Cross-national patterns associated with adult learning systems: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Cross-national patterns associated with adult learning systems: Patterns of participation and outcomes RICHARD DESJARDINS UCLA Department of Education Leuven, Belgium, September 2018 Overview What is meant by Adult Learning Systems?
Leuven, Belgium, September 2018
RICHARD DESJARDINS UCLA Department of Education
▪
What is meant by Adult Learning Systems?
▪
Cross-national patterns of participation
▪
Cross-national patterns of outcomes
▪
ALS refer to mass of organized learning opportunities available to adults…
… along with their underlying structures and stakeholders that shape their
▪
General features of ALS concept
Comprises governance, financing & provision structures (institutions, policies) Beyond the responsibility of any given ministry, institution or stakeholder Embedded in society at intersection of other systems (E&T, LM, Welfare) Not commonly seen as a system per se, but some countries feature more coordination and integration of key elements (common language and vision)
Dynamic and inclusive ALS
Opportunities to work (gainful employment)
Policies and programmes related to basic skills Policies and programmes related to non- formal education Policies and programmes related to formal education Employment policies and programmes
Ministries Employers Trade unions Providers PES/ALMPs
Coordination???
▪
….include FE qualifications attained by non-traditional students and NFE
▪
FE types include….
…Adult Basic Education(ABE) (may lead to ISCED: 1,2 for 19+)
Formal and non-formal – latter may involve modules that can lead to basic qualifications
…Adult General Education(AGE) (may lead to ISCED: 3 for 21+)
Typically formal – usually upper secondary equivalence (e.g. GED)
…Adult Vocational Education(AVE) (may lead to ISCED: 4 for 21+, 5b for 26+)
Formal and non-formal – extent of formal depends on how well country’s VET system is developed
…Adult Higher Education(AHE) (leads to ISCED: 5b,5a for 26+; 6 for 30+)
Formal if part of programme that leads to qualification or non-formal if one-off extension courses
▪
NFE ...provisions may be flexibly linked to qualifications related to ABE/AGE/AVE/AHE
ABE, AHE mentioned may be non-formal and may be linked to ALE or AVE Adult Liberal Education(ALE), for community, leisure, or basic skills related reasons Non-formal AVE (most common)
supported, may be government supported, e.g. for SMEs)
▪
Common barriers
Poor coordination and integration of provision
Flexible integration of NFE, ABE, AGE, AVE, AHE to qualifications, as well as ALMPs Lack of openness of FE structures/qualification system to non-traditional students Lack of flexibility, customization, and public support
Lack of shared/common language, understandings, purpose and vision Keeping separate structures for youth who succeed faster and more efficiently (elitist and selective approach)
▪
Hypothesis: Countries that can successfully coordinate an effective ALS that is dynamic and inclusive will prosper more in an open global knowledge economy
Based on concept of Institutional Comparative Advantage in the Varieties of Capitalism literature
▪
Distinguishing factors of advanced ALS in different countries
Degree of openness of FE systems to non-traditional students Flexible and open qualification systems linking to AE and non-formal provisions A higher level of integration of ABE-AVE-AHE and ALE Diverse provision catering to diverse needs Targeting and outreach to socially disadvantaged adults High and widely distributed participation in AE & foundation skills
▪
Stock
Past Formal AE that has led to qualifications Adults participated in credentialed (degree or diploma) programs Including: Basic skill courses (ABE, AGE) ISCED 1, 2, 3 Apprenticeships (AVE) ISCED 4, 5b Higher education (AHE) ISCED 5a, 6 Qualifications attained at older ages
▪
Flow
Current (last 12 mths) Formal and non-formal AE future qualification? Adults participate in: Basic skills courses; Credential (degree or diploma) programs; Apprenticeships;
Work-related courses; Informal learning at work; Personal interest/personal development courses
Excludes students in regular initial cycle (those following front-loaded path to qualifications)
3 1 1 1 3 2 4 2 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 1 2 1 1 2 1 4 6 5 1 3 2 5 2 2 3 7 4 7 4 1 9 1 6 9 4 8 1 7 2 8 12 9 13 12 9 5 2 13 8 10 20 1 3 4 3 2 1 1 4 2 3 8 10 4 4 4 6 5 9 3 6 7 1 1 1 4 3 2 5 5 3 3 6 3 4 9 5 9 4 3 5 7 6 6 16 5 5 8 8 4 7 10 8 10 9 12 7 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 6 4 3 1 5 4 3 5 5 4 3 2 5 3 5 6 5 4 2 10
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Japan Flanders (Belgium) Cyprus¹ Slovak Republic Turkey Russian Federation² Greece Austria Czech Republic Italy France Spain Korea Poland Singapore Estonia Northern Ireland (UK) Lithuania Slovenia Ireland OECD Average Israel Chile England (UK) Australia Netherlands Germany United States New Zealand Canada Finland Sweden Norway Denmark
ISCED 2 or lower (19+) ISCED 3 (21+) ISCED 4 (21+) ISCED 5b (26+) ISCED 5a BA (26+), MA, PHD (30+) Percent
1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 2 5 1 3 2 1 3 4 2 5 1 2 7 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 4 1 4 5 1 2 2 6 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 4 1 1 4 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 3 3 2 4 3 3 2 6 4 3 2 3 3 6 3 4 3 5 3 4
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Japan Korea Cyprus¹ France Czech Republic Slovak Republic Italy Poland Greece Lithuania Austria Russian Federation² Germany Flanders (Belgium) Estonia Singapore Turkey Slovenia Chile OECD Average Northern Ireland (UK) Israel United States Spain Sweden Canada Denmark Finland Australia Netherlands Ireland Norway England (UK) New Zealand
ISCED 2 or lower (19+) ISCED 3 (21+) ISCED 4 (21+) ISCED 5b (26+) ISCED 5a BA (26+), MA, PHD (30+) Percent
1 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 4 4 6 2 5 4 3 4 2 6 2 7 7 6 9 5 5 7 8 9 7 8 7 8 10 15 21 21 21 21 24 23 27 26 25 27 27 31 26 30 31 32 35 32 35 34 36 38 35 39 41 41 40 41 43 42 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 6 2 2 3 5 5 4 7 3 7 7 10 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 5 4 2 5 4 4 6 3 3 4 4 4 5 4 3 3 3 3 2 4 2 4 5 4 8 5 9 5 7 6 6 6 6 6 7 4 5 6 4 7 6 5 6 9 8 8 6 6 5 19 18 18 22 32 30 32 36 34 43 41 49 43 46 48 47 46 47 46 51 47 47 51 52 56 57 53 55 63 63 62 65 64 61
20 10 10 20 30 40 50 60
Greece Turkey Russian Federation² Italy Poland Slovak Republic Lithuania Cyprus¹ France Spain Japan Korea Chile Slovenia Ireland Austria Israel OECD Average Flanders (Belgium) Estonia Czech Republic Northern Ireland (UK) Germany Australia Canada United States England (UK) Singapore Sweden Finland Netherlands New Zealand Denmark Norway Adult Formal Education (AFE) (qualifications) - Job related Non-Formal Education (NFE) only - Job related AFE/NFE - Non-job related Total participation
Percent
Non-employer supported Employer-supported
38 34 32 38 22 28 35 23 26 20 8 16 8 17 11 8 8 50 49 45 51 32 44 52 39 52 38 16 44 23 49 36 31 34 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 6 7 7 8
20 20 40 60
Finland Sweden England (UK) Norway Slovenia United States Denmark Northern Ireland (UK) New Zealand Czech Republic Italy Canada Poland Netherlands Flanders (Belgium) Chile Ireland
LFS annualized % change (ca 1992-2014) PIAAC 2012-2015 IALS 1994-1998 Percent Annualized growth rate Percent of adults participating in employer supported AE in PIAAC vs IALS
22 58 53 56 45 42 48 46 33 32 31 36 27 14 22 22 19 22 63 63 64 54 56 61 65 46 46 55 62 47 32 47 48 43 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 5
20 20 40 60 80
Italy Finland Sweden Denmark England (UK) United States Norway New Zealand Slovenia Northern Ireland (UK) Canada Netherlands Czech Republic Poland Flanders (Belgium) Ireland Chile
LFS annualized % change (ca 1992-2014) PIAAC 2012-15 IALS 1994-1998 Percent Annualized growth rate Percent of adults participating in any AE in PIAAC vs IALS
0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7
Read at work ICT use at work Firm Size Occupation Education Literacy skill Sector Industry Age Immigration-language status Gender
Effect sizes
Adjusted probabilities of participating in any AE by age
0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 16-25 (Youth) 26-40 (Early career aged) 41-55 (Mid career aged) 56-65 (Late career aged)
Adjusted probabilities of participating in any AE by literacy proficiency
0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 Level 4/5 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 or below
Advantage of having attained ISCED 3 beyond normative age vs not attaining ISCED 3
0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
Japan US Estonia Ireland Sweden Korea Norway Italy Denmark UK Netherlands France Austria Finland Germany Spain Belgium Cyprus Poland Czech Republic Slovak Republic
Advantage of having attained ISCED 3 beyond normative age vs not attaining ISCED 3 ISCED 3, beyond normative age >20 ISCED 3, within normative age <=20 Did not complete ISCED 3
0,3 0,2 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
Czech Republic US Japan Spain Cyprus UK Finland France Denmark Norway Austria Estonia Belgium Italy Sweden Korea Ireland Netherlands Poland Slovak Republic Germany
Advantage/disadvantage of completing beyond normative age Earnings premium for ISCED 5a (BA), beyond normative age >25 Earnings premium for ISCED 5a (BA), within normative age <=25 Effect size
Advantage of having attained qualification beyond vs within normative age Disadvantage of having attained qualification beyond vs within normative age
y = 0,9919x - 0,5258 R² = 0,2512
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25 0,30 0,35 0,40 0,45 0,50 0,50 0,55 0,60 0,65 0,70 0,75 0,80 0,85 Employment rate Percent who attained highest qualification beyond normative age
Correlation = 0.5
y = 0.4597x - 0.2414 R² = 0.23501
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25 0,50 0,55 0,60 0,65 0,70 0,75 0,80 0,85 Employment rate Percent who attained HE qualification beyond normative age
Correlation = 0.48
AT CA CY CZ DK ET FI FR DE IR KO NL NO PL SL ES SE UK US IT R² = 0,3824
0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25 0,30 0,35 0,40 250 255 260 265 270 275 280 285 290 295 300 Average literacy skill score (PIAAC) of adult populations Ratio of HE graduates over 30 vs under 30 Correlation = 0.62