Transforming formal education from a lifelong learning perspective

Rosa María Torres

Conference prepared for the
  International Conference on Learning Cities
           UIL-UNESCO and China's Ministry of Education,
           Beijing, China, 21-23 October 2013

(draft, in process)

Pawel Jonca

Lifelong Learning means Learning throughout Life

Many people confuse Lifelong Learning (LLL) with Out-of-School Learning (Informal Learning, Open Learning, etc.), leaving the school system out of it. Many think LLL as Adult Education or as Non-Formal Education, leaving children out of it. All these associations seem to ignore that Lifelong Learning means literally learning throughout life.

In the first place, LLL is a fact: all of us learn from birth to death, everywhere and from many sources: family, friends, play, observation, practice, experience, nature, school, work, reading, writing, solving problems, participating, etc.

LLL is also the paradigm proposed for education and learning policies and systems in the 21st century. It embraces and emphasizes two key concepts: LEARNING and LIFE.

LEARNING: 
- NOT getting access to
- NOT teaching
- NOT studying
- NOT approving

LIFE:
- NOT only adulthood.

Formal education and lifelong learning 
 
Formal education is "institutionalised, intentional and planned through public organizations and recognised private bodies" ( UNESCO's International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED, revised in 2011). The education ladder includes pre-school education, primary education, lower and upper secondary education, technical and vocational education, adult formal education, and higher education. 

Formal education is a very important part of the LLL experience. However, viewed in a LLL perspective, formal education occupies a rather small portion of learners' lives. Most of what we learn in life (and some of the most important, such as learning to speak) is the result of  informal learning: non-institutional learning that occurs in daily life, and where no actual or deliberate teaching is involved.

Millions of people worldwide get no or very little formal education; others make it through various school levels, get diplomas and higher education qualifications. All of them - the illiterate and the Ph.Ds - are lifelong learners. Without learning, survival and life would be impossible. Those who never go to school learn basically through informal learning and oral (non-written) interaction.

Life and lifelong learning

Life is getting longer. Life expectation has grown considerably throughout the world over the past two decades. Consequently, adult and older learners have multiplied - current population trends indicate they will continue to multiply in the coming years. New scientific knowledge confirms that aging implies cognitive deterioration but it also confirms that older adults are capable of learning almost anything. Now we also know that learning begins before birth, and that it takes place also while we sleep.

Schooling and lifelong learning

Formal education continues to expand downwards and upwards. Institutionalized initial/pre-school education grow in many countries, and even become part of compulsory education in a few countries; the age to start school is also lowered in some countries. On the other side, higher education continues to expand, adding degrees and titles. School life expectation and the number of years of schooling and/or of higher education graduates are taken as indicators to compare countries' educational status.

However, the real objective is not a competitive race for titles. The objective is learning, enhancing lifelong learning opportunities for all, creating learning societies.

Formal education and learning

Access to school, especially to primary education, has been the traditional focus of national governments and international agencies vis à vis "developing countries". Completion of primary education and other levels and cycles, was the next step. Actual learning has remained an elusive objective until very recently, and often continues to be confused with approving school tests. And yet, the core mission of education is learning. Teaching without learning is absurd and a waste of time. Learning remains a critical area of school systems worldwide. Ensuring learning within the  school system is thus a major challenge in itself.

OECD: PISA & PIAAC

OECD's PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) test applied to 15 year-olds since the year 2000 assesses competencies in three key areas: reading, mathematics and science. Initially designed for OECD countries, over 70 countries have participated in PISA so far.

In recent times, OECD has also applied ‌the Survey of Adult Skills, a survey conducted in 33 countries as part of the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies  (PIAAC). The survey was applied in 2012 to 16 to 65 year olds. It measured "Literacy, Numeracy and Problem Solving Skills in Technology-rich Environments". They are considered "information-processing skills", "key cognitive and workplace skills needed for individuals to participate in society and for economies to prosper." The questions could be answered via computer or with pen and paper. 5,000 individuals were interviewed at home in each participating country.

This is the first international survey on the subject, the first one digging into LLL from an adult (16-65) learning perspective. The first results were released in October 2013.

                                          PIAAC: Some results

PIAAC provides insights into how these "information-processing" skills are developed and used at work and at home. Below a concise summary of some of these results:

▸ LITERACY AND NUMERACY skills are low in most countries.

▸ INITIAL + CONTINUING OPPORTUNITIES There appears to be a combination of poor initial education and lack of opportunities to further improve skills.

▸ AGE In general, older adults have lower proficiency in the three domains than younger ones (the peak is around 30 years of age). This is especially true in relation to modern technology. The extent of the gap between generations varies considerably among countries.

▸ GENDER differences are there (men have higher scores in numeracy and problem solving in technology‑rich environments than women), but the gap is not large and is very small among younger adults.

▸ LANGUAGE is a major barrier affecting the immigrant population, especially in the literacy domain.

▸ ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL WELL BEING is positively related to higher skills levels.

▸ WORK has major influence on skills use and development.

▸ FORMAL EDUCATION On average, adults with tertiary‑level qualifications have a 36 score‑point advantage – the equivalent of 5 years of schooling – over adults who have not completed upper secondary education. However,  levels and qualifications are not necessarily linked to skills proficiency.

Source: OECD Interactive Charts  OECD Skills Outlook 2013

Literacy and numeracy continue to be the most important and critical skills (all ages)

For the purpose of the Survey of Adult Skills, PIAAC defines Literacy and Numeracy as follows:

Literacy is the ability to understand, evaluate, use and engage with written texts, to participate in society, to achieve one's goals, and to develop one's knowledge and potential. Literacy encompasses a range of skills from the decoding of written words and sentences to the comprehension, interpretation and evaluation of complex texts. It does not, however, involve the production of text.

Numeracy is the ability to access, use, interpret and communicate mathematical information and ideas in order to engage in and manage the mathematical demands of a wide range of situations in adult life. To this end, numeracy involves managing a situation or solving a problem in a real context by responding to mathematical content represented in multiple ways.

Source: OECD Interactive Charts

Historically, literacy and numeracy are at the heart of the school system and of the mission of primary education in particular. Reading, writing and dealing with mathematical problems, continue to be at the top of any list of "21st century skills". However, literacy and numeracy skills continue to be problematic for a large part of the schooled population, be it children, youth or adults, in both "developed" and "developing" countries.

This is what PISA and PIAAC reveal, as well as many other research and evaluation reports throughout the world. Formal education is doing a poor job in this field. This is not new. The situation has been identified and exposed for a long time now.

▸ After completing 4 years of primary school, 130 million children worldwide cannot read and write (Education for All - EFA Report 2012)

▸ "In most countries, there are significant proportions of adults who score at lower levels of proficiency on the literacy and numeracy scales" (...) "Even among adults with computer skills, most scored at the lowest level of the problem solving in technology‑rich environments scale."
(PIAAC 2013)

(See: Rosa María Torres, El fracaso alfabetizador de la escuela | ¿Renuncia a un mundo alfabetizado?)

What does it mean transforming formal education from a LLL perspective?

Among others:

■ A unitary, articulated formal education system  
In many countries, the formal education system is segmented in two or more systems - education and higher education, or initial/preschool education, education, and higher education - in charge of different government bodies (Family, Social Wellbeing, Education, Technical Education, Training, Higher Education, etc.). with little or no co-ordination between them. A major challenge is thus viewing and organizing formal education as a continuum, as a teaching and learning system articulated in all dimensions: administrative and normative issues, curriculum, pedagogy, learning spaces, teacher education, etc. 

■ Placing learning at the centre
Moving from access to learning,
from student to learner,
from studying to learning,
from approving to learning,
from education for all to learning for all,
from lifelong education to lifelong learning.

■ Acknowledging learners’ and teachers' previous knowledge and experience
Acknowledging learners' (children, youth, adults) and teachers’ previous and out-of-school information, knowledge and experience and adopting it as a key pedagogical principle at all levels.

■ Rethinking TIME for education and learning purposes 
The school system is always in a rush, trying to add and cover as much content as possible, with the "next level" as the desirable and visible horizon. A LLL perspective of learning allows moving back and forth, seing beyond the next level and back to the previous level, and outside the school system. Learning requires time.
(See: Rosa María Torres, ¿Más de lo mismo? Un sistema escolar que se estira | Repensar los tiempos escolares)

■ Rethinking SPACE for education and learning purposes 
The school system is one of many education and learning systems. Learning is ubiquitous. Rather than trying to assume total responsibility and control over learning, counting with families as the only "outside partners", school systems and teachers have a critical role in visualizing community and out-of-school learning realities and possibilities, and identifying the role of the community as a learning community.
(See: Rosa María Torres, Comunidad de Aprendizaje: Educación, territorio y aprendizaje comunitario)

■ Rethinking AGE within the right to education and to learning (education and learning for ALL)
Radically rethinking the traditional vision of AGE for schooling, education and learning purposes.
- Learning does not begin with the first day of school. Learning begins at birth (and even before birth). Early childhood is the most important learning period and experience in the life of any individual. When children get to school they are competent speakers of their language, they have learned and know many things. This knowledge must not be denied but rather be assumed as the starting point for the school experience.
- Revisiting concepts such as 'school age' and 'over-age'.
- Promoting (rather than inhibiting) peer-to-peer learning and inter-generational learning.
- Acknowledging adult education as part of the right to education and of the learning continuum.
- Children's right to education must include the right to educated parents.
(See: Rosa María Torres, Pre-niños (los cimientos invisibles) | Children's right to basic education | Educar a los niños o a los adultos: falso dilema | Los niños como educadores de adultos | Kazi, el sin gracia | Kazi, The Graceless | Child learning and adult learning revisited)

■ Connecting school and out-of-school learning systems
Connecting the school system to the multiple learning systems operating out of school: home, community, media, play, work, religion, social and civic participation, etc.

■ Education centres and community learning centres and learning communities
Thinking education centres as community learning centres and learning communities (inter-generational, family-centred, learning-oriented).


SIX EXAMPLES: LLL POLICIES AND FORMAL EDUCATION

■ A LLL perspective of literacy acquisition, use and development

When and where do we learn to read and write? Where do we read and write? Where do we develop our reading and writing skills?

The answer is: FROM BIRTH and EVERYWHERE.
- When children reach school, they have valid knowledge about reading and writing, they have developed their own hypotheses about their use by seing others read or write and by seing reading and writing materials around them.
- The school system is not the only one in charge of teaching and developing literacy skills. Moreover, within the school system, literacy education is embedded in the entire curriculum, not just in one particular subject.

Finland is a fine example in this regard: the whole society places great importance on reading and enjoys reading. Reading is a national hobby. Reading and writing are given great emphasis in the school curriculum. Families use libraries over the weekend; libraries are spread everywhere. Newspaper subscription is one of the highest in the world.

Given that literacy is often the main reason for school repetition in early grades, a wider vision of literacy acquisition would allow to understand it not as an objective for the first or two first grades but at least for the whole of basic education.
(See: Rosa María Torres, El absurdo de la repetición escolar)

Literacy, and reading specifically, require LLL policies and strategies, prior to and far beyond the school system, not tied to any particular Ministry (typically, Education and/or Culture), making use of all available and potential resources, from the local to the national level.

A schooled society is not necessarily an educated society. An educated society is a learning society. Proficient reading and writing are essential to an educated and a learning society.  
(See: Rosa María Torres, Escolarizado no es lo mismo que educado).

■ A LLL perspective of teacher education 

Teachers’ school biography and family background are key elements in teacher quality. Teacher education does not start with professional education. Quality formal education requires quality teachers, but quality teachers are educated in quality schools. School reform is thus a requisite for quality teacher education.
(See: Rosa María Torres, Los maestros son exalumnos | Talleres de lectura para maestros)

■ A LLL perspective of skills development

PIAAC confirms that "actual skills often differ from what formal education qualifications suggest".

▸ "Italy or the United States rank much higher internationally in the share of adults with tertiary degrees than in the level of literacy or numeracy proficiency".

▸ "On average, Japanese and Ducth high school graduates easily outperform university graduates in some other countries".

▸ "In many countries, there are large proportions of the population that have no experience with, or lack the basic skills needed to use ICTs for many everyday tasks".  (PIAAC 2013)

Answers to the question: Where are skills developed, used and eventually lost? include formal, non-formal and informal learning, and especially the role of home, school and work.

■ A LLL perspective of school "dropout" 

School "dropout" is generally not a personal decision but rather a sign of system disfunction. It is not a sudden fact, but a process. A process that starts in the early grades of primary school and even before, in early childhood and pre-school education. The school system gives students and their families permanent signs that things are going fine or wrong. Problems are viewed as "learning problems", "learners' problems", "individual problems", rarely as "teaching problems" and "system problems". Policies and programmes often see their mission as "reducing school failure" rather than "ensuring school success". Failure becomes the expected outcome, much more than success, especially if students come from poor and disadvantaged contexts. Nothing is more successful than success. If children are trusted, if high expectations are deposited in them, they will succeed. From the start. This is the best way to "prevent failure" and "reduce dropout".
(See: Preventing Dropout Effort Starts in Kindergarten, MindShift, Dec. 1, 2010).

■ A LLL perspective of family cultural environment and inter-generational learning

All studies and evaluations of school learning achievement conclude on the critical role of out-of-school factors and especially of the family, not only its socio-economic but also its cultural status and background. Literate/educated mothers and fathers, and a culturally rich and stimulating family environment, make a big difference in children's learning and performance in school. And yet, disregarding all scientific and empirical evidence, adult education continues to be treated with ad-hoc remedial policies, often reduced to adult literacy. A LLL perspective would imply an inter-generational approach to children's and adults' learning, address the family as a whole - family literacy, family education, family cultural development.
(See: Rosa María Torres, Niños que trabajan y estudian: Centro del Muchacho Trabajador, Ecuador)

■ A LLL perspective of "human talent"

Increasingly, the notion of "human talent" gets to be associated with formal education and, specifically, with higher education, science and technology. However: a) every person has talent(s), b) human talent is developed since early childhood, c) there is no necessary correlation between talent and titles. A LLL perspective of human talent development takes all this into account, for investment and pedagogical purposes.


Transforming formal education from a LLL perspective: a major 21st century challenge

Given the importance of the school system as a systematic teaching and learning system for children, youth and adults, one that is spread throughout the world and that is critical to fulfilling the right to education, transforming formal education from a LLL perspective is essential to make LLL an effective new education and learning paradigm, to organize learning communities, and to build learning societies.

This implies an authentic revolution, not just introducing innovations, reforming or "improving the quality of education". It requires scientific knowledge but also people's wisdom and lots of common sense. Political will - top-down and bottom-up - is essential, but so are creativity and imagination!

Març Rabal

Related texts in this blog (English)
Rosa María Torres, On LifeLong Learning ▸ Sobre Aprendizaje a lo Largo de la Vida (compilation)
Rosa María Torres, Sobre Lectura y Escritura ▸ On Reading and Writing  (compilation)
Rosa María Torres and Manzoor Ahmed, Reaching the Unreached: Non-Formal Approaches and Universal Primary Education (dossier)
Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning in the South: Critical issues and opportunities for adult education, Sida Studies No 2, Stockholm, 2004 (book, PDF) 

Cuba and Finland | Cuba y Finlandia

Rosa María Torres

 
(texto en español, abajo)

What do Cuba and Finland have in common? 

Two very different countries, one in the Caribbean, the other one in Europe, with very different histories and cultures, very different political, social and education systems, and yet both sharing high international recognition for educational and other social achievements. 

High Human Development Index (HID) 

▸ Finland is number 24 in the world. Cuba - together with Chile and Argentina - is in the group of Very High Human Development Index in Latin America, and number 44 in the world. (HDI 2014).

Best countries to be a mother and raise a child - region/world

▸ Cuba and Finland are the best countries - in Latin America and the Caribbean, and in the world, respectively -  to be a mother and raise a child, according to Oxfam's State of the World's Mothers Report 2013 (Cuba ranked 33 worldwide).

High suicide rates 

▸ Cuba and Finland have high suicide rates. Together with Uruguay, Cuba has the highest suicide rate in Latin America and the Caribbean. Finland has one of the highest suicide rates in Europe and in the world. (See list with WHO data here. See my post: Educación y suicidio).

Free education  

▸ Cuba's and Finland's education systems are public and free, from initial education to the end of higher education.

High investment in education

▸ In the Latin American region, Cuba is the country with he highest investment in education in relation to its GDP. Cuba invests 16,3% of its GDP in education, followed by Bolivia, Honduras, Costa Rica and Argentina. (Source: ECLAC)

Equity first: good education for ALL, nobody left behind  

▸ Both Cuba and Finland are egalitarian societies. Equity is the main concern. Nobody should be left out or left behind. "Every school a good school" is Finland's motto, and  Cuba's as well. 

Boredom and education   

▸ It is not rare to hear/read comments referring to both Cuba and Finland as "boring" places - Finland because of its weather; Cuba because of its political system and its precarious entertainment resources - and mentioning this as one of the factors that would explain people's dedication to education, studying, and reading. In the case of Cuba, we have seen this argument mentioned in reports by US academics and researchers. 

Top performers in education - region/world

▸ Cuba and Finland are among the one third of countries that achieved 2000-2015 Education for All goals worldwide. Cuba was the only country achieving them in Latin America and the Caribbean.

▸ Cuba and Finland have been top performers in student achievement tests in school: Cuba in LLECE (Latin American Laboratory for Assessment of the Quality of Education - Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la Educación), co-ordinated by the regional UNESCO office in Santiago, and Finland in PISA (OECD Programme for International Student Assessment).

Finland is well known for its high performance in PISA, which assesses competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Sciences among 15 year-olds. PISA has been applied every three years since 2000. 

LLECE tests have been applied three times so far:

- The First Study (PERCE) was applied in 1997 - Language, Mathematics, and associated factors for third and fourth grade primary school students - in 13 countries. Cuba ranked first.

- The Second Study (SERCE) was applied in 2006 in 16 countries plus the state of Nuevo León in Mexico, to third and sixth grade students on Mathematics, Reading and Writing, and Natural Sciences. Cuba ranked first.

- A Third Study (TERCE) was applied in 2013 in 15 countries plus the state of Nuevo León (Mexico). Cuba did not participate this time. In Cuba's absence, Chile ranked first.

Everyone knows about Finland's remarkable performance in PISA. Few people know that Cuba has been number one in regional LLECE tests. It is important to reiterate that LLECE tests are applied to both public and private schools (Cuba is the only country in the region that has only public, state-run, schools).

Cuba's results in LLECE showed a huge difference with respect to the other participating countries (including Chile, for many years considered an 'education model' in the region, and the Latin American country that has so far achieved the best results in PISA).

LLECE countries were divided in four groups according to their results in the Second Study (SERCE):

• Leading: Cuba.
• Above regional average: Uruguay, the Mexican state of Nuevo León, Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, and Mexico.
• Average: Brazil, Colombia, and Peru.
• Below regional average: Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, and the Dominican Republic. 

Cuba is also the country with the highest "school life expectancy" in the region (16.2 years), followed by Argentina (16.1) and Uruguay (15.5). While many countries in the region are still struggling with universalizing basic education, Cuba is trying to universalize higher education. 

Finland, on the other hand, ranked second, after Japan, in PISA for Adults (PIAAC, 16  to 65 year olds, applied in 23 OECD countries), thus showing an educated society, far beyond a schooled society. PIAAC measures literacy, numeracy and problem-solving in technology rich environments. See graph here. 

In conclusion: Finland and Cuba are 'successful' school systems according to the instruments and indicators applied by international organizations - OECD and UNESCO, in this case - to measure desirable social and educational achievements. 

And yet, while Finland is internationally known and viewed as an inspiring "education model", Cuba does not enjoy the same type of recognition -- regionally or internationally. Questionable international indicators? Lack of information? Prejudice? Double standards? Something to reflect upon.  

 Cuba y Finlandia

 

¿Qué tienen en común Cuba y Finlandia? 
 
Dos países muy diferentes, uno en el Caribe y el otro en Europa, con historias y culturas muy diferentes, sistemas politicos, sociales y educativos muy diferentes, pero ambos compartiendo un alto reconocimiento social por sus logros en el campo de la educación. 

Alto Indice de Desarrollo Humano (IDH) 

▸ Finlandia ocupa el lugar 24 a nivel mundial. Cuba - junto con Chile y Argentina - está en el grupo de Alto Desarrollo Humano en América Latina, y en el lugar 44 a nivel mundial. (IDH 2014).

Mejor país para ser madre y criar un niño - región/mundo
 
▸ Cuba y Finlandia son los mejores países - en América Latina y el Caribe, y en el mundo, respectivamente - para ser madre y criar a un niño, según el Informe sobre el Estado Mundial de las Madres 2013 de Oxfam (Cuba ocupa el lugar 33 a nivel mundial).

Altos índices de suicidio
 
▸ Cuba y Finlandia tienen altos indices de suicidio. Junto con Uruguay, Cuba tiene el índice más alto de suicidio en América Latina y el Caribe. Finlandia tiene uno de los índices de suicidio más altos de Europa y del mundo. (Ver aquí la lista de la Organización Mundial de la Salud - OMS. Ver mi artículo Educación y suicidio).

Educación gratuita 
 
▸ En Cuba y en Finlandia la educación es pública y gratuita, incluyendo todos los costos relacionados con el estudio, desde la educación inicial hasta el fin de la educación superior.  

Alta inversión en educación 

▸ Cuba es, en el contexto latinoamericano, el país que más invierte en educación en relación al Producto Interno Bruto (PIB). Cuba invierte 16.3% de su PIB en educación, seguida de Bolivia, Honduras, Costa Rica y Argentina. (Fuente: CEPAL)

La equidad primero: buena educación para TODOS

▸ Cuba y Finlandia son sociedades igualitarias. La equidad es la preocupación principal. Nadie debe quedar afuera, nadie debe quedarse atrás. "Toda escuela, una buena escuela" es la consigna en Finlandia, y también en Cuba. 

"Aburrimiento" y dedicación al estudio y la lectura   

▸ No es raro escuchar/leer comentarios sobre Cuba y a Finlandia como países "aburridos"  - Finlandia por la inclemencia de su clima; Cuba por su sistema político y su precariedad en términos de consumo y entretenimiento - y mencionar éste como uno de los factores que explicaría la dedicación de la población a la educación, el estudio, la lectura. En el caso de Cuba, hemos visto este argumento ... en informes de académicos e investigadores estadounidenses.  

Mejor desempeño educativo  - región/mundo

▸ Cuba y Finlandia destacan en las pruebas internacionales de rendimiento escolar: Cuba en las pruebas aplicadas por el LLECE (Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la Educación), co-ordinado por la oficina regional de la UNESCO en Santiago, y Finlandia en las pruebas PISA (Programa Internacional para la Evaluación de los Estudiantes, de la OCDE).

Finlandia es conocida por su ubicación destacada en las pruebas PISA, que evalúan competencias en lectura, matemáticas y ciencias entre jóvenes de 15 años de edad. Las pruebas vienen aplicándose cada tres años desde el año 2000.

Las pruebas del LLECE se han aplicado tres veces:

- El Primer Estudio (PERCE) se aplicó en 1997 - lenguaje y matemáticas, a estudiantes de tercero y cuarto grados de primaria - en 13 países. Cuba se ubicó en primer lugar.

- El Segundo Estudio (SERCE) se aplicó en 2006 en 16 países y en el estado mexicano de Nuevo León, en tercero y sexto grados de primaria. Se evaluó lectura y escritura, matemáticas y ciencias naturales. Cuba se ubicó en primer lugar.

- Un Tercer Estudio (TERCE) se aplicó en 2013 en 15 países y en el estado mexicano de Nuevo León. Sus primeros resultados se dieron a conocer en diciembre 2014. Cuba no participó esta vez. En ausencia de Cuba, Chile ocupó el primer lugar.

Todos saben del éxito finlandés en PISA. Pocos saben que Cuba ha obtenido los mejores puntajes en las pruebas del LLECE (1997 y 2006). Es importante reiterar que estas pruebas se aplican tanto a escuelas públicas como privadas (Cuba es el único país en esta región que tiene solo sistema escolar público).

En ambas pruebas del LLECE, los resultados de Cuba mostraron una enorme diferencia con respecto a los demás países participantes (incluido Chile, por muchos años considerado 'modelo educativo' en la región y el país latinoamericano que ha obtenido los mejores resultados en PISA). Asimismo, los resultados de Cuba mostraron la diferencia más pequeña entre escuelas urbanas y rurales.

Los países participantes en las pruebas del LLECE fueron organizados en cuatro grupos, según sus resultados en el Segundo Estudio (SERCE):

• Lugar destacado: Cuba.
• Por encima del promedio regional: Uruguay, el estado mexicano de Nuevo León, Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica y México.
• Promedio regional: Brasil, Colombia y Perú.
• Por debajo del promedio regional: Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay y República Dominicana.  

Cuba es también el país que tiene la mayor esperanza de vida escolar en esta región (16.2 años), seguido de Argentina (16.1) y Uruguay (15.5). Mientras otros países de la región aún se debaten con el acceso a la educación básica, Cuba está empeñada en la batalla por universalizar la educación superior.

Finlandia, por su parte, se ubicó en segundo lugar, después de Japón, en PISA para Adultos (PIAAC, 16 a 65 años, aplicada en 23 países de la OCDE, mide competencias en lectura, cálculo y resolución de problemas en contextos tecnológicos), haciendo evidente que estamos frente a una sociedad educada, no solo escolarizada. Ver aquí gráfico comparativo entre países. 

En definitiva: los sistemas escolares de Finlandia y Cuba son 'exitosos' según los parámetros, instrumentos e indicadores aplicados por las agencias internacionales  - OCDE y UNESCO, en este caso - para evaluar logros educativos.
 
No obstante, mientras que Finlandia goza de reconocimiento internacional y es, merecidamente, vista como 'modelo educativo' a nivel mundial, esto no sucede con Cuba, incluso en el ámbito regional. ¿Cuestionables indicadores internacionales? ¿Falta de información? ¿Prejuicio? ¿Dobles estándares? Un tema para reflexionar y debatir.  

Related posts in this blog | Textos relacionados en este blog
On education in Finland | Sobre la educación en Finlandia
Finland's education compared | La educación finlandesa comparada
La voluntad cubana (a propósito de voluntad política y educación)
América Latina y las pruebas del LLECE
Glosario mínimo sobre la educación en Finlandia
Escolarizado no es lo mismo que educado  
Indice de Desarrollo Humano: América Latina y el mundo

Reaching the Unreached: Non-Formal Approaches and Universal Primary Education

Rosa María Torres and Manzoor Ahmed

Photos: BRAC, Bangladesh

Photo: CONAFE indigenous school, Mexico

This text is part of a dossier prepared by Manzoor Ahmed and myself in 1993, while both of us worked at UNICEF/HQ Programme Division in New York. The dossier was one of many UNICEF/ Education Cluster contributions to the policy-making process following the World Conference on Education for All - EFA (Jomtien-Thailand, 1990). The dossier included this conceptual text and a selection of twelve innovative primary education programmes from all over the world. Some of them are now over forty years old, such as BRAC in Bangladesh, Cursos Comunitarios - CONAFE in Mexico or Escuela Nueva in Colombia (BRAC and Escuela Nueva won recent WISE Awards). The term "non-formal" - adopted mainly from the South Asian experience - refers to the innovative, flexible and alternative nature of these programmes.

There was no Internet back in 1993. The dossier was printed and distributed by mail to all UNICEF offices. Two decades later, many of the ideas contained here remain valid. Many things have changed in the world, for good and for bad, and opportunities for education and for lifelong learning have widened, but many of the key educational problems addressed by the six EFA goals are still unsolved. Universal Primary Education - UPE (EFA Goal 2) remains a major challenge - not only universal access and retention but, most importantly, universal learning.

In 1990, at the launch of the global Education for All initiative (World Conference on Education for All, Jomtien), according to UNESCO there were 106 million children out of school. The year 2000 was established as the deadline for achieving UPE. In 2000 (World Education Forum, Dakar), the promise was postponed until 2015. However, in 2013 (data from 2001-2012):

- "More than 57 million children continue to be denied the right to primary education, almost half of whom will never enter a classroom."
- "Progress in reducing the number of children out of school has come to a virtual standstill just as international aid to basic education falls for the first time since 2002." (EFA Global Monitoring Report/UNESCO-UIS, Policy Paper 09, June 2013).
- Nigeria, Pakistan, Ethiopia, India, the Philippines, Burkina Faso, Kenya, Niger, Yemen, and Mali are the 10 countries with the largest number of out of school children.
- About 25% of children who enroll in school drop out before completing primary education.
- 120 million of those who complete four years of primary education are not able to read, write, and calculate.

“We are at a critical juncture. The world must move beyond helping children enter school to also ensure that they actually learn the basics when they are there. Our twin challenge is to get every child in school by understanding and acting on the multiple causes of exclusion, and to ensure they learn with qualified teachers in healthy and safe environments. Now is not the time for aid donors to back out. Quite the reverse: to reach these children and our ambition to end the learning crisis, donors must renew their commitments so that no child is left out of school due to lack of resources, as they pledged at the turn of this century.” Irina Bokova, UNESCO’s Director General, June 2013.

The proximity of the 2015 deadline - both for Education for All (EFA) and for the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) - has revived old concerns, discussions and ideas with a long history. Governments and international agencies have weak institutional memories; documents that are not on the web are invisible today. These are some of the reasons why we resuscitate this text and make it available in digital format, as a contribution to current reflections and analyses on primary schooling, educational innovation and education reform worldwide. 

Reaching the Unreached:

Non-Formal Approaches and Universal Primary Education

Dossier Prepared for the Second EFA Forum by UNICEF,  New York, 1993

This paper is the product of a collaborative effort. A draft prepared at UNICEF by Rosa-María Torres and Manzoor Ahmed was circulated to the international EFA Forum Steering Committee and others. Comments received were taken into account in preparing a longer draft that was reviewed in a meeting held at UNICEF headquarters in New York on 7-8 June 1993. The meeting was attended Olivier Berthoud, Anil Bordia, Frank Dall, Lavinia Gasperini, Aklilu Habte, Khadija Haq, Aster Haregot, Anthony Hewett, Uyeng Luong, Frank Method, Nyi Nyi, Heli Perrett, Ana Maria Quiroz, Elsie Rockwell, Kate Torkington, Daniel Wagner and Fred Wood. All these contributions are acknowledged gratefully.

INTRODUCTION

The term Non-Formal Education (NFE) denotes here an approach to education rather than an educational domain or sub-system. Such approach introduces greater flexibility with respect to formal education: a decentralised structure, more democratic management and relationships,  adapting programmes to specific contexts and people (families, learners, educators), learner-centred pedagogies and content, creative ways of mobilising and using education­al resources, community ownership and participation in planning and management. Non-Formal Primary Education, as it is called in South East Asia, refers thus to non-conventional school programmes that "deformalise" schools in a number of aspects. In order to reach the unreached - the hardest to reach, the poorest, the most vulnerable and distant, those trapped in conflict situations - flexibility is essential. Rigid and homogeneous school patterns, imposed to all, have not and will not serve the purpose.

"Non-formal" approaches can be applied to all modes and levels of education - including initial, primary, secondary and tertiary education, as well as adult education, and vocational training.  Given the paramount importance of universal primary education (UPE) -- UPE being recognized as the core and the cutting edge of 'basic education for all' within EFA efforts -- this paper concentrates on NFE's potential for achieving UPE.

I. UNIVERSAL PRIMARY EDUCATION: THE CHALLENGE 

The main delivery system to ensure children's basic education outside the family is the school. Primary education must be universal, meet the basic learning needs of children, and take into account the culture, needs and expectations of families and of the community. Non-conventional, alternative programmes can help meet such basic learning needs, even in highly disadvantageous situations, if they are given the necessary conditions to facilitate children's access, wellbeing and learning.

Achieving universal primary education has been an explicit aim for most countries since the early 1960s. However, UPE was understood in terms of enrollment, regardless of retention, completion, and actual learning. This model, centered on a linear and homogeneous expansion of the regular school system, overlooked the different contexts and needs of the population, the actual teach­ing/learning conditions and processes, and ultimately, the learning results. Access and enrollment, infrastructure and central administration consumed most efforts and budgets destined for education, to the detriment of the quality of teaching/learning conditions and results. Non‑enrollment, repetition, dropout and low learning achievement are still major challenges, particularly for 'developing countries' and for the most disadvan­taged groups of society.

Although progress in the last three decades has raised net enrollment rate in developing countries from around 50 per cent of the primary school age-group to over 80 per cent, there are still at least 130 million eligible children who are not enrolled in primary schools. And of those who enroll, at least one-third, do not complete the primary cycle because of a combination of poverty and other socio-cultural disadvantages of children and their families, and the poor quality of the education offered. These figures hide profound disparities, such as those between rural and urban areas, between and within countries, and between boys and girls.

"Education for All" launched and approved in Jomtien (1990) re-defined UPE beyond enrollment or numbers of years of schooling; UPE must ensure "meeting basic learning needs" and "alternative programmes" must ensure:

(a)  quality,

(b)  linkages with the regular school system ("the components should constitute an integrated system, complementary and mutually reinforcing"), and

(c)  adequate support.

(a)  Quality: Quality is a major concern in all forms and levels of education. In particular, quality remains a key issue within the NFE field, historically marked by low academic status and weak political and social recognition. The most effective way to gain legitimacy, indispensable to success, is by demonstrating results. Achieving equal results as those of the school system -- often claimed as a proof of success-- is important but not enough if we consider the low learning outcomes of the school system and the ongoing efforts to improve them.

(b)  Linkages with the regular school system: The battle for UPE requires convergent -- although diversified -- efforts, integrated within a unified system. Not only is the school system the most widespread educational institution worldwide, but it also defines and influences social perceptions and expectations about educa­tion in general. Associating NFE with "out-of-school" education has contributed to its marginalisation. Rather than developing two parallel systems, it is necessary to create linkages and coordination between school and out-of-school, formal and non-formal, based on complementarity, mutual exchange and mobility between them. NFE approaches have much to contribute to the renovation and the "deformalisation" of the school system as well as to the creation of non-conventional programmes complementary to regular schools to serve the difficult-to-reach groups. 

(c)  Adequate support: NFE has been traditionally viewed as a cheap compensatory alternative to the school system, operating with untrained, underpaid and voluntary personnel, with low budgets and precarious management. NFE primary education programmes are required to achieve the same or more than the mainstream school system under more difficult circumstances -- serving the most disadvantaged populations, most heterogeneous groups, in hard-to-reach zones - with fewer resources. If NFE is to improve its quality and play an effective role as a national UPE strategy, it will require greater resources and support at all levels of the educational and administrative hierarchy. Govern­ment policy and decision-makers must assume a lead role in promoting diversified educational approaches, in mobilizing and sustaining a favourable climate of opinion towards them, and in guarantee­ing the conditions (political, financial, legal, techni­cal, and managerial) required for success.

 II. DIVERSIFIED APPROACHES TO PRIMARY EDUCATION: THE NFE ROLE 

There are today, in broad terms, three main strands of organizational and institutional arrangements in primary education: a) the formal school system, b) traditional indigenous education systems and institutions and c) non-conventional programmes generally labelled as NFE programmes. The three are present in all regions, although operating under very specific realities, with different emphases, approaches and strategies. All three require major changes and improvement.

a.  Innovations within the formal school system

The need to reform and revitalise the formal school system is evident all over the world. Counterbalancing the growing tide of criticism and skepticism about schools and public education, identify­ing and disseminating "success stories" ("good practices", "effective schools") have become a major thrust both nationally and interna­tionally. Programmes such as Colombia's Escuela Nueva, Chile's Programa de las 900 Escuelas, Mexico's Cursos Comunitarios, Zimbabwe's Educational Reform and the "Community School" approach revived in several African and Asian countries, show that change is possible and taking place within school walls in state-run public education systems. Many of these reforms have been inspired or become acceptable and possible as a result of the legitimacy of change and innovation spawned by NFE practices and research. Since formal primary schools serve the large majority of children, the greatest potential for NFE's contribution to universal primary education lies in its possibilities to trigger change and innovation in the public school system.

b.  Traditional indigenous education institutions

Traditional indigenous institutions, primarily stemming from the religious tradition predating European colonialism, are widespread in 'developing countries' and can be found in many countries under different denominations (Buddhist temple schools in several Asian countries, African bush schools in Liberia, Islamic schools in Asian and African countries, Church Schools in Ethiopia, etc). Many of them are elaborate systems that have been maintained outside the standard school system, have not been incorpo­rated in educational diagnoses and statistics, and have been overlooked by policy makers and researchers. Some provide an alternative to modern schooling, including a whole range of levels and modalities that play an equivalent role to the conventional "ladder" from pre-school to middle and even special­ized education. Some of them have been undergoing changes and introducing innovations in an effort to adapt to changing times and to "modernization". This is particularly true of the Islamic or Koranic school system, prevalent in over 40 countries and a large school population numbering in tens of millions of children.

Today, with ongoing educational reforms and a sense of urgency promoted by EFA, there is an increasing interest - particularly in Africa and Asia - in studying, documenting and revitalizing these traditional indigenous education alternatives, incorporating them within UPE efforts, and nourishing them with new curriculum and pedagogical methods, some of which are derived from NFE  approaches. 

c.  Non-formal primary education programmes

Primary education programmes categorically labeled as "non-formal" have been emerging since the early 1970s, with a marked increase during the 1980s, particularly in South Asia, the region with the highest percentage of out-of-school children in the age group 6-11.  (Bangladesh's BRAC Non-formal Primary Education is one of the best known programmes of this type). These programmes are still incipient in Africa and rather unfamiliar in Latin America and the Caribbean, where the term "non-formal" continues to be associated with adult education and out-of-school activities.

Non-formal primary education is aimed at out-of-school children/ youth, covering both the non-enrolled and the drop-out; most programmes operate in the rural areas; some are specifically designed to deal with gender disparity through a range of measures including gender-segregated programmes; some are addressed to very specific groups such as working children/youth, abandoned or street children, refugees, nomads, etc;  many derive methodology from adult education programmes, and some have maintained that link and even developed an integrated child/adult education framework; and some have attempted systematically to establish links with other development activities such as community development projects, women's groups, recreation and reading centers, etc.

These programmes present a great variety in terms of magnitude and scope, management, modes of delivery, curriculum, teaching approaches, and relation­ship with the school system. Some common features of the more effective non-formal primary education programmes can be identified:

▸ Organization of the programme: annual calendar, daily schedule and number of total yearly hours determined by local circumstances, including part-time and spare-time schedules as well as multiple-shift arrangements. Emphasis on utilizing shorter hours more effectively.  Local and community involvement in planning, management and budget with accountability to community and parents.

▸  Teachers: Para-professionals and community members, including part-time and volunteer staff for all or most of the teaching personnel. Flexible formal education requirements, short pre-service orientation/training; reliance on on-the-job learning and supervision for maintaining teaching quality and teachers' motivation.

▸ Learners: Flexible age requirements and no pre-requisites, although usually "affirmative action" approach in favour of the disadvantaged is followed.

▸ Curriculum and teaching-learning methods: Curriculum and learning materials are adapted to local needs through simplification, shortening, condensing or re-structuring the curriculum. Flexible evaluation, promotion and certification criteria and procedures. Pragmatic mix of a variety of approaches and methods: self-learning, group and individual work, peer-tutoring, ability and interest grouping; self-paced learning; multigrade classes and arrangements.

▸ Physical facilities: Any convenient physical facility (including private homes or even open spaces), multiple use of building, no capital investment for building within the primary education budget.

Types and degrees of linkages with the formal school system vary considerably from one programme to another, as well as the understanding and operationalization of the issue of "equivalence", depending on the role seen for NFE in the total UPE effort.  Many programmes run parallel to the regular school system and have no connection with it. A number of them seek equivalence either with the complete primary cycle or with some initial grades -- usually the first three or four grades. Some have lateral entries to the school system at several points. A few have a much wider and more complex relationship with the formal system, collaborating with it in areas such as teacher training, planning, learning materials, etc. Others operate in a compensatory role, as school reinforcement, providing poor and deprived children a substitute for elitist private tutoring (e.g. the Explicaçâo - "Explana­tion Schools" - in Guinea-Bissau and other countries). Establishing a modus operandi for links between the regular primary system and the non-formal programmes is critical for realizing the full potential of NFE for universal primary education.

III. TEN CONDITIONS FOR EFFECTIVENESS

Experiences have accumulated and lessons have been learned over the past decades to help avoid common mistakes, anticipate common problems, and limit the search for strategies, approaches and measures that have proven useful in different circumstances. Major requisites for effective application of NFE approaches in UPE can be identified from the wide vista of practice and experience in all regions of the world.

1.  A unified comprehensive system for UPE.  NFE and diversified approaches to primary education need to be seen as components of a unified system.  Major non-conventional and non-formal primary education initiatives must be a key component of the total UPE strategy to reach all those not reached by the regular system. This unified approach requires:

(a) decentralized local structures of planning, management and monitoring of the UPE strategy in geographical units small enough to allow meaningful involvement of communities; and

(b) a partnership for basic education and UPE at community and other levels among government, private sector, community organizations, parents, teachers and local government.

An unplanned voluntary sector expansion of NFE programmes, in a general climate of heavy criticism of public education and a government withdrawal, is not the answer.  Governments have to assume a strong and pivotal role in UPE in establishing general policies and indicators, guaranteeing basic inputs, compensating for regional imbalances, creating the conditions for local actions, and providing professional support for making a unified system with diverse approaches function effectively. 

2.  A supportive climate of opinion.  The greatest obstacle to adoption and effective application of NFE approaches is lack of understanding and appreciation of their potential both among national policy-makers and in the entrenched educational establishment. NFE has been traditionally conceived as "second rate" education, a low-cost compensatory alternative to the regular school system intended for the poor and for marginal populations. An effective way to counteract the perceived low status of NFE is to demonstrate its effectiveness, by carrying out well-conceived projects, assessing these and other relevant experiences, and disseminating the results.  Government policy and decision-makers must assume a lead role, especially in defending and promoting diversified educational approaches.

3.  A support structure for planning and implementation.  Several factors are of crucial importance for success in NFE within UPE:

(a)  Organisational, administrative and management issues are often underestimated in the NFE field. The idea persists that NFE is, by nature, a non-systematic, non-structured type of education. NFE primary education programmes cannot succeed without a decentralised local structure for planning, management and monitoring in a small enough unit for effective community and parental participation in the local UPE effort. This local structure needs to have adequate authority and support by higher levels of the educational planning and administration hierarchy.  NFE cannot play its role fully as long as it is planned and managed in isolation from mainstream primary education.

(b)  The curriculum, pedagogy and learning materials are often neglected as key components of the educational process and as specialised areas. NFE approaches can help rethink conventional ways of addressing problems related to curriculum and content -- overburdening with too many academic subjects, use of a non-local language as medium of instruction, fragmentation of the curriculum and lack of practical relevance, which prompt children to drop-out and defeat the main purpose of primary education. Some successful programmes have simplified the curriculum, organized relevant learning materials, related content to the life and experience of learners, and adapted it to the specific needs and possibilities of teachers. Regional and even local adaptations to centrally produced materials that foresee the need and include built-in mechanisms for such adaptations have proven effective in programmes such as Escuela Nueva in Colombia.

(c)  Capacity-building and training of personnel in planning, administration, pedagogy, curriculum, supervision and evaluation at different levels are another neglected area. Teacher training in NFE approaches becomes all the more crucial considering the limited formal education and lack of pedagogic preparation of the usual para-professional and community teachers. A short initial training complemented by frequent refreshers and close supervision has proven successful in many programmes. Multigrade methodologies require specialized training targeted at the specific components and requirements of multigrade teaching (group learning, peer-tutoring, self-paced learning, self-instructional materials). At the same time, desirable levels of competence should be set realistically so that too high standards do not become an obstacle to expanding or replicating the programme and serving those deprived of any primary education opportunity.

4.  Adequate resources  NFE has been traditionally viewed as a cheap alternative to the formal school system. It is expected to accomplish the "mission impossible" with few resources and support.  Often, the very concept of "cost-effectiveness" is misunderstood: a programme may be cost-effective but not necessarily inexpensive, while a low-cost programme may turn out to be an ineffective investment. It is clearly necessary to pay attention to costs, benefits and resource mobilization for both formal and other complementary primary education programmes with a perspective of attaining the universalisation goal. NFE is not the remedy for chronic under-financing of primary education.  NFE approaches, however, offer the opportunity for developing a more efficient pattern of resource allocation, that de-emphasises capital costs and concedes greater importance to factors that are critical to the teaching-learning process and results, such as capacity building, learning materials, and monitoring.

5.  Strong community and parental involvement  Community and parental involvement are crucial not only for the necessary ownership of the programme but also for the indispensable accountability at local and community levels, both of which are crucial to sustainability. "Participation" is an ambiguous term and often understood in a restrictive sense -- provision of materials and labour force.  One essential condition is to create and cede authority to local planning and management structures that lead to community ownership of the programme.  Participation involves all phases of the programme, from design to evaluation.

6.  Assessment of learning achievement  Developing appropriate assessment methodologies and tools implies coming to an agreement on, or a definition of, basic learning needs in terms of literacy, numeracy, and basic life knowledge and skills. This also implies a clear understanding and assessment of implementing conditions and better use of information for planning, management and monitoring at local and higher levels. BRAC's Assessment of Basic  Competencies (ABC) -- a simple and rapid assessment method to assess reading, writing, arithmetic and essential life knowledge and skills -- is a pioneering attempt applicable to both formal and non-formal components of UPE.

7.  Taking advantage of modern and traditional media  Communication media are fundamental allies of UPE: (a) as complementary teaching and learning tools for everyone; (b) as a means for continuous teacher professional development and solidarity, and (c) as channels for advocacy, information, citizenship building and shaping public opinion. Better use of media and technologies for educational purposes requires developing technical capacities and critical thinking.

8.  Expansion and replication of innovations  The lack of plans and mechanisms for scaling up of programmes is a major issue in NFE approaches, especially the ones managed by NGOs. "Pilot projects" (often confused with "small projects") have become a matter of controversy as a result of many failed experiences. The opposite danger is of massive programmes that are implemented without previous experimentation or hurried scaling-up of emerging small-scale experiences. A balanced approach that recognizes ample lessons from experience in NFE as well as in other social development programmes must be adopted. More important, however, is the need to initiate and design programmes from the very beginning with an eye to expansion and replication, if we consider that in many countries UPE cannot be achieved without large-scale efforts.

9.  Addressing gender disparity  Studies conducted all over the world have consistently documented some of the main constraints in girls' and women's access to education, and the need for specific strategies to address them. Such strategies include, among others, the location of schools closer to homes or communities; promoting the recruitment of female teachers; reducing hidden costs to parents; developing relevant curricula; increasing community participation; promoting localiza­tion and decentralization; encouraging advocacy and social mobiliza­tion; designing systems that accommodate the needs of female students; and supporting multiple delivery systems that involve multi-media approaches. All of these constitute features commonly attributed to NFE approaches. If properly put into practice (at least a combination of several of them), NFE can make a specific contribution to greater gender equity. One concrete experience is that of BRAC in Bangladesh, where over 70 per cent of children enrolled in schools are girls.

10.  Continuing educational opportunities beyond primary education  Primary education cannot be viewed as a terminal and the only educational opportunity for the vast majority of the world's population. Invariably, expansion of primary education has led to an increasing demand for more education. Expanding, improving and diversifying post-primary educational opportunities are thus also challenges for both the regular school system and NFE programmes. Basic education, as defined by the World Conference on Education for All, must satisfy basic learning needs of children, youth and adults. In as much as one of these basic needs is building the foundation for lifelong learning, continuing post-primary education, also flexible and adapted to learners' specific needs and conditions, cannot be lost sight of in planning for UPE and NFE strategies.

Related texts in this blog
International Initiatives for Education ▸ Iniciativas internacionales para la educación