The Realizing Of Lifelong Learning In Organizations Of The Educational And Training System

Author(s):

Barbara Lindemann(presenting / submitting)Johannes Wahl(presenting)Rudolf Tippelt

Conference:

ECER 2015

Network:

32. Organizational Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

32 SES 08 B, Transition in Organizations (Workplace and Training System)

Paper Session

Time:

2015-09-10

09:00-10:30

Room:

3008. [Main]

Chair:

Karen Evans

Contribution

The research project “LOEB” (project-time from March 2014 to February 2017) is connecting Educational Science and Organisational Science - funded by the Hans Böckler Foundation - and in line with the project “PAELL” (Professional Educational Work in the System of Lifelong Learning, 2014, funded by German Research Foundation). It is a joint initiative of the Institute for Social Education and Adult Education (GU Frankfurt/Main) and the Institute for General Education and Educational Research (LMU Munich). The concept of lifelong learning in the educational discourse emphasizes the unity of the educational system and the training system and highlights the close relationship between professional biography and individual life course. The findings of the previous study PAELL have shown that the anchoring of lifelong learning in the professional knowledge of practitioners in the various fields of the educational and training system is partly problematic and not yet complete. However, organizational requirements and specifications turned out to be trend-setting.

The state of the realization of empirical educational research on lifelong learning can be described as highly incomplete, even as underdeveloped: Thus, the strategically important question how far the educational system’s organizations realize their central role in the processing of lifelong learning in their institutional self-descriptions, isn’t examined in any single study. Although there is a vast body of literature on lifelong learning, these publications are highly programmatic, often influenced by education policy or time diagnostic – but not empirically oriented. There are not enough studies of lifelong learning, which has considered both: the side of the professional culture as well as the side of the organization. Durkheim's theorem of division of labor and the neo-institutionalism can serve as theoretical anchor points.

The aim of the project is to raise awareness among members of selected groups of educational professionals in dealing with the concept of lifelong learning. The purpose is to see the actual anchoring of lifelong learning in the organizations of the educational system and training system because we should be able to investigate the degree of the implementation of lifelong learning beyond the professional self-descriptions of educational workers (educators in early childhood, teachers, vocational instructors, social workers, professionals in adult and further education). Also, knowledge, which is helpful to optimize the culture of cooperation, to strengthen the institutionalization and to realize and concretize programs of lifelong learning shall be identified. The research project is focusing the following leading questions: How widespread is the unifying concept of lifelong learning in the organizations of the early childhood sector, primary school, lower and upper secondary level, adult education/training, social work/social education and higher education? Is lifelong learning anchored here in a similarly one-sided manner as in the corresponding professional cultures? Which quantifiable and objectified efforts do organizations make at the level of advanced training courses on the subject of lifelong learning? Which creative potentials can be identified in the professional knowledge of practical working pedagogues/educators that can help to overcome the status quo of the "pillarization" of the educational system and of the general tendency of dysfunctional segmentation between the professional cultures?

Method

Quantitative and qualitative methods and the schema of triangulation is used in the project: In four regions of Hesse and Bavaria, organizations from different educational segments are taken into account: nursery sector, primary education, secondary levels, universities, institutions of adult education and of social work/social education. By using qualitative analysis of training programs, expert interviews with managers and theme centered group discussions with educational professionals; the degree of implementation of lifelong learning is explored from different perspectives. The outcome of this is a profile of requirements for a training module applicable for all educational professions. The first step consists in the selection and collection of documents to be included: The resulting data corpus will contain between three and five models from each of the analyzed segments, so that altogether 24 to 40 documents are involved in the evaluation process of the document analysis. Parallel to this step, a coding scheme for document analysis is developed. At this point in the research process, the selection of keywords is necessary. These keywords will form the basis for the investigation of the included documents. Concepts such as lifelong learning, learning over the life span, transition management, education permanence, self-directed learning, self-learning, informal learning or intergenerational learning are covered and will form the basis. Afterwards, the models are analyzed and interpreted by using the document analysis. Finally, based on the obtained results and their comparison with the state of research on the topic of lifelong learning, we develop an interview guide for the survey of the management of the participating institutions. The focus is the identification of possible weak points in the organizational self-descriptions, which suggest an understanding of lifelong learning in those facilities, which is not complex enough. Likewise, the particular focus contents of incomplete knowledge of lifelong learning are worked out and made the subject of following interviews with experts. In every field of education, (at least) five, led up to seven expert interviews with leaders and managers in highly contrasting establishments in every area, will be evaluated content-analytically. In addition to the analysis of documents the expert interviews will get a deeper understanding of the developed concepts of lifelong learning. In a third step we analyses six group discussions with educational professionals to get a broader perspective to the understanding of lifelong learning in the focused educational institutions.

Expected Outcomes

We expect that empirically proven deficits in professional self-descriptions and weaknesses in the concept development will be identified, but also that the positive developmental potentials of pedagogical practice can be worked out. The concepts in most of the education sectors will presumably only deal with lifelong learning on the margins and won’t focus lifelong learning for their clients or for their employees (e.g. in the context of educational programs). In many cases, it can be expected that the formulated pedagogical concepts are not completely implemented in the educational practice. Lifelong learning is probably not profoundly anchored at the institutional level, so that a unifying effect can be hardly achieved by using this formula. Especially from the group discussions with different educational professional in different organizational cultures, important suggestions are expected: practitioners don’t understand lifelong learning only as a normative orientation but agree that in institutional key situations, their decisions and actions intervene massively in the biographical development of their clientele. The project wants to communicate the results into practical institutions and discuss the findings with representatives of educational practice: professionalism can be no longer realized isolated, but has to take place in exchange with colleagues of their own, but also of other segments of the educational system. The project wants to contribute – as far as research can influence this – to the promotion of a collective professional identity of pedagogues and to foster the interinstitutional cooperation in education. At the same time, it wants to contribute to a better, clearer profiling in the interaction with the responsibles and the donors.

References

Alheit, Peter/Dausien, Bettina (2010): Bildungsprozesse über die Lebensspanne: Zur Politik und Theorie des Lebenslangen Lernens. In: Tippelt, Rudolf/Schmidt, Bernhard (Hrsg.): Handbuch Bildungsforschung. 3.Auflage. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, S.713-734. Brödel, Rainer (Hrsg.) (1998): Lebenslanges Lernen – lebensbegleitende Bildung. Neuwied: Luchterhand. Buschle, Christina/Fuchs, Sandra/Tippelt, Rudolf (2012): Cooperations as a key element of sustainable adult education. In: Heikkinen, A./Jögi, L./Jütte, W./Zarifis, G.K. (Hrsg.): The Futures Of Adult Educator(s): Agency, Identity And Ethos. Joint Conference Proceedings, pp.83-91. DiMaggio, P. & Powell, W. (1983). Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. Dohmen, Günther (1996): Das lebenslange Lernen. Leitlinien einer modernen Bildungspolitik. Bonn. Durkheim, Emile (1999): Über soziale Arbeitsteilung. Studie über die Organisation höherer Gesellschaften. 3.Auflage. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Emmingshaus, Christoph/Tippelt, Rudolf (2009): Lebenslanges Lernen in regionalen Netzwerken verwirklichen. Abschließende Ergebnisse zum Programm „Lernende Regionen – Förderung von Netzwerken“. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann. Europäische Kommission (2000): Memorandum über Lebenslanges Lernen. Online verfügbar unter http://www.bologna-berlin2003.de/pdf/MemorandumDe.pdf (10.07.2012). Fatke, Reinhard/Merkens, Hans (Hrsg.) (2006): Bildung über die Lebenszeit. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Glaser, Barney G./Strauss, Anselm L. (1967): The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine. Hof, Christiane (2009): Lebenslanges Lernen. Eine Einführung. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Lima, Licíno C./Guimarães, Paula (2011): European Strategies of Lifelong Learning. A Critical Introduction. Opladen: Budrich. Luhmann, Niklas (1997): Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. 2.Bd. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Luhmann, Niklas (2000): Organisation und Entscheidung. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Meyer, John W./Scott W. Richard (1983): Organizational Environments. Ritual and Rationality. Beverly Hills et al: Sage. Nittel, Dieter/Schütz, Julia/Tippelt, Rudolf (2013): Pädagogische Arbeit im System des lebenslangen Lernens. Weinheim Der Ansatz einer komparativ pädagogischen Berufsgruppenforschung. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa (in Planung). OECD (2001): Economics and Finance of Lifelong Learning. Paris: OECD. Scott, Richard W. (2014). Institutions and Organizations. Ideas, Interests, and Identities. Los Angeles: Sage. Tippelt, Rudolf (2011): Institutionenforschung in der Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung. In: Tippelt, R./Von Hippel, A. (Hrsg.): Handbuch Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung. Wiesbaden: VS- Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. S.453-471. Tippelt, Rudolf/Kadera, Stepanka/Buschle, Christina (2014): Interorganizational cooperation to promotion of lifelong learning. In: Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft (Sonderheft 26), 17(S5), S.65-78. Warne, Daniel (2008): Economization and Pedagogization. In; Peters, Michael A./A. C. Besley/Olssen, Mark/Maurer, Susanne/Weber Susanne (Hrsg.): Governmentality Studies in Education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, S.473-486.

Author Information

Barbara Lindemann (presenting / submitting)

LMU München

Institut für Pädagogik

München

Johannes Wahl (presenting)

Goethe-Universität Frankfurt

Frankfurt

Rudolf Tippelt

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München