Social Education and Popular Education: A View from the South

Spider Art by Claire

Rosa-María Torres

 

Closing conference AIEJI XVII World Congress

“The Social Educator in a Globalised World”
Copenhagen, Denmark, 4–7 May 2009
(edited transcript of original presentation)

Introduction

When I was invited by AIEJI (International Association of Social Educators) to be a keynote speaker of this world conference, I had only vague ideas of Social Education. I thought of it as a foreign, European concept and movement, distant from the realities, thinking and practices in the South (“developing countries”). Accepting this invitation was therefore for me both an honour and a research and learning opportunity.

I learned that this is an evolving European construct, with specificities in each country, with an ongoing internal debate about its nature, dimensions and purposes, and with growing presence in countries in the South. There is no European consensus on the denomination and definition of Social Education and on social professions in general. Socialpædagogen, the biweekly magazine of the Danish National Federation of Social Educators circulated at this congress, highlights diverse Social Education experiences throughout the world "working with children, young people and adults who need special care due to physical or mental disabilities, or social problems." One distinctive feature of Social Education is that it deals with vulnerable groups and with the entire lifespan.

It was not easy to find references to Social Education programmes in Africa and Asia. References were also scarce in Latin America and the Caribbean, beyond the hub created by AIEJI’s world conference held in Montevideo-Uruguay in November 2005. In Latin America, Uruguay is the country that has embraced Social Education in the most visible manner, taking the French model as initial source of inspiration. ADESU - Asociación de Educadores Sociales del Uruguay is an active national association. Nearly 300 professional Social Educators have been trained over the past few years. Many of them are working in diverse intersections between government and non-government, academic and action-oriented programmes. Last week I was in Uruguay invited by the Ministry of Education and happened to meet some of them. There must be something good in this profession that is able to attract such bright, critical and socially committed young people.

There are activities in Brazil associated to the Popular Education movement. The Department of Education of the University of Sao Paulo, for example, has organized a series of International Encounters on Social Pedagogy, with the idea of institutionalizing it in Brazil as a profession linked to non-formal education, NGOs, and social programmes (See Portal de la Pedagogía Social . See also Associação dos Educadores e Educadoras Sociais do Estado de São Paulo - Aees SP). Through informal conversations with Latin American participants in this congress, other activities have surfaced: a Social Pedagogy programme started by a private university in Argentina; a small group operating in Chile; in Nicaragua, an institution that trained social educators for over two decades is not operating any more but there are ongoing activities linked to institutions in Spain. In general, it becomes apparent that initiatives termed Social Education in Latin America still have little visibility.

Social Education and Social Pedagogy

The term Social has come to be added, in several fields, to mean different or alternative. 

- The World Social Forum (WSF), organized by progressive forces in the South and in the North, was launched in 2001 and was held for the first time in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Since then, the WSF is run in parallel to the World Economic Forum held in Davos.

- Social Economy is expanding as an international movement with roots and practices in the South. It proposes an alternative economic model to the neoliberal model. Social/Solidarity Economy is a work-centred economy that places people at the centre, is concerned with solving the needs of all and with preserving ecological and social equilibrium, promotes human solidarity, collaboration and networking rather than individual or corporate accumulation of profit or power. (See for example RILESS, Red de Investigadores Latinoamericanos en Economía Social y Solidaria – Network of Latin American Researchers in Social and Solidarity Economy). In some cases, a Social and Solidarity Pedagogy is associated to such alternative economic initiatives ( See, for example, the Programa Pedagogía Social y Solidaria organised by the Departamento Administrativo Nacional de la Economía Solidaria - DANSOCIAL in Colombia).

- Social movements have emerged in many countries as a new important social and political actor, especially in Latin America.

As for Social Education, the term in Germany and in the Nordic Countries continues to be Social Pedagogy, a tradition of progressive thinking and practice, often associated to, or translated as, "community education." Here is an explanation of the differences between both concepts, found in a leaflet available at a stand of this conference:

“’Social Education’ is the official translation of the Danish term ‘Socialpædagogik’. In this module we will use the term ‘Social Pedagogy’ as it indicates the fact that social pedagogical care work embraces much more than what is usually conceived as ‘Social Education’. ‘Social Pedagogy’ provides a unifying concept of work with people in many formal and informal institutional settings.” (Social Education and Pedagogy in Denmark”, VIA University College, Peter Sabroe, Department for Social Education, leaflet).

In other contexts, differences are made between Social Education and Social Pedagogy. Again, there is no consensus on the use of these two terms in Europe.

Social Education and Popular Education

While the term Social Education is not familiar in most countries in the South, its practice is widely extended. In fact, in every region in the world we may find specific and endogenous emancipatory education movements. In Latin America, Educación Popular - Popular Education - is rooted especially among civil society organizations. Just like with Social Education, there is not one single definition and there are various trends within the Popular Education movement. Many associate it with Paulo Freire; others consider it a development that preceded and surpassed Freire, and that is nurtured by many sources. Many link it to adult and non-formal education; others consider Popular Education an embracing category applied to children, youth and adult education, in and out of school.

The term popular refers to the socio-economic status of learners/participants, to the context and to the purpose: promoting awareness, social participation and organization for people’s empowerment and social transformation. What defines the popular educator is his/her social and political commitment, not his or her educational and professional background. Popular educators often work as volunteers or with very little remuneration, and with some short training. Training and professionalization of popular educators are old requests.

The table below is an attempt to compare Social Education and Popular Education in their respective contexts. 

Comparison between Social Education and Popular Education

	Social Education (Europe/Denmark)	Popular Education (Latin America)
Historical context	1940s – wake of World War II AIEJI (International Association for Social Educators). Original name Association Internationale des Éducateurs des Jeunes Inadaptés - created in 1951. “From charity, assistencialism and philanthropy to social wellbeing as a human right.”	1960s-1970s – wake of Latin American military governments and dictatorships. Brazil, Paulo Freire’s ideas and work. Human liberation and emancipation. Religious groups and churches involved.
Original target population	Homeless and orphaned children in the wake of World War II.	Illiterate adults (by 1950s half of the adult population in the region were illiterate).
Current target population (historical perspective)	Children Adolescents Youth Adults (disabled) Third age	Adults Youth Adolescents Children Families Communities Social movements
Characterisation of target populations	Ill-adjusted, maladjusted or poorly adjusted Troubled Disabled Homeless Marginalised Excluded At risk With special needs	Poor Marginalised Illiterate Semiliterate Low schooling
Characteristics of educators	- Emphasis on professionalization and on continuous education and training. - Defence of employment and of working conditions.	- Little attention to professionalisation or career development. - Diverse training opportunities offered, often short. A few universities and NGOs offer university degrees. - Often work on voluntary basis.
Organisation of educators	Organised in unions and/or professional associations. National, European and international organizations.	- Not organised in unions or professional associations, sometimes organised in local associations. - Local, sometimes national and also international organisations (i.e. CEAAL - Consejo de Educación de Adultos de América Latina, NGO network). - Social movements have their own Popular Education bodies and programmes.
Identified similar occupations	Social workers, teachers, nurses, psychologists, therapists.	Teachers, social workers, extension workers, community agents, community leaders, cultural animators.
Work environments	Mainly non-formal education, non-school environments
Areas of work	Specialised education Conflict mediation Sociocultural animation Adult education School education Environmental education Leisure education		All potential areas
Purposes	Adaptation Participation Citizenship Social change Social justice		Awareness (Conscientisation) Participation Organisation Empowerment Social change Political change Social justice Culture of rights
Principles	Dialogue Respect Participation Learners' voices		Dialogue Respect Participation Learners' voices
Dimensions of work	Pedagogical, social, political and ethical

   Elaborated by Rosa-María Torres

In the South most educators are ‘social educators’

The majority of educators in ‘developing countries’, within and outside the school system, deal with problematic socio-economic contexts and with major challenges facing individuals, families, groups, local communities and national societies.

The situation of rights denied to the a large portion to the population in many countries in the South presses the public school system, and educators working in it and on its margins, to deal with unsatisfied basic needs of the school population (i.e. food, health, affection, security, etc.), whose satisfaction would normally correspond to the State and to the family. This erodes the school’s main teaching-learning mission and further jeopardises the quality of educational provision. Thus, the borders between social workers and educators as well as between social action and political action, tend to be thin and blurred. 

When poverty affects the majority of the population, economic and social exclusion/inclusion imply massive phenomena that go beyond well-intentioned small-scale interventions or focused ‘alleviating poverty’ policies. Poverty is a structural condition that, as such, requires major changes in the current economic, social and political model that leads to massive exclusion and poverty. Such model and its change is no longer national in scope; it has been deepened and globalised, thus requiring global alternative thinking and concerted action. Social educators and other progressive forces in the North and in the South need to work together in the building of a new global ethics that fights social injustice and promotes equality at local, national, regional and global level. Democratizing global awareness, global protest and global solidarity vis à vis the most vulnerable majorities and minorities in the world is at the very heart of the efforts towards global social networking.

The objective is not only good quality education for all, but good quality of life for all

However, the notions of ‘quality of life’, ‘welbeing’ or ‘prosperity’ are not universal. The traditional ‘developed’/’non-developed’ or ‘less developed’ dichotomy used to classify countries, is being revised. ‘Human development’ and human satisfaction and realization are not linear categories defined between more or less and measurable by universal quantitative indicators; they are cultural, social and political constructions shaped in concrete historical circumstances.

The notions of ‘quality of life’ and ‘personal satisfaction’ adopted by the Gallup Worldwide Quality of Life Survey are not necessarily perceived as such in countries in the South. Gallup’s ‘quality of life’ places consumption at the centre. The question asked in the survey is: “Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with your standard of living, that is, with all the things you can buy and do?.” On the other hand, the concept of Buen Vivir (‘Good Living’, Sumak Kawsay in Quechua indigenous language) in the Andean countries in Latin America places harmony at the center and is defined by three relational dimensions: harmony with nature, with oneself, and with others.

Global networks, global solidarity

In a globalised world, the role of agents of social change acquires also a global dimension, a global dimension that honours diversity, equality, inter- and multi-culturality, and rejects universal models, homogenous policies and perpetual hegemonic North/South relationships and ‘cooperation’ patterns. The wider the scope and the territories reached throughout the world, the greater the need to acknowledge and incorporate diversity to vision and to practice in all spheres.

The new challenges posed by the many world crises – the development crisis, the financial crisis, the food crisis, the energy crisis, the ecology crisis, the work crisis, the education crisis – call for radical rethinking, reshaping and re-articulation of education and learning systems worldwide. They also create new opportunities and urgencies for networking and solidarity, configuring new frontiers that challenge conventional ‘developed’/’less developed’ and North/South distinctions. The time is ripe for stronger multidisciplinary, trans-sectoral and inter-institutional linkages as well as for more and better-coordinated work with organized groups, families and communities rather than with isolated individuals.

There are conditions for effectively adopting Lifelong Learning (LLL) as a new global paradigm for education and learning, overcoming the dual educational agenda -- LLL for the North and primary education for the South. Social Education is well positioned in this endeavor: learning beyond the family and the school system, an ageless category and a continuum.

The alternative and alterative nature of Social Education

The world has become a hostile and uncertain place to live for the majority of the world’s population. Inequality within and between countries is growing. In many regions and countries (both developing and developed), the battles against poverty, unemployment, hunger, school dropout, and others are not making progress. For millions of people, and especially for the most disadvantaged, the word future does not entail hope anymore.

In this context, the room for Social Educators is likely to expand. Many will view it as a damage-control device, ready to fill in the holes left by education and learning systems that are not doing their job properly -- the family, the school system, mass media, politics. Not accepting such remedial and compensatory role implies among others assuming an explicit political role vis a vis the need for systemic and structural change at local, national, regional and world level.

In fact, all education should be social, empathetic, relevant, contextualised, differentiated, responsive to specific needs and cultures, aimed at enhancing learners’ critical thinking, empowerment, autonomy, participation and organisation for personal and social transformation. Being alternative is not enough; the real challenge is becoming also alterative -- a social, political, pedagogical and ethical force that pushes others towards major changes in all these spheres.

To know more
AIEJI, Social pedagogy in a European perspective
AIEJI, Social pedagogy in the UK
AIEJI, Brazilian thesis on social pedagogy: A constituição da Pedagogia Social na realidade educacional brasileira
3º Congresso Ibero-americano de Pedagogia Social, ULBRA, Canoas, RS, Brasil, 11-21 Outubro 2011
Infed, Social Education: The evolution of an idea 
Eduso.net : El portal de la Educación Social
Sociedad Ibero-Americana de Pedagogía Social - SIPS
Otro Desarrollo (Another Development): Collection of articles on sumak kawsay or "buen vivir" ("good living") - Spanish
La agonía de un mito: ¿Cómo reformular el "desarrollo"?, ALAI (varios autores), América Latina en Movimiento No 445


Related texts
Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning for the North, Primary Education for the South?

Rosa María Torres, About "good practice" in international co-operation in education
Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning: moving beyond Education for All
Rosa María Torres, On "Learning Anytime, Anywhere" (WISE 2011, Doha, Qatar, 1-3 Nov 2011)

Learning Anytime, Anywhere (WISE Summit, Doha, 2011)

Jaume Piensa

Rosa María Torres
 
"Learning Anytime, Anywhere"
session at the World Summit on Innovation in Education (WISE 2011)
Doha, Qatar, 1-3 Nov. 2011

The format adopted for the debates required no presentations by the speakers but individual questions posed by the Chair of the session and questions coming from the audience and through Twitter. This format favors flexibility and dynamism, but it also limits a more contextualized and holistic understanding of the speakers' viewpoints and backgrounds.

The text below is a reconstruction of my intervention.

Four people participated in this #WISED34 debate:

▸ Graham Brown-Martin, Chair (Learning Without Frontiers, UK) @GrahamBM
▸ François Taddei (Centre for Research and Interdisciplinarity at Paris Descartes University, France) @FrancoisTaddei
▸ Rosa-María Torres (Fronesis, Ecuador) @rosamariatorres
▸ Ruth Wallace (Centre for Social Partnerships in Lifelong Learning, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory, Australia) @RuthwallaceNT

What is Lifelong Learning (LLL)

Most people continue to associate LLL with adult education or to use it as equivalent to lifelong education or continuing education. The term, however, is selfdescriptive and should provide no room for confusion: Lifelong Learning means learning throughout life, "from cradle to grave." This is a fact of life in the first place: learning is a continuum, lifelong and lifewide. Adopting LLL as a principle for policy formulation implies introducing major changes to the conventional education and training paradigms.

Awareness on LLL challenges the school-centered mentality. It looks beyond the school system and acknowledges the other learning systems where we learn throughout life: home, community, media, play, work, arts, sports, social participation, the Internet and the virtual world, etc.

LLL also challenges the traditional focus on education and on teaching. Learning is the main concern, in and out of school. The main failure of the school system is precisely that there is lots of teaching but little learning taking place.

▸ Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning in the South: Critical Issues and Opportunities for Adult Education, Sida Studies 11, Sida, Stockholm, 2004.

What do international agencies understand as LLL? 

Most of the agencies that use this term continue to associate LLL with adults and adult education, rather than with a life-cycle perspective.

In OECD countries, and specifically in Europe, LLL emerged as an education and training strategy to ensure the necessary "human resources" for economic development.

Beyond definitions and glossaries, it is important to look at the content of policies and programmes labelled LLL. In the case of the European Commission, for example, in spite of the rhetoric on informal learning, four out of the five benchmarks established in the LLL Programme 2000-2010 (see below) were related to formal education, from early childhood to higher education. "The decreasing levels of low-achieving 15-year olds in reading and falling levels of adult participation in learning are among the largest concerns."

The goals were not met, as acknowledged by the evaluation released in Sep. 2011. Not only "developing" countries (the global South) but also "developed" ones (the global North) have problems to accomplish agreed education and learning agendas.

▸ Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning: moving beyond Education for All

European Union: Lifelong Learning benchmarks for 2010

1. EU average rate of early school leavers to be no more than 10%;

2. Total number of graduates in mathematics, science and technology in the EU to increase by at least 15% (achieved in 2004), with a decreased gender imbalance in these fields;

3. At least 85% of 22-year-olds to have completed upper secondary education;

4. Percentage of 15-year-olds who are low-achieving in reading to have decreased by at least 20% compared to the year 2000;

5. Average participation in lifelong learning to be at least 12.5% of the adult working age population (age group of 25–64 year).

▸ European Commission: Interim Evaluation of the Lifelong Learning Programme (Sep.18, 2011)
▸ European Report on the Future of Learning by Tony Bates (Nov. 11, 2011)

Poverty, creativity and innovation 

There is lots of talk about innovation, creativity and problem-solving as qualities and skills of the 21st century. Currently, innovation in education tends to be strongly associated with modern technologies -- as if there was no innovation before the emergence of ICTs! Visions of innovation are rather futuristic and sophisticated, requiring specialists, experts, etc.

However, the most creative and innovative people in the world are the poor. They are born problem-solvers. Otherwise, they would not be able to survive. Surprisingly, we do not see this mentioned. If we want to learn about innovation and creativity, we should get out there, observe and live with the poor for a while.

The challenge is how to make schools and other learning institutions places where the poor can enhance - rather than inhibit - their innovativeness, creativity and problem-solving skills and expand them to other domains beyond survival and daily life.

▸ Rosa María Torres, On Innovation and Education

Testing does not necessarily reflect learning

Tests and testing are not necessarily the best ways to capture learning. Additionally, standardized tests deny diversity, assume the classical "one-size-fits-all" approach.

PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) tests, proposed by OECD and for OECD countries, do not match the realities, needs and aspirations of most young people in the South. Often, these and other tests tell us what our children and youth don´t know rather than what they know and are able to do.

"Developing countries" are very diverse and face very different realities than "developed countries", also heterogeneous. If PISA tests were prepared in non-OECD countries, reflecting our cultures and realities, how would 15-year-olds in OECD  countries do in such tests? Underprivileged children and youth develop strong survival skills - essential for life and increasingly important in today's world - that wealthy children and youth often do not need to develop, at least at an early age.

▸ Rosa María Torres, Repensando el entusiasmo evaluador y las pruebas PISA (Spanish)

The "global banking education model"

Paulo Freire characterized the conventional school system as "banking education": learners who are considered to know nothing and teachers who think they know everything, and who deposit knowledge in their heads like checks in a bank.

That banking education model has now become global, among others thanks to the expansion of ICTs. Global teachers located in the North and eager learners located in the South, mere consumers of information and knowledge produced elsewhere and whose only knowledge credited is "local wisdom".

Since it decided to become a "Knowledge Bank", the World Bank acts as a global teacher offering ready-to-use knowledge and strategies for "development". All we have to do in the South is get trained and assimilate that information.

The global banking model is such because it reproduces the traditional teaching model at a global scale - the world as a global classroom is a usual metaphor - but also because it is incarnated by a bank and its international partners.

▸ Rosa María Torres, Knowldedge-based international aid: Do we want it? Do we need it?

▸ Rosa María Torres, About "good practice" in international co-operation in education

Neuroscience and pro-age education and learning

Over the past years, neuroscience is contributing key new knowledge on topics we had only vague ideas of. A better understanding on how the brain works, at different ages and in different circumstances, shows the need to review many conventional stereotypes on education and learning.

Now we are confirming that all ages are good to learn, and that each age has its own cognitive possibilities and limitations.

Within a LLL framework, and based on ongoing results from neuroscience research, I am developing the concept of "pro-age education and learning": let us allow each person - children, young people, adults, the elderly - to learn according to their age, rather than fighting against their age.

Unfortunately, neuroscience research and results are not reaching the population at large, not even teacher education institutions, policy makers, journalists, etc. 

▸ Rosa María Torres, Child learning and adult learning revisited 

The Basarwa in Botswana

I would like to tell you a story from Botswana. While working there with the Ministry of Education, back in the 1990s, I heard about an indigenous group called the Basarwa. They were well known because they rejected schooling. I got interested in understanding why. The explanation was simple: the Basarwa have seen or heard that schools punish children. In their culture, children's punishment does not exist. Adults relate to children through dialogue, not through fear. Parents love, take care and respect their children. Basarwa parents may be unschooled, but they are wise.

▸ Rosa María Torres, Children of the Basarwa ▸ Niños Basarwa

Related texts

Rosa María Torres, Basic Learning Needs: Different Frameworks
Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning for the North, Primary Education for the South?

Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning: moving beyond Education for All

Rosa María Torres, From Literacy to Lifelong Learning ▸ De la alfabetización al aprendizaje a lo largo de la vida

Rosa María Torres, Over two decades of 'Education for All' ▸ Más de dos décadas de 'Educación para Todos'

Children of the Basarwa ▸ Los niños Basarwa

Rosa María Torres

(abajo el texto en español)

In Botswana I learned of the existence of the Basarwa, a nomadic group living in the Kalahari desert and whom the government has been trying to persuade, without much success, to attend school.

Asked why they do not send their children to school, fathers and mothers have basically the same responses: in their culture, adults do not shout at children or hit them; when children do something wrong, adults talk to them. In school, they state, there is no dialogue; mistakes are paid for with punishment.

What do the Basarwa know of school? Some have actually been to school. Others have heard stories of reprimands and punishments, threats and teasing, humiliation and slaps on the hand and the head. The word has spread. Now, neither adults nor children want to go to school.

What kind of people are the Basarwa? What kind of adults and parents are these who neither shout at nor hit their children, who talk to them, respect them and treat them with sensitivity? What kind of children are these exceptional Basarwa children who grow up without fear of punishment, ill-treatment, and physical violence, without fear of telling the truth and admitting to error?

Nomadic, poor, unschooled, in a perpetual struggle for survival, the Basarwa teach us a lesson in ethics, humanity and hope. Their contempt for school, for the type of school they know or of which they have heard, is indeed a sign of mental health, an act of love and protection for their children.

From their hidden retreat in the Kalahari desert, Basarwa children coalesce the hopes of all the children of the world, regardless of race or culture, economic income or social status. Unknowingly, Basarwa parents give life to the utopia so often envisioned and reiterated, signed and ratified, of the right of children to be loved, respected and heard. Through their dignified illiteracy, the Basarwa remind us of the inevitability of a school meant to love and respect children.

* Published originally in: Education News, UNICEF Education Cluster, New York, 1994.

Los niños Basarwa

En Botswana supe de la existencia de los Basarwa, un grupo nómada que habita en el desierto del Kalahari y al que el gobierno viene tratando hace mucho de persuadir, sin éxito, de enviar a sus niños y niñas a la escuela.

Preguntados acerca del por qué se resisten a la escuela, padres y madres tienen básicamente la misma respuesta: en su cultura, los adultos no gritan ni pegan a los niños; cuando los niños se portan mal, las personas adultas hablan con ellos.  En la escuela - dicen - no hay diálogo; los errores se pagan con castigo.

¿Qué saben los Basarwa sobre el sistema escolar? Algunos de ellos han asistido efectivamente a la escuela. Otros han escuchado historias de reprimendas, amenazas y burlas, humillación y golpes en las manos o en la cabeza. Las historias han circulado. Hoy, ni adultos ni niños quieren saber nada de ir a la escuela.

¿Qué clase de personas son los Basarwa? ¿Qué clase de adultos y de padres de familia que no gritan ni pegan a sus hijos, que hablan con ellos, les respetan y les tratan con sensibilidad? ¿Qué clase de niños son estos excepcionales niños Basarwa que crecen sin miedo al castigo, sin maltrato, sin violencia física, sin miedo a decir la verdad y a admitir el error?

Nómadas, pobres, no-escolarizados, en perpetua lucha por la supervivencia, los Basarwa nos enseñan una lección de ética, de humanismo y de esperanza. Su desprecio por la escuela, esa escuela que conocen o de la cual han escuchado, es de hecho un signo de sanidad mental, un acto de amor y de protección hacia su prole.

Desde un lugar remoto en el desierto Kalahari, los niños Basarwa portan la bandera de todos los niños del mundo, independientemente de su raza, cultura, ingreso económico o estatus social. Sin saberlo, los padres y madres Basarwa dan vida a la utopía tanta veces imaginada y reiterada, tantas veces acordada y ratificada, de niños y niñas con derecho a ser queridos, respetados y escuchados. Desde su digno analfabetismo, los Basarwa nos recuerdan la inevitabilidad de una escuela hecha para amar y respetar a los niños.

* Texto en español publicado originalmente en: Página editorial El Comercio, Quito, 21/8/1994.

Some related texts / Textos relacionados en OTRAƎDUCACION

» Children's rights: A community learning experience in Senegal
» Open Letter to School Children
» Carta abierta para niños y niñas que van a la escuela
» Children's Right to Basic Education
» El derecho de niños y niñas a una educación básica
» Escuelas del mundo  |  Schools in the world
» Por qué los maestros están llamados a ser los primeros defensores de los derechos de los niños

Children's right to basic education

Rosa María Torres

(texto en español aquí)

The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) acknowledges education as a right of every child. The World Declaration on Education for All (1990) and the World Summit for Children (1990) adopted an "expanded vision of basic education" as the foundation of learning for every individual - children, youth and adults. This expanded vision of basic education was defined as an education able to "satisfy basic learning needs" of children, youth and adults, in and out of school. In the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) basic education comprises primary education and lower secondary education.

Within this framework, what does it mean ensuring children's right to basic education?

1. The right to be children, to play and enjoy playing, to be protected from the abuses of child labour, to have enough time to attend and stay in school, and learn. The right to a home and a family; to the nearby school, to teachers who enjoy teaching and like children, to an education that prepares not only for adulthood but, most importantly, for a happy childhood.

2. The right to learn in and out of the school. The right to be curious, to ask and to be answered, to doubt, to think and argue, to err, to be consulted and to participate, to express themselves spontaneously and with liberty, to be listened and respected in their opinions, to disagree, to imagine and to create, to learn to learn. The right to self-esteem, to parents' and teachers' high expectations, to feel both confident and challenged in their capacities and rewarded for every small gain.

3. The right to continuous learning, starting at birth, in a continuum that does not recognize other limits than the child's own interest and capacity to learn. Since the foundations of personality and knowledge are built in the first years of life, and since it is in this period that the most important and spectacular cognitive development takes place, the most basic right to basic education children have is the right to a good start in life. The right to an early childhood that plants good seeds for their future growth and development.

4. The right to open learning, at home, in school, in daily life, through play, in their interaction with friends, through mass media and the Internet, in their own exploration of the world. The right to enjoy libraries, the sports yard, the museum, the park, the zoo, the circus; to access to books, newspapers, comics, fairy tales, encyclopedias, dictionaries, videos, movies, works of art; to learn not only from books but from the contact with reality, with people and with nature. The right to learn not only from adults but from other children. The right to learn from others but also from personal experience and error, from reflection and discussion.

5. The right to go to a good school and remain there the time required to develop the knowledge, skills and attitudes that are essential to survive, to get to know their own bodies and protect their health, to learn about their culture and roots; to express themselves orally and in writing; to calculate and solve the basic problems of daily life; to better understand themselves and the world around them; to protect the environment; to internalize the values of justice and solidarity; to be aware of their rights and duties; to build the foundations of their self-esteem and self-confidence, and to continue learning.  

6. The right to an education tailor-made for children in which everything -- relationships, contents and methods, buildings and spaces, calendars and schedules, regulations and norms -- is designed to meet the needs of children, not adults. An education that respects the knowledge, points of view and dreams of children. An education based on joy, play and music, surprise and adventure, movement and laughter, not as complements but as the raw material for teaching and learning.     

7. The right to quality and relevant education, oriented to learning, aware of the importance not only of how much but also of what is learned and how. The right to an education free from prejudice and stereotypes, that fights racism and sexism, respects differences and acknowledges the value of the child's own language and culture; an education that highlights what children know and are able to do, rather than what they don't know and are unable to do; an education that privileges cooperation over competence, dialogue over monologue, doing over saying; an education that aims at achieving what constitutes the dream of any good parent and teacher: children and students who are better than themselves.    

8. The right to basic learning conditions essential to take advantage of school and other educational opportunities, and to fully develop the child's capacities. The right to basic education assists each boy and girl to demand from their communities and societies not only free schools, trained teachers, relevant curricula and necessary materials, but also the indispensable economic, social and affective conditions: nutrition, health care, proper housing, and, above all, love, emotional support, respect, and a general environment of stability, security and peace.

9. The right to educated parents, because parents' education is crucial for children's survival, well-being, learning and future perspectives. The right to informed parents, aware of the importance of educating both girls and boys, respectful of child play, open to dialogue and persuasion rather than to punishment. The right to literate parents, who appreciate the effort involved in learning, distinguish bad from good teaching, take part in school matters, and are willing to demand quality education. The right to parents who are knowledgeable of their rights and obligations, and possess the self-confidence and the fundamental knowledge to help their children grow, learn and develop.

10. The right to responsible information and communication media, sensitive to children's needs, capable of complementing and enriching their education: of putting the urban child in contact with the field and the rural child in contact with the city; of widening their vision of the world and transporting them to other realities, countries and times; of introducing them to the possibilities and limits of modern science and technology; of showing them the greatness and also the smallness of mankind; of developing their appreciation for universal art, science and culture; and of developing their vocation for peace, non-violence, tolerance, solidarity and justice.

Basic education is a universal right. It assists all children: boys and girls, rich and poor, those living in the city, in rural and remote areas, those with special needs, working children, indigenous children and those coming from ethnic minorities, those who have a family and those who live in the streets, migrants, children who are refugees and displaced by war.  

Related texts in this blog:
Rosa María Torres, Open Letter to School Children
Rosa María Torres, Children's Rights: A Community Learning Experience in Senegal
Rosa María Torres, On LifeLong Learning ▸ Sobre Aprendizaje a lo Largo de la Vida

Lifelong Learning: moving beyond Education for All

Rosa María Torres

The Eternal Circle 7 - David Pyatt 

Keynote speech delivered at the Shanghai “International Forum on Lifelong Learning”
at the Shanghai World Expo 2010 (19-21 May 2010)
UNESCO, the Shanghai Municipal People’s Government, the Chinese Society of Educational Development Strategy (CSEDS) and the Chinese National Commission for UNESCO.

Included in the book Conceptual evolution and policy developments in lifelong learning, UIL-UNESCO, 2011 (PDF)

Introduction

Over the past two decades, the world has experienced profound changes. A rapid globalisation process has resulted in a highly connected world, with economic and political power more concentrated than ever. Many old structural problems have further deteriorated or become more evident to public awareness, while new ones have emerged. Technology has undergone impressive leaps, bringing with it new possibilities as well as new threats. All these developments have major consequences on people’s lives around the world, as well as on education and learning systems.

However, the education field continues to revolve around the traditional “education reform” mentality. More money and resources devoted to doing basically more of the same. Top-down policies and measures. “Improving the quality of education” instead of revisiting it. Quantities predominating over qualities. Education understood mainly or solely as school education. Access, retention and completion rates as main (school) education indicators. Tests aimed at evaluating how much information students are able to digest and retrieve. Weak attention to learning, easily confused with testing and school achievement. Overburdened curricula attempting to capture as much content as possible. And so on and so forth.

All this is apparent not only at the national but also at the international level. World platforms such as Education for All (EFA), coordinated by UNESCO, are not tuned with LIfelong Learning (LLL) the new emerging paradigm, adopted over the past few years by many countries in the North, especially in Europe, and promoted by many international agencies, UNESCO being one of them.

We focus here on the relationship between EFA and LLL, and argue in favour of revisiting EFA in order to better adjust it to the lifelong learning paradigm and to the changes experienced by the world since 1990, when EFA was initiated worldwide.

Education for All (EFA) – far from Lifelong Learning

The Education for All (EFA) world initiative was launched in 1990 (Jomtien, Thailand) and ratified in 2000 (Dakar, Senegal). In Dakar, a new deadline was established (2015) given the fact that the six EFA goals were not accomplished 2000 (Torres, 2000). The goals remained six but were slightly modified (Box 1).

Box 1

Education for All goals (1990-2000-2015)

Jomtien: 1990-2000	Dakar: 2000-2015
1. Expansion of early childhood care and development activities, including family and community interventions, especially for poor, disadvantaged and disabled children.	1. Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children.
2. Universal access to, and completion of, primary education (or whatever higher level of education is considered as “basic”) by the year 2000.	2. Ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly girls, children in difficult circumstances and those belonging to ethnic minorities, have access to and complete free and compulsory primary education of good quality.
3. Improvement in learning achievement such that an agreed percentage of an appropriate age cohort (e.g. 80% of 14 year olds) attains or surpasses a defined level of necessary learning achievement.	3. Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate learning and life skills programmes.
4. Reduction in the adult illiteracy rate (the appropriate age cohort to be determined in each country) to, say, one-half its 1990 level by the year 2000, with sufficient emphasis on female literacy to significantly reduce the current disparity between the male and female illiteracy rates.	4. Achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access to basic and continuing education for all adults.
5. Expansion of provision of basic education and training in other essential skills required by youth and adults, with programme effectiveness assessed in terms of  behavioural changes and impacts on health, employment and productivity.	5. Eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by 2015, with a focus on ensuring girls’ full and equal access to and achievement in basic education of good quality.
6. Increased acquisition by individuals and families of the knowledge, skills and values required for better living and sound and sustainable development, made available through all educational channels including the mass media, other forms of modern and traditional communication, and social action, with effectiveness assessed in terms of behavioural change.	6. Improving all aspects of the quality of education and ensuring excellence of all so that recognised and measurable learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy and essential life skills.

Sources: WCEFA 2000a,b,c; EFA Forum 2000; UNESCO-EFA International Coordination ; Ten things you need to know about Education for All 

EFA goals replicate the conventional education mentality and do not facilitate a holistic understanding of education and of learning throughout life. This is because, among reasons,

▸ EFA goals are a list. Each goal is treated and measured separately. The linkages between them are not apparent (eg, between child and adult education, school and out-of-school education, and so on). EFA’s traditional and ongoing focus on Goal 2 – children’s primary education – reflects and replicates the false historical “option” between child and adult education, and the neglect of early childhood care and education, despite well-known rhetoric on the subject. In fact, the EFA Development Index (EDI), created in 2003 to monitor EFA developments in countries, includes only four EFA goals, leaving out Goal 1 (early childhood care and education) and Goal 3 (youth/adult basic education).

▸ EFA goals are organised by age – early childhood (Goal 1), school age (Goal 2), youth and adults (Goals 3 and 4), in the Dakar list – without articulation between them. Learners’ segmentation according to age reflects the conventional education mentality that is behind the segmentation of education policies, goals and institutions. Focus on age contributes to losing sight of social learning organisations like the family and the community, and has institutionalised the false “option” between children’s education and adult education, whereby children and adults have to compete for their right to education, especially in circumstances of multiple needs and scarce resources such as those that characterise countries in the South (Torres, 2003). EFA Goal 6 formulated in Jomtien in 1990, which referred to family education and public information (“Increased acquisition by individuals and families of the knowledge, skills and values required for better living and sound and sustainable development…”) was eliminated in Dakar in 2000.

▸ EFA goals adhere to the conventional formal/non-formal dichotomy, leaving out informal learning, fundamental and expanding throughout the world given among others the expansion of life and of modern information and communication technologies (ICTs). The three-tier category (formal/non-formal/informal education) long used in the education field shows the centrality of formal education, with all other categories defined as non- or in-. In fact, the revised International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997) does not include informal education, currently acknowledged as informal learning (incidental or random learning) given the absence of an organised education activity (Box 2).

▸ EFA goals continue to view literacy in isolation, as a separate area and goal, without acknowledging that literacy is a basic learning need of the population and thus part of basic education 

▸ EFA goals adopt “basic education” as the main organising concept – not lifelong learning. The Jomtien conference spoke of an “expanded vision of basic education”, an education aimed at “meeting the basic learning needs of the population”, in and out of the school system. However, the mission of education is not only meeting basic learning needs, but also expanding them and generating new learning needs along the process. (Torres, 2003). [1]

Box 2

Education: Formal and non-formal

Education: “Within the framework of ISCED, the term education is taken to comprise all deliberate and systematic activities designed to meet learning needs. This includes what in some countries is referred to as cultural activities or training. Whatever the name given to it, education is understood to involve organized and sustained communication designed to bring about learning. The key words in this formulation are to be understood as follows:
- COMMUNICATION: a relationship between two or more persons involving the transfer of information (messages, ideas, knowledge, strategies, etc.). Communication may be verbal or non-verbal, direct/face-to-face or indirect/remote, and may involve a wide variety of channels and media.
- LEARNING: any improvement in behaviour, information, knowledge, understanding, attitude, values or skills.
- ORGANIZED: planned in a pattern or sequence with explicit or implicit aims. It involves a providing agency (person or persons or body) that sets up the learning environment and a method of teaching through which the communication is organized. The method is typically someone who is engaged in communicating or releasing knowledge and skills with a view to bringing about learning, but it can also be indirect/inanimate e.g. a piece of computer software, a film, or tape, etc.
- SUSTAINED: intended to mean that the learning experience has the elements of duration and continuity. No minimum duration is stipulated, but appropriate minima will be stated in the operational manual.

Formal education (or initial education or regular school and university education): “Education provided in the system of schools, colleges, universities and other formal educational institutions that normally constitutes a continuous ‘ladder’ of full-time education for children and young people, generally beginning at age five to seven and continuing up to 20 or 25 years old. In some countries, the upper parts of this ‘ladder’ are constituted by organized programmes of joint part-time employment and part-time participation in the regular school and university system: such programmes have come to be known as the ‘dual system’ or equivalent terms in these countries.

Non-formal education: “Any organized and sustained educational activities that do not correspond exactly to the above definition of formal education. Non-formal education may therefore take place both within and outside educational institutions, and cater to persons of all ages. Depending on country contexts, it may cover educational programmes to impart adult literacy, basic education for out-of-school children, life-skills, work-skills, and general culture. Non-formal education programmes do not necessarily follow the ‘ladder’ system, and may have differing duration”.

“Education, for the purposes of ISCED, excludes communication that is not designed to bring about learning. It also excludes various forms of learning that are not organized. Thus, while all education involves learning, many forms of learning are not regarded as education. For example, incidental or random learning which occurs as a by-product of another event, such as something that crystallizes during the course of a meeting, is excluded because it is not organized i.e. does not result from a planned intervention designed to bring about learning.”

Source: UNESCO, Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997)  

From education to learning and from lifelong education to lifelong learning

The shift of focus from education to learning, and from lifelong education to lifelong learning, has been on the table at least since the 1970s.[2] However, and although learning has in fact become a much repeated word, with a multitude of labels[3], disregard for effective learning continues as well the long-entrenched confusion between education and learning.[4] It is generally assumed that learningis always the result of some sort of teaching, and that teaching results automatically in learning.

The Fifth International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA V), held in Hamburg in 1997, called for such transit, ending up with the Hamburg Declaration on Adult Learning.

However, few understood and adopted such change of focus in the 12 years between CONFINTEA V and CONFINTEA VI (Belém, Brazil, December 2009). (Torres, 2009) 

Lifelong Learning and the right to education

Lifelong learning is activated today as the key organising principle for education and training systems, and for the building of the “knowledge society”.

Lifelong learning acknowledges essentially two inter-related facts: (a) learning is lifelong (not confined to a particular period in life, “from the womb to the tomb”); and (b) learning is lifewide (not confined to school but taking place everywhere: home, community, playground, workplace, sports yard, mass media, through play, conversation, debate, reading, writing, teaching, problem solving, social participation, social service, travel, use of ICTs, and so on).

On the other hand, one can relate the “emphasis on learning” to two different dimensions:
- ensuring that education (formal or non-formal) results in effective learning
- ensuring relevant learning opportunities beyond the school system

Thus, the right to education can no longer be understood as the right to access the school system (and eventually complete a certain number of years of schooling). The right to education implies essentially the right to learn and to learn throughout life. The state has an obligation to ensure equal learning opportunities for all, within and beyond the school system, at all ages.

Lifelong learning can be related to various concepts:

· Learning throughout life
· Learning to live
· Life is the curriculum
· Learning to learn
· Learning families
· Learning communities
· Learning societies.

Advances in neuroscience research are contributing to a better understanding of learning, and of learning throughout life, at various ages and stages. The belief that learning occurs and can occur at any age is confirmed by such research, thus providing scientific support to the claim that school age should not be confused with learning age. Now we know that the brain is mature between the mid-20s and the 30s, and that the mature brain can focus better and is capable of deeper and more complex learning. Also, the adult brain is capable of learning new tasks and being shaped by new experiences. Cognitive decline with age is avoidable if the brain is kept active, curious, in a permanent state of learning. [5]

What Lifelong learning is NOT

Lifelong Learning is not only about adults – as many people and organisations continue to use it. Lifelong Learning is not equivalent to adult education or adult learning; it is lifelong, “from the womb to the tomb”, thus embracing children, youth and adults across the life span. Curiously, some countries in Latin American and the Caribbean that have adopted the Lifelong Learning terminology include it as an additional category or section within Ministries of Education or other ministries, as if it were separate from the rest (Torres, 2009). UNESCO itself has contributed to such confusions. The former UNESCO Institute for Education (UIE), based in Hamburg, traditionally devoted to adult education and responsible for organising the International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA), was renamed UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL). EFA goal 3 – “Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate learning and life-skills programmes” – is the only one labelled “lifelong learning” in UNESCO’s documents and website.

The LIfelong Learning paradigm has so had far little impact in countries in the South. Many countries, especially in Africa and Asia, are still struggling with access and the completion of children’s primary education and high adult illiteracy rates. Most of them struggle with quality issues at all levels of the education system. Generally, education continues to be associated with school education, and learning with school assessment. The picture of learning within and outside the school system is still distant and considered a luxury for many governments, social organisations and international agencies engaged with education in the South. International platforms such as EFA and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) contribute in fact to the reinforcement of such trends.

There are also legitimate concerns vis-à-vis the Lifelong Learning paradigm as adopted and developed by countries in the North, mainly as a strategy for human resource development. Many fear that Lifelong Learning and its “focus on learning” may be a way to further neglect teaching and teachers, and to disengage governments from their commitment to ensure the right to education, by leaving learning in the hands of people, as their own individual responsibility. However, lifelong learning does not need to be reduced to an economic strategy; it does not imply abandoning teaching but rather strengthening it and acknowledging educators’ own learning needs; it does not have to be associated with individual learning, but as the possibility to combine social and personal learning in different contexts and moments; and it does not have to conflict with the right to education. On the contrary, the right to education expands beyond access and becomes the right to learn.

It is true that Lifelong Learning is an agenda proposed and adopted by countries in the North, whose contexts and perspectives differ considerably from those in the South. Thus there is the need to define Lifelong Learning from the perspective of the South, and of the diversity of situations and cultures characterising each region and country.

Lifelong Learning: Building learning families, learning communities and learning societies

Adopting Lifelong Learning as a paradigm is not just about introducing minor adjustments to education structures, systems and policies. It implies a major revolution of traditional education and learning cultures: 

▸ revisit the school-centred education culture that continues to view the school as the only education and learning system

▸ acknowledge and articulate the various learning systems, to ensure necessary coordination and synergy at both local and national level

▸ understand education/training, face-to-face/distance, formal/non-formal/informal as part of a continuum

▸ ensure effective learning within the school system, beyond tests measuring “school achievement”

▸ recognise previous knowledge and know-how as a key transectoral component of education and training policies

▸ rethink age as a central factor to organise education/training systems and opportunities

▸ abandon prejudices about age and learning, open up to new scientific evidence confirming that learning is an ageless endeavour

▸ accept literacy as a lifelong learning process rather than as a learning period
▸ go beyond the book as the single reading object that continues to define “reading habits”, and accept the wide variety that today characterises the reading world

▸ incorporate the screen as a new reading and writing device for all ages

▸ promote and support peer- and inter-generational learning at home, in school, at the community, at work, everywhere.

▸ envisage education and learning beyond classrooms and closed spaces, while ensuring outdoors learning, contact with nature, people, real-life situations

▸ combine all means and media available to make learning happen, through multimedia strategies

▸ acknowledge the importance not only of “modern” technologies but also of “traditional” ones massively available and still poorly utilised (radio, TV, blackboard, tape recorders, and others)

▸ take advantage of distance education/learning opportunities, through all available means, better if combined with face-to-face contact

▸ diversify policies and strategies to accommodate the specific needs and desires of specific communities, groups and individuals

▸ think education and learning not only in terms of isolated individuals who contribute to statistics, but also in social terms (groups, communities, networks, organisations)

▸ build learning families, with the help of specific policies and strategies aimed at enhancing the cultural and educational capital of the family as a whole
▸ build learning communities, in urban and rural areas, so that all members – children, young people, adults – are engaged in learning activities, and all local resources are utilised, with community and local development in mind
▸ work towards a culture of collaboration that promotes collective access to, and use of, resources, rather than “each one have one” (each school a library, each student a computer, each person a cell phone, and so on).

The real challenge is building a learning society – families, communities and societies that learn – a goal far more complex, democratic and egalitarian than building an information society.

Effectively adopting Lifelong Learning as a paradigm implies a major shift for education and learning cultures.

           References

Commission of the European Communities. 2000. A Memorandum on Lifelong Learning. Brussels: Commission Staff Working Paper.

Dave, R.H. (dir.).1976. Foundations of Lifelong Education. Hamburg: UIE-UNESCO.

Delors, J. et. al. 1996. Learning: The Treasure Within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-First Century. Paris: UNESCO.

EFA Forum. 2000. The Dakar Framework for Action, World Education Forum (Dakar, 26-28 April, 2000). Paris: UNESCO.

  Faure, E. 1973. Learning to Be. Paris: UNESCO.

Torres, R.M. 2000. One decade of ‘Education for All’: The challenge ahead. Buenos Aires: IIPE-UNESCO.

Torres, R.M. 2001a. “Lifelong Learning in the North, Education for All in the South?”, in: Proceeding, International Conference on Lifelong Learning: Global Perspective in Education (Beijing, 1-3 July 2001). Beijing: BAES.

Torres, R.M. 2001b.  “What happened at the World Education Forum?”, in: Adult Education and Development, N° 55. Bonn: IIZ-DVV, 2001.

Torres, R.M. 2001c. Learning Community: Re-thinking Education for Local Development and for Learning. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Learning Communities, Barcelona Forum, Barcelona, 5-6 October, 2001.

Torres, Rosa Maria. 2003. Lifelong Learning: A new momentum and a new opportunity for Adult Basic Learning and Education (ABLE) in the South. A study commissioned by the Swedish International Development Agency. Stockholm: Sida, 2003; Bonn: IIZ-DVV, 2003.

Torres, Rosa Maria. 2009. From literacy to lifelong learning: Trends, issues and challenges of youth and adult education in Latin America and the Caribbean. Regional report prepared for the Sixth International Conference on Adult Education, Belém, Brazil, 19-22 May, 2009. Commissioned by the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL) with the financial support of CREFAL

UIE-UNESCO.1997a. CONFINTEA V – Fifth International Conference on Adult Education, Adult Learning: A Key for the Twenty-First Century (Hamburg, 14-18 July, 1997)

UIE-UNESCO. 1997b. CONFINTEA V documents. The Hamburg Declaration on Adult Learning, Hamburg, 1997.

UIL-UNESCO. 2009. 6th International Conference on Adult Education, Living and Learning for a Viable Future: The Power of Adult Learning (Belém, 1-4 December 2009) 

UNESCO. 1997. Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997) 

UNESCO. 2000a. World Education Report 2000. The right to education: Towards education for all throughout life. Paris.

UNESCO. 2000b. Final Report. World Education Forum (Dakar, 26-28 April 2000). Paris.

UNESCO. 2000c. The Dakar Framework for Action “Education for All: Meeting Our Collective Commitments”, World Education Forum (Dakar, 26-28 April 2000). Paris.

WCEFA (World Conference on Education for All/Inter-Agency Commission). 1990a. Meeting Basic Learning Needs: A Vision for the 1990s, Background Document, World Conference on Education for All. New York.

WCEFA. 1990b. World Declaration on Education for All and Framework for Action to Meet Basic Learning Needs (Jomtien, Thailand, 5-9 March 1990). New York-Paris.

WCEFA. 1990c. Final Report, World Conference on Education for All (Jomtien, Thailand, 5-9 March 1990). New York: UNICEF.

---

NOTES

[1] The term basic education is understood in diverse ways. Officially, according to UNESCO’s International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997), basic education comprises primary education and lower secondary education. In Jomtien (2000), basic education was defined as “education aimed at meeting the basic learning needs” of all, in and out of school (WCEFA 1990). For the OECD-DAC and standard aid classifications basic education includes early childhood education, primary education, and basic life skills for youths and adults, including literacy (Glossary, EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010).[2] See: Faure 1973; Dave 1976; Delors et. al. 1996; Commission of the European Commission 2000. [3] A few such denominations: distance learning, online learning, active learning, blended learning, distributed learning, synchronous learning, self-paced learning, self-directed learning, cooperative learning, collaborative learning, social learning, open learning, informal learning, lifelong learning, invisible learning, iLearning, fLearning, etc.

[4] Translation problems further reveal and exacerbate the lack of distinction between the two concepts. A few examples: a) the Delors report entitled “Learning, the Treasure within” (1996) was translated into Spanish as “La educación encierra un tesoro”;  b) the “Hamburg Declaration on Adult Learning” (1997) was translated into Spanish as “Declaración de Hamburgo sobre la Educación de Adultos”: c) the 1st World Forum on Lifelong Learning organized by a Lifelong Learning Committee (Paris, October 2008) was translated into Spanish as Foro Mundial para la Educación y la Formación a lo largo de la vida and into French as Forum Mondial pour l'Education et la Formation Tout au Long de la Vie
[5] See for example:* Dave Snowden’s Cognitive Edge
* UCL -Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience  - Ability to concentrate improves during adolescence  (2010)
* Plos Biology: Axonal Dynamics of Excitatory and Inhibitory Neurons in Somatosensory Cortex (2010) 
* The Rockefeller University Newswire: New research shows how experience shapes the brain’s circuitry (2010)
* Neurociencias 

This text is included in a book organized by UIL-UNESCO with the seminar proceedings. See: Jin Yang and Raúl Valdés-Cotera (eds.), Conceptual evolution and policy developments in lifelong learning, UIL, Hamburg, 2011.

Related texts in this blog

» Rosa María Torres, Lifelong Learning in the South: Critical Issues and Opportunities for Adult Education, Sida Studies 11, Sida, Stockholm, 2004.
» Rosa María Torres, 25 años de Educación para Todos ▸ 25 Years of Education for All
» Rosa María Torres, Six 'Education for All' Goals ▸ Seis Metas de la 'Educación para Todos'

» Observatory: Myths and goals of 'Education for All'(1990-2000-2015)

» CONFINTEA VI: Sixth International Conference on Adult Education (Belém, Brazil, 1-4 December 2009)