Session Information
99 ERC SES 08 F, Sociologies of Education
Paper Session
Contribution
There is a consensus about lifelong learning (LLL) being at the centre of a rapidly changing world. The idea is that change happens in “such a frantic pace that […] we all need to be lifelong learners. We need to continually keep our skills sharp and up to date so that we have an edge in all we do” (Laal & Salamati, 2012, p. 1). Luckily, “of course, we all have a natural desire to learn for adapting to change, enriching and fulfilling our lives” (ibid.). European policy has embraced this zeitgeist and developed several strategies towards LLL. However, the concepts of LLL and the associated concepts knowledge economy/society lack clear analytical distinctions, contributing to a conceptual ambiguity (Peters, 2001). This is not merely definitional but shapes and legitimates knowledge (Hughes, 2002). Brine (2006) differentiates between high knowledge-skilled (HKS) individuals, typically graduates, and low knowledge-skilled (LKS) individuals. Brine (2006)also reveals a persistent association between LLL and employability, especially for LKS learners and despite the shift of employment from the first to the fourth aim of LLL, the European Commission continued to prioritise the relationship between LLL and employability in its White Papers (CEC, 2000). The White Papers construct the LKS learner as at risk and the threat, to the knowledge society. The White Papers outline the individualised, pathologised, LKS learner who, unlike the HKS learner, has personal identifiable needs: basic skills (numeracy, literacy, information technology), entrepreneurship and social skills. Those who have not been able, for whatever reason, to acquire the relevant basic skills threshold must be offered continuing opportunities to do so. However often they may have failed to succeed to take up what has been offered so far (CEC, 2000, p. 11). In this sense, Field (2006, p. 114) states that “[l]ifelong learning is actively reproducing inequality.” Field (2006, p. 116) raises four reasons for that: 1) the closure of options for those deemed unskilled; 2) rising general expectations; 3) new politics of poverty and welfare; 4) absence from new learning culture can become a mechanism for legitimating existing inequalities. And so, inequalities in education carry on throughout life even if those who suffer the most from it are often the least aware of it (Becker, 2013; Hadjar, 2008). Because those who have benefited least from educational opportunities in the past are also far the most likely to express little or no wish to return to education in the future (Aldridge, 2005, pp. 15-17). And so, another important aspect of LLL to consider is resistance. Some adults simply have no interest in taking up the so-called opportunities that are on offer (Field, 2006, p. 131). For them, not being a school type can be a positive form of self-identity.
Working out the perception and subsequent coping strategies of this form of inequality and/or resistance is the aim of this research. The focus of this project is on the relationship between educational and job-related experiences and the resulting attitudes towards LLL. This relationship describes the exercise, production, and accumulation of knowledge and cannot be dissociated from the power mechanisms with which they maintain complex relations (Foucault, 1994, p. 291). This work will therefore analyse how the LLL discourse, including societal expectations and exclusion, affect people whose lives are shaped by educational inequality. The research question is:
What patterns of perception, interpretation and potential coping strategies are evident in people who suffer from educational inequality regarding the perceived pressure coming from LLL discourse?
Method
In order to understand the mechanisms of disadvantage, affected individuals will be interviewed with the help of biographical interviews. Interview partners will be recruited, in Germany, amongst lower educated employees as well as amongst the long term unemployed. Employees with lower educational histories are affected by disruptive technologies and are hence under pressure for LLL. The long term unemployed are forced to visit educational programmes by the state and must therefore also cope with a pressure for LLL. Expected results will be coping strategies and structures of meaning concerning pressure as well as opportunities for LLL. LKS learner’s awarded abilities, needs and wishes for LLL are widely shaped by their educational experiences and the discourse around LLL, and hence, by society. A decisive argument was put forth, by Rosenthal (1993) to navigate away from the impasse of the subject-society dualism through the utilization of the concept of biography. The exploration of the biographical as a social entity encompasses both the inquiry into the social role of biographies and the examination of the social processes that shape them (Fischer-Rosenthal, 1991, p. 253). In biographical interviews, biographers are prompted with an opening question to spontaneously narrate their life events. The uninterrupted main narrative, facilitated by nonverbal cues, allows for a comprehensive account. The subsequent questioning phase delves into elaborations on mentioned topics and addresses blocked-out issues. Analysis involves two levels: genetical (reconstructing biographical meaning and chronological sequence of experiences) and narrated (thematic field analysis for present meanings and temporal order). Thematic field analysis explores the selection mechanisms guiding the biographer’s textual elements. The goal is to reconstruct the form and structure of the narrated life story, emphasizing the dialectical link between experienced life history and narrated life story. Considering biography as a social construct that encompasses both social reality and the subjective experiential realm focuses on methodological and procedural aspects of reconstructing narrated life stories, aiming to address the relationship between educational experiences, decision-making and behaviour and the discourse of LLL. In short, the aim of the biographical interviews is to gain insights into the LKS learner perspective on LLL. So far, the needs of LKS learner have been defined by others, top-down. This research aims to inquire from the ground-up, self-defined learning described by LKS learners as well as to understand the meaning of learning for LKS learners.
Expected Outcomes
The technological progress and the frantically paced change lead to contradictory developments in LLL: On the one hand, in many areas, more complex work equipment increases the pressure on employees to learn new things as a means of ensuring employability. This can lead to uncertainty and additional stress for employees and the unemployed in two ways. Firstly, their own perceived employability is weakened when knowledge and skills lose their (perceived) half-life (Jackson & Wilton, 2017; Yeves et al., 2019). Secondly, a confusing and contradictory technology discourse leads to uncertainties regarding relevant knowledge. The market for continuing education programmes reflects this confusion. On the other hand, technologies that foster human-machine interaction can result in jobs that require no skills or qualification (Autor, 2015). LKS learners, hence, are still needed but in fewer numbers. So, the discourse of LLL can help to blame the unfortunate life situation of marginalised learners (e.g., long-term unemployment) on themselves, as all the options for LLL (the cure for all their ills) are always at hand. Because LKS learners are often problematised as a threat to society, there is only little research on potential positive meaning of non-participation in education and its relationship to the LLL discourse. Rather, the needs of the LKS learners are described as basic skills, skills to increase inclusion, vocational education, basic social skills and skills to increase entrepreneurship and increase employability (Thompson, 2002). However, if individual employability, the economy and even the nation itself ride on lifelong learning, the infamous and the reluctant are of interest, too.
References
Aldridge, F. (2005). Better news this time? The niace survey on adult participation in learning 2005. NIACE. Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(3), 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.3.3 Becker, R. (2013). Bildungsungleichheit und gerechtigkeit in der schweiz. Swiss Journal of Educational Research, 35(3), 405-424. Brine, J. (2006). Lifelong learning and the knowledge economy: Those that know and those that do not—the discourse of the European Union. British Educational Research Journal, 32(5), 649-665. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920600895676 CEC, Commission of the European Communities (2000). Commission staff working paper: A memorandum on lifelong learning. Field, J. (2006). Lifelong learning and the new educational order. ERIC. Fischer-Rosenthal, W. (1991). Biographische methoden in der soziologie. Flick, U./Kardorff, E. v./Keupp, H./Rosenstiel, Lv/Wolff, St.(Hg.)(1991): Handbuch Qualitative Sozialforschung. München: Psychologie Verlags Union, 253-256. Foucault, M. (1994). Interview conducted by d. Trombadori 1978, first published 1980. In: J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984. Volume 3: Power. Sage. Hadjar, A. (2008). Meritokratie als legitimationsprinzip. Springer. Hughes, C. (2002). Key concepts in feminist theory and research. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857024459 Jackson, D., & Wilton, N. (2017). Perceived employability among undergraduates and the importance of career self-management, work experience and individual characteristics. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(4), 747-762. Laal, M., & Salamati, P. (2012). Lifelong learning; why do we need it? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 399-403. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.073 Peters, M. (2001). National education policy constructions of the ‘knowledge economy’: Towards a critique. The Journal of Educational Enquiry, 2(1). Rosenthal, G. (1993). Reconstruction of life stories: Principles of selection in generating stories for narrative biographical interviews. The Narrative Study of Lives, 1(1), 59-91. Thompson, J. (2002). Life politics and popular learning. In: J. Field & M. Leicester (Eds.) Lifelong learning: education across the lifespan (pp. 134-145). Routledge. Yeves, J., Bargsted, M., Cortes, L., Merino, C., & Cavada, G. (2019). Age and perceived employability as moderators of job insecurity and job satisfaction: A moderated moderation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 799.
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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.