Comparative studies in adult education

7505

Comparative studies in adult education: notes on the discussion of the Elective Group

Dr E. M. Monkhouse, University of London

The group, under the chairmanship of Stuart Marriott, was concerned with comparative studies in Adult Education in general. The questions to which it addressed itself were:

  • are comparative studies in adult education possible?
  • if so, are they worth making?
  • what kind of models may be used to carry them out?

Are comparative studies in adult education possible?

It is possible to conduct meaningful comparative studies in adult education if certain conditions are observed.

Firstly, it is essential that the studies be based upon a sound understanding of the social, cultural and political environment of the adult education systems which are the subject of attention.

Secondly, it is essential that anyone undertaking research in this field should prepare himself carefully before undertaking field studies.

Thirdly, it is necessary that a reasonable amount of time, counted in weeks or even months rather than days, be allowed for visits of observation. A week in New Zealand is not an adequate basis for a study of its adult education system.

Studies based upon a good background knowledge, thorough preparation and an adequate amount of observation-time may yet go awry if they are carried out in a spirit of uncritical determination to import whatever is found to be admired in the system under study whether it is susceptible of transplant to a different environment or not. A singular disservice may be rendered by the adoption of features admirable in one context to another to which they are alien or even inimical. Some of the contributions of British experience of adult education to Africa were cited as coming into this category.

Are comparative studies in adult education worth making?

They are worth making in several obvious ways:

Firstly, they commonly prove to be a valuable sensitising exercise, enabling those who undertake them to look with a fresh eye upon their own familiar and perhaps too tenderly cherished systems. Different approaches to common problems may be illuminating as, for example, the British who approach industrial studies in that sensitive area lying between vocational and non-vocational education may learn from the confident and uninhibited approach of Americans in the same area.

Secondly, the investigator may in turn be able to bring a fresh and critical eye to bear upon the system under study, to the benefit of its owners.

Thirdly, knowledge of the existence of effective methods and solutions elsewhere may become a tool for practical purposes, through analogy or emulation. Adult educators in the Netherlands are known to have used the example of British access to local authority premises to argue successfully for access to their own schools and colleges. Swedish educational vouchers and French educational leave may prove useful levers within the British system.

What kind of models may be used for carrying out comparisons?

It is perhaps possible to construct a model consisting of the relevant legislative features, the financing, the typology of providing bodies and the content and purpose of the education offered. This provides the essential skeleton of a system whose bony structure may be compared with that of another system. However, it is far more difficult to clothe it effectively in flesh, let alone to capture its spirit.

It is perhaps to the administrator that this approach to the organic whole comes most naturally. The sociologist may prefer to proceed from a partial study, comparing like with like in a more specialised area- (education in the slums of New York with that of the slums of Glasgow or Nanterre, rural education in the Netherlands with rural education in England). Ideally a model should be treated by a team bringing together the expertise of, for example, an economist, a sociologist, an anthropologist, a psychologist, an administrator and a member with a knowledge of politics. In practice, an investigator usually has to work alone, drawing upon his homespun knowledge of economics, psychology, sociology and politics.

Since differences between even superficially similar systems are many and various, perhaps the most profitable starting point for the construction of models might prove to be at home, working from skeletons of the provision of adult education in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Dr Colin Titmus offered to circulate copies of a study entitled: ‘Notes for a Model of Adult Education in Great Britain’. A more ambitious step might be seen in a study carried out in Denmark under the title: ‘Adult Education in Nordic Countries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland)’. A further study might extend the skeleton for use in comparing the systems of North Western Europe. The process will become increasingly complicated as the study moves outwards to more fundamentally different systems.

It can be said that we are now beginning to accumulate the information upon which to base comparative studies in adult education. If these are to be developed, considerable resources in money and manpower will be required. Already the question is arising as to how far these studies should be incorporated regularly in courses on adult education, and the pressure is on.

Reproduced from 1975 Conference Proceedings, pp. 27-28  SCUTREA 1997