Global perspectives on higher education and lifelong learners

Maria Slowey, Hans Schuetze

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN: 9780415675079
• eBook ISBN: 9781136332975
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

The global expansion of participation rates in higher education continue more or less unabated. However, while the concept of lifelong learning has figured prominently in national and international educational policy discourse for more than three decades, its implications for the field of higher education has remained relatively underdeveloped.

This book focuses on a particular dimension of the lifelong learning: higher education for those who have not progressed directly from school to higher education. Some will embark on undergraduate programmes as mature students, part-time and/or distance students; others wish to return to higher education after having completed (or not completed) a previous academic programme, while increasing numbers participate in postgraduate and continuing studies for a complex mix of professional and personal reasons.

Adopting a comparative and international longitudinal perspective which goes beyond a snapshot view by building on the cases of a core group of ten OECD countries, this timely book investigates the ways in which important new developments impacting on higher education crystallise around the lifelong learning agenda:

• new technology and open source resources;
• the changing role of the state and market in higher education;
• the blurring of public and private boundaries;
• issues of equity and access in a time of global economic turmoil;
• the increased emphasis on research and international league tables;
• the changing nature of the education; and,
• the complex interaction of international, national and regional expectations which governments and other stakeholders have of universities and other public and private institutions of higher education.

While focusing on the situation in Canada, USA, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and a wide variety of European countries, the book also assesses the issues from the perspective of developing countries.

Launched by the Irish Minister of Education, this timely book is a must read. Find out more here: http://www4.dcu.ie/ovpli/herc/book_launch

Part I

Comparative Perspectives

Chapter 1

All Change – No Change?

Lifelong Learners and Higher Education Revisited

Maria Slowey and Hans G. Schuetze

Introduction: Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose?

Globally, higher education systems have undergone substantial transformation since the time of our first look at adult learners in higher education (OECD 1987). Notably, the pace of change in most systems has accelerated over the last decade with increasing diversification in the composition of the student body, types of higher education institutions, forms of provision and funding mechanisms. The reform of higher education has been a dominant theme in national and international policy discourse with a focus amongst other considerations on changing higher education governance, financing, structures and modi operandi in order to make institutions more ‘relevant’ to the needs of labour markets, more ‘efficient’, more transparent and accountable, and more international and competitive. As the participation rates in OECD countries increased significantly, equity issues and widening access for under-represented sections of the population tended to be relegated to second order consideration.

Global trends are, of course, mediated at the level of national public policy by complex political, historical, cultural and economic conditions. This is why we believe that there is much insight to be gained from an examination of the ways in which a common international topic is interpreted across different countries. The idea of lifelong learning is one such theme, having been widely promulgated for decades by international organizations such as UNESCO, OECD and the EU as an organizing principle or ‘master plan’ for a potentially new approach to teaching and learning.

The concept is contested and open to widely different interpretations, as discussed in our earlier book (Schuetze and Slowey 2000). At its core, however, lifelong learning is built around two axes: a vertical one which relates to the truism that people learn not just while they are young, but over the whole of their lives; and a horizontal axis which relates to the fact that active and purposeful learning takes place not only in formal educational institutions such as schools or universities, but also in the workplace, in the community, in different social environments as well as through individual non-formal study.

However, while the concept of lifelong learning featured prominently in national and international educational policy discourse, the implications of this concept for higher education remained underdeveloped. Some types of institutions in the post-secondary system gradually changed to accommodate lifelong learners, but overall, higher education has been slow to adapt its mission, structures and understanding of knowledge and learning – in short, its culture – to the demands for a more open, flexible and egalitarian system. This generally slow pace of change seems somewhat surprising in the light of calls from employers for an educated, flexible and adaptable work force, the aspirations of governments to develop ‘knowledge-based economies’ and ‘learning societies’ and, in many OECD countries, significant demographic shifts associated with ageing populations. Two factors contribute to this slow progress towards a lifelong learning system. First, there is the recognition that a system of lifelong learning requires complex processes of articulation and coordination as well as far-reaching changes to the formal education system and the ways the workplace and other social organizations are designed, organized and used as learning places. Second, however, the complexity of the concept masks a fundamental conflict between, on the one hand, a model of lifelong learning derived from principles of social justice and equity, and on the other, a model based on a human capital perspective (Coffield 2000; Rubenson and Schuetze 2000; Slowey and Watson 2003; Fagerlind and Stromqvist 2004; Schuetze and Slowey 2003; Schuetze 2006; Schuetze and Casey 2006; Field 2006; Jarvis 2009; Rubenson 2009). In relation to higher education, the dominance of the neoliberal perspective has, inevitably, resulted in the latter perspective being preeminent.

By adopting a common analytic framework and a comparative and international approach, this book aims to go beyond the level of generality in order to uncover just how these competing agendas play out in practice at national levels. Specifically, our interest is in higher education for those who have not progressed directly from school to higher education, but who are engaged – in one way or another – in broader economic, social and civic life outside the academy. Some embark on undergraduate programmes as mature students, part-time and/or distance students; others wish to return to higher education after having completed (or not completed) a programme leading to a first degree or other post-secondary qualification, while increasing numbers participate in postgraduate and continuing studies for a complex mix of professional, personal and social purposes. In different ways they are all lifelong learners.

Additionally, by building on a core group of ten OECD countries involved in two previous studies (OECD 1987; Schuetze and Slowey 2000) we are in a position to go beyond a snapshot view, providing a cumulative longitudinal perspective. This allows us to address important new developments which affect the way in which higher education systems have responded (or not) to the lifelong learning agenda, including: the changing role of the state; the marketization of higher education; the blurring of public and private boundaries; issues of equity and access in a time of global economic turmoil; the increased emphasis on research and international league tables; the changing nature of the education and associated forms of knowledge defined as ‘higher’; new technology and open source materials; and the complex interaction of international, national and regional expectations which governments and other stakeholders have of higher education.

This chapter is divided into four parts. The first provides an overview of global changes in higher education which have particular relevance for lifelong learning. The second outlines our methodology and the main themes to be explored in-depth in the country case studies in this book. The third examines the patterns – both congruent and contradictory – emerging from qualitative reviews of developments in lifelong learning alongside the (growing) phenomenon of international quantitative indicators of various kinds. The final part draws the themes together, locating higher education in the much broader landscape of lifelong learning.

Global Developments

The classic role of universities in the formation and social reproduction of the next generation remains their most fundamental function, yet systems of higher education as a whole have changed dramatically in terms of the scale, the structure, the composition of the student body, patterns of governance, stakeholder involvement, the growth in graduate education and the emphasis on research (Marginson and van der Wende 2006; Altbach, Reisberg and Rumbley 2009; Schuetze and Slowey 2009; Scott 2009). As a result, universities and other institutions of higher education have become significant economic, social and cultural players at local, regional, national and global levels and the subject of increasing attention at national and international policy levels – as is, for example, reflected in the findings of a comprehensive review of higher education policies in 24 countries (OECD 2008).

There has also been a steady growth in the resources invested in higher education, and even where public budgets ceased to grow (or were reduced due to the crisis of the banking and financial services systems at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century), institutions sought to diversify their income sources and make up for losses by increasing tuition and other fees, cutting scholarships and services, or, where these measures did not suffice to fill the gap, by cutting student enrolments and programmes (Douglass 2010). In many countries this reflects an ideological shift towards increased marketization and privatization of elements of higher education – with consequent blurring of the boundaries between public and private dimensions (Marginson 2007; Enders and Jongbloed 2007; Ball and Youdell 2008; Altbach and Levy 2005; Altbach, Reisberg and Rumbley 2009).

The higher education system indeed grew exponentially: globally, student numbers have doubled in less than a decade and a half, from 68 million in 1991 to 132 million in 2004 (OECD 2008). Despite the major challenges facing the higher education systems of poor countries, most also experienced expansion. A study of middle income countries involved in the UNESCO World Education Indicators (WEI) Programme showed the significantly larger volume of students graduating from these countries than in the 30 OECD member states combined (UNESCO 2007). In 2006, for example, China had more tertiary graduates (2.4 million) than the top three OECD countries combined – the United States (1.4 million), Japan (0.6 million) and France (0.3 million).

In exploring the topic of lifelong learning in higher education, three factors need to be taken into consideration when looking behind these headline higher education participation figures. Firstly, one of the key comparative indicators of levels of participation is the Age Participation Rate (APR). This measures the proportion of the population of the typical school-leaving age cohort which progresses to higher education. By definition, this refers to young people, and only rarely are such measures used to explore levels of participation by adults in higher education. Secondly, much of the expansion in higher education over the last two decades has taken place in non-university institutions such as polytechnics, community colleges, further education colleges and the like. The statistics therefore generally do not refer only to universities, but to participation across all types of higher education institutions. Thirdly, international statistics usually refer to full-time undergraduate entrants, whereas mature students are more likely to be found on part-time, distance, post-experience and non-credit programmes.

As the country chapters (except for Mexico and Brazil) show, the term lifelong learning is so ubiquitous in national policies that it is easy to forget that the concept and principle were first developed – and strongly advocated – by international organizations, not by individual countries. In fact, a brief glance ‘at national educational documents is all that is needed to appreciate the extraordinary success the supranational organizations have had in setting the agenda for lifelong learning’ (Rubenson 2009: 129).

As developed and discussed by UNESCO and OECD in the 1970s the concept of lifelong learning – building on radical education ideas emanating from the adult education tradition – was associated with notions of ‘de-schooling’ and student protests which criticized the traditional education system as being closed and elitist, especially the universities (for example, Field 2006; Osborne and Thomas 2003; Schuetze and Casey 2006; Osborne, Gallacher and Crossan 2007; Desjardin and Rubenson 2009). Sometimes referred to as the ‘first generation’ of lifelong learning, the underlying principles were characterized by a mix of social justice objectives relating to participation and inclusion – including the provision of second chance opportunities for people to return to education as adult students. Educational opportunity was seen as the foundation for participation in social and civic life, and therefore of critical importance in fostering a vibrant democracy, as well as preparation for employment.

The concept then experienced a revival in the 1990s in a different guise. This ‘second generation’ of lifelong learning was shaped by a neoliberal agenda in which lifelong learning was viewed as a key educational mechanism to underpin the development of the ‘knowledge economy’. This new economy, it was argued, required a well-trained, flexible and adaptable workforce, with associated investment from enterprise and individual workers in continuing training and learning. As in its earlier incarnation, there were variations in emphasis between the major international organizations, with UNESCO stressing individual development and enrichment as well as the wider economic objectives of lifelong learning (UNESCO 1996). In contrast, the OECD (1996) and later the European Union (2000) and the World Bank (2003) placed the main emphasis on human resource and employment dimensions, with considerations of equity and social justice as secondary concerns. Lifelong learning was thus highlighted as a potential tool in the drive for ‘modernization’ and ‘development’ with the economic imperative of education and training being to the fore.

The active advocacy of lifelong learning by international organizations stood in contrast to their ability to implement a lifelong learning policy in the member countries. With the exception of the EU, which can legislate on matters for which it has the mandate, international organizations have no direct instrument of implementation. Nevertheless, higher education institutions were subject to, and arguably complicit with, the growing use of policy-steering mechanisms (Neave 2004). Thus, despite the fact that universities and other institutions of higher education in the various countries emerged from different traditions, and took on different organizational forms as they played their role in nation building, analyses of the contemporary trends in higher education suggest there is evidence of increasing convergence. Reviews of empirical literature reveal a high degree of global isomorphism in terms of aspiration, content, expansion and patterns of enrolment from the medieval roots of the university through to contemporary times (Meyer 2000; Schofer and Meyer 2005).

In Europe, for example, the major EU policy dr...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Figures
• Tables
• Contributors
• Part I Comparative Perspectives
• Part II Europe
• Part III North America
• Part IV Pacific – Australia, Japan and New Zealand
• Part V Perspectives from Two ‘BRICS' Countries
• Part VI Epilogue
• Index