Quality of Adult Educator’s Profile in Second Chance Education: The Main Current and Future Tendencies
Author(s):
Svetlana Surikova (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2014
Network:
11. Educational Improvement and Quality Assurance
Format:
Paper

Session Information

11 SES 08 B, Teacher’s Approaches to Remedial and Adult Education of Quality

Paper Session

Time:
2014-09-04
09:00-10:30
Room:
B232A/B Sala de Aulas
Chair:
Irina Maslo

Contribution

In many recent studies (Deggs & Miller, 2011; Keogh, 2009; Knowles, Holton & Swanson, 2011; Nuissl & Egetenmeyer, 2010; Nuissl &  Lattke,  2008; Research voor Beleid, 2008, 2010, etc) it is argued that the quality of adult educators has an influence on the quality of adult learning. It is very important to think about the future of adult learning and education not only from the adult educators’ point of view but from the point of view of adult learners also. In Latvia, “the main challenge in the present day situation of adult education is how to increase the participation rate in adult learning” (EAEA, 2011, p. 5). Therefore, the “enhancement of the second chance education opportunities” (ibid.) is recognised as a priority in Latvian adult education policy.

The paper aims at presenting the main findings of the research on quality of adult educator’s profile conducted in Latvia during the study "Identification and analysis of new challenges and solutions that have influence on engagement and reintegration of adults (18-24 years) in lifelong learning" funded by ESF project "Support to research in educational field" (sub-activity 1.2.2.3.2.), project No 011/0011/1DP/1.2.2.3.2/11/IPIA/VIAA/001. The main findings are structured in nine domains such as personal qualities; interpersonal behaviour and communication with learners; cooperation with the external environment; planning and management; access and progression of learners; subject-related, specialist domain; monitoring and assessment of learning processes; didactical-methodological domain; personal development and reflection.

The research questions are:

  1. How do the adult educators and adult learners from the field of second chance education evaluate the quality of adult educator’s profile within the nine domains from current and future perspective? Are there any differences between adult educators and adult learners’ opinion?
  2. How do the 18-24 years old learners and older learners (25+) from the field of second chance education evaluate the quality of adult educator’s profile within the nine domains from current and future perspective? Are there any differences between 18-24 years old learners and older learners’ (25+) opinion?
  3. Which are the most important tendencies related to the quality of adult educator’s profile from the field of second chance education according to the 18-24 years old learners’ preferences and expectations?

Theoretical framework of the research is based on existing theories and empirical findings in the field of andragogy (Knowles, 1973; Knowles, Holton, Swanson, 2011), adult learning in the social context (Jarvis, 2012) and qualification of adult learning professionals (Bernhardsson & Lattke, 2011; Nuissl & Egetenmeyer, 2010; Nuissl & Lattke, 2008; Research voor Beleid, 2008, 2010). The quality of adult educator’s profile is analysed in the context of second chance education (EAEA, 2011; Keogh, 2009; McFadden, 1996; Munns & McFadden, 2000, etc).

Method

The research tool (i.e. first wave questionnaire, see Bernhardsson & Lattke, 2011, pp. 66-81) on the core competencies of learning facilitators in adult and continuing education developed in the frame of the EU funded (Leonardo da Vinci) project “Qualified to Teach” (2009-2011) was used. Furthermore, the original research tool was translated into Latvian and Russian and created as a web-based survey tool (i.e. online questionnaire) using Google forms. The translated questionnaires were sent to 6 voluntary experts to provide feedback on it’s adaptation to Latvian context. In October 2011 the email invitation of participating in the web-based survey was sent out to 507 potential respondents (155 adult educators and 352 adult learners) from the field of second chance education (20 evening shift schools). In February 2012 online survey yielded a total of 118 respondents (64 adult educators and 54 adult learners) for a response rate of 23 %. For data processing and analysis the methods used were crosstabs and Mann-Whitney U Test.

Expected Outcomes

The main research results showed that in general from current and future perspective the adult educator’s profile within all the domains has been evaluated higher by adult educators in comparison with adult learners. Furthermore, the ranking provided by older learners (25+) usually was higher when compared with the 18-24 years old learners. However some important tendencies should be stressed, for instance, the 18-24 years old learners prefer the adult educators who are: - minded to be more authentic, extroverted and altruistic; - able to inspire the learners, to use suitable body language, to manage group dynamics, to handle the conflicts, and to act considering the democratic values; - successful in thinking along commercial lines (both in intrapreneurship and entrepreneurship); - focused on updating their domain specific knowledge and skills continuously; - able to be flexible, to reflect their own professional role, to evaluate their own practice, to see different perspectives; - focused on enabling the learners to apply what they have learnt, on diagnosing learning capacity and learning attitude of their learners; - disposed to support informal learning, to apply adult learning theory in teaching, to monitor the learning processes of learners, to create a safe learning atmosphere, to proceed in a structured way. Finally, it can be concluded that encouraging the adult learners to take over responsibility for their learning processes and involving the adult learners in facilitating their own learning processes (e.g., self-motivating, self-inspiring, diagnosing and assessing their own learning needs, monitoring their own learning processes, analysing their own learning barriers, evaluating their own learning outcomes, etc) are the key elements of qualitative second chance education in Latvia.

References

1. Bernhardsson, N., & Lattke, S. (2011). Core competencies of adult learning facilitators in Europe. Findings from a transnational Delphi survey conducted by the project “Qualified to Teach”. Retrieved from http://www.qf2teach.eu/assets/files/Transnational%20Report.pdf 2. Deggs, D., & Miller, M. (2011). Developing community expectations: The critical role of adult educators. Adult Learning, 22(3), 25-30. 3. EAEA. (2011). Country report on adult education in Latvia. Retrieved from http://www.eaea.org/doc/pub/Country-Report-on-Adult-Education-in-Latvia.pdf 4. Jarvis, P. (2012). Adult learning in the social context. London: Routledge. 5. Keogh, H. (Ed.). (2009). The state and development of adult learning and education in Europe, North America and Israel: Regional synthesis report. Hamburg, Germany: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/INSTITUTES/UIL/confintea/pdf/GRALE/confinteavi_grale_paneurope_synthesis_en.pdf 6. Knowles, M. S. (1973). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED084368.pdf 7. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2011). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Oxford: Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/B978-1-85617-811-2.00001-8 8. McFadden, M. (1996). ‘Second chance’ education: Accessing opportunity or recycling disadvantage? International Studies in Sociology of Education, 6(l), 87-111. doi:10.1080/0962021960060105 9. Munns, G., & McFadden, M. (2000). First chance, second chance or last chance? Resistance and response to education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(l), 59-75. doi:10.1080/01425690095162 10. Nuissl, E., & Lattke, S. (Eds.). (2008). Qualifying adult learning professionals in Europe. Bielefeld: W. Bertelsmann Verlag. 11. Nuissl, E., & Egetenmeyer, R. (Eds.). (2010). Teachers and trainers in adult and lifelong learning: Asian and European perspectives. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 12. Research voor Beleid. (2008). ALPINE – Adult Learning Professions in Europe. A study of the current situation, trends and issues. Final report. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/doc/adultprofreport_en.pdf 13. Research voor Beleid. (2010). Key competences for adult learning professionals. Contribution to the development of a reference framework of key competences for adult learning professionals. Final report. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/doc/2010/keycomp.pdf

Author Information

Svetlana Surikova (presenting / submitting)
University of Latvia
Rezekne

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.