| Does education yield any results or is it just a leisure pursuit? | | Print | |
| Drs. Maurice de Greef | 19.04.2008 | Science - Articles [en] | ||||
|
A question for the new study “Learning for Life” (“Leren voor Leven”) (Subtitle) “Of course it was very pleasant, but I’m not terribly sure about what I got out of it.” The evaluations by participants in adult education courses at ROCs (regional educational centres) show that most people were pleased with their course. In most cases, there were notably very positive evaluations of the teacher and atmosphere. However an answer to the more specific question about what they actually got out of the educational course has never been systematically obtained before. At the bottom of this lies the question whether or not education does yield any results or if it is just a pastime activity for residents. Second chance for residents Whatever you want to call them: Poor/Troubled Neighbourhoods (Aandachtswijken), Urban Renewal Neighbourhoods (Prachtwijken) or Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods (Krachtwijken). The neighbourhoods where people with specific social problems live, just keep on receiving special attention from the government in order make the quality of life the best it can be in those areas, too. The inhabitants at whom the Dutch government action programmes are aimed, have problems finding a proper place in society. A place where you have a good job, participate in social and economic life, defend your own interests and have a meaningful way to spend your day. A lot of these people left school early and did not have the necessary attention and opportunity to become equipped well enough to find their own proper place in society. Now too, they experience so-called inclusion problems. For this group of inhabitants, there must be a second chance so they can still obtain a satisfactory place. Since time immemorial there has been a mandate for adult education. This sector can provide schooling for these ‘vulnerable’ inhabitants which will result in them actually obtaining a proper place. In reality, a type of ‘second chance education’. Educational issues in chain cooperation “Second-chance education” appears to be a means in local society for giving people enough ‘tools’ so they can manage/cope the way they want to. Education is seen as a form of social or professional self-reliance (promoting well-being versus career development in the job market). Yet alongside living and local care, education has not proven to be a very sellable item. A housing cooperative is called in to an underprivileged neighbourhood in order provide better and more affordable housing for ‘vulnerable residents’. Who can then make use of the care to prevent being or becoming ill for long periods of time. But besides certification for the job market, it has been very difficult up to now to show what sort of added value education specifically has for inhabitants. The key issue must be why there has to be an educational facility in the neighbourhood and what its added value is for residents. In particular, non-formal education (education without certification) has a hard time justifying its existence and demonstrating why living and care together have to work with this sector. Fickle government for education Owing to the fact that the result of education has never been objectively analysed before, the government (justifiably in part) does not know what its exact added value is. The reaction to this is fluctuating budgets (local and national) that can be implemented for this area of work. It’s still an open question as to whether education is profitable and effective. This is why the government cannot attach a fixed value to this area of work and often does not allow financial choices to depend on the core issue of what the necessity of education is, but on the issue of why other fields (such as youth policy) are more important to finance than education. This “fickle” government does have a point however. Education must have a demonstrable influence on the inclusion of residents. If “second chance education” prevents inclusion problems, then this is a desirable means for promoting the quality of life in neighbourhoods and a significant contribution to quality of life is provided. Learning for Life Study The study ‘Learning for Live’ (“Leren voor Leven”) has been started by Spectrum (Centre for Social Development) as commissioned by the province of Gelderland and the Leren & Werken project management ( joint venture between the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sciences and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment). This doctoral research must provide insight in the results of adult education for participants. The key question is whether taking a course has boosted the participant’s inclusion. Has the participant obtained a better place in society? Has job and social participation increased through this? Inclusion (subdivided in social and job participation) is defined and measured with measurable indicators. In cooperation with the University of Leiden, the Dutch-speaking Free University of Brussels and the Gelderland ROCs, a quantitative study has been started that will hopefully be able to reveal the added value of adult education. These clear results together should be able to indicate what the added value of adult education is. Who knows sufficient material to demonstrate that ‘second chance education’ has value added for inhabitants in the Netherlands and is not just a leisure pastime. Additional information Mr Maurice de Greef Spectrum Adviser This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it /tel.: 0031-26-3846252 Maurice de Greef 19-4-2008 |
||||
| Details: | ||||
|
||||
