Module 6

Group 9 - Anna Palva (SF), Bart Ketelslegers (B), Melissa Verkley (NL), Mira Van Olmen (B)

Group 1 - Paper 6: foundations of adult education

Module 6 - Foundations

Group 3 - Esther Booltink (NL), Veerle Dupont (B), Tom Jansseune (B), Miia Lehtonen (SF)

INTRODUCTION

In this paper we are going to discuss what the foundations of adult education are and what adult education means for us. Nowadays there is a growing attention for adult education: Is it/should it be a discipline of its own? What is the role of adult educator?

This growing attention seems to be caused by the many and fast changes in todays society, for example the strenghtened individualism, the developments in technology, the enhanced mobility, the concept of lifelong learning, unemployment and the idea that work and learning are closely linked to each other.

Adult education can play a role in dealing with those changes and we have to think about what the role of an adult educator can be. There is a lot of discussion about this and related topics and there seems to be no right answer, because the meanings of adult education differ so much between people.

Despite of the different meanings, for us the essence of the role of an adult educator is to be a facilitator in the learning process of adults, that is helping people to reflect because reflecting is a basic process of learning.

In the first paragraph we are going to discuss about the foundations of adult education and the distinction between theoretical and practical foundations. After that we discuss in paragraph two the practice of adult education. In paragraph three we mention some points relevant for the future of adult education. We will end the paper with our conclusions.

1. FOUNDATIONS OF ADULT EDUCATION

1.1 Theoretical foundations

Like every science, adult education has its own foundations. If you ask adult educators about the foundations of their work, we think the principle of eclecticism can be recognised. Every adult educator will pick out theories most usefully theory for them, depending on their environment, content, context, values etc.

In this paper we will distinguish two kinds of foundations: theoretical and practical.

To find out which are the foundations of adult education, we thought about the foundations of education in our own countries and in our studies, because we think that the foundations of adult education are similar to those of the overall educational science.

To clarify this we gather up the foundations of education in general, which we see in our intercultural group.

We came to the conclusion that the foundations of (adult) education are quite similar in our countries. There are four main foundations: psychology, sociology, philosophy and history. The emphasis differs in the different countries. For example in Belgium psychology and sociology are mainly supporting foundations and in Finland the emphasis is very strong on the social science foundations. We see statistics and methodology as foundations of foundation. These two are needed in all the disciplines of science.

In our opinion, by mentioning all these different foundations, we gave an academic point of view of the foundations of adult education. We think people in the field will not oversee all the mentioned foundations in their work if you ask them. They will not be aware of all of them in the practice. A clear overview of history is needed, to oversee all the foundations:

1.2 Practical Foundations

Before talking about the practice as a foundation you have to make a distinction between two kinds of practice: 1) practice according to the theory and 2) practice founded by practice.

The first one is the most known form of practice. You have a theory and the practice is based on that theory; theory is basis for practice. For example when you are fixing a car, you can follow a theory of a functional model of the car. Following the theory, you know what you have to do in order to repair it in the right way.

If you don’t know the theory/principles or if there isn’t any theory at all, you have to use "trial and error" to fix the car. By reflecting on your actions, you develop your own theory. This theory is never free from values. People create their theories by putting together (parts of) different existing theories and experiences they have had in the past. We recognize in this also the principle of eclecticism, according to us in this context a very creative process.

To create a theory based on practice, reflection on action is of vital importance. It is only by means of reflection, that your theory can reach the level of foundations. The regulative cycle goes around and around (problem definition, diagnosis, plan, intervention, evaluation, problem definition etc.) thereby innovating the theory.

We asked ourselves the question when does a theory based on practice reach the level of scientific knowledge. Only when the theory fits all the characteristics of scientific knowledge (for example general validity), you can speak about a real practical foundation (and the scientific knowledge). Until that the theory carries the potentiality of being a practical foundation and real science.

We want to make the following remark. Reflecting is the real basis of a change/learning process, but not everybody has that capacity to reflect. A task of an adult educator can be to help people reflect on their behavior, attitudes and thinking/learning process, in order to facilitate their learning processes.

2. PRACTICE OF ADULT EDUCATION

It seems that the foundations are almost the same in every country, but the practice can be quite different. There is a lot of discussion about the fields of working and the profile of an adult educator. Not only between countries and disciplines, but also within countries (for instance between universities) and disciplines (for instance between professors within a certain university).

The profile of an adult educator is not clear. In job-advertisements for example, they never specifically ask for an adult educator. You have to see for yourself if you could fit within the profile. Moreover, when people ask us "What can you do with your study in the future", we have no clear answer. We can end up working almost everywhere!

Because of the fact that adult education is such a young science, there are also a lot of discussions about terminology. As we experienced in working in intercultural groups during the classes and in writing our papers, there is a lot of confusion about terminology. Different terms have same meanings, while same terms can have different meanings. We think the content of the modules would have been totally different if the modules where divided over the professors of the different countries in another way. What if a finish professor had lectured us about community education? That would have been impossible, because in Finland there doesn´t excist something like community education.

We see in Belgium, Finland and Holland, that there is one discipline of adult education where you learn the knowledge and methodologies of being an adult educator. After graduating, you are confronted with a specific context and content of the organisation you are going to work for. For example if you are going to work in an organisation which fight against sexual assaults and abuse, you have to adapt to this specific context and content by learning new knowledge.

In contrast, in USA there is no discipline of adult education. Students first orient on a certain content (for instance biology) and only in the last year of their studies, they choose the specialisation of adult education.

In our group we prefer seeing adult education as a separate discipline, because people are more specialised in the field of adult education and can work in a whole range of different field and not only one.

3. FUTURE OF ADULT EDUCAITON

We have been thinking if there can be one international profile of adult education? In our opinion it is good that every country has its own interpretation of adult education, because adult education in a country reflects the needs of a country. It depends for instance on the kind of situation the country is in. For example, in Belgium community life is very important, resulting in a great emphasis on community education within adult education. In Finland, community education has no real significance, because community life there is not so much valued. There vocational training gets more emphasis.

The main challenge for adult education is to work out the terminology-problem. As already mentioned in the former paragraph, there is much confusion about meanings of adult education. In stead of trying to make one general profile of adult education, we should focus on consistence in terminology between people.

In the classes we discussed about the norms in society and purposes of education in postmodern time. It was mentioned that the most important norm in postmodern society should be an aesthetic way of living. We think............????

Professor K. Nurmi proposed that the purpose of education in postmodern society could be enjoyment. We don’t totally agree with that. We think by stating this, the fact that there are two kinds of educational systems are overlooked.

1. Education in economical sense

If education is seen as a way to reach economical growth and effectiveness, people can be more or less forced to educate themselves to keep their place on the labour market. Education in this sense seems to us more survival than enjoyment; if people don’t see that the education contributes to self-realization, they will validate in a negative way. For example migrants can be pressured to learn in order be allowed to stay in the country. They don’t have an internal drive for learning but are forced and they will not enjoy the education.

2. Education to reach self realization

We think that education can only bring enjoyment, if people see education as a way of realizing their selfhood.

CONCLUSION

Because of the many and fast changes in postmodern society, there is much discussion about adult education, also about the foundations of adult education. We found four main theoretical foundations of adult education that are more or less the same in the countries of our intercultural group. Practical foundations will differ more between our countries, because they are based on the values and experiences, which are closely linked to culture. Reflection is very important to form practical foundations and therefore adult educators should stimulate this capacity in people.

The practice of adult education differs very much between countries. It is impossible and not needed to formulate one global profile of an adult educator, but the standardization of terminology is a great challenge for the future.

Karen Dereymaeker
Peter De Temmerman
Paula Kari
Jutta Laukart

1. Introduction

Adult Education is a young science in most of the European Countries. Like other young sciences it has to face the problem concerning legitimisation. In the following paragraphs we try to look at this problem from different points of view. We do not claim to give a broad and sufficient overview about the foundations of adult education but we try at least to give some selective points which should be considered when talking about the legitimisation of this profession:

1. Education sciences were for hundreds of years part of philosophy. So we have to ask if these roots can be used for a foundation of adult education.
2. Psychology is also an important factor in the processes of learning -especially on the micro-level. We have to take into account that adults already have a psychological "history" before taking part in educational activities.
3. The practice of research and the developing of theories in the field of adult education is dominated by a sociological point of view. We have to ask if there are some good arguments for this modus operandi.
4. At last we have to ask the question which influence practice itself could have on the theoretical foundation of adult education. It might be that the practice is too various and too unsystematic at the moment because of the lack of legitimisation and professionalisation to find good arguments for the foundations of adult education.

2.1 Philosophy and Education

Education (Bildung) as a philosophical term is strongly connected to modernity. The modernity from a philosophical point of view is characterised by the "discovery" of the individual (Subjekt).

Before modernity Greek philosophy was the common basis in the philosophical European discourse. Very influential was Plato's "The State": the state creates sense through order. The practice in a state is goal-oriented (<Greek telos). Every citizen is part of the order and his education has to prepare him for his place in the state. The people are considered as citizens but not as individuals. Higher education in academies is restricted to the upper class. They are free for contemplation (reasoning) because they do not have to deal with worldly actions. The most important sciences in the state are politics and philosophy (insight of ideas). Politics and philosophy create the sense and the meaning of the state and its order.

In modernity the "Subjektphilosophie" of the German philosophers Kant and Fichte has great impact on the idea of education (Bildung). The characteristic of the individual is "Vernunft" (reason). Vernunft is the last metaphysical principle and the precondition for the ideas of Bildsamkeit (the ability to learn in a non deterministic sense) and Selbsttätigkeit (the ability to use your own reason to get insight).

Another important philosopher who strongly influenced education sciences was Rousseau: he discovered the childhood in his book "Emile" and created the meaning of "perfectibility" ("Contract sociale"). Human-beings try to reach perfection without ever reaching it. In other words perfectibility is a thinkable assumption but it never can be reality.

These premises lead to the question for every individual to find own goals and own sense in life. Goals and sense (Bestimmung) are no longer given from before like in Greek antique. This is the historical beginning of education (in the sense of "Bildung") in philosophy and education and the starting point for the development of school-systems in Europe.

Now in the stage of post-modernity where the end of the great narratives is claimed and replaced with expert-knowledge and the play of languages (Lyotard) and the principles of metaphysics seem to be obsolete and are replaced with "text" (Derrida), we have to confront ourselves with new challenges. Not principles but plurality is the keyword of the present discourse. Now the question arises how adult education can cope without principles such as emancipation and participation that are the historical origins of its concept in the 19th century?

If it is right what Habermas said: "The project of modernity has failed", we have to deal with the problem how adult education can legitimate itself any longer. How can we act as adult educators in practice if we give up metaphysic ideas and ideas of unity and replace it with the concept of plurality and the concept of "difference" (Derrida)? Are adult educators only facilitators of self-directed learning? Is there a task to just provide a forum where people can express there own peculiar way of thinking and adult educators do not try to change their attitudes? Is it good and useful only to stress differences? Or is it possible to find common values in discourse (Habermas) and therefore find a basis for common action? The post-modern philosophers fear the danger of totalitarism in this last strategy (Lyotard) but if people (and adult educators) do not share common values/ideas communication and living together is not possible.

It seems obvious that psychology is one of the basic sciences of adult education. Present assumption is that in the childhood psychological characteristics (Freud) and cognitive patterns (Piaget) are formed. In the past the scientific discourse in education sciences was dominated by the opinion that the psychological formation is finished after the stage of youth. Now this rigid assumption changed, socialisation never ends and therefore the psychological development continues life long: different factors like family, work, friends have influence on our psychological characteristics.

The recent research in neurology shows that the neuronal nets are more changeable and flexible (even after injuries) then thought until now. But the idea is still dominant in adult education that adults have pre-knowledge and that new knowledge is just put in already existing patterns. This idea has the consequence that adult educators always have to think about the -biographical and psychological- relevance of new knowledge and that they have to be aware which knowledge participants already have to fit their demands in the most appropriate way.

Another important aspect are the emotions. Research has shown that the limbic system (the part of the brain which "deals" with emotions) is the oldest part of the brain. Emotions are accompanying all of our thinking and actions. Emotions are also one of the most important factors for successful learning not only related to motivation and interest but also to cognitive capabilities: without emotional involvement a person cannot solve complex tasks.

Many learners have had bad learning-experiences (often in school) and still have problems to learn when they are adults and often these blockades are not cognitive but emotional. In many cases bad learning behaviour is repeated (for instance in second chance learning). Learners are in a vicious circle and cannot leave it without help. Adult educators should pay attention to learners with learning-problems and try to create in general a positive, fear-free, relaxed but also demanding and stimulating atmosphere.

Today the developing of theories in adult education is dominated from the point of view of the social sciences. The methods are taken over from sociology whether they are analytical/quantitative (often used in practice for evaluation) or whether they are hermeneutic/qualitative (often used in research).

Especially the discourse about lifelong-learning always refers to society. The idea of Bildsamkeit and perfectibility seems to be forgotten. Education has no intrinsic value in this discourse anymore. The reason for this development is that the practice of economics has become dominant in our societies.

Other factors which are supporting the sociological point of view are that despite of the invention of compulsory school-systems, open access to education on all levels and second chance learning, the social exclusion through education is still existing.

The (education-)biographies show that people of educated families have better chances to reach the highest levels of education than others (Bourdieu claims that they learnt a certain habitus).

One big problem practitioners have to deal with is that the worse the situation is the less people are willing to participate in education. This is a problem because in our times education is considered by sociologists as one of our most important resources in society: education is often the decisive factor for social ascend or social descend. Education could become the most important factor of survival in the risk-society (Beck).

Social sciences’ methods used in adult education can help to discover the factors behind educational behaviour of individuals and milieus. By answering questions like "who takes part in educational activities?", "when?", "where?", "why?", "what?", adult education could develop own knowledge. This knowledge could help the practitioners on all aspects of practice for instance to improve their offers, to be more creative, to organise different, find institutional alternatives, create interpretation-schemes and so on. This approach alone is not suitable for legitimisation but he can definitely improve professionalization.

2.4 Practice

Social sciences in adult education just follows the practice (In most cases it is not so theoretical like the social science themselves. Adult education has not the demand to itself to develop comprehensive theories) and the practice is often very complex and various. Practice is too unsystematic and fragile because adult education seems always be threatened by restructuring, financing problems and legitimisation problems towards policy-makers and economics. The always changing trends and movements in the field of adult education related to institutions, programs and self-awareness of practitioners are not a stabile basis for legitimisation.

To help practitioners to find an own habitus, scientific argumentation is needed. Hence adult education has to ask itself how it can legitimate itself as a science. As long as science has no identity, adult educators in practice will have legitimisation-problems.

Therefore it would be better to find the ground for legitimisation in the philosophical tradition, especially in ethics/moral philosophy. From our point of view practice cannot do without principles.

3. An international perspective of the four foundations in our studies

In this part we want to regard the attention paid to the different foundations of adult education in our study to become an adult educator as mentioned above.

In Finland as well philosophical, sociological and psychological courses are part of the curriculum. Nevertheless it can be said that there is a stress on philosophical discourse. Especially sociology (and to a minor degree psychology) is entered from a philosophical point of view. The practical part of the study consists of a three month during traineeship.

In Belgium, also philosophy, psychology and sociology can be regarded as the three basic foundations of the study. Somehow there is more a stress on philosophical and psychological theory-building in the first years of the study. In the last three years, next to courses, a mixture between theory and practice is offered on one side through projectwork and on the other side through the traineeship. The third and the fourth year the Belgian student works on a project with an organisation in group. The group consists of six or seven other students and is supervised by a someone of academic staff. In the last year there is a three month during traineeship in an organisation belonging to one of the four focused domains in the study.

In Germany on the contrary, educational sciences can only be followed in a Magister-combination. Courses with a strong philosophical approach are an obliged part of this study. When choosing adult education as one of the sub-directions of educational sciences, the approach is more sociological. So, philosophy and sociology play a big role in the study to become an adult educator whereas there is paid less attention to psychological discourse, unless you choose those courses as an option. In contrast with both other countries, practice is no part of the curriculum.

Group 5

Carme Anguera Iglesias (Spain)
Kalle Mäkinen (Finland)
Kristel Jansen (Belgium)
Lilianne Hercules (Netherlands)

Introduction

How do we visualize our ideas about adult education and its foundations ? If we should represent these ideas into a form of a house, how would it eventually look like ? Can we even talk about a real house since the stones and materials, the different components of adult education, are not so defined and stable as in real in real house construction process ?

First we tried to draw the house of adult education and its foundations into a house that one can find in real life without taking into account our reflection about the difficulty and blurines of the adult education . Drawing our more sophisticated thoughts about adult education was not possible to draw instantly into a clear picture. So we decided to construct our own peculiar drawing which represents the field of adult education in our mind. The drawing is a mixture of different elements from different " architechtures " as is the discipline itself.

House interpretation

After the first construction was done we started to see the picture differently, analysing and criticing of our drawing and reasons why we ended up drawing such a building we had, opened our eyes to see the picture differently from what it was in the first place. With the reflection we try to see our own spontaneous representation of AE, and the reasons that toke us to draw that kind of house and not another one, the ideas that we have about it, what we take into account and what we don’t.

In the first picture we had a flag (1) on top of the house representing the visibility and attractiveness of the discipline, obviously the case is not so clear about these two characteristics. When it comes to our personal experiences we don’t see adult education having such a clear and visible attraction in the field of human sciences. Why did we put the shiny flag on top of the house ? May be because of our implicit wish as adult educators is to have this attractiveness more explicit as it really is.

We see the position of adult education not clear in relation to other disciplines. There are also other flags in the rooftops, meaning that the position of adult education in the field of human sciences is not problematic. We also drawed one hole (3) in to the roof of the building to reprecent the negative influences which come from outside into the field : with these we mean that there is also some aspects which are not clear or in all sense positive for the science. We could say that there are bad inf luences from outside such as in some cases the states’ opinion about adult education, that it is seen not so important as it obviously is.

We draw the political climate (2) as the weather that gives light into the house, and as the weather has the power to change the climate of the nature, the political influences and decicion making have the power to alter the ambient inside the field.

The field of adult education has connections with the neighbour (6) disiplines and there are also some possibilities to share some rooms with them as in the reality there are also some common aspects and interests.

The place for practice (4) is the most central in our house, but why do we situate the practice there ? We see the practice as our main tool to achieve goals and see the results of our work and the effectiveness of adult education. The main playground for us is the practice not the theoretical field, and that’s why we chose an open place for the dialog between practice and theory.

Afterall it is the practice itself where the actual work is been done. That is also the reason why we have the foundations (5) under the house for support of the house and the practice of adult education.

What about research then ? In the beginning we didn’t mention the research at all. That is peculiar since now we see it as an important component especially in the discussion about the relationship between theory and practice. The atrium of practice wouldn’t exist without the research where new theoretical findings are made about the practice itself. We see the practice as a fountain in themiddle of the atrium. We use this metaphore because the practice in adult education is changing and vivid as the water in the fountain, the water circles in the fountain like the practice and the theory. To keep the water going circle in the fountain we need the impact of the research to change the dirty and old water of the fountain.

Personal experiences

What about our personal experiences about the circle and dialog between theory and practice ? Do we interpret the practice from the theory ? What kind of methodological principles we have been following in our experiences ? From the surface the practice seems to have the most central place in our experiences from the field of adult education. But on the other hand when we go deeper into the relation between practice and theory we see that it is not that clear that the practice would exist apart from the theory. This is the central dilemma that practice doesn’t exist without theory and theory surely doesn’t exist apart from the practice. These questions are central especially in the qualitative research methodological discourses where the researcher is confronted with the question of how to interpret the practice : Interpretations about the practice are always made influenced on the theoretical backgound of the researcher.

Pirjo Töllinen (SF), Emma Causa (E), Miet Vanhilderson (B), Karen Wouters (B)

Introduction

In our model we don’t preview a roof, because we think that the professional is always developing new methods or theories through the learning circle of Kolb. Therefore our house has a spiralling stair which goes up. We think that in this house regression is also possible. If there is a practice or a theory developed that doesn’t work, than there collapses a floor. Our house has open windows, so that the environment always influences our way of thinking.

Foundations of adult education

Group 9 - Anna Palva, Mira Vanolmen, Melissa Verkley, Bart Ketelslegers

Introduction

In this last module we want to interview ourselves and get to know what are our own, basic foundations. Beginning this module (Foundations of adult education) we had to draw a house where the foundations of adult education could be seen. The house was made in the intercultural groups and the foundations where made together, although we come from three different countries and universities. We all have our own experiences and backgrounds which makes us see and think of adult education and its basic foundations in a different way. In this last paper we will have a more personal approach to the foundations of adult education. We want to see what kind of foundations our group members personally consider important and then try to see some kind of links or differences between them.

Mira Van Olmen from Belgium:

"When I was preparing this paper, I was wondering what my personal foundations for adult education could be. What is it I really believe in as a basis for adult education? Why do I believe in that? What has influenced me? I think a lot of experiences in the past had an influence on my opinions and beliefs about adult education: some courses during my carreer as a student, projects, my apprenticeship in a secundary school and in Vredeseilanden-Coopibo, my dissertation, my long 'carreer' in the Chiro (youthgroup), books I have read,...

I think two main elements seem to play quite an important role for me.

During my carreer as a student in social pedagogy, I learned about experiencial learning. These theories impressed me immediately. But also after reading a lot about it, even some critics on the concept, after writing a part of my dissertation on that theme, I still believe in the power of the method. I think the reason why can be found in my experiences in the Chiro (a youthgroup). But I can not explain it completely. There’s also the affective side for me, a kind of feeling that experiential learning is a real good method. But at least I can try to explain the more rational side.

As a member of a more coordinating instance in the Chiro, I got the chance to lead, toghether with other young people, some courses for starting youth leaders of the Chiro. The way these courses were organised, the contents of the courses, the relation with the participants, the way sessions were set up,… left a strong impression on me. I do not want to say that everything was perfect there, but there were some main ideas behind the design of the course, based on experiential learning that were very strong. I also saw it as a challenge afterwards to discuss the weaknesses and to search explicitly, and consciently of the goals we wanted to reach with those courses, for better things. Not only did I teach a lot to the new youth leaders (although 'teach' is not the good word for this), I also learned for myself to express my ideas, to find new examples and new creative games,...

Because I saw and went through some strong examples of experiencial learning in practice, the theory got a more concrete content and a strong relevance. But on the other hand, my knowledge of the theory made me also see those elements of experiential learning in practice, in the courses for youthleaders.

But what are those strong elements I recognise in the theory and practice of experiencial learning?

Kolb describes experiential learning as an ongoing process that starts with a concrete experience and moves to observation and reflection upon the experience. After that people make generalisations and abstract conceptualisations out of it which they try out in an active experiment. This experiment is again a concrete experience for people.

A first strength is the starting point of the learning cycle of Kolb. When you start learning with a concrete experience of the learners, they will be more involved in the learning proces because their learning process is based on something they did, they undertook, they experienced in an active way. I think that people can only really learn when they are involved in it. Involvement of the learners is a standard for learning and learning outcomes.

But on the other hand, learning can not be reduced to experiencing. People must do something with their experiences, otherwise they will never come to abstract, conceptual knowledge, and only have concrete situated knowledge that is adaptable only in particular cases. So I think the second part of Kolbs learning cycle, the observation and reflection and the generalisation and abstract conceptualisation also are important and strong parts of experiencial learning. In the course for youth leaders for example, we always took some time to reflect in small groups on what we had done, set up or tried out. This made it possible for the new youth leaders to transfer the new elements to other situations in their everyday life.

In the intercultural program I recognise some experiential learning moments. For example when we had the role of an airplane construction enterprise, when we took up the role of the European parliament who had to decide what kind of support they wanted to pay for a third world country. More in general, we really learned by experiencing what intercultural learning means, for example when we worked together in small intercultural groups. We also had a lot of experiences of 'strangeness', when we met other habits, other ways of organising, other ways of thinking in the other students.

Maybe you might wonder why I suppose experiential learning as a foundation for adult education, instead of for the education for children. Children need more concrete experiences and concrete examples to learn because they are not able yet to think more abstractly. I think this is true. But on the other hand, there are people (Siebert, 1996) who say that childeren and youngsters can and want to learn more easily abstract matters than adults, who want to learn only when they see immediate relevance for it or see in it a solution for concrete problems or needs they have to deal with.

Maybe experiencial learning can have its benefits both for child's learning and for adult learning, on the condition that it is used in a good way by people who are aware of the strengths and the weak points of experiential learning."

Anna Palva from Finland:

"Before I could start studies in the university I had to read three books and pass an exam about them. One of those books has influenced very much my thinking (Rauste von Wright&Wright, Oppiminen ja koulutus, 1994). The book tells about learning and education. The main idea of this book is constructivism; people/individual construct the picture of reality by selecting and interpreting information, but also from the feedback they get from their action. How people select their information, depends on their previous experiences (what they already have learned). The picture of reality is constructed during the life and it will be reconstructed all the time by learning new things. The most important part by learning new things is to reflect on own thinking (self-reflection). The role of education is not anymore to teach people, it is more to try to learn people to learn themselves (facilitate them to reflect own thinking).

My picture of adult education is constructed mainly from the studies in the university and from work experiences. This program in Montpellier has also increased/broaden my picture about adult education. I have learned many new things (for example community education and multicultural learning are not included in our program in Finland), but all those new things have some kind of link to this book, what I learned before I started my studies in the university (the book is for me some kind of "starting point"/framework to select and organise new information). It is almost the same what kind of context we have had in this program. The message of all modules have been almost the same and have had also a link to my framework/book; people should become more reflective and critical in everyday life, learners have to be self active and experience that the action (s)he does is meaningful and are in the same direction with his/her values and goals, without reflecting, people/individuals are not motivated to learn new things…"

Melissa Verkley from the Netherlands:

"It is difficult to say already what my foundations of adult education are. They are still under construction. During my studies of andragogy, I am hearing theories from different fields, e,g labour and organisation, social work. But also subjects as psychology, philosophy and sociology. And of course my own norms and values are also a part of the foundation. In today’s society you see so many different people, so many different cultures. And you also see a tendency towards more individualism. It’s hard to find your way, especially when the dominant culture is not your own. I think adult education can contribute to help people to find their way in society, to empower people. Make them become aware of their identity, what they want, what they need and what they stand for. And of course the communication is important. There should be some kind of ‘dialogue’. Not only between the learner and the ‘teacher’, but also between learners.

On the first day of this program, when we met the students of the other countries, we had some kind of feeling of ‘strangeness’. I think adult education can help to deal with strangeness. Try to understand each other and maybe also learn from each other. "Intercultural learning is a principle of adult education. If adult learners are confronted with new meanings, that don’t fit in their acquired cognitive system, there is to be made a decision between assimilation and accommodation (Piaget). Intercultural learning stresses the need for acquiring a new context of meaning by first accepting the difference" (Schäffter).

But there is not only strangeness considering different cultures, society is also changing. There comes more and more importance on the individual and also many new technologies are coming up. A task of adult education could be to deal with that kind of strangeness."

To me, a principle rather than a real foundation for adult education (understood in the broad sense of an agogical practice) seems to be the constant link between what ‘is’ and what ‘ought to be’. Yet, what ought to be can in post-modern times no longer be determined by a ‘simple’ grand narrative. To think of a ‘reflexive modernity’ makes it clear why these narratives have become impossible. This term might have both a negative and a positive connotation. Negative is the fact that society has really become a problem to itself (Risk Society), but rather positive is the demand to be reflexive and to take a critical stance both to what ‘is’ and to what ‘ought to be’. If education has a role in and for society, it cannot remain neutral with regard to social practices and policies (educational policies included) but it must make a social-political choice, state that choice explicitly, and account for it, justify it. However, in many cases this does not really happen, and (adult) education is seen as a mean, a tool, disconnected from every not-merely-methodological-philosophy. Under the appearance of being neutral, in fact it just keeps in line with the mainstream-thought and the dominant socio-political reality. I.e. the discourse on and the practice of life long learning nowadays sometimes does not at all seem to question the dominant neo-liberal market ideology. Mere vocational training is fashioned (no problem on itself of course) and general education seems to be obsolete ( that is where it becomes a problem…). If modernity is ‘reflexive’ (or just should it be?), a huge role is assigned to (adult) education. Both sociology (what ‘is’) and philosophy (what ‘ought to be’) influence its conceptions. Of course they can’t give immediate, clear-cut answers, but the quality of the educational answer will highly depend upon the critical awareness it brings about with people; a critical stance both towards themselves as consumers (Mezirow’s term of ‘perspective transformation’ is certainly relevant here) and towards society (inspiration can be found in the ideas of Klaus Mollenhauer and Paolo Freire). A good example of what this implies I found in my internship while talking to an Ecuadorian peasant. In fact he made a very simple but enormously relevant statement when he said "we [in the South] are poor because you [in the North] are rich". That is to say that the problems of the South or in fact these of the North, caused by the North. However, there still is a very strong conviction in people’s mind that not only development is to be done by working in the South, but also that we [the North] should ‘help’ the South to develop. Exactly here, I see a very important task for adult education, maybe in alliance with the new social movements, to work on a real "concientisaçao" of our own, western society.

The North-South problem is, of course, just one of the main challenges of our society. There are many others like the environment, the demographic evolutions, the multiculturalism,…

One thing however may be clear: the challenges are enormous, and adult education can only contribute in finding solutions when it doesn’t avoid being critical. That is why a critical point of view is for me the main principle for adult education.

It was nice to see from each other why we are studying adult education and what each of us finds important. It was also interesting because we discovered that there are some relations between our foundations and the pieces we have written for the different modules.

At first we thought we had some really different foundations. We saw four subjects: social constructivism, intercultural learning, and experiential learning and critical thinking. But then we saw that they are not excluding each other, they seem to be more complementary, we think. We also have many things in common in our foundations. If we go back to the construction of a house, you could say that we all have some foundations in psychology, philosophy and sociology. When we look at the house itself, you could say that we all have our own room and we furnish it and colour it all in our own way. Maybe one buys a table and some chairs and another one buys a couch and a TV and paints the room pink. You can say it’s a matter of taste, but also of background and norms and values.