Lifelong Learning: An Annotated Bibliography

The bibliography aims to demonstrate the breadth of issues being addressed under lifelong learning. It is arranged under a series of subject headings that reflect:

• The traditional education and training structures;
   
• Current moves towards increased cross-sectoral provision of education and training; and
   
• Current trends towards linking education and training provision and outcomes more directly with labour markets.

The bibliography indicates that lifelong learning is a term widely adopted by politicians and policy agencies as a ‘catch-all’ term used to address the wide range of education and training issues that have arisen along side the economic and technological changes that have occurred in recent times and that are captured by the term ‘globalisation.’ Thus lifelong learning is a central concept in international forums such as OECD and UNESCO.

In Australia lifelong learning has been a key theme in policy statements and reviews of education and training in each of the sectors: schools, higher education, vocational education and training (VET), and adult community education (ACE). For example, key government reviews that draw on the concept have included:

• West, R. (1998). Learning for life: Final report - Review of higher education financing and policy (West Report). Canberra, Department of Employment Education Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA).
   
• ANTA (Australia National Training Authority) (1998). A Bridge to the Future. Brisbane, ANTA.
   
• Crowley, R. (1997). Beyond Cinderella: Towards a learning society. Canberra, Australia Senate Employment Education and Training References Committee
   
• Crowley, R (Chair) (1998) A Class Act: An Inquiry into the Status of the Teaching Profession. Canberra, Australia Senate Employment Education and Training References Committee

The bibliography also confirms that, in spite of this widespread adoption at the policy level, the concept remains ill-defined and all encompassing. It has something of the flavour of a ‘motherhood statement’ – that is, it is ‘unquestionably worthy of support, unarguably meritorious and praiseworthy’ (Macquarie Dictionary). As a consequence, although the term is widely used in policy contexts, it continues to lack a unitary conceptual foundation. In fact, the term appears to be used to support a number of distinct discourses and political agendas.

In the materials reviewed for this bibliography there appear to be at least three discernible theoretical trajectories drawing on the term. The first of these appears to be drawing on learning theory, the second from a redefinition of education and training as a valuable commodity, the third posits a link between education and training and human resource development (or labour markets).

Much of the rhetorical power of the term ‘lifelong learning’ stems from its resonance with established concepts drawn from learning theory. One of the best exemplars of this use of the concept is to be found in the 1996 UNESCO report Learning, the Treasure Within (the Delors Report). The ‘pillars’ of learning identified in this report speak to a humanist tradition in educational theory that harks back to the educational philosophy of John Dewey and others. The pillars of learning identified in the UNESCO report are:

• Pillar 1: learning to know
   
• Pillar 2: learning to do
   
• Pillar 3: learning to live together
   
• Pillar 4: learning to be.

These ‘pillars’ allow the notion of life long learning to be coupled with a wide range of curriculum issues – from, for example, ‘learning to learn’ to education for citizenship, to increased vocational emphasis in the curriculum. This notion also allows engagement with international concern over basic education provision for the world’s poor – which is an important element of the UNESCO agenda.

A second arena in which the term life long learning is currently being invoked is that of structural reform of education and training provision. On this trajectory issues of articulation, credit transfer, and sectoral boundaries have become central policy issues. ‘Pathways’, ‘seamlessness’, ‘open education markets’ and ‘private providers’ have become key concepts – all aimed at achieving greater ‘flexibility’ and ‘responsiveness’ which will, in turn, benefit the students/clients by making the system more responsive to their changing education and training needs.

It is at the rhetorical level – at the level of justifying structural change in terms of benefits to students (and the community) - that notions embedded in the term ‘lifelong learning’ (drawn from the ‘learning as empowerment’ paradigm) appear to find their appeal within this discourse.

The notion of lifelong learning resonates well with contemporary debates over the needs of workers/organisations in the globalised market place. The rhetorical coupling of continual skills upgrading and economic success (maintaining ‘a competitive edge’) gives the concept a powerful link to contemporary agendas that lie outside the traditional fields of education and training. Within this paradigm education and training outcomes are defined in terms of their links with employment destinations, human-resource planning and supply-side economics. Reports from the OECD provide some of the best examples of the approach to lifelong learning, although there are many Australian examples in the bibliographical collection. This way of conceptualising lifelong learning has generated research related to issues as diverse as:

• Education and training links with employment destinations;
   
• Workplace restructuring, and workplace training and retraining;
   
• On-the-job and ‘just-in-time’ training; and
   
• Continued professional development.

The bibliography clearly illustrates the diverse range of policy issues that draw on the rhetorical power of the lifelong learning term. But to what extent has this term reached beyond the boundaries of policy-makers and been actively taken up by either the academic community or by education and training practitioners? Or, to put it another way, how much critical debate is taking place outside the policy-making domain? To address this question we have divided each section in the main bibliography into four sections, as follows:

• Policy statements and reports. The reports include both government reports and research monographs;
   
• Conference papers and published collections of conference papers;
   
• Journal articles; and
   
• Books and book sections.

In addition, we have drawn from the main bibliography a sub-set of the materials that refer specifically to lifelong learning in their titles or abstracts This resulted on a sub-set of 64/224 items (see Appendix A). This sub-set was then divided into the same categories as those set out above, with the following results:

• Policy statements and reports (25/64);
   
• Conference papers and published collections of conference papers (22/64); and
   
• Journal articles, books and book sections (17/64).

In dividing the materials in this way it was assumed that the first set of materials are those that promote the policy agenda directly either through policy statements or as agency-funded research.

The middle section—conference papers—tend to lie at the intersection between the policy-driven construction of issues and the research community. The conference papers tend to be a mix of:

• Policy-makers’ (and funding bodies) speeches to the research community; and
   
• Presentations to peers of research methods and findings.

It is assumed that the third section—journals and other non-report writing—represent the ‘space’ where more independent and critical analysis of the policy constructs takes place. We should emphasise that we are not claiming that the bibliography, or the sub-set drawn from it, is exhaustive. The bibliography was designed to illustrate the range of themes currently being addressed in policy debates in the area. Given the ‘motherhood statement’ status of the lifelong learning term an exhaustive collection would need to incorporate most current debates in education and training—from foundation studies, to training and retraining, to the University of the Third Age (or ‘cradle to grave’ learning).

Nevertheless, if the bibliography is representative of the range of materials in the area then the different types of materials, and their relative numbers, can be taken as an indication of the extent to which the lifelong learning concept is policy driven. From this perspective, the fact that independent journal articles make up so small a part of the sub-set on lifelong learning is significant in that it suggests that the concept is not one that is being widely taken up outside the policy domain or subject to much critical analysis.

Obviously not all journal articles are equally rigorous or challenge the policy-makers’ assumptions to the same degree. Of our sample at least half could be defined as articles that accept the meaning of lifelong learning as self-evident – that is, the concept appears unproblematic (examples include Aspin et al., Chapman, Bagwell, Sinclair). Of those remaining we found a predominance of articles addressing higher education concerns, particularly in relation to theories of adult learning (examples: Cornford, Duke) and changes in delivery modes brought about by the new communications technology (example: Gorard & Selwyn). Several, most notably Allport and Schuler & Field, and Tight, address deeper assumptions about the nature of globalisation and economic restructuring and its relationship to education and training. One article in the sample, that by Levin, looks at the question of lifelong learning from the perspective of the economics of education.

By using this rather crude categorisation we conclude that the lifelong learning concept appears to have been widely adopted at the policy level but has less purchase in the wider education and training community. This is not to say that the term does not have the rhetorical power associated with its ‘motherhood statement’ status – it would be difficult to find someone who, at the common sense level of understand, thought ‘lifelong learning’ was a ‘bad’ thing. What it does suggest is that the term is not being critically interrogated by the education and training profession and its meaning is not a ‘site of struggle’ for practitioners. Or, to put it another way, our examination of the literature leads us to conclude that the term appears to have little resonance with the curriculum issues faced by teachers and trainers in their day-to-day practice.

This bibliography illustrates the wide range of education and training issues that have drawn upon the rhetorical power of lifelong learning. It demonstrates that, because the concept draws on traditional notions of the importance of education and training for personal and social development, it has found acceptance both within the education and training profession and in the wider community. However, the bibliography also indicates that the ready adoption of the term by policy makers, addressing a range of issues from structural reform of education and training provision to human resource management and the impact of technology, has rendered the term rather hollow – something of a ‘motherhood’ statement – the meaning of which is mostly assumed. The different ways it is used in policy statements and commissioned research is not sufficiently interrogated in the academic literature for the concept to develop the strength necessary to usefully engage with current education and training issues and debates. The emerging trends do not give much heart to those who would wish to see the concept become more sharply defined.
 

Full Report    (465.25 KB) PDF