Baynazarova Tursynay Beisenbekovna
Candidate of
philology, associate professor
Orazbayeva Alima
Master in
pedagogy, senior
lecturer
Lifelong learning in education process:
problems and perspectives
Abstract.
Nowadays innovation is all around us. We are faced with and experiencing
massive changes reflecting the impact of new technologies. So we should develop
our skills and knowledge all the time, the whole of our lives. Nowadays,
lifelong learning is at the very centre of this new agenda. We are in a new age
- the age of information and of global competition. Familiar certainties and
old ways of doing things are disappearing. The types of jobs we do have changed
as have the industries in which we work and the skills they need. At the same
time, new opportunities are opening up as we see the potential of new
technologies to change our lives for the better. In our report we deal with the importance of
lifelong learning in education sphere.
Key words. Lifelong
learning, education process, higher
education
Introduction
Higher
education in a changing knowledge economy is important in helping to maintain
the growth by educating highly-skilled graduates for the economy. Higher
education helps to create human capital in the economic environment by
producing new knowledge and exploring the possibilities for its growth. In
addition, the knowledge economy gradually depends on new learning processes
such as problem-solving, critical thinking and creativity.
The
importance of the development of a “learning culture” is also introduced as a
“long formal education, repeated re-education and retaining. Because, culture
and language are interconnected with each other. However,
although the impact of the socioeconomic changes enhances the transformation of
education, the process of educational change is rather challenging. Some
scholars argue that “real change, whether desired or not, represents a serious
personal and collective experience characterized by ambivalence and
uncertainty” but the results of the change can lead to “a sense of mastery,
accomplishment, and professional growth” [4, p.22].
It also means the reform requires its education system to
increase the education participation in order not only to create a skilled work
force for the labour market but it also aims to enhance learners’ lifelong
learning skills.
It is clear that Kazakhstani education system, especially in
higher education sector should make changes in order to enhance and maintain
the development of new demands of the economy and to meet social demand for
higher education to create skilled employees for the labour market.
However, universities do not
necessarily define these needs as their highest priority. It is the main
problem of lifelong learning. For some
these concerns are peripheral, particularly when there are financial incentives
to do so or it is politically unavoidable. Now many universities have become
private for students after Soviet Union. Such universities see their high
research earnings as the product of a very different approach. Here, an
emphasis on the very highest academic quality, on the abstract education system
rather than the concrete and the practical. Their courses are mainly
traditional in content and delivery, with campus-based students. Most
universities do not have academic exchange for teachers. They see their purpose as the induction of
the able minority, with an emphasis on the quality of thinking required,
alongside a mastery of an academic discipline and its stock of knowledge.
In this regard the following statement tells us: ‘We have no
choice but to prepare for this new age in which the key to success will be the
continuous education and development of the human mind and imagination’ [1,
p.9].
In fact, our institutions of higher
education (HE) are experiencing a period where for many they seem close to a
state of 'continuous revolution', at least in terms of internal restructuring,
if not with respect to their methods of teaching and learning. Some
universities, or at least some parts of some universities, are opting to
embrace a culture of change to enable themselves to respond flexibly and
rapidly to new demands [2, 14]. The boom for change is partly driven by
enthusiasm for the new, but very often it is a response to a more basic drive,
the fear of losing. Much of the innovation we are seeing is a defensive
response to the perceived threats of competitors - if we don't change and
change rapidly others will thrive at our expense.
For higher education these 'others' may
be more innovative universities or private enterprises seeking to take our
place and, crucially, they may be from other countries or, indeed, have an
international character enabling them to offer 'borderless education' [3]. In
order to market internationally a nationally branded product, thus minimizing
competition amongst themselves and maximizing the chances of success globally
[1].
What
does all this mean for methods of teaching and learning in HE? How are
universities affected by the demands for lifelong learning and the imperatives
of this new age?
One important requirement for lifelong
learning is what Knapper & Cropley (2000) call 'vertical integration' (p
35), ie that educational provision should facilitate learning throughout the
life span. In these terms, lifelong learning is not a synonym for adult
education or continuing education, but is about the whole educational process,
including pre-school and compulsory schooling as well as FE and HE.
In
terms of the prevailing discourse, however, it would appear that the move to
lifelong learning makes the following demands on HE:
-
the content of the curriculum and the methods of
teaching and learning should meet the needs of vertical integration, ie
facilitating the progression of learners from 'feeder' institutions and
programmes (schools, FE, adult education, access courses, etc) and preparing
their graduates for the continuation of their learning in both formal and
non-formal contexts (developing independent learners who have learnt 'how to learn');
-
the principle of horizontal integration implies the
need for the accreditation of informal or experiential learning and the
permeation of the curriculum and teaching and learning methods in HE with
matters and methods of relevance to the outside world (problem-based learning,
work-based learning, employment placements, practical projects, skills that
enhance employability, etc);
-
higher education
must become more flexible to allow for learners to study at various
stages in their lives to update their skills and knowledge, which suggests the
packaging of parts of programmes through modularization, some system of credit
accumulation and transfer, the provision of part-time modes and enabling
students to learn at a distance (making use of new technologies as
appropriate).
Our
principal concern here, however, is to examine how universities of various
kinds within our unequal system of higher education, have responded to these
demands for vertical and horizontal integration and flexibility, with
particular reference to their adoption of new methods of teaching and learning.
Change in higher education is thus
driven by a number of forces including the demands of employers, government
policy initiatives and attempts by 'teachers' in universities to meet the
changing needs of students and to reflect the changing nature of their subject
matter. For certain institutions the nature of their intake has remained more
or less constant, the demands of employers fairly distant and the temptations
of government advocated reforms generally resistible, despite the necessity of
some token effort.
The higher education sector is, of
course, highly differentiated, with the obvious divide between 'new' and 'old'
universities (pre- and post-1992), well illustrated by the league table of
Research Assessment Exercise performance, with a fairly neat division between
them in terms of quality ratings at about the half way point. However, there
are also divisions within institutions and even within departments. Even in the
most research-oriented of old universities there are lecturers who see
themselves primarily as having a teaching role and in the most progressive of
new universities, aiming at becoming student-centred learning centres, there
are those who strongly aspire to international levels of research excellence.
For many 'academics', a term which they
would much prefer to 'teachers', their subject remains paramount and their
expertise is measured by their research output rather than the quality of
learning experienced by their students. Nevertheless, one of our second phase
case studies was of a research-oriented 'old' university that had developed a
very strong teaching and learning strategy, with a high level of innovation
well-supported by external funding.
Findings and Results
As a result higher education
institutions in Kazakhstan are
expanding their number and range of students, aiming to meet new requirements
in terms of the eventual employability of their graduates and to provide
'lifelong learning' for a 'learning society'. We know that alongside these
demands, other aims for higher education - the development of 'critical
thinking', education as a means of empowerment, liberal education - persist,
even if they are not currently in vogue. Any changes that are introduced have
to ensure the maintenance if not the raising of 'quality' in both teaching and
research, with little hope of extra public funding and with a requirement for
continuing 'efficiency gains'.
But there are also weak points of
education which can be developed. Overall, drawing on both the first phase
survey of innovators and the five institutional case studies of the second
phase, we found that innovation in
teaching and learning is most likely to take place when:
a.
the innovator feels a degree of security within an
understood community or cultural context, recognizes the need for change and
has encouragement or support from the head of department, dean or other person
in authority;
b.
an institution has a policy establishing parity
between research and teaching and learning, including for purposes of
promotion, and the policy is reflected in practice;
c.
people in authority show an interest in disseminating
the outcomes of innovation;
d.
teaching resources are available through the
department, an innovations fund or similar fund, and an educational development
or learning support unit.
Innovation is most likely to be
obstructed by:
a.
low esteem of teaching and learning, compared with
research;
b.
lack of recognition and interest by colleagues and
people in authority;
c.
institutional or other policies and action plans
laying down firm directions that preclude individual initiative;
d.
excessively bureaucratic procedures for approval,
support and resources;
e.
quality assessment procedures or other procedures that
inhibit risk-taking.
Chief among the
various means by which these demands are to be met is the hope that methods of
learning and teaching can be developed and adopted that will meet the needs of
more, and more diverse, students, within resource constraints. Innovations in
'pedagogy' are looked for that will both enhance the quality of the student
learning experience and reduce its demands on staff time, with information and
communications technology being widely seen as the means of achieving this.
This is why struggles over the introduction of new methods of learning and
teaching in higher education have assumed such importance.
So, can
universities of Kazakhstan respond to the challenge of providing for lifelong
learning through flexible provision and both vertical and horizontal
integration? Can their teaching and learning methods be adapted to meet these
needs? The answers must surely be in the positive, but we must be careful not
to be fooled into thinking that all of universities in Kazakhstan will adapt to
a similar degree or in a similar fashion. From this analysis it is to be
expected that the differentiation that already typifies our system, with its
in-built inequalities and its prevailing hierarchies, will continue to find
expression in this brave new world.
REFERENCES
1.Bjarnason S.;
Davies J., Farrington D. The business of borderless education: UK
perspectives (London:
cvcp). -2000
2.Bowles S, Gintis
H. (1976) Schooling in capitalist America (London:
1976)
3.Lifelong Learning and the New Educational Order by John Field (Trentham Books, 2006) ISBN 1-85856-346-1
4.Field, John (2006). Lifelong Learning and the New Educational Order.
Trentham
Books, 2006.