Learning - A Shared Responsibility
Education, Training and Learning
Employment/Educational Profile of Glasgow
The Education and Training Response
Good afternoon, my name is Mike Egan and I am Co-ordinator of the Centre for Lifelong Learning in Dublin City University. The Centre is a comparatively recent initiative in the University; it was established just over two years ago. Its primary focus is on developing adult and continuing education in the University within an overall ethos of embracing lifelong learning as a guiding principle.
Although the phrase lifelong learning is sometimes taken as equating to adult and continuing education this, at least to my mind, is an incorrect definition. Lifelong learning, as I hope to suggest in this workshop, covers all areas of informal and formal education from the cradle to the grave, or the womb to the tomb, to use two contemporary clichés.
This is a time of tremendous change in Irish education in general and Irish tertiary education in particular. The dramatic recent improvement in the Irish economy and the ensuing kudos for the Irish education system have led to an increased emphasis on the need for lifelong learning opportunities for economic reasons. In order to maintain a balanced perspective on the broader societal role of education, it is also necessary to actively make the case for learning as a means to personal and social development. The concept of lifelong learning itself presents many new challenges for educationalists at all levels within our education systems. The title of this conference is "A Vision of Higher Education – challenges for the millennium". As you will see from the conference brochure, the main sub-themes place a strong emphasis on widening participation, on acknowledging experiential learning, fostering independent learning and ultimately, changing the culture of the University. All of these issues may be incorporated into the remaining sub-theme – the challenge of lifelong learning. University Adult Education
As I have mentioned earlier, I feel that the phrase lifelong learning does not necessarily equate to adult and continuing education only. However, part of the difficulty which adult education has encountered over the years has been its segregation from the mainstream of education and training. It is not without reason that adult education, at least in the Irish context, has often been described as the Cinderella of the Irish education system. As the sector primarily deals with people who have been out of the formal education system for 5, 10, 20, or 30 years, it does not sit readily with the traditional sequential dynamic of the mainstream education system.
I have been very fortunate to be working, in DCU, on adult education at this particular time. As is the case with our sister institution, the University of Limerick, we are comparative newcomers to the university sector. Naturally, the main focus of DCU's work to date has been the development of quality undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, primarily aimed at the school-leaver cohort. We therefore do not have at present a large element of adult education provision along the lines of what is available in many of the older Irish universities. While this means that we have had to work harder to develop the contacts and expertise required for such provision, it has also allowed a considerable amount of flexibility in our planning for the future.
At a recent OECD conference on Lifelong Learning, Leslie Wagner, Vice Chancellor of Leeds Metropolitan University made a very interesting contribution from the floor, when suggesting that the paradigm of Education is a provider-directed paradigm, whereas the paradigm of Learning is a student-directed paradigm:
“Universities can provide education, but they can only provide opportunities for learning.” (Egan. 2000. p. 11).
Much as we might like to describe our institutions of higher education as "seats of learning" or in similar terms, the real power over learning lies with the student not the provider, or does it? If one accepts, as most educationalists do, that the level and quality of learning is the single most important outcome of the higher education process, then one must also accept that the role played by the individual learner is a very powerful one and should be acknowledged as such. At the same time, the role of the institution as the provider of learning "opportunities" must also be recognised.
The acknowledgement of student influence over their own learning is especially important for adult learners who have become accustomed to being contributors and decision-makers in both their own and their environments’ development. It is equally important that in considering the issues of concern to adult learners we also recognise that the debate and resolution of these must also be framed in a student-enabled rather than a provider-directed paradigm. Processes which involve adults as objects rather than actors in their own learning will continue to reinforce narrow, limited perceptions and experiences of higher education rather than encouraging the broad, encompassing perspective demanded by our present circumstances.
By the same token many staff who are actively involved in the teaching and support of adult learners are themselves disempowered by the institutional processes and structures in which they work. It is hoped that that new developments in higher education might contribute to consideration of new processes and structures which would, in turn, lead to a greater sense of practitioner involvement in adult learning policy and practice.
As well as appropriate structures and processes, the terminology used to encourage greater participation by adults, particularly second-chance students, in the education system may be more influential than previously thought. While the terms education, training and learning have been used interchangeably by many agencies, a recent study in Scotland is quite thought-provoking in revealing public understanding of their respective meanings. A MORI poll, commissioned by the Glasgow Development Agency, sought to establish the perceptions which a wide sample of the population (aged 16-65) associated with the terms learning, training and education, respectively. While overall the terms learning, training and education had quite high correlations of association with concepts of self-development, it is informative to note the differences between the three:
‘Discovering’ and ‘finding out more’ (71%) were the most common associations with the term ‘learning’; followed by ‘exchanging ideas/information with others’ (69%). Positive associations such as ‘enjoyment’ (65%) and ‘personal growth’ (66%) are mentioned by around two-thirds.
The term ‘training’, on the other hand, has one specific association – ‘gaining new skills’ (65%). No other association with the term ‘training’ is mentioned by a majority of Glaswegians, although significant minorities cite ‘hard work’ (45%) and ‘computers’ (35%).
The term ‘education’ is associated with ‘school’ for a large majority (73%), whilst three in five (59%) mention ‘studying’." (MORI. 1998:11)
Pending similar research in an Irish setting, there is little reason to expect that the wider adoption of ‘learning’ would not carry similarly positive associations and circumvent many of the negative side-effects resulting from the perceived education/training binary divide.
While institutions of higher education may have an agenda and ethos which indirectly seeks to promote learning through the provision of education, it may be that the reverse might prove a more effective strategy; the emphasis being on the provision of learning opportunities which attract learners, of all ages, to the education system. This element of emphasis on learning, rather than education or training, forms a core strand throughout this presentation.
No less than individual learners, institutions and organisations also need models of good practice from which to both develop and benchmark their lifelong learning processes. Bearing this in mind, in early 1999, a number of University staff began to look for a model within which DCU might actively network with community and other organisations towards a structured development of lifelong learning opportunities. A potential example of such a model was identified as operating in Glasgow and steps put in place to bring information on that example to a North Dublin audience.
In May 1999 a Working Group, consisting of representatives from DCU and various external agencies, organised a conference in the University entitled "Building Learning Networks". The conference had a two-fold aim; firstly, to invite a guest speaker from Glasgow, Ms Stephanie Young, Director of Lifelong Learning with the Glasgow Development Agency, to share her experiences with a North Dublin audience and secondly, through a series of workshops, to gauge the level and areas of interest in developing a Learning Network in the North Dublin region. The seminar proceedings are important for two reasons; firstly, it involved the presentation of an innovative learning network model and, secondly, it also captured the responses to that model of a significant cross-section of the North Dublin community, involved in learning initiatives. The following records the key issues raised in the course of Ms Young’s presentation and the subsequent workshop responses.
Stephanie opened her presentation by thanking the conference committee for the invitation to share "some of the experience of our attempts in Glasgow to become a learning city". As well as being Director of Lifelong Learning with the Glasgow Development Agency she pointed out that she was also Chair of the Glasgow Learning Alliance, a network of organisations dedicated to lifelong learning.
Warning that there are no easy answers to achieving an equitable and comprehensive system of lifelong learning support, Stephanie outlined the process currently used in Glasgow called The Learning Enquiry. She emphasised that no one city will have all the answers to lifelong learning but that is important to seek out the answers, to borrow and adapt from other examples.
Stephanie emphasised that lifelong learning is not just about vocational training but that it should appeal to everyone covering "both the need for high levels of skills to push economic prosperity, and issues like social inclusion or exclusion. It is a very broad and all-inclusive concept." Ms. Young also stressed the need "to find a solution to your problems that suits your culture, one that reflects your way of doing things and that you are comfortable with". The important issue, she suggested, is that the process offers the opportunity for dialogue and consultation with the local people involved as well as with the relevant organisations.
According to figures quoted by Ms. Young, Glasgow has the highest rate of unemployment in Scotland, seventh highest in the UK and in some communities unemployment runs as high as 70%. While the workforce in Glasgow numbers 320,000, only 150,000 of those jobs are held by Glasgow residents. Most of the workforce live external to city. Family poverty is a big problem. The academic achievement of young people in Glasgow is lower than the national Scottish average. "Twenty seven percent of the workforce in Glasgow have no qualifications. The pace of change in employment, especially in the areas of science and technology, means that people have to become lifelong learners if they are to continue to secure well-paid employment,” said StephanieReturn to Contents
A MORI poll, described earlier, carried out on behalf of the Glasgow Development agency revealed that people have far more positive associations with the concept of learning than with the traditional concepts of education and training. Stephanie suggested that if the Learning Enquiry could achieve a participation rate in learning initiatives of 70% of the city’s population, then Glasgow could be truly described as a learning city.
She also suggested that there is a time for research and a time for action. There were several different advisory fora, reports and strategies. "We were coming down with strategies, but not a lot of action," according to Stephanie and that was why the Learning Enquiry initiative came to be adopted.
One of the main objectives of the initiative is to avoid duplication of provision. This must be achieved while allowing existing organisations and groups to continue to make their contribution to lifelong learning. She suggested that the avoidance of duplication and maximising collaboration between organisations was a key goal of the initiatives, while being sensitive to the needs of smaller community groups.
Within the Learning Enquiry there are a number of sub-groups: an advisory group, called the Glasgow Learning Alliance; a Steering Group, made up of key public agencies led by the Glasgow Development Agency; and the facilitators group which provide support for the Themed Action Groups.
According to Ms Young, the Themed Action Groups, or TAGS for short, involving 160 volunteers across the city, are "where the real action takes place”. The TAGS are divided into a number of different specialist areas: Learning Environment in Technology, Individual Learning Accounts, Literacy, Organisation Development, Measurement Framework, and Education for Work. Stephanie went on to outline the role of the various Themed Action Groups, which include looking at the role of technology in learning, dealing with adult literacy, staff development in business, the transition from school to work, individual learning accounts and the culture of learning. Of particular interest, she suggested, were the Learning Environment Technology Group and the Learning Culture Group.
The Learning Environment Technology Group is developing the concept of Learning Centres. Rather than putting these in traditional venues like a library, shopping centre or community centre the group is looking at placing these Learning Centres in the most appropriate locations, "If the community are using a flat that is where the learning centre will go." The Learning Centres are designed to appeal to all different types of learning styles whether written or visual for example.
Central to the role of the Learning Culture Group has been the idea of bringing more people, who would otherwise not have participated, into learning. Two of the initiatives adopted by the Learning Culture Group have been the Glasgow Learning Festival and The Sharpes cartoon strip. The Learning Festival had an initial target of involving 100 people, but in the end over 300 people participated.
The Sharpes cartoon strip was aimed at presenting learning in a fun way. The cartoon strip involves a typical family called The Sharpes. Issues around learning are dealt with as the family go through their everyday lives. Formal messages about learning are delivered by the family’s pet parrot in the cartoon. This features in a magazine which is distributed by the Glasgow City Council throughout Glasgow. It is planned that, in future, the cartoon strip would be published in one of the national newspapers.
The learning initiative in Glasgow has also availed of the opportunity to hold a Citizens Jury. The Citizens Jury is like a court which deals with issues of interest to the population at large. A panel of 15 people, representative of the Glasgow population, were selected to examine the issues of learning and learning development in Glasgow. Over a period of four days the jury questioned witnesses involved in the delivery of learning in the city. The jury were also allowed call witnesses of their own and a identified one particular public agency which they questioned about the state of learning in the city.
In conclusion Stephanie expressed the opinion that "progress doesn't only take time, it takes commitment." She explained that, in order to achieve their target of 70% participation in learning in Glasgow, they would need to generate 100,000 new learners in the city. At the existing rate of progress this achievement would take some 40 years!! The Glasgow Learning Alliance hopes that this figure might be achieved in 10 or 20 years, with the assistance of those many volunteers who have been recruited.
Questions from the audience related to the issues of social exclusion, duplication and competition, and accreditation of prior learning. In dealing with these, Stephanie emphasised that the learning initiative works very much on a partnership basis with local authorities, educational institutions and local and national social services working together to tackle issues like social exclusion.
She agreed that lifelong learning spans from the cradle to the grave and that it has been "one of the great disappointments" that accreditation of prior learning has not been adopted in a more efficient and effective manner.
In dealing with a question about resources, Stephanie explained that the Learning Initiative had a budget of some two million pounds. While this might seem like a considerable amount of money, it has to be viewed in the context of spending of over a half a billion pounds on education and training annually in Glasgow.
In order to illustrate the expanse of involvement in the Learning Alliance, Stephanie outlined the Alliance vision statement and the stakeholders involved:
Glasgow's status as a learning city will be founded upon the belief that citizens of all ages will have access to relevant learning opportunities throughout life. This will help them to develop their personal potential and adapt to new challenges as they rise, while producing an articulate, flexible, skilled and able population, who are capable of contributing to their workplace and community.
One of the key recommendations from the workshop was that there should be equal recognition of education, training and learning. The workshop suggested that, as a starting point, there is a need amongst all parties for "real listening" to the needs of the community. It is important to realise that community learning initiatives are not starting from scratch. According to the participants a good base has already been established for networking. It can be difficult to find "a creative balance" between those organisations officially charged with the responsibility of delivering educational services and voluntary bodies who have been working flexibly in the community for many years.
It is suggested that finance is a major barrier to people's efforts to participate in learning, "to buy a book for six pounds is a fairly big expenditure if they have three kids who have to have books and clothes or whatever."
The community workshop discussed the issue of how learning can be "replicated constructively" rather than being "duplicated competitively". While recognising that there are instances of duplication in the area of learning delivery, the education workshop participants felt that competition between organisations can be very healthy and that, if it improves the opportunities for learners, it should be actively promoted.
The participants emphasised the need for mapping the provision of learning across the North Dublin area in order to maximise the use of existing resources.
The participants in this workshop took issue with making a distinction between education and training. They spoke of "the need to start with the new paradigms of the way that we all think about learning, not about education and training, but about learning."
The education and training working group became "very passionate" when they discussed the issues of institutional and attitude barriers which restricted the progress of learners. The group felt that even among themselves a number of prejudices existed which are effective barriers for learners. Among these may be identified, in particular, "out of date notions about the difference between academic learning and vocational experience, out of date notions about the difference between further and higher education".
They suggested that in some cases higher education institutions "put in place terrifying aptitude tests for adult learners that they seek to admit".
Some disappointment was expressed about the exclusion of the universities from the proposed new Qualifications Bill. This exclusion was seen as hindering progression for learners from one stage or opportunity to the next.
While there was much debate about whether the emphasis on lifelong learning should prioritise target groups, especially the disadvantaged, there was the general consensus that if we are serious about lifelong learning, "we have to start with the premise that it is for everybody". The point was made that if we are to facilitate and promote a lifelong learning culture then everybody must be involved, employers, social partners and community.
The opinion was expressed that lifelong learning provision should be demand-led. "So many times we are still providing the sort of learning opportunities that we think people need as opposed to what they want".
It was emphasised that, judging by the Glasgow experience, much can be achieved on a relatively small budget once the focus is placed on making maximum use of existing resources, especially people.
It was noted that although there were 13 members in the enterprise workshop, there was only one employer in the group. The workshop dealt with four key issues:
The group discussed the importance of bringing employers on board such a learning network. In order to facilitate lifelong learning in an holistic fashion, the provision of education and training must deal with people who are both in and out of employment.
It was felt that, within lifelong learning, the issue of skills development was very important especially from an employment point of view: personal skills, communication skills and presentations skills. It was suggested that the Irish higher education system tends to have too narrow a focus and that graduates may not necessarily have the broader range of skills required by an employer. The point was made that Irish employers only contribute 50 percent of the OECD average in terms of employees training expenditure. The local Fast-track to Information Technology (FIT) and PLATO (small business mentoring) initiatives were given as examples of good practice in lifelong learning support. Not all leaders in business, however, "see the importance for the need to up-skill, to get people on board, to give the flexibility for people to participate".
The workshop discussed the fact that 70% of small and medium enterprises have a problem recruiting employees and that given the particular skills needs required, "there are possibilities of getting people on board without going through the huge amount of actual education". From the careers advisory perspective, it was seen as very important that people are given ownership of the own learning and development. It was suggested that, in the workplace, "if each of us can take responsibility for our own education and training it will make for a much more creative, innovative place".
In conclusion the workshop suggested that, while a pilot network might be useful in the North Dublin area, the resources required for the full adoption of such a learning network would involve a Dublin-wide initiative based on the experience of Glasgow.
Christine White, of the National Rehabilitation Board, explained that it was her experience that effective change can occur. She explained that within their own sector of providing services for people with disabilities, "we have managed to argue for our own demise as an organisation". As a result of a widespread consultation process with their "customers", the organisation was now working on developing an education and training network "to bring trainers from the public and private sector, right across the spectrum, together in trying to form a network of membership that will address training problems and issues".
John Lonergan, Governor of Mountjoy Prison, explained how his "customers" would "be from a very specific part of disadvantaged Ireland". He explained that over 60 percent of the population of Mountjoy had left school before 15, none had any third level accreditation, 88 percent were unemployed and two-thirds of them were seriously addicted.
These, John suggested, "are some of the challenges that need to be looked at if we want to bring learning to an acceptable level, on a fair, just and equitable level across Irish society."
Kathleen Maher, of the Ballymun Women's Resource Centre, spoke of the need to think of people as human beings in the most holistic sense. She emphasised that, in order to identify with learners at local level, all kinds of skills, not just those that are recognised in an academic sense, must be recognised. Kathleen described the NOW project in Neighbourhood Planning which involved the training of women as community facilitators in the Ballymun regeneration initiative. She suggested that there is a real challenge, for anyone trying to develop an inclusive learning network, "to have that intertwining of the privileged and the not so privileged in working out the strategy necessary for such a development".
Pat Jennings, of the Probation and Welfare Service, outlined a community education and training project in Darndale called the Darndale Discovery Centre, which was being funded under the Urban initiative. He suggested that the project was an example of "a tangible micro-project to put some of the concept, ideas and suggestions to work in a practical sense. The hardware will be there but help is needed to design the software to make the hardware work, otherwise we could end up with something that will never achieve the potential it set out to achieve.”
One of the most interesting findings from the Building Learning Networks conference was the shared vision which emerged, across all three workshops and the keynote presentation, that a new paradigm of learning (as opposed to education and training) was needed to address the current issues facing education/training, community and enterprise organisations. The participants were, almost unanimously, supportive of the approach taken by the Glasgow Development Agency and felt that it provided a model which could be very usefully explored in the North Dublin setting.
Since the conference, there has been significant progress on the Learning Network initiative. A "North Dublin Loves Learning" festival, based on the Glasgow event, was successfully held in February 2000. The week-long event, attracted over 1,000 participants and is planned again for March 2001. Also stemming from the conference, DCU has become actively involved in the development of the Darndale Discovery Centre and proposes to assist with a Summer School in the Dóchas Centre of Mountjoy Prison.
An underlying emphasis theme which has emerged, at least for me, from our work on the Learning Network, is that although learning is generally agreed to be the key objective of any education or training process, it is generally overshadowed by the mechanics of the process itself. The means obscuring the ends, as it were. The use of the ‘Learning Ocean’ metaphor in the title of this presentation is aimed at bringing learning to the forefront, to visually capture, in an albeit simplistic fashion, the essence of the waves and tides, the ebb and flow of learning which courses through the lifecycles of individuals, communities and societies.
One interesting aspect of the ‘Learning Ocean’ analogy is that it captures both the capability and the vulnerability of the learner. Given favourable conditions and the right supports the learner may venture wherever s/he may wish. The learner is, at the same time, very vulnerable to the prevailing conditions and a strong current of economic or technological change may bring them in directions they had neither anticipated nor desired. In such conditions, institutions of education and training play (or at least should play) vital roles in both equipping the learner to deal with the new conditions and, insofar as possible, providing some shelter from the most immediate effects of the winds of change. I believe there is much merit in networking, along the lines of the Glasgow model, and I would be delighted to hear your opinions on how learners can be best supported on their voyage through lifelong learning.
[At this stage the Workshop went into an open discussion on the practical implications of the Learning Network model for the institutions represented.]
The North Dublin Learning Network was formally inaugurated on October 5th 2000 and has subsequently established three Theme Action Groups. The above paper and the process which led to the Network are outlined in more detail in "Towards a Learning Network – North Dublin Loves Learning", which was launched by the Minister for Adult Education, Willie O’Dea T.D., on November 29th 2000. Mike Egan is currently employed as Development Director with the Darndale Belcamp Discovery Centre.
Egan, M. 2000. Student Power in Education Matters. March 2000, Vol 14, Issue 2. Education Matters. Dublin.
MORI. 1998. Glasgow the Learning City: Lifelong Learning – Attitudinal and Behavioural Study. Glasgow Development Agency. Glasgow.