Workshop D - Session 1 - Questions and Contributions

Title: Securing a Policy Framework that Promotes Lifelong Learning Chair: Talvi Marja, The State Assembly, Estonia Team: Jean-Francois Lippert, International Centre of Resource and Initiatives, France Professor John Coolahan, National University of Ireland Jarl Bengtsson, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Netherlands

Q: (John Pierre Tib, Secretary of the Educational Committee at the Council of Europe)

I have 2 questions that I would like to put to the experts. The first observation is that it seems to me that the concepts of lifelong learning are the same as they were 20 years ago, except perhaps the challenge of new technologies. What does seem to me to be of interest is that it is not the same people: they are not representatives of the same social groups that are saying these things. 10 years ago we would not have heard for instance from shop stewards, from union representatives what we are hearing today, nor would we be hearing the same from the employers. I would like to know what the experts think about this.

My second question is perhaps a bit more of a negative reflection, but what we have today is perhaps due to the crisis, and all social partners and governments have been faced since 1975 with various problems that have left them really feeling taken aback about what to do. We do have empirical examples of this, but it seems to me perhaps as a result of this we have lost a long term approach, a more holistic approach. Will we have a system that is a lifelong learning system that is very dynamic and innovative for adults and also a formal education system?

Barry Hake:

I am a little worried here with the distinction between lifelong learning and the formal educational system; that to me is problematic. If we are talking about lifelong learning, we are talking about learning from the birth to the grave. A problem with the Dutch approach is that it goes the other way and says that we will appropriate lifelong learning for the formal educational system. As part of a SOCRATES programme, we are doing the preparative study of the policy formation process of different countries. I have been interviewing the top civil servants, the trade unions and other policy relevant bodies, such as employers' organisations. The first question we asked in the interviews was "why now?" and it was amazing how these people really knew that it had been there 30 years ago and they knew that it was different, supporting groups in the constituency for lifelong learning then, compared to now. I think that you must not forget that in terms of workers and organised workers there are 2 ways in which workers can talk to each other. They can talk to each other as trade unions and communicate with employers but we also in many European countries have a very strong tradition of workers' education and my concern at this point in time is what is happening with workers education in a number of European countries and in terms of their European coalitions.

Professor Coolahan:

The key thing is the change in circumstances now where there is a greater convergence of the great players. It is really only when the political clout, the political push which is usually driven by an economic push happens that the convergence can really make the breakthrough. I think that would be potentially the biggest difference in the debate in the '70s and the situation at the end of the century.

Q: (Frank Coffel,Newcastle University in North East England)

There is one topic that is never discussed at these conferences which is, what concept do we have of learning? It is never defined in any of these reports, it is never discussed.

Jarl Bengtsson:

I wonder whether one should address issues about what sort of knowledge we are talking about and what sort of learning strategies or learning theories. I think it is an extremely important issue in the future debate on lifelong learning and it is the same when it comes to learning strategies. I remember we at OECD said that the importance of obligatory schooling was to lay the ground for lifelong learning and that the most important objective for obligatory schooling is that they should not allow anybody to leave that system with less motivation for learning than they had when they started. But today in OECD on average about 25% of the kids leave absolutely determined never again to be involved in learning and that we cannot afford.

Q. Joseph Emboland from Ireland:

If the economic imperative is going to be behind the drive of our policy framework somewhere down the line, somebody is going to ask the question 'how do we know it has been happening, and what are the indicators of the achievement of learning?' Somebody quoted a statistic in one of the opening presentations to the effect that 25% of adults in the UK have not learnt in the past so many years. If you come up with those sorts of statistics about people learning or not learning, the fundamental question is, 'what represents learning?' It is a process and it is also an outcome and somewhere down the line, especially if we are going to look for the sort of funding requirements to support and promote the policy framework, I think we do need to be a bit clearer about what we regard as valuable learning.

Barry Hake:

I am not sure whether we can answer the question of what is valuable for other people to learn. I think we can look at where people are learning and I think that is part of this issue of the formal education system. In the Netherlands, for example, there are about 17% of the population participating in adult education per year. If you add to that more non-formal approaches in study circles in, for example, the Scandinavian countries, and if you add that to your definition of adult education, where learning is taking place immediately, your participation numbers increase.

Back

Home

Next