COMMENTARY T


It’s time we joined up education spending


With the squeeze on public spending threatening to further compartmentalise policy thinking on education, the challenge is to convince politicians and the public of the need for a more


joined-up approach across the life stages, argues RICHARD SPEAR


he Australian state of Victoria made safety helmets mandatory for all bicycle riders in 1990. There was a reduction in the number of head


injuries, but also an unexpected drop in the number of young cyclists – apparently due to image concerns about wearing a helmet. The result was an overall decline in health and an increase in health-related costs. Although this may appear to have little to do with adult learning, it is an example of how rational but restricted thinking can lead to unintended outcomes. The focus on school investment as the way to improve the educational development of children may be an example of this type of reasoning. Between 1995 and 2004, the average


increase in expenditure per pupil across OECD countries was 39 per cent in real terms. Yet the most recent Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) study noted that the reading performance of 15 year olds within these countries generally remained flat between 2000 and 2006. The response to the PISA results,


however, has been to focus even more resources on literacy and numeracy within schools. In both England and Wales, the double-figure percentage increases in funding per school pupil in recent years have been matched by double- figure decreases in adult participation in education. To be fair, at least Wales is trying a different approach with the introduction of its Foundation Phase – a new curriculum for children aged between three and seven based on experiential learning. However, even where there is more enlightened thinking, it still seems to be predicated on increasing the resources of schools at a time when limited public funding is restricting opportunities for adults. Why is this such a problem? Well, forget for a moment the significant benefits that participation in learning brings to adults, and focus only on the educational development of children and young people. The following two facts highlight the predicament: despite progress, there are high numbers of adults with low levels of educational attainment in the UK, and in particular low levels of literacy and numeracy; and parental levels of education and the educational performance of children are inextricably linked. There is a risk, therefore, that focusing


more and more resources on schools rather than adult learning could be counter- productive. Research shows that parental education and involvement has a major influence on the development and life chances of their children. The intergenerational aspect of educational development is illustrated clearly by the Millennium Cohort Study. It revealed that, by the age of three, the children of graduates were already a year


more advanced in terms of vocabulary performance compared to the children of the least-educated parents. Despite the best efforts of schools, the gap appears to widen further throughout compulsory education. This evidence does not question the importance of good schools, which are critical, but it serves as a reminder than the education of young people and the education of adults are not distinct and separate policy issues. The link between the two has been clearly articulated by the Social Exclusion Task Force: ‘The primary responsibility for a family’s welfare will always rest with parents. The task of public services is to provide the best possible support to enable parents to fulfil that responsibility. Good children’s services are critical, but adults’ services also have a crucial role to play in determining children’s achievements and future life chances. Even the best children’s services can only ever mitigate the impacts of parental problems.’ This message is more important than


ever, as there is a danger that the squeeze on public resources will further compart- mentalise the thinking of policy makers – as departments compete for decreasing resources. The challenge is trying to convince politicians, and the public, of the need for a more joined-up approach across the life stages. The National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy has encouraging findings on the success of family learning programmes, but more evidence on the relationship between investment in adult learning and child development would be helpful. In the meantime, an assessment of the existing evidence highlights the need for change, and common sense offers some solutions. Nobody would expect adult learning to be funded at the same rate as compulsory education, but a slight rebalancing of resources to provide greater support for family and intergenerational learning could have a huge impact on child development. For those who are sceptical, David Watson and Tom Schuller, in Learning Through Life, explain how funding could be redeployed without reducing the spend per pupil – by taking advantage of the decrease in the number of young people.


If we do not change our approach, a continued focus on school investment alone would probably lead to some successes – just as the example from Victoria resulted in fewer head injuries. However, until education policy reflects a greater apprec- iation of the contribution of adult learning, I fear that progress within schools may be more than offset by the decrease in learning opportunities for parents.


Richard Spear is Director of NIACE Dysgu Cymru


APRIL 2010 ADULTS LEARNING


7


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32