CORDIS Archive
This page has been archived. It will no longer be updated.
|
LIFELONG LEARNING IN EUROPE: A RESPONSE TO CHANGED LABOUR MARKET, LIFE COURSE, AND SOCIAL INTEGRATION. CONDITIONS AND STRATEGIES IN EUROPE | |||||
|
SOClifelearn960058/EW/rm Scientist in charge :
WALTHER Andreas Tel.: 49/7071551696
Contractor :
IRIS e.V., INSTITUT FUER REGIONALE INNOVATION UND SOZIALFORSCHUNG Contract N° :
ERBFMMACT960058 |
Euroconference Lifelong Learning in Europe - Euroconferences Project
Overview Starting point of the project was the observation that the term of "lifelong learning" rather describes a fact than a concept. It is used for a broad range of different educational and training measures and, thus, it describes the manyfold reactions to the the pressure of changing economical and social structures. The project had the objective to develop an integrated concept of lifelong learning supporting new individual life forms as well as corresponding to changing qualificatory demands. Therefore presumptions and perspectives implied by a new social organization of learning were to be collected mainly from an educational and sociological perspective - without leaving important economical and political viewpoints apart. The Euroconferences project consisted of two events: The first conference in november 1996 in Dresden (East-Germany) was intended to clear necessary conditions and implications of an integrated concept of lifelong learning. The focus of the second event in may 1998 in Lisbon (Portugal) looked at existing experiences with models and policies in Europe. Thus, perspectives for the effective implementation of measures of lifelong learning allover Europe could be developed. The interculturality within a European framework on the one hand was a means to identify 'best practices', on the other hand of widening the horizons on local, regional, national, and European levels. Dresden, November 1996 Lifelong Learning in Europe: The focus of this conference was to clear social and theoretical pre-conditions implied by the concept of lifelong learning. Central Issues:
This conference took place in the context of the European Year for Lifelong Learning at the Tecnical University of Dresden from 28th to 30th of november 1996. The conference was attended by some 100 persons from 16 European countries - mainly young researchers and regional training and education experts from Saxonia. The cross-cultural, interdisciplinary and theory-practice discourses arising from this attendance structure dealt with the basic question of the conference: What are the social prerequisites of a strategy lifelong learning intended to solve increasing challenges of social integrations with totally open perspectives? Lothar Böhnisch (University of Dresden) opened the conference by an outline of the perspectives and implications of biography as a key dimension of learning. A concept of learning and achievement of integrity considering processes of 'self-socialisation' becomes necessary in the context of de-structurisation of life ages. In his paper on "Post-Fordist Possibilities for Lifelong Learning", Phil Brown (University of Canterbury) tried to connect these different perspectives by drawing a picture oscillating between the perspective of a globally flexibilized economy weakening individuals' possibilities of participation, national regimes of - more (in the United Kingdom) or less (in Germany) - deregulated education and welfare policies and individual needs and aspirations. The central task of social and educational policies should be to shape diversified options of entering and re-entering local labour markets. The societal organisation of learning as the institutionalisation of gender-specific life courses and of inter-generational relationships were the issues of the second plenary session. As Thomas Ziehe (University of Hannover) showed, educational processes are increasingly influenced by the culture of everyday life. However, there is a difference in the experiences of modern life between the adult and the young generation which can be described as a more disenchanted perception of the world by young people. A "new culture of learning" considering therefore should confront learners with experiences of difference and unfamiliarity. Specific strategies of young adults to organize their lives were the focus of Manuela du Bois-Reymond's (University of Leiden) contribution based on empirical data on "life projects" of young women and men in the Netherlands. The biographic synchronicity of trajectories instead of linear status passages between youth and adulthood is reflected by the openness of young adults' life plans - "I still cannot spot my future". According to educational attainment and to gender she offered a typology of cultural trendsetters on the one side and (a majority of) young people with work and future orientations based on the 'normal biography' on the other side. The gendered differences of biographical opportunities stood in the centre of Gisela Notz' (Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation, Bonn) reflections on the "Emanicpatory Aspects of Lifelong Learning". The experience of these segmentations as well as the necessity of structures enabling women (and men) to combine living, learning and working points to a re-politization of education in general providing critical-social competences. The next step was to concretize the implications of lifelong learning by project presentations of young researchers in thematic working groups. In the first working group new concepts of work - new concepts of learning the changed labour market structures formed the background for the search for new designs of learning - the demand of flexibilization, the rising of the information society and the increasing importance of third sector organisations as employment opportunities. Here especially the contribution Jyri Manninen (Helsinki) was interesting as he offered a differentiation between lifelong learning measures - re-active, pro-active and innovative - between „training for jobs" and „learning for change". He showed that re-active measures dominate the scenery whereas innovative measures are reserved for high qualified professionals. In the second working group on the structures of new learning biographies conditions of participation in lifelong learning according to class and gender, life age, social environment, integration into networks or access to education and training measures were discussed. In the third working group cultural differences were presented as challenge for lifelong learning from the perspectives of learners as individuals in a multicultural society and of professionals working with migrant families. In working group four different spaces and contexts were described with their specific resources and problems for lifelong learning processes: Learning projects in organisations, milieux of students' lives, civil cases in the court-room and the development of community education in urban areas. The fifth working group dealt with different perspectives of social participation and learning opportunities for young people according to class, educational attainment and anticipated employment perspectives, new life situations and national structures of youth policy During the plenary sessions as well as in the working groups one of the repeatingly posed questions was the one concerning the responsibility for political and social change towards an integrated concept of lifelong learning - "Who is 'we'?" as one participant put it. Possible answers to this question were expected in the last session of lectures asking for political conditions of the new learning society: Enzo Morgagni (University of Bologna) pointed to the eminence of the third sector as mediator between state, market and individual life worlds. With regard to the learning challenges posed by new media public intervention would be mainly required as introducing filters or enabling intermediate actors to to canalize informations and learning opportunities. Luigi Guerra (University of Bologna) sharpened the focus on the consequences of new media by demonstrating that not only in the context of educational policy but even regarding relationships of learning and education in general the question of actorship and of self-determined learning has to be taken up in a critical way. Burkart Sellin (CEDEFOP, Thessaloniki) gave a view over the historical development of European training policies and showed major barriers of a further convergence of national strategies - especially the mutual recognition of modularized training - as a prerequisite of lifelong learning.
Lisbon, May 1998 Lifelong Learning in Europe: Differences and Divisions. Can the concept of Lifelong Learning really promote social integration in an increasingly competitive Europe? This was the guiding question during the second conference, held at at Costa da Caparica, near Lisbon, from 13th to 17th of may 1998. Objective of this conference was to question concrete policies of lifelong learning regarding their awareness of the risks of reproducing social divisions which are connected to the necessity of diversification. Central Issues
The conference was opened by Maria João Rodrigues (European Commission, General Direction V) giving an outline over the European Commission's policy on lifelong learning. Manuela du Bois-Reymond (University of Leiden) gave the scientific opening lecture. In her speech she proposed the analytical combination of the perspective on individual intrinsic motivation which is demanded more and more in the Learning Society and the perspective on social structure. Thus, she developed a typology with four learner-types: intrinsically motivated intellectuals, intrinsically motivated cultural trendsetters, extrinsically motivated mass-learners represented by modern school youth, and extrinsically motivated adults in continous requalification. The learning modes of the intrinsic types can be understood as models for the implementation of the Learning Society's programs for the extrinsic learner types. After the opening session the structure of the conference consisted in excursions to local community education projects and three sessions which after a plenary introduction split into workshops. The plenary sessions were chaired and introduced by experienced researchers, the moderations as well as the presentations in the workshops were done by young researchers. In the first two sessions criticism was raised regarding different and unequal opportunities of access and outcomes of lifelong learning according to education, labour market position, gender, life age and ethnic background. In his introduction to Session I "Lifelong Learning and the differences in labour market positions and educational attainments" Andy Furlong (University of Glasgow) showed that in Great Britain as well as all over Europe increased educational participation hasn't lead to increased social equality. This perspective was deepened and concretized in two workshops. Workshop 1 dealt with "Research approaches twords and effects of lifelong learning". Here Wolfgang Jütte (University of Flensburg) presented an indicator model of describing learning societies, Andy Biggart (University of Edinburgh) demonstrated the difficulties of interpreting young peoples' motivation to continue with secondary education after the end of compulsory schooling. David van Ypersele (Catholic University of Leuven) presented a holistic evaluation concept for education measures for longterm-unemployed. In Workshop 2 "Experienced practices of lifelong learning" critically were presented. Jutta Goltz, Anne Schwarz (both IRIS, Tübingen), Roberta Palmintieri and Roberta Bertoletti (both from the University of Bologna) presented results of a European research project on success criteria of further training for women focussing the aspect of reconciliation between work, family and learning demands. Morena Cuconato (University of Bologna) presented the example of the Incubator for female entreprise creation in Bologna showing that also progressive means of equal opportunities fail to integrate those with the highest need of support. Elizabeth Kiely (University of Cork) presented data regarding an Irish program for the integration of young people with low educational achievements showing that access to lifelong learning is closed for the most of the program's participants. Session II "Lifelong Learning and the differences of biographies in the context of gendered biographies" was introduced by Claudia Born (University of Bremen). She pointed to the fact that ‚biography' is a useful means to show that even higher qualifications of women haven't improved their employment situation and their access to lifelong learning. In Workshop 3 "Reflecting gender hierarchies through lifelong learning" Veerle Stroobants (University of Leuven) presented a concept of ‚biographicity' considering women's efforts to combine work and family in their lives. Lydia Sapouna (University of Cork) reflected research results on the education needs of EU-migrant women in Ireland for labour market integration. In Workshop 4 "Lifelong learning in the life-course" the biographical perspective was broadened towards age groups who are not regarded as typical learning groups. Two contributions reflected learning possibilities in the old age: Arno Heimgartner (University of Graz) developed a biographical and learning perspectives for elder persons in the Third Sector, Esther Alcala Mangas (University of Granada) presented experiences of university courses for elder students. Maria Teresa Tagliaventi (Bologna) presented results of a research focussing needs and possibilities of education and training to overcome child work. Session III "Lifelong Learning in the context of everyday culture" dealt with the relationship between formal and informal learning. In his introduction Sven Mørch (University of Copenhagen) reflected the contextualization of learning in peer education, i.e. in the context of friendship, ‚scenes' or youth clubs. The following workshops consequently dealt with the social embedding and the outcomes of informal learning contexts: In Workshop 5 "Informal learning and cultural orientations" focussed arts based projects and youth cultural access to learning. Axel Pohl (IRIS e.V.), Steve Miles (University of Plymouth) and Maria do Carmo Gomes (CIES Lisbon) presented intermediate results of a European research project on „secondary learning effects of community arts projects" based on the qualitative evaluation of three projects in Mannheim, Liverpool and Lisbon. Massimiano Bucchi and Cristina Limoncini (IARD Milan) presented results of a research on young people's orientations towards and experiences with informations tecnologies showing the importance of informal channels which however revealed to be dependent on social structure in terms of financial means and education. Federica Zanetti (University of Bologna) presented research results of a European action research project with groups of migrant minorities in order to raise their intercultural competencies. In Workshop 6 "Lifelong learning by community actions" community education projects were presented: Mafalda Margarido Santos (University of Lisbon) reported from a European project on citizenship and participation as objectives and principles of community based youth work. Gabriele Lenzi (University of Bologna) presented experiences based on the evaluation of a health education project for persons with AIDS that ‚networking' is an important pre-requisite, means and objective of learning processes. Mark Cieslik (University of Teesside) showed - using an example from South Wales - that young people may use community actions as rather open and familiar access to education and social integration.
Future One of the perspectives raised by the two conferences was that social educationalists, sociological youth and social policy researchers have important contributions to give with regard to a comprehensive integration of the concept of 'lifelong learning'. To sum up, most speakers and participants were highly sceptical regarding the integrative potential of lifelong learning regarding its ideological function. Participation and empowerment of learners as basic principles of lifelong learning therefore not only have to be considered as normative but as necessary for the effectiveness of lifelong learning itself. This points to the necessity to treat lifelong learning not only as education but also as an objective of social policies. | ||||
|
Publications | |||||
|
Walther, A. & Stauber, B. (eds.) 1998. Lifelong Learning in Europe: Options for the Integration of Living, Learning and Working, Volume 1. Tübingen: Neuling Verlag).
Walther, A & Stauber, B (eds.) 1999. Lifelong Learning in Europe: Differences and Divisions, Volume 2. Tübingen: Neuling Verlag (forthcoming)
Links: Website (including abstracts of the contributions) : http://www.iris-egris.de | |||||
| Program Events | |||||
|
Conference n° 1 : LIFELONG LEARNING IN EUROPE I. OPTIONS FOR THE INTEGRATION OF LIVING, LEARNING AND WORKING? Dates .....: Place .....:
|
Conference n° 2 : LIFELONG LEARNING IN EUROPE II. DIFFERENCES AND DIVISIONS - STRATEGIES OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION AND INDIVIDUAL LEARNING BIOGRAPHIES Dates .....: Place .....:
|
Conference n° 3 :
|
Conference n° 4 :
| ||
| TMR Home Page | CORDIS | Programme Home Pages | |||