Lifelong Learning and Teacher Education

In 2001 this project, which was funded by the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs under the Evaluation and Investigation Program (EIP), was undertaken by members of the Centre for Lifelong Learning at Australian Catholic University. The investigation sought to determine how teacher educators’ roles and responsibilities might change in response to the policy challenge of making lifelong learning a reality for all.

The project had three broad goals:

In this study we were concerned to understand the ways in which lifelong learning was conceptualised in Australian teacher education. One approach to conceptualising lifelong learning suggests that it is primarily concerned with the promotion of skills and competencies necessary for the development of general capabilities and specific performance on given tasks. Skills and competencies developed through programs of lifelong learning will, on this approach, have a bearing on questions of how workers perform in their tackling of specific job responsibilities and tasks and how well they can adapt their general and specific knowledge and competencies to new tasks (OECD Jobs Study, 1994). This approach presents us with a relatively narrow and limited understanding of the nature, aims and purpose of lifelong education.

Chapman and Aspin (1997) have pointed out that it is evident from the recent work of OECD, UNESCO, The European Parliament and The Nordic Council of Ministers that there are much broader and more multi-faceted ways of approaching the conceptualisation of lifelong learning. Instead of seeing education as instrumental to the achievement of an extrinsic goal, education may also be perceived as an intrinsically valuable activity, something that is good in and of itself. From this perspective, the aim is to enable those engaging in learning, not merely to arrive at a new place but ‘to travel with a different view’ (Peters, 1965). On this view, lifelong learning offers the opportunity for people to bring their knowledge up to date. It enables them to enjoy activities which they may have either long since laid aside or always wanted to do but were previously unable to. It allows them to try their hands at activities and pursuits that they had previously imagined were outside their available time or competence. It enables them to work consciously at extending their intellectual, vocational and personal horizons by seeking to understand and grasp some of the more significant advances of recent times, that have done so much to affect and transform their worlds. From this broader viewpoint, the expansion of cognitive repertoire and increasing one’s skills and competencies is an undertaking that can - and indeed, must - continue throughout life, as a necessary part of growth and development as a human being, as a citizen in a participative democracy, and as a productive agent in a process of economic change and advancement (Chapman and Aspin, 1997).

The OECD Ministers have argued (OECD, 1996) that none of these aims of lifelong learning can really be separated from the other: all three elements interact and cross-fertilise each other. According to this view, there is a complex inter-play between all three, that makes education for a more highly skilled work force at the same time an education for a better democracy and an inclusive society and a more rewarding life. For this reason, OECD Ministers argued that the whole notion and value of ‘lifelong learning for all’ has to be seen as a complex and multi-faceted process, that begins in pre-school times, is carried on through basic, compulsory and post-compulsory periods of formal education and training, and is then continued throughout life, through such learning experiences, activities and enjoyment in the workplace, in universities and colleges, and in other educational, social and cultural agencies and institutions - of both a formal and informal kind - within the community (OECD, 1996).

It was this conceptualisation of lifelong learning that provided the framework for our study.

We began our study with an examination of the ways in which lifelong learning had been conceived and incorporated into the policies of the Commonwealth and State Governments, and employing authorities in Catholic and Independent schools in Australia, taking particular note of the relevance of such policies to teacher education.

We found that after the initial attention to the concept of lifelong learning by Commonwealth Governments in the early 1970s, the re-emergence of interest in lifelong learning at national level coincided with the downturn in the Australian economy at the end of the 1980s. Lifelong learning came to be associated with the economy, and the expectation that a highly educated and skilled workforce would contribute to a more advanced and competitive economy. During the late 1990s, however, the emphasis broadened from a primary concern with the contribution of lifelong learning to the nation’s economy to include the value of lifelong learning for the economic well-being of the individual. More recently still there has appeared in Government policies the idea that lifelong learning also contributes to the social well-being of individuals and the community through improved access and the amelioration of education disadvantage. A number of policies and practices have been put into place to bring about educational reform in line with these concerns.

All States, we found, demonstrate commitment to lifelong learning in their education and training policies. However, the level of explicit commitment to lifelong learning varies between the States. Some State Governments have identified lifelong learning as a central priority in educational policy. Other States give more implicit support for the concept. As with the inclusion of reference to lifelong learning in education policies, reference to lifelong learning and the preparation of the teaching profession varies between States. There is, however, in all States, an appreciation of the need to improve the quality of teaching in the classroom. There is also a recognition that ongoing education for teachers is essential.

In the Catholic and Independent sectors we found strong support for lifelong learning, especially in regard to the total development of the student and the teacher with particular reference to the individual’s personal and faith development.

The next stage in our study involved interviews with a wide range of stakeholders in nine randomly selected Faculties and the use of a questionnaire survey which collected views from the Deans of Education in Australian Faculties of Education. The data revealed a strong commitment to lifelong learning but both the survey and case study data suggested that there is little evidence of a commonly shared understanding of the concept of lifelong learning in Australian teacher education.

Notwithstanding these difficulties we were able to uncover examples of good practice that were consistent with lifelong learning. We found examplars of good practice in areas including:

We also were able to identify a number of factors that can be drawn upon to enable the operationalisation of lifelong learning. These included:

We identified a number of problems in the operationalisation of lifelong learning in teacher education:

1. A lack of clarity and shared understanding regarding the concept of lifelong learning

2. A lack of widespread knowledge about recent policy initiatives on lifelong learning

3. A discrepancy between policy pronouncements and implementation of lifelong learning in individual Faculties of Education

4. The constraints impacting on the operationalisation of lifelong learning policies at the Faculty level resulting from the existence of a range of institutional barriers including:

   • Staff workloads

   • Class sizes

   • Institutional complexities

   • Availability of time

5. The existence among some teacher educators of a level of scepticism regarding the nature, importance and implementability of a number of recent developments in education, including lifelong learning, which are seen to have their origin in the policies and initiatives of international agencies or government.
6. The lack of a multi-agency vehicle for reform to bring about the implementation of lifelong learning in teacher education working in partnership with other providers in the education community
7. The lack of a sophisticated and well developed research base which directly addresses lifelong learning in teacher education
8. The need for some systematic address on the whole area of teacher education and lifelong learning with a view to developing policies and initiatives which are in line with government concerns and the realities of institutional application.

In order to address these problems an Agenda for Action for operationalising lifelong learning in teacher education in Australia was put forward, including:

1. The organising and conducting of a national seminar on lifelong learning and teacher education to assist in the development of a shared understanding and operational definition for the implementation of lifelong learning in teacher education

2. Government support for the development of multi-agency approaches to lifelong learning and teacher education including the creation of ‘Lifelong Learning, Teacher and Teacher Education Networks’

3. A reconsideration of appropriate models of policy development and vehicles for reform in Australian teacher education, and the acceptance of changed roles and responsibilities necessary for the achievement of lifelong learning

4. Consideration by Faculties of Education of the implementation of lifelong learning policies and approaches in teacher education and the development of ‘good practice’ in line with lifelong learning goals

Full Report    (793.57 KB)