, 5(1), 241–246.
