1. lifelong learning (LLL) and professional development (PD)
Department of Learning and Philosophy
Aalborg University
Copenhagen
NERA 45th Congress of the Nordic Educational Research Association (NERA) March 2017
Why formal education,
lifelong learning (LLL) and professional development (PD)
should be a part of the same educational discourse and
thus be squarely placed at the core of the system of education
(and why not)
Jón Torfi Jónasson,
School of Education, University of Iceland

2. Other ways to phrase my question(s)
How does our system of education take into account societal developments in its structure and operation?
Does the system of education adapt itself to rapidly changing demands for education in a fast and continually changing society?
Here I am referring to structure. It is perhaps even more pressing to talk about content, but that would be a different session.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

3. A preamble to the current argument I
I am talking about LLL in general. But I will turn to a specific subset for the sake of clarity and force of the argument. I accept the term “learning” as a focus, even though I would prefer to use the term “education”. (See e.g. Andreas Fejes. (2014). Lifelong Learning and Employability)
There are important subsets of this discussion.
First is the rhetorical notion that LLL is a term to emphasise that learning extends from birth to death, i.e., to note that all learning, including kindergarten, school and all later learning should be accepted as being important.
In there, is the basic, general, formal education, which people do not have in mind when talking about LLL.
Also, what we may call General LL education (for skills or enlightenment).
Then we have Adult education, which is normally treated as a special field, intended for people who have not received basic education and then seek it as adults. I will not focus on this part in the present talk.
Professional development (PD), which is an immense part of the LLL discourse.
LLL
Basic education
Secondary education
General LLL
Adult Education
Tertiary education
Professional development
Work based development
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

4. Formal (higher) education
There are many different discourses at large and it is not clear how the intersect, but they certainly do, but they don't seem to interact explicitly
Professional development
Work place learning
Adult education
Continuing education
Formal (higher) education
Lifelong learning
Informal education
Distance education e-learning
Informal learning
Non-formal education
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

5. A preamble to the current argument II
The basic formal argument is at least 60 or 70 year old – but in fact much older.
The premises and lines of argumentation are not new either
There are little signs that “the system” takes any notice, neither in terms of rhetoric, ambitions, infrastructure, nor financial considerations
Thus we need to do three things:
Rehash and rethink the arguments
Evaluate if the set of arguments has strengthened or weakened
Explore and evaluate the forces or constraints that frustrate and motion in the direction of more sensible infrastructures
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

6. The four parts of the current argument
I. The premises on which the current system of education is based are outdated (not wrong).
II. The “new” premises require LLL. There are four lines of argument to underpin and mould these.
The first line of argument focuses on change
The second line of argument focuses on pedagogy
The third line of argument has a focus on the political or cultural environment
The fourth line of argument has a focus on the way people become experts, through deliberate practice and coaching
As for PD all this can only be developed on the job, partly as the job also develops.
The third part presents the system perspective, introducing the system inertia
Various obstacles to system change are presented.
This part is largely inspired by Jónasson (2016), but here the emphasis is on the system rather than content.
IV. The fourth part is a critique of the above argumentation
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

7. The four parts of the current argument
I. The premises on which the current system of education is based are outdated (not wrong).
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

8. Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017
The question is also about what the LLL discourse in fact conveys or reflects
The rhetoric is sensible, but very general and thus does not imply any concrete settings – it doesn’t imply anything except that education never ends – a notion that has been accepted for centuries
The system is denoted by the dark green sections, even though some of the rest is formalised it is still outside the system of education (with exceptions)
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

9. Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017
26 countries
Very substantial variation by country Considerable missing data
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

10. Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017
The premises on which the current system of education is based are outdated (not wrong). We mistakenly, implicitly, assume
That we know what knowledge will be powerful for a future life or what competencies come us in good stead generally
With reference to challenges, culture, technology or jobs
That we know what competencies certain jobs or professions, or participation in society generally, would be best served by
That we know what jobs will exist in the near or far future or what complex challenges await us
That we know “our” labour market trajectory – or any trajectory for that matter; in particular that we will stay in one job or vocation or profession for long – for which we can usefully prepare
That fast changes in the past few decades will slow down; the rapidity of change is now finally over
All taken together, that things will be relatively stable, as they were in relative terms in the middle and even latter part of las century.
Of course nobody really assumes all of this!? But the system seems to.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

11. Again we (the formal system) mistakenly, implicitly,
still assume the setting at the top rather than that of the bottom
A schematic diagram indicating the way many people think (implicitly) about education, accepting a relatively sensible description for the 1950’s
It is suggested here that a much more appropriate description or conceptual framework would be (note we are hinting at 5 x 20 year periods):
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

12. The four parts of the current argument
II. The “new” premises require LLL. There are four lines of argument to underpin and mould these.
The first line of argument focuses on change
The second line of argument focusses on pedagogy
The third line of argument has a focus on the political or cultural environment
The fourth line of argument has a focus on the way people become experts, through deliberate practice and coaching
As for PD all this can only be developed on the job, partly as the job also develops.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

13. The new premises require LLL
There are four lines of argument to underpin and mould these premises.
Some people want evidence based policy:
The evidence we have demands that we take these arguments seriously
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

14. The new premises require LLL
In every walk of life the changes taking place are enormous often with exponential characteristics.
There are demographic, cultural and labour market changes. New challenges emerge all the time related to sustainability and climate.
There is an ongoing knowledge explosion with enormous changes e.g., in biology, genetics, computer science and technological tools – but of course in every field.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

15. The new premises require LLL
We learn by working, trying - doing, by receiving expert guidance and inspiration in situations we know to be authentic, relevant and challenging.
We are constantly facing new challenges that we are motivated in our daily jobs to overcome.
Being immersed in real life situations with professional coaching and encouragement is the most sensible for effective professional development.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

16. The new premises require LLL
There is a host of political pressures on the schools that are rather merciless, but variable and difficult to simulate. Developing one’s job expertise is very situation specific.
The existing pressures may mould the life in the labour market more than any formal technical or academic argument or knowledge may do. These relate to labour policy (e.g. to educational policy for teachers, on inclusion, testing, tracking, etc. etc.) and to cultural norms in the work place.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

17. The new premises require LLL
Development of expertise takes time. It also requires deliberate and guided practice, which calls for coaching in authentic circumstances.
It also requires critical reflection on the tasks at hand and new and alternative ways to do things.
This can only happen on, or related to the job, or real life circumstance, even though it may be worthwhile also to step outside it at times for reflection.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

18. A summary of these arguments
Change – In the labour market and in most jobs, and in life generally, very rapid updating, based on well informed expertise, is crucial.
Pedagogy – Arguments based on motivation, and feedback that refer to developing knowledge of the task and on the task, are very strong.
External pressures – politics of the work place, especially of the working environment make most (professional) development very situation specific.
Expertise – needs to be developed over time in most jobs or tasks, and relies on expert coaching in authentic circumstances.
Again, all this depends on specific situations, but taken together, presents a very powerful argument for a shift towards a systemic implementation of PD and related LLL, within the system of education – an idea that seems alien to HE.
The argument suggests that in-service (and in-life!) education is no less important than pre-service education and deserves at least the same attention and same emphasis on infra-structure.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

19. The four parts of the current argument
The third part presents the system perspective, introducing the system inertia
Various obstacles to system change are presented.
This part is largely inspired by Jónasson (2016), but here the emphasis is on the system rather than content.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

20. Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017
There are little signs that “the system”, takes much notice as far as its main agenda is concerned, - i.e., with reference to LLL, either in terms of rhetoric, infrastructure, nor financial considerations: But it could!
With reference to the four lines of argument we note that the education system – in particular HE, due to its research agenda:
Knows a lot about the future and future competencies – it would perhaps be better equipped – content-wise - to deal with LLL and in particular PD, than initial vocational – professional education – where its present focus lies
With its pedagogic expertise the system is well equipped to address the pedagogic challenges
It is – to be fair – not competent to address or take into account all the political or external pressures interwoven into most real life tasks, but is competent to design environments where this would be done
It could be an important partner in providing the coaching and the reflective component needed for proficient development of expertise
The “system” has various ways to take constructive notice:
Offer accredited courses or degrees – this is its main contribution – often on top of basic accreditation (but is not what is needed)
Many (perhaps most) universities have departments or units to deal with continuing education – but these efforts are rarely an integral part of its mainstream educational agenda – it is seen as marginal (in more than one sense)
There are examples of research that explicitly interweaves research and on the job development
- action research (various strands)
- Activity theory related research – see e.g. CRADLE in Helsinki …
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

21. Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017
Formal vs non-formal education systems Or, what characteristics do these systems have, which makes them more, - or less rigid? Perhaps some of the following – but not all may be important
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

22. Strengths and weaknesses of the different strands
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

23. The forces of stagnation ― the inertias
and the likelihood of substantial change
There are very many reasons why systems and people don't want to change, I have called them “the inertias”
These are of many sorts including, old discourses, a variety of strong vested interests, preservation of status and power, outdated skills, outmoded ways of operating, lack of knowledge about change or new possibilities, lack of understanding of changing roles for education, conservative values (some are very good, some are not), etc.
Thus taking together the characteristics of these institutional forms, their strengths and weaknesses and their inertias, - having the focus in the formal systems- and sub-systems, we may be able to envisage how likely they are to change, or what we should address in an attempt to encourage change – – but I am not sure who would be interested in doing this.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

24. The four parts of the current argument
IV. The fourth part is a critique of the above argumentation
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

25. A critique of the above argumentation
All the systems can co-exist; is beneficial to have many different systems; we are perhaps even best served without a system for LLL or any of the present non-formal parts of it.
The formal system does participate within the non-formal sector; much more than is indicated above.
The population and the labour market are well-served without the meddling of the formal system; it is inherently conservative.
The four arguments for the emphasis on LLL or PD don’t require the participation of HE system as suggested.
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017

26. Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017
Thank you
Jón Torfi Jónasson NERA 2017