Читать книгу Learning in Adulthood - Sharan B. Merriam - Страница 45
National Studies of Formal Participation
ОглавлениеBeginning in 1969, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the U.S. Department of Education undertook a set of triennial surveys of participation of adults in education. The results of the first six surveys (1969, 1972, 1975, 1978, 1981, and 1984) and three studies in 1991, 1995, and 1999 have been loosely compared with each other to reveal participation trends. In these surveys, adult education was equated with organized instruction: “Adult education is defined as any course or educational activity taken part-time and reported as adult education by respondents” (U.S. Department of Education, 1986). These courses or activities are considered “formal” because they are sponsored by educational institutions or employers. Changes in methodology and sample design over the years warrant caution in making comparisons (Collins, Brick, & Kim, 1997). Nevertheless, certain trends emerged including an increase in the number of adults participating part time in organized instruction from a low of 10% in the 1969 survey to 14% in 1984, 38% in 1991, 40% in 1995, and 46% in 1999 (Kim & Creighton, 2000). In a comparison of the 1991 and 1999 NCES studies, Creighton and Hudson (2002) noted an overall increase in participation “among virtually every group of adults” surveyed (p. ix).
Two other NCES surveys of adult education participation were conducted in 2001 and 2005. As in previous studies, NCES employed a random, national digit dial (RDD) telephone survey of civilian, noninstitutionalized persons ages 16 and older not enrolled in secondary school at the time of the interview. In this survey, “formal” coursework or training was defined as those activities having an instructor. As can be seen in Table 4.1, the overall rate of participation in formal educational activities was 44%. As in previous participation studies, younger adults with higher levels of education and household income and in professional and managerial occupations had higher rates of participation. Women had slightly higher rates of participation than men (47% versus 41%). Not surprisingly, “work-related courses” were the most cited reason for participation in formal adult education activities, with “personal-interest courses” as the second most cited type of activity. An interesting finding in this 2005 survey was that one-third of the participants in formal adult education activities reported using some type of distance education (O'Donnell, 2006). One would expect with the growth of Internet-related educational opportunities since this survey that this would be even higher today.
Table 4.1 Percentage of Adults Who Participated in Adult Education, by Type of Educational Activity and Selected Adult Characteristics: 2004–2005
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Adult Education Survey of the 2005 National Household Education Surveys Program.
Formal adult education activities | |||||||||
Characteristic | Number of adults (thousands) | Any formal adult education | ESL classes | Basic skills/GED classes | Part-time college degree program | Part-time vocational degree/diploma program | Apprenticeship | Work-related courses | Personal interest courses |
Total | 211,607 | 44 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 27 | 21 |
Age | |||||||||
16 to 24 years | 25,104 | 53 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 21 | 27 |
25 to 34 years | 38,784 | 52 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 32 | 22 |
35 to 44 years | 42,890 | 49 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 34 | 22 |
45 to 54 years | 41,840 | 48 | a | a | 3 | 1 | 1 | 37 | 20 |
55 to 64 years | 29,068 | 40 | a | a | 1 | 1 | a | 27 | 21 |
65 years or older | 33,922 | 23 | a | a | a | a | a | 5 | 19 |
Sex | |||||||||
Male | 101, 596 | 41 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 24 | 18 |
Female | 110,011 | 47 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 29 | 24 |
Race/ethnicity | |||||||||
White, non-Hispanic | 146,614 | 46 | a | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 29 | 22 |
Black, non-Hispanic | 23,467 | 46 | a | 2 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 27 | 24 |
Hispanic | 26,101 | 38 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 17 | 15 |
Asian or Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic | 7,080 | 44 | 2 | 1b | 6 | 1b | 1b | 24 | 23 |
Other race, non-Hispanic | 8,346 | 39 | a | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 23 | 20 |
Highest education level completed | |||||||||
Less than a high school diploma/equivalent | 31,018 | 22 | 2 | 7 | a | 1 | 1 | 4 | 11 |
High school diploma/equivalent | 64,334 | 33 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 17 | 16 |
Some college/vocational associate's degree | 58,545 | 51 | 1 | a | 6 | 2 | 1 | 31 | 25 |
Bachelor's degree | 37,244 | 60 | a | a | 6 | 1 | a | 44 | 29 |
Graduate or professional education or degree | 20,466 | 66 | 1b | a | 7 | 1 | 1b | 51 | 30 |
Household income | |||||||||
$20,000 or less | 34,670 | 28 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 11 | 16 |
$20,001 to $35,000 | 35,839 | 36 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 17 |
$35,001 to $50,000 | 33,376 | 42 | 2b | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 22 |
$50,001 to $75,000 | 47,114 | 48 | a | a | 5 | 1 | 1 | 33 | 21 |
$75,001 or more | 60,607 | 58 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 39 | 27 |
Employment status | |||||||||
Employed full time | 106,389 | 53 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 40 | 20 |
Employed part time | 27,090 | 53 | 1 | 2b | 7 | 1 | 1 | 32 | 29 |
Unemployed and looking for work | 9,941 | 38 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 2b | 14 | 23 |
Not in the labor force | 68,187 | 28 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 20 |
Occupation | |||||||||
Professional/managerial | 48,647 | 70 | a | a | 8 | 1 | 1 | 56 | 29 |
Sales/service/clerical | 66,218 | 48 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 31 | 22 |
Trade and labor | 37,585 | 34 | 2 | 2b | 2 | 2 | 3 | 19 | 13 |
a Estimate rounds to 0 or 0 cases in sample.
b Interpret data with caution; coefficient of variation is 50% or more.
1 Includes those enrolled only part time in college or university degree or certificate programs or those enrolled through a combination of part-time and full-time enrollments in the 12 months prior to the interview.
2 Includes those enrolled only part time in vocational or technical diploma, degree, certificate programs, or those enrolled through a combination of part-time and full-time enrollments in the 12 months prior to the interview.
What these national surveys show is that 50 years after Johnstone and Rivera's original study, the profile of the typical adult learner remains stable. Compared to those who do not participate, participants in adult education are better educated, younger, and employed full-time and have higher incomes. But as Creighton and Hudson (2002) point out,
[A] closer look at participation in specific activities reveals some troubling signs of groups being left behind—especially Hispanics, those with lower levels of education, those with lower status jobs, and those who are employed part-time. … Thus, although the widespread increase in participation in adult education has been accompanied by an elimination of some inequities, in many cases the highly educated and high status groups that have been the traditional beneficiaries of adult education remain the main beneficiaries today. (p. ix)
Even more recent national surveys of adult participation in learning conducted in Great Britain reveal much the same patterns. For over 20 years an annual survey has been conducted first by the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE), which then merged with the Learning and Work Institute (L&W). The annual study surveys a national representative sample of approximately 5,000 adults and asks who participates, their motivations, barriers, and benefits experienced. Results from the 2017 survey reveal approximately 40% participate in learning activities; women had a higher participation rate than men as did those of higher socioeconomic status. The main reason for learning is work or career related; adults over 65 or retired reported being motivated to learn for leisure or personal interest. Not surprisingly, over half (55%) reported learning in a work setting. The report includes a number of recommendations for policy and practice such as targeting “adults in lower social grades, adults who are furthest from the labour market, older adults, and those who left full-time education at their earliest opportunity” (Egglestone, Stevens, Jones, & Aldridge, 2018, p. 9).