Session Information
23 SES 03 A, Lifelong Learning
Paper Session
Contribution
The aim of the paper is to compare evidence on barriers to participation in adult education in countries with different macro institutional context. Previous studies have indicated that there are substantial differences across countries in participation in learning activities and in inequality of participation (Dieckhoff et al. 2007; Bassanini et al. 2008; O’Connell and Jungblut 2008). The data suggest that patterns of inequality mirror broader structural inequalities in society as well as institutional differences between countries (Roosmaa and Saar 2010).
Previous studies have offered several explanations for these country differences. According to the bounded agency model proposed by Rubenson and Desjardins (2009), the ability and potential of individuals to participate in learning as adults is affected by structural and institutional conditions as well as targeted policy measures. Furthermore, the role of adult education in a society has been said to be largely dependent on its socio-political structure (Carnoy 1990).
It is presumed that the different types of welfare countries (e.g. liberal, conservative and social democratic) have a different influence on factors that hinder participation in adult education, particularly institutional and situational (work- and family-related) barriers (Rubenson and Desjardins 2009).
The type of welfare state affects the social structure, the system of adult education and individual prospects, as well as the awareness of individuals regarding their opportunities. In addition to certain resources (knowledge, skills, income), the decision to start or continue learning requires people to be able to use the resources available to them in order to achieve their goals. Thus, limitations caused by dispositions related to learning, which are, in turn, affected by structural and institutional barriers, may prevent an individual freedom in participation in adult education.
While the political measures characteristic of different types of welfare states have a direct effect on the structural context of people’s activities (workplace, home, civil society), they also indirectly influence individual rational choices and assessment of the options available to them. Targeted policies may, however, encourage people to decide to start learning.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
References Bassanini, A., Booth, A., Brunello, G., Paola, M. and Leuven, E. (2007) Workplace training in Europe. In G. Brunello, P. Garibaldi and E. Wasmer (Eds.), Education and Training in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 143-309. Carnoy, M. (1990) Foreword: How should we study adult education. In C. A. Torres (Ed.), The politics of nonformal education in Latin America. New York: Praeger. Dieckhoff, M., J.-M. Jungblut, and P.J. O’Connell. (2007) Job-related Training in Europe: Do Institutions matter? In D. Gallie (Ed.), Employment Regimes and the Quality of Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 77-104. O’Connell, P.J. and Jungblut, J.M. (2008) What do we know about training at work? In K.U. Mayer and H. Solga (Ed.), Skill Formation: Interdisciplinary and Cross-National Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109-125. Roosmaa, E.-L. and Saar, E. (2010) Participating in Non-Formal Learning: Patterns of Inequality in EU-15 and the New EU-8 Member Countries. Journal of Education and Work, 23, 179-206. Rubenson, K. and Desjardins, R. (2009) The impact of welfar
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.