What the heck is Lifelong Learning?
For all the attention it gets, learning throughout the life-course is neither a new, nor a static, nor a simple uncontested concept. It has been around, at least in some form, since at least the time of Plato (Rubenson, 2004). But in the 1960s and 1970s, LLL (called lifelong education at the time) became a “master concept and guiding principle for restructuring education” (Rubenson, 04, p. 29). It received substantial attention for a short time and then was resurrected with different character and under different forces years later (Rubenson, 04). Its character is dependent on its contexts: in different times, different organizations (and different interests within organizations) construct LLL in different ways (Biesta, 2006). Schuetze (2008) compares LLL to “… a chameleon whose colours are changing according to its environment thereby confusing the very concept” (Schuetze, 08, p. 376). However, there are main features that are rather consistent across contemporary discourse: LLL is a) lifelong, b) life-wide, and c) focused on learning instead of education (Schuetze, 08).
Today, and in coming posts, I want to explore the changes in the conceptualizations of LLL as evidenced by the discourse from major international agencies such as the OECD, World Bank and the EU. One of the early "modern" conceptualizations of LLL came from UNESCO, so today, I want to start by describing, in very general terms, the UNESCO conceptualization. This will set the stage for a comparision that I will make in the coming days.
The UNESCO Conceptualization of LLL
Rubenson (2004) refers to orientations and generations of LLL policy discourse. The first generation, which he refers to as the Humanistic orientation, was typified by The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) 1972 Fauré Report which called for nothing less than the “complete fulfillment of man [sic]” (p.?) . It outlined 21 guiding principles for implementing LLL (Ouane, 2008) and decried the unsettling impact of modernization on daily life. I proposed LLL so people could “develop a scientific frame of mind in order to promote the sciences without being enslaved by them (p. xxvii, as quoted in Rubenson, 2008).
UNESCO has continued to promote LLL. It has supported numerous studies and authored many reports including the 1996 Delors report, Learning: The Treasure Within, which aimed to preserve the values of education put forth in the Fauré Report in the face of globalization (Ouane, 2008) . In 2006, the UNESCO Institute for Education became the Institute for LLL [check] with a mandate to strengthen services supporting LLL, foster a holistic approach to LLL with special concern for those who are disadvantaged, and to network (Ouane, 2008).
In the following section, I describe UNESCO’s conceptualization of LLL. This description is not based on my own in-depth analysis of UNESCO publications, but rather on academic and critical discourse comparing the UNESCO vision with what is being called the dominant view of LLL.
A Broad Conceptualization
The UNESCO documents present broad aims and visions of LLL which are
“…marked by a strong, explicitly stated, humanistic ideology, a political programme, and a philosophy of education in which the ideals and language of the European Enlightenment can be clearly read, with its global aspirations, its humanistic concerns, its emphasis on solidarity, and its faith in science and technology working together with education and democracy as tools for the global improvement and progress of humanity” (Wain, 2007, p. 46).
And the state is given “pronounced role in the mobilisation and maintenance” of learning (ibid, p. 46) in its various forms. The Delors Report (1996) suggested 4 diverse pillars of learning: Learning to do, Learning to be, Learning to know, and Learning to live together and it sought to “rethink and update the concept of LLL so as to reconcile 3 forces:” 1) competition which provides incentives, 2) cooperation which gives strength, and 3) solidarity which unites (Ouane, 2008, p. 307).
A Right and Value in Itself
The UNESCO vision is not overly pragmatic. Since as far back as 1947, UNESCO saw education and learning as valuable pursuits in their own right, and as a right of every individual including adults (Ouane, 2008). Learning is part of a process in ones continuing intellectual and cultural journey. It is at the very heart of what it means to live a human life.
Education is not an addendum to life imposed from the outside. It is no more an asset to be gained than is culture. To use the language of philosophers, it lies not in the field of ‘having’ but in that of ‘being’! The being in a state of ‘becoming’ at each different stage and in varying circumstances is the true subject-matter of education. (Dave, 1976, p. 63-64, as quoted in Ouane, 2008)
Dave (1976) refers to it as a way of developing a “need for and interest in cultural values, because it makes life more colourful and more worthwhile. Thus, education helps to intensify our awareness of the values of life and so creates one form of human happiness” (p. 63, as quoted in Ouane, 2008). As a feature of living itself, LLL cannot tie itself to a notions of learning as the transmission of static knowledge. Learning is a part of life and knowledge is used in living.
[I]n any learning process the stress can no longer be on the necessarily limited and arbitrarily fixed content; it must bear upon the ability to understand, to assimilate and analyse; to put order in the knowledge acquired, to handle with ease the relationship between the abstract and concrete, between the general and the particular, to relate action and to coordinate training and information. In a setting of LLE this is tantamount to equipping the human being with a method which will be at his [sic] disposal throughout the entire length of his [sic] intellectual an cultural journey. (Lengrand, 1975, p. 55 as cited in Ouane, 2008)
UNESCO’s first director, Julian Huxley explained that LLL is
…based upon the enlargement of knowledge, not only or even mainly in the natural sciences, but equally in the social sciences and humanities. For those bits and pieces of new knowledge, now reality. And new understandings, man is capable of forming a new picture of himself, his place in nature, his relationships with the rest of the universe, his role in the universal cosmic process—in other words, his destiny; and on that turn, building new and more adequate beliefs…in becoming aware of his destiny, man has become aware of the entire evolutionary process on this planet; the two are inter[linked]” (p. 107) (Ouane, 2008)
Learning offers a way for people to enjoy themselves now and prepare for the future. Lengrand (1989) says that each new learning experience is both “…a unique and valuable experience and a preparation for future states….lived to the full and should constitute experiences, pleasures and satisfactions…[where one] gradually comes to know himself or herself” (p. 7, as cited in Griffen, 2008).
Themes of Emancipation, Equality and Democracy
Running throughout the documents and history of UNESCO are the themes of emancipation, equality and democracy. At the time of the Fauré Report, Ettore Gelpi was the UNESCO’s Chief of Lifelong Education. He was highly influenced by Freire and sought deep transformations in education with a radical focus on helping the poor (Ouane, 2008). In the Fauré Report itself, “democratisation is the main driver, and where the basic function of LLL lies in the combination of the personal and the democratic dimension” (Biesta, 2006, p. 174). Lengrand (1975) described it in terms of global issues like human rights and social justice that transcend particular societies and Dave (1976, p. 63) explained that once LLL is available to all, it will cease to be “…a factor in the formation of an elite and in the stabilization of its position….It is no longer described as a means of advancement in society, or because of the financial benefits it brings” (Ouane, 2008). UNESCO remained committed to these themes. In the Fifth International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA V) in 1997, UNESCO expressed its desire for a learning society which was “committed to social justice and general well-being” (p. 31). LLL was positioned to promote
· “the capacity to deal with the transformations taking place in the economy, in culture and in society as a whole” (p. 30-31)
· coexistence and tolerance, and
· creative and active democratic participation.(Ouane, 2008).
Thus, this first generation version of LLL is painted as a radical, humanistic and broad model inclusive of many forms and objectives (including personal, economic and political aims), conceived of as a right with inherent value for all. In the next posting, I will give a brief comparison of this model to that of the second generation, before beginning to summarize the critiques that have developed around this latter model.
No comments:
Post a Comment