🔔高等教育機構可以為終身學習做些什麼？
高等教育機構於推動終身學習方面扮演著重要之潛力角色。聯合國教科文組織終身學習研究所與上海開放大學的新研究顯示，目前於這領域取得一些進展，但仍存在限制與挑戰，阻礙充分實踐之潛力，艾迪斯·漢默（Edith Hammer）寫道。
在職學習、線上學習、微證書、靈活之學習途徑、社區外展，這些僅是高等教育領域支持終身學習的幾種方式。傳統與正規教育相關之大學及其他高等教育機構，已成為促進不同學習者終身學習之重要力量。作為傳統知識的樞紐，它們可將終身學習作為轉型之催化劑，支持技能再培訓及技能提升、社會公平及永續發展。在此背景下，出現了兩個問題：高等教育機構於促進社會終身學習中扮演什麼角色？高等教育機構如何成為終身學習機構？
這兩個問題是聯合國教科文組織終身學習研究所與上海開放大學，於2020年至2022年在中華人民共和國開展的「高等教育機構對終身學習的貢獻」國際研究項目之起點。這項研究結果已以兩份報告之形式發表：《高等教育中終身學習的國際趨勢》，基於與國際大學協會合作，對399所高等教育機構進行之國際調查結果；以及《高等教育中實施終身學習的機構實踐》，基於六個案例之研究。這次調查與案例研究，共同提供對於在高等教育內部及透過高等教育促進終身學習之成功策略、挑戰與改善領域的細微理解。
以國家政策背景而言，大約三分之二的高等教育機構於受訪時表示，他們的國家已有相關之法律，將終身學習定義為高等教育機構之職責，這展現於高等教育中擴大終身學習機會方面有著強烈之承諾。案例研究亦顯示，缺乏全面的國家政策，繼續教育及靈活學習途徑是最為發展之領域。這種對繼續教育及專業教育之重視，亦體現於高等教育機構之終身學習策略、使命聲明與治理機制之中，繼續教育中心於實施終身學習中具關鍵作用。在那些表示有設立專門之終身學習單位的機構中，近三分之四的機構選擇「提供及銷售教育項目與培訓」作為該單位的主要功能之一。以終身學習對象而言，最優先的群體是「需要提升技能/再培訓之在職人員」（89%），其次為「公共及私營機構」（84%）與婦女（82%）。
相較之下，較少重視高齡者、失業學習者與身障者。對於居住於偏遠或貧困地區、以及少數民族及宗教少數群體之人士，重視度下降。而最不被重視的群體是囚犯與前科者。這些結果表明，最弱勢之群體通常較不被重視，而以勞動力市場為導向之學習，通常相對具有利條件之學習者群體，已成為機構終身學習議程之重要組成部分。
雖意識到需以多元化進入高等教育及參與其中之需求，但於許多國家中，高等教育機構亦面臨公共資金投入減少之挑戰。許多高等教育機構仰賴學費及按需求服務提供終身學習活動。依據研究指出，終身學習者最有可能依賴個人資源參與終身學習，這是弱勢群體參與終身學習之阻礙。
在此背景下，高等教育機構必須制定全機構之終身學習方法，而不僅是為社會上已受過良好教育之群體提供繼續教育。實現這目標之重要步驟是高等教育機構領導層的堅定承諾與制定機構之終身學習策略，該策略應考慮高等教育機構終身學習之不同要素（靈活學習提供、先前學習成果之認可、靈活學習途徑、社區參與），不同學習目的（專業發展、個人成長、公民能力、永續發展、社會包容、強化地方社區等），不同目標群體，以及永續的資金及品質保證模式（例如：發展跨金融途徑及建立監測與評估系統，以系統性地追蹤進展）。
總體而言，這六個案例研究揭示出，儘管某些領域（例如：持續教育及靈活學習途徑）於某些情況下已蓬勃發展，但機構通常缺乏全面的政策框架。這對於確保跨機構之方法更加一致，並鞏固政府機構與其他利益相關者於參與方面，至關重要。
這樣全面的方法可成為擴大訪問及參與，以及多元化學習提供之有力槓桿。高等教育機構是將學習機會擴展到地方社區之關鍵，它們可對促進社會公平、社區抗逆力及強化地方經濟做出重要貢獻，考慮到氣候危機，這一點尤為重要。鑑於當前及未來之社會經濟變革，納入弱勢群體的問題需在政策制定者與高等教育機構領導者之議程中得到提升。因此，重新思考與轉變目前之教育模式，努力實現所有人享有終身學習之權利是很重要的。
👍原文網址：請點選
🌏What can higher education institutions do for lifelong learning?
Higher education institutions have a significant potential role in promoting lifelong learning. New research from the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning and Shanghai Open University shows both the advances being made and the limitations and challenges that continue to prevent this potential being fully realized, writes Edith Hammer
Part-time study, online learning, micro-credentials, flexible pathways, community outreach – these are just a few ways to support lifelong learning in the higher education sector. While traditionally associated with formal education, universities and other higher education institutions (HEIs) have become paramount in promoting lifelong learning for diverse groups of learners. As traditional hubs of knowledge, they can embrace lifelong learning as a catalyst for transformation, supporting reskilling and upskilling, social equity and sustainable development. Within this context, two questions arise: What is the role of HEIs in promoting lifelong learning in society? And what does it take for HEIs to become lifelong learning institutions?
These two questions were the starting point for an international research project on ‘The contribution of higher education institutions to lifelong learning’, conducted by the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning and Shanghai Open University (SOU), in the People’s Republic of China, from 2020 to 2022. The results of this research have now been published in two reports: International trends of lifelong learning in higher education, based on the results of an international survey among 399 HEIs, conducted jointly with the International Association of Universities, and Institutional practices of implementing lifelong learning in higher education, based on six case studies. Together, the survey and case studies offer a nuanced understanding of successful strategies, challenges, and areas for improvement in promoting lifelong learning within and through higher education.
When it comes to the national policy context, roughly two-thirds of the HEIs surveyed reported that their country has national legislation in place which defines lifelong learning as a mandate of HEIs, indicating strong commitments to widening lifelong learning opportunities in higher education. The case studies also revealed that a comprehensive national policy is often lacking, with continuing education and flexible learning pathways appearing as the most developed areas. This emphasis on continuing and professional education is also reflected at institutional level, in HEIs’ lifelong learning strategies, mission statements and governance mechanisms – with centres for continuing education playing a key role in implementing lifelong learning. Among those institutions that indicated that they had a dedicated unit for lifelong learning, almost three-quarters selected ‘offering and selling education programmes and trainings’ as one the main functions of this unit. When it comes to target groups for lifelong learning provision, the most prioritized group selected was ‘working people requiring upskilling/reskilling’ (89%), followed by ‘public and private organizations’ (84%) and women (82%).
In comparison, older people, unemployed learners, and people with disabilities are targeted to a lesser degree. The priority further decreases for persons living in remote or deprived areas, and ethnic and religious minorities. The least prioritized group are prisoners and former prisoners. These results suggest that the most vulnerable groups are generally less prioritized, while labour market-oriented learning, usually targeting comparatively advantaged groups of learners, has become an important part of institutions’ lifelong learning agenda.
While recognizing the need to diversify access to and participation in higher education, HEIs are also challenged in many countries by a decline in public funding for higher education. Many HEIs rely on tuition fees and on-demand services to provide lifelong learning activities. As the research indicates, lifelong learners are most likely to rely on personal resources to participate in lifelong learning, which is a barrier to participation for disadvantaged groups.
Against this backdrop, it is vital for HEIs to develop a whole-institution approach to lifelong learning that goes beyond offering continuing education for often already well-educated groups in society. An important step to achieve this is a strong commitment by HEI leadership and the drafting of an institutional lifelong learning strategy that considers different elements of HEIs’ lifelong learning mandate (flexible learning provision, recognition of prior learning, flexible pathways, community engagement), a range of learning purposes (professional development, personal growth, civic competences, sustainable development, social inclusion, strengthening local communities, etc.), different target groups, and a sustainable model for funding and quality assurance (e.g. developing cross-financing approaches and a monitoring-and-evaluation system to systematically track progress).
The six case studies in general reveal that while some areas – such as continuing education and flexible learning pathways – are in some cases very well developed, institutions often lack a comprehensive policy framework. This is essential in ensuring greater consistency of approach across institutions and in consolidating the involvement of government agencies and other stakeholders.
Such a comprehensive approach can be a strong lever to widen access and participation and diversify learning provision. HEIs are key for extending learning opportunities to local communities; they can make important contributions to promoting social equity and community resilience and strengthening local economies – critical in light of the climate crisis. In view of current and future socio-economic transformations, the inclusion of vulnerable groups needs to move up on the agenda of policy-makers and HEI leaders. Therefore, it is important to rethink and transform current educational models and to work towards a right to lifelong learning for all.
