Global Perspectives on Recognising Non-formal and Informal Learning: Why Recognition Matters

Front matter

Technical and Vocational Education and Training: Issues, Concerns and Prospects 21

Madhu Singh

Global Perspectives on Recognising Non-formal and Informal Learning

Foreword

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) continues to play a central role in the international vision of developing and extending lifelong learning across the globe. Since 1972 and the release of the pathbreaking Learning to Be report by UNESCO, the Organization has provided detailed and timely research into lifelong learning with a strong focus on promoting equality and meaningful development around the world.

In UNESCO, the importance of recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning (RVA) has been discussed since the UNESCO General Conference in 2005.! In this context, the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning located in Hamburg, Germany, conducted analyses of national policies and practice of RVA drawing on data from Member States. More recently, the Belém Framework for Action highlighted UNESCO’s role by developing guidelines on all learning outcomes including those acquired through non-formal and informal learning so that these may be recognised and validated. At the same time, it called on member states to develop or improve structures and mechanisms for the recognition of all forms of learning by establishing equivalency frameworks.

Launching from this broad research base, the publication presented here on Global perspectives on recognising non-formal and informal Learning: Why recognition matters provides a thorough, wide-ranging and accessible analysis of Member States’ experiences with RVA. It approaches the recognition of lifelong learning pathways by investigating critical factors conducive for RVA’s implementation, its strategic policy objectives, best practice features and the challenges and the ways forward as reported by Member States and perhaps most importantly RVA’s role in promoting equality and inclusiveness both in education and across society more generally.

The overall aim of the study is to advance a body of knowledge that allows us to share experience, expertise and lessons that concern in-country RVA practices across Member States. It is presented in such a way that enables its effective and immediate

133C/Resolution 10 of the 33rd session of the General Conference (2005).

vi Foreword use across the full spectrum of country contexts whether in the developing or developed world. It is our hope that Global perspectives on non-formal and informal Learning will promote a proper understanding of the opportunities and challenges offered by RVA in different contexts to policy-makers, educators, researchers and anyone with an interest in lifelong learning and the recognition of non-formal and informal learning. For every country that seeks to enable its citizens, build capacity and cultivate human capital, the understanding promoted in this study will be of genuine significance for the sharing of mutual benefit across international borders.

Director Arne Carlsen UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning, Hamburg, Germany April 2015

Acknowledgements

This book represents a part of UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning’s work on “Recognition, Validation and Accreditation of the Outcomes of Non-formal and Informal Learning”. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge all the colleagues at the Institute for their continued support throughout and for making this publication possible.

An international study like this one is always a major challenge and relies on the collaboration with several individuals and organisations. I have had the privilege to be able to draw on the long-standing working relationships with several of these people and organisations that I cite in the text. They have greatly contributed to the policy debate on recognising, validating and accrediting non-formal and informal learning. Their data and their continual commitment and involvement in necessary and responsible education reforms have greatly contributed to my understanding of the challenges and opportunities that we face in relation to recognising existing talent and in respect to access to education for disadvantaged people.

Most of all, I would like to thank all the peer reviewers for their constructive feedback on the various drafts and for their invaluable expertise and guidance.

My grateful thanks go out to Marcus Brainard for copy-editing the introduction and to Damian Harrison for copy-editing the rest of the publication. I am grateful to Stephen Roche, head of the publications unit at UIL, for overseeing the entire publication. Finally, I am thankful to Marianne Wenger for helping with the bibliographic references.

Hamburg, Germany Madhu Singh April 2015

Springer Book Series Technical and Vocational Education and Training: Issues, Concerns and Prospects

Series Editors Introduction

Worldwide, countries are examining what role education and schooling can play in contributing to a more just, equitable and peaceful world, where there is sustainable economic and social development for all, and the end of poverty. In doing this countries recognize a need to re-engineer education for change: that is, rather than just ‘tinkering with the existing system’, to examine the fundamental, often taken for granted and unexamined values and practices upon which current education and schooling systems are built, and to modify (or even rebuild) these from their foundation upwards. Countries already know the range of education challenges and stumbling blocks that need to be confronted to achieve the improvement of education and schooling for change. These are well researched and documented. But do countries have the courage and commitment, and political will, to take the necessary action?

These are amongst the matters addressed by Madhu Singh, a researcher at the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning in Hamburg, in this important book which examines the importance of re-engineering education for change by moving away from the limited notion of ‘education’ for all, to that of ‘learning’ for all, and to placing an increasing emphasis on non-formal and informal learning, rather than largely focusing on learning that occurs in the formal education system in institutions such as schools and colleges.

Singh surveys global perspectives on the importance of non-formal and informal learning, and of giving greater recognition to such forms of learning, rather than just that which occurs in formal education institutions, which traditionally tends to be the emphasis of researchers, policy makers and practitioners. The reason is that much of the most important learning that occurs for individuals and groups in societies worldwide is not that which occurs in formal settings in schools or colleges, but that which occurs through informal and non-formal means, from family, friends, x Springer Book Series Technical and Vocational Education and Training. . .

the mass media and ‘on the job’ in the workplace. This is particularly true when it comes to the knowledge, skills and understandings individuals learn and develop with regard to citizenship and in the area of employment.

In essence, the overall aim of the study presented in this book is to share experience, expertise and lessons concerning the importance of recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning by establishing mechanisms and frameworks to enable this to happen. Singh identifies global best and innovative practices in the belief that what works in one country can, with suitable adjustments to take account of different national contexts, also work elsewhere. The book examines the changing nature of lifelong and shared learning across countries, both developed and developing; the importance of adopting a holistic approach to lifelong learning; the role of the recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning (RVA) in education, working life and society; importance of the coordination and stakeholder interests and motivations; and, features of best practices drawn from country examples.

We believe that the study reported on in this important and timely book will be of considerable interest to a wide audience of education policy makers, researchers and practitioners, as they seek out most effective directions to reengineer education for change to improve the relevance, effectiveness and quality of learning.

31 December, 2014

Contents

1.2 Sharing Learning Across Countries eccirni reni iaa resa 2

10 Key Arcas TOP Analys Beceiro i E ra teas Hes 1 1.6.1 ‘The Strategic Valte of RVA. 2...4.256.-seeieewsonoormadeces 0% 1 1.6.2 Best Practice and Quality of RVA Mechanisms and Proges O n a Ta EE EEEREN EEE EES ea 12 L7. TTIW POS Pi upcr aan a EEEE i E OPE erk 13 1.8 Structure and the Content of the Chapters ...sissr:sissisrirsirsserecss 15 2.1.1 Understanding Lifelong Learning 2.2.1 Use of ‘Intended’ Learning Outcomes 2.2.2 Learning Outcomes as Objectives of More 2.3.5 What Counts as Knowledge, Skills and Competences in BVA... ccyeccsesepegneseseerseseseaes esos 34 xi

Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction

This study on recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning, in short RVA, seeks to contribute to the vast and growing field of interest in recognition — or making visible and valuing knowledge, skills and competences, and learning that is still largely invisible. While it is widely accepted by educationists, governments and the general public, that learning takes place not only in formal educational or training institutions but also in the workplace and in non-formal and informal activities, not all learning is formally recognised. A number of international organisations — particularly the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the European Union (EU) — have conducted studies on the RVA experience across different country contexts. However, those studies have varied greatly in terms of focus, agenda and direction. For this reason, it is important to clarify at the outset the focus of this study and the useful and distinctive contribution it seeks to make to the growing body of knowledge and ideas concerning recognition of non-formal and informal learning.

1.1 Context and Rationale

For the purposes of this study the acronym RVA is used. It was coined by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and means the recognition, validation and accreditation of the outcomes of non-formal and informal learning: a practice that renders visible and gives value to the hidden and unrecognised competences that individuals have obtained in various contexts, through various means in different phases of their lives. Valuing and recognising these learning outcomes may significantly improve individuals’ self-esteem and well-being, motivate them to further learning and strengthen their labour

© UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning 2015 1 M. Singh, Global Perspectives on Recognising Non-formal and Informal Learning,

Technical and Vocational Education and Training: Issues, Concerns and Prospects 21, market opportunities. RVA may help to integrate broader sections of the population into an open and flexible education and training system and to build inclusive societies. (UIL 2012,

In the context of non-formal and informal learning the term ‘recognition’ has several different meanings. In a general sense, it can mean the process of giving official status to competences (or learning outcomes) through the awarding of qualifications, equivalencies, credits, or the issuing of documents such as portfolios of competences. It can also refer to social recognition in terms of the acknowledgement of the value of skills and competences in the labour market or for academic entry or progression — sometimes called currency. It refers to the acceptance of the principle of recognition of non-formal and informal learning by national education, training and employment stakeholders (UIL 2012). Ultimately, it underlines the recognition that learning is a social activity and depends for its value on its embeddedness within a social framework.

This study examines the implementation of RVA and its impact on those who have acquired skills outside the formal education system. For such people recognition is a means of facilitating first-time or renewed participation in formal education and training, or of recognising skills gained in the workplace or through voluntary work. In other words, such recognition has both a personal, individual impact and a social and economic effect upon the collective. This impact has many dimensions (from psychological and personal through to the communal), and transfer value in the labour market, progression value within an education system, as well as use value in daily life situations.

To put it more simply, the present study aims to further an understanding of the following:

e How RVA policy and practice contribute, or could contribute further, to improving quality of life and well-being in those countries that need it most;

e How such recognition is crucial to the educational, economic and social development of many countries;

e The features of good practice in RVA processes that can be shared;

e The key factors that influence the use of RVA in different learning environments;

e The main challenges to the practice of RVA; and

e How RVA can be a part of an appropriate policy response to education and training.

1.2 Sharing Learning Across Countries

There is no single, simple way that a country should approach the use of RVA in order to achieve the desired personal, social and economic impact. Rather, there are many examples of diverse, successful approaches to RVA that can be shared, discussed and developed in new ways to achieve a country’s goals. This study,

1.2 Sharing Learning Across Countries 3 therefore, considers examples from a variety of countries in the global North and South. The study’s distinctive contribution to the RVA discussion is to harness lessons learnt about RVA from many contexts, and to present these as an enabling contribution to RVA policy discourse in less developed countries.

In countries where the large sections of the population have yet to gain access to even the most basic education, the debate on the recognition, validation and accreditation of existing skills, knowledge and competences can seem less crucial. However, it is precisely at the time when countries are developing broader learning reforms — such as the introduction of lifelong learning strategies, competence-based qualifications or national qualifications frameworks — that it is necessary to discuss access to concepts and mechanisms that promote equality and value alternative ways of acquiring knowledge, such as RVA.

The challenge facing governments and other stakeholders is to find ways to harness the benefits of a coherent RVA framework in tandem with broader educational goals such that it promotes substantive equality and inclusiveness for all members of society.

The perspectives of developing and least developed countries where basic education, economic and social systems are facing acute challenges — have much to teach all countries, both developed and developing, about innovation and opportunity in RVA. Those perspectives can also provide crucial information to governments about how to respond to grassroots community developments in educational programmes such as community-school interactions and how to strengthen informal learning in adult and community learning programmes. Although these programmes and centres operate outside the official education system, they provide youth and adults with a foundation for future development and learning. In light of this, the present study emphasises policy dialogue and learning rather than policy borrowing.

Policy dialogue and learning are particularly important in the context of a “politics of knowledge and a politics of competing theories of knowledge” (Visvanathan 2001). In taking issue with Castells’ The Rise of the Network Society (1996), and calling for Science to open up to the knowledge of the people, Visvanathan (2001, p. 4) criticises Castells’ network society as lacking an explicit theory of knowledge or the varieties of knowledge. Citing Richards (1983) on African models of farming, Visvanathan makes a point about varieties.

As Paul Richards argues, African models of farming might embody different notions of community and science. It is this community of expertise that the official application of development [model of Science] might have destroyed. Within such a framework, African agriculture and systems of healing might be alternative paradigms, elusive and elliptical to current models of science. Viewed in this way, the Fourth World becomes not a void or a black box but an alternative list of diversities, possibilities, epistemologies (Visvanathan 2001, p. 5).

Visvanathan also cites Wes Jackson (1987), a botanist, who observed that though we are in the midst of an informational explosion, few dispute the loss of biological and cultural information. Cultural information is the information that has left the rural area and the kind of information that is the necessary basis for a sustainable agriculture.

For Visvanathan the definition of knowledge is crucial to the debate about what counts as knowledge. To define knowledge solely as formal, abstractable knowledge is to impoverish knowledge and to deny the existence of tacit, embodied and, alternative knowledge. Visvanathan calls such sensitivity to alternative ideas of knowledge the “dialogue of knowledges” or “cognitive justice”. Cognitive justice asserts the diversity of knowledges and the equality of knowers. Visvanathan defines cognitive justice “as the right of many forms of knowledge to exist because all knowledges are seen as partial and complementary and because they contain incommensurable insights” and because they are “link[ed] to livelihood, lifestyles and forms of life” (p. 8).

Defending Visvanathan’s notion of cognitive justice, against the charge of an “everything goes” relativism, Van der Velden (2006, p 13) argues that Visvanathan is not arguing for romantic, “museumised” or revivalist ideas of a return to indigenous and traditional knowledge and solutions that are unrealistic in the context of a political and economic globalisation (See Visvanathan 2001). Rather the solution, he argues, lies in a political economy based on the following cognitive principles:

Cognitive justice is first of all a call for making other ways of knowing visible, in particular the knowledge of the defeated and the marginalised. Only on that basis, argues Visvanathan, is it possible to examine the validity of these different ways of knowing. The supposed validity of people’s knowledge lies not ... in the fact that there are diverse ways of knowing (the logical fallacy). Their relative validity will be realised through their inclusion in the heuristic dialogue between (conflicting) knowledges. It is in that sense that these different ways of knowing are valid: they should be treated equal in terms of access to and participation in dialogues of knowledges (Van der Velden 2006, p. 14).

A similar dialogic principle is relevant for the so-called “informal economies” where alternative communities of practice and culturally relevant knowledge are important aspects of professional development. In this context, Michelson (2012) suggests that recognition be understood not as a mere technical issue involving the accumulation of skills and the accreditation of informal knowledge hitherto disregarded, but as an engagement with alternative communities of practice, disparate forms of cultural expression, environmental traditions and workplace practices. Recognition, she argues, needs to be understood as a holistic exploration of the knowledge, skills and understandings that exist in individuals and communities. Recognition speaks to the human aspiration to be seen and honoured for what one already knows, and to be given new learning opportunities and to contribute to society through creative and meaningful work. As Michelson (2012) points out, recognition ‘is central both to recognising the skills that exist in the workplace, creating learning pathways where gaps exist, and distinguishing a true “skills gap” from what is better understood as a “recognition gap” (Michelson 2012, pp. 21). Michelson argues that by relocating recognition of non-formal and informal learning within an epistemology of situated knowledge, we can reconfigure it as a dialogue across alternative modalities of knowledge. This, she says, is not a question of epistemological relativism, or of softening of academic “standards”. Rather recognition is a way of making the criteria of judgement visible and it can grant visibility to knowledge that is valuable for its divergence from formal ways of knowing. Most importantly, Michelson argues, “RPL [Recognition of Prior Learning] can become an important venue

1.3 The High Relevance of RVA in the UNESCO Context 5 for revising the relationship between authorised and devalued forms of knowledge precisely because it formalises it.” (Michelson 2006, p 155).

In the so-called “knowledge-based economies”, the “dialogue of knowledges” has been described by Livingstone and Guile (2012) in terms of the “interplay” between those responsible for generating the knowledge that constitutes curricula in formal learning on the one hand, and occupational epistemic cultures that arise through the interplay between the desire of experts (knowledge workers) to continue their individual informal on-the-job-learning and the organisations nurturing that desire, on the other.

The development of the knowledge society based on dialogical learning means that non-formal and informal learning is an expanding aspect of adult learning. This is also evident from the evolving informal learning processes and supporting non-formal learning pedagogies and applications in the digital age. Paradigms such as just-in-time learning, constructivism, learner-centred learning and collaborative approaches have emerged and are being supported by technological advancements such as simulations, digital gaming, virtual reality and multi-agents systems (International Association for Development of the Information Society (LADIS) 2012).

In the context of the present study, it will be important to ask how, for example, RVA could promote and build upon the latent capabilities, understandings, values and attitudes, perceptions, creative capacities and resourcefulness which adults have and which they use in the everyday transactions and tasks of their working, learning and community lives? How could this learning potential, these everyday strategies of learning be harnessed to increase employability, promote lifelong learning and reduce poverty?

1.3 The High Relevance of RVA in the UNESCO Context

Since its early days, UNESCO, as the United Nations agency responsible for education, has continuously supported the renewal of educational structures, contents and methods at all levels. UNESCO programmes emphasise both the development of flexible, diversified modes of learning that are adapted to young people’s and adults’ needs, languages and cultures, and their acquisition of practical skills for active daily life and employment. Another objective UNESCO has promoted as important for sustainable learning is the participation of all interested stakeholders and partners at local, national and international levels in the development and renovation of education systems.

The study deals with issues that are at the top of the policy and research agenda in many countries around the world. It is highly relevant in the UNESCO context since RVA ranks among the possible ways to redress the glaring lack of relevant qualifications in many developing countries and to promote the development of competences and certification procedures which recognise different types of learning, including formal, non-formal and informal learning, everyday knowledge and skills, practical wisdom and indigenous knowledge.

The opening up of learning systems to RVA is a central tenet of the “learning society” as expressed in the Faure Report, Learning to Be:

If learning involves all of one’s life, in the sense of both time-span and diversity, and all of society, including its social and economic as well as its educational resources, then we must go even further than the necessary overhaul of “educational systems” until we reach the stage of a learning society. For these are the true proportions of the challenge education will be facing in the future? (Faure et al. 1972, p. xxxiii)

According to this report, a learning society embodies fundamental alternatives to the prevailing concepts and structures of education, which are as pressing today as they were more than 40 years ago, when the Faure Report was first published. They include:

e restoring the “dimension of living experience” to education, focusing not on “the path an individual has followed, but what he [or she] has learnt or acquired” (p. 185); acknowledging and setting up all paths, whether formal, or informal, institutionalised or not, that employ different learning methods;

e providing an “over-all open education system [that] helps learners to move within it, both horizontally and vertically, and widen[ing] the range of choice available to them” (pp. 183, 185, 188);

e giving every worker the right “to re-enter the educational circuit in the course of his [or her] active life” (p. 190);

e changing certification procedures in order to rule out premature selection. Procedures should stress the value of “real competence”, aptitude and motivation over and above marks, class ranking or formal credits obtained (p. 190);

e ensuring that “access to different types of education and professional employment depend only on each individual’s knowledge, capacities and aptitudes” (p. 203, emphasis added).

The Faure Report defines a learning society as one in which learning is valued by all members of society, in which stakeholders invest in recognising and developing human learning potential, and everyone regards people’s non-formal and informal learning as a cornerstone of lifelong learning strategies.

The notion of a learning society has far reaching implications not only for the redirection of the formal educational system but also for policies, theories and practices concerned with lifelong learning, which many authors like Hager and Halliday (2009) consider to be unfortunately based on the assumption that such learning should be predominantly formal. This assumption according to them excludes the educative possibilities of informal learning which they consider to be equally worthwhile as formal learning, because informal learning relates to the social circumstances of people, to cultural transmission between generations, and to the “variety of mutually shared interests” (Dewey 1966, p 322). And these aspects are necessary for a democratic and harmonious societal development. According to them, “there is a necessarily a balance to be struck between formal and informal learning and that one is not inherently superior to another” (p. 2). In the same vein, Rogers (2014) argues that lifelong learning should be promoted not only as

1.5 Human Capabilities and the Social Dimensions of Learning 7 a learning programme with a purposeful agenda; rather it should take into account the “universal natural learning for the specific”. It matters to take this informal learning into account because firstly tacit or implicit knowledge and understandings form the basis for our decisions and actions; secondly informal learning helps to develop skills, which we develop unconsciously in the course of the many tasks we undertake, be they mental skills such as calculations or physical skills such as making a meal; and thirdly it is mainly through informal learning that a whole range of perceptions, feelings and attitudes are developed (pp. 32-41).

1.4 Addressing the Challenges of a Learning Society

The educational challenges UNESCO foresaw several decades ago are not so different from the learning challenges confronting us today. In the context of rapid societal transformation arising from globalisation, the information revolution and the need for sustainable economies, the learning systems of “the North” and “the South” face the same general issues of social inequality. Not everyone has the same opportunities to enter education and attain specified outcomes, be they standard indicators of school attainment or broader parameters, including environmental, health and cultural education. At the same time, there is a growing education-job gap and a widening chasm between the haves and have-nots. One of the principal consequences of such inequality is a major under-utilisation of existing human potential, talents and human resources, which people may have acquired in non-formal and informal learning settings. These settings have long been underexploited and not counted as real learning or with real outcomes. Furthermore, formal education and training systems are finding it increasingly difficult to respond to the full range of individual and social needs and demands in an ever changing world. There is therefore clearly a need to accord sufficient esteem and respect to the unrecognised potential in society and to make better social and economic use of the outcomes of non-formal and informal learning by offering a greater range of avenues for self-improvement and personal fulfilment to all citizens, increasing a country’s economic potential and making its political arrangements more socially inclusive.

1.5 Human Capabilities and the Social Dimensions of Learning

The prevalent dependence on formal education in the past meant that social goals such as the promotion of social cohesion and democratic citizenship and the preservation of humanistic values were neglected. By emphasising knowledge, capabilities and competences in all social contexts, a learning society involves all social and cultural groups, irrespective of gender, age, social class, ethnicity, mental health difficulties, etc. People are encouraged to learn throughout their lives — to learn what they like, when they like, and from whomever they like — and to impart their knowledge to those who wish to learn from them (Naik 1977).

Lifelong learning that values all varieties of non-formal and informal learning, seeks to open up the individual learner’s prospects within the social context. A wide range of types of learning exist and add social value. Competences acquired in informal and non-formal situations are essential to each individual’s performance in the labour market and the education system, as well as in local communities and volunteer work. Central here, then, is the insight that we are always learning everywhere, albeit not always in a conscious or self-chosen learning situation. Likewise, we should be mindful of our non-formal and informal learning achievements and the possibility of building on these acquired competences.

The acquisition of such self-awareness — who we are and how to use our talents — is a precondition for “deployability” and “employability” “Deployability” denotes the potential to increase our general capability as persons in order to enhance our contribution and participation in society. Greater self-awareness through recognition involves not only the differentiation of one’s self from others but also the development of self-awareness and self-caring in and through solidarity with humanity and through direct engagement and action in the world (Gibbs and Angelides 2004, p. 336). This point is eloquently elaborated upon by Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen in his influential book Development as Freedom (2000). The recognition of the individual’s value in order to empower people and provide social opportunities lies at the centre of his book. Sen (2000, p. 31) identifies “social opportunities” as one of the five instrumental freedoms (the others being political freedoms, economic facilities, transparency guarantees, and protective security) that influence our substantive freedom to live better and advance our general capabilities. With adequate social opportunities (such as support for RVA and basic education), we can effectively shape our own destiny and help each other. He observes, “Individual freedom is quintessentially a social product, and there is a two-way relation between (1) social arrangements to expand individual freedoms and (2) the use of individual freedoms not only to improve the respective lives but also to make the social arrangements more appropriate and effective” (p. 31).

Sen argues that, while human capital and labour market integration are important, they form only a part of the picture and require supplementation. Societies need to develop approaches that encompass the notion of human capabilities and the social dimensions of learning (Sen 1993). In the context of the RVA of non-formal and informal learning, Sen’s observations suggest that broadening the scope of recognition, validation and accreditation to include all types of learning outside the mainstream mutually reinforces human capabilities in a society and the opportunities that the society offers. The development of individual capabilities is the aim of RVA, and serves as the driving force for social change, development and social progress. As social opportunities and human capabilities are cultivated, substantive freedom is promoted.