شناسایی ابعاد یادگیری پوی پا در دانشگاه

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان شناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان شناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

3 استاد گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان شناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

4 استاد گروه برنامه ریزی آموزش عالی، مؤسسه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی آموزش عالی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

هدف: هدف از اجرای این پژوهش شناسایی ابعاد یادگیری پوی­پا در دانشگاه بود.
روش: روش پژوهش، آمیخته از نوع اکتشافی است. در بخش کیفی پژوهش از رویکرد تحلیلی بافت­نگاری و در بخش کمی از روش توصیفی- همبستگی  استفاده شده است. در بخش کیفی پژوهش، مشارکت کنندگان پژوهش به روش هدفمند انتخاب و با 16 نفر از متخصصان حوزه آموزش عالی مصاحبه انجام شد. مشارکت کنندگان پژوهش در بخش کمی، شامل 120 نفر برای مرحله اول و 378 نفر از اساتید دانشگاه­های دولتی برای مرحله دوم بودند که به روش طبقه­ای و تصادفی ساده انتخاب شدند. ابزار گرداوری داده­ها در بخش کیفی مصاحبه­های نیمه ساختمند بود. قابلیت اعتماد مصاحبه­ها از طریق باورپذیری، انتقال پذیری، اعتماد پذیری و تأییدپذیری بدست آمد. در بخش کمی ابزار گرداوری اطلاعات پرسشنامه محقق ساخته­ای بود که روایی صوری، محتوایی و سازه آن سنجیده شد و ضریب آلفای کرونباخ جهت سنجش پایایی برای پرسشنامه 93/0 بدست آمد. در این پژوهش تجزیه و تحلیل داده­ها به کمک دو نرم­افزار SPSS و LISREL صورت پذیرفت.
یافتهها: نتایج پژوهش نشان می­دهد مؤلفه­های یادگیری پوی­پا در دانشگاه در چهار محور، یادگیری برای یادگرفتن، یادگیرى برای انجام دادن، یادگیرى برای با هم زیستن و یادگیرى برای زیستن دسته بندی می­شوند. یادگیری پوی­پا به عنوان یکی از سیاست‌های آموزشی در اکثر کشورها مورد توجه سیاست گذاران و برنامه‌ریزان آموزشی قرار دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying Lifelong Learning pillars in University

نویسندگان [English]

  • Farhad Ahmadiasl 1
  • Sakineh Shahi 2
  • Yadullah mehralizadeh 3
  • Maghsoud Farasatkhah 4
1 Shahid Chamran University
2 Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz
3 Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz
4 Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education
چکیده [English]

Learning can result from formal, non-formal or informal interactions (Chris Duke & Hinzen, 2010). Because learning occurs every day and during every period of life, finding appropriate nomenclature for how, where, and why people learn has spawned many new phrases in the literature including life-long, life-wide, and life-deep learning (Bell, 2012). There are many signs of change in educational system including; new climate of classrooms, textbooks and resources, physical space, co-location of educators and learners, bounded curriculum (Siemens & Matheos, 2010), online learning, new learning and teaching style, new funding mechanism, new organizing and controlling and changing interaction between families and educational systems. These signs are only some of the new trends in educational systems. In information era, based on changes in work places, educational systems have some emerging features including; Continuous progress, out coms base learning, individualized testing, performance - based assessment,  personal learning plans, cooperative learning, teachers as coach or facilitator of learning, thinking, problem solving skills and meaning- making communication skills.
Education can take place in formal, non-formal and informal venues (Chris Duke & Hinzen, 2010). Formal education is a process of transforming knowledge, skills, and abilities and is typically delivered by trained teachers within schools, colleges, universities or official institutions with defined stages. This kind of education need systematic planning, organizing insight of formal educational systems, spanning lower primary school and the upper reaches of the university (La Belle, 1982). Non-formal education are placed outside the formal systems and plays supportive roles in beside of formal education, in fact person attending these forms of education makes it for own reasons (Tudor, 2013), for example community-based sports programs, professional conferences and continuing professional development.  Informal education deals by every time and everywhere experience that are not organized or systematic (Etling, 1993). There is no segmentation for informal education but Formal education is commonly segregated formally into such stages as kindergarten, primary school, secondary school and higher education. Change in the environment is inevitable, constant and dynamic. Change is the result of new and evolving technologies, efforts toward globalization, demographic shifts, moves toward environmental sustainability, urbanization, social and cultural changes, shifts in the labor markets and economic and political challenges (Deegan & Martin, 2018).  In light of inevitable change and in order to retain vibrancy, organizations must not only acknowledge the need for change but also be willing and able to exchange outdated inefficient structures for more robust adaptable alternatives. In information era, based on changes in work places, educational systems have some emerging features including; Continuous progress, out coms base learning, individualized testing, performance - based assessment,  personal learning plans, cooperative learning, teachers as coach or facilitator of learning, thinking, problem solving skills and meaning- making communication skills.
Method: This research was a mixed study with exploratory method. A qualitative design with recontextualization approach was selected to carry out the research. Semi structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 educational experts. Data were analyzed using inductive coding of phrases and words from participant interviews and documents analysis. The reliability of the interviews was obtained through credibility, transferability. The descriptive-correlational method applied in the quantitative part. The research participants included 120 for the first stage and 378 public university professors for the second stage who were selected by stratified and simple random sampling. The study used the researcher-made survey questionnaire as a principal tool for gathering data. Face validity, content validity and construct validity (exploratory factors analysis) were used for studying validity. The reliability of it was calculated via Cronbach's alpha. The quantitative data have been analyzed by descriptive and inferential tests (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis).
Results: The quantitative and qualitative results of this study classified the components of lifelong learning into four pillars: learning to learn, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be. Lifelong learning is becoming a necessity in many countries educational policies and these countries have ongoing strategies for extolling lifelong learning pillars in their universities. These pillars combined with personal responsibility are required for attainment of LLL goals (Nesbit, Dunlop, & Gibson, 2013).  The pillars are key features of lifelong learning that offer systemic learning, learner centralization, emphases on motivation, and a focus on multiple objectives in the learning process (OECD, 2001). In our model, these four pillars illustrate the open loop process for lifelong learning. Based on our model, the lifelong learner start her/his learning in informal shape then they enter formal educational systems (kindergarten, primary school, secondary school and higher education), After passing successfully all stages,  people come back to the complex milieu and play role in the labor market or society. This is not the end of the story, facing with new learning needs in workplaces, emerging new technology and demands in labor markets push people to go to the formal educational system to be updated with new conditions. Maybe this open loop cycle be continued until the human die.  Lifelong learning is a process of learning that happen in all human life and includes all formal, non-formal and informal learning. Considering needs for specific skills and competencies in future Lifelong learning includes all forms of learning that develop individuals’ knowledge, skills and critical thinking abilities through interactions with the environment. Increasingly LL and education are becoming important to career success in higher education (Moxley, Najor-Durack, & Dumbrigue, 2001). There are six characteristic elements that are necessary to support a lifelong learning in higher education: 1) overarching regulatory, financial, and cultural/social frameworks 2) strategic partnerships and linkages 3) research 4) teaching and learning processes 5) administrative policies and mechanisms 6) student support systems and services (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2001). Responding to subsequently changes in Higher education missions, changes in the educational environment and shifting needs cause that higher education will be different from the way it is today and there will be mass adoption of learning styles and methods in universities and colleges. Universities and colleges will have to undertake an important role in responding to the demand for LLL (Jongbloed, 2002), So lifelong learning included a combination of formal and informal learning in higher education.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Key words: Learning
  • Lifelong Learning
  • University
Ackoff, R. L. (1999). Re-creating the Corporation: A Design of Organizations for the 21st Century. Oxford University Press, USA.
Ahmadiasl, F., Shahi, S., Mehralizadeh, Y., & Farasatkhah, M. (2019). Identifying desirable Structure components in Higher Education: paving the way for Lifelong Learning, Education and Learning studies, 76(1), 218-238. [In Persian].
Ahmed, M. (2014). Lifelong Learning in a Learning Society: Are Community Learning Centres the Vehicle? In Education, learning, training (pp. 102-125). Leiden, Boston: Brill.
Ahonsi, S. (2012). The Trico logical Learning Approaches: Pedagogy. London, UK: Andragogy and Heutagogy.
Aspin, D. N. (Ed.). (2007). Philosophical perspectives on lifelong learning (Vol. 11). Springer Science & Business Media.
Bagheri, A., Yamani, M., Farasatkhah, M., & khorasani, A. (2018). Student Social Networks in the Learning-Innovation Process: A Systematic Review of Scientific Research Papers (2006-2008). Research on the Foundations of Education, 1 (15), 92-115. [In Persian].
Bennet, M., & Moriarty, B. (2016). Lifelong learning theory and pre-service teachers’ development of knowledge and dispositions to work with Australian Aboriginal students. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning11(1), 1-9.
Bhatia, P. G. (2015). Lifelong learning-learning to learn. The Business & Management Review5(4), 265.
Billett, S. (2010). The perils of confusing lifelong learning with lifelong education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 29(4), 401-413.
Bozat, P., Bozat, N., & Hursen, C. (2014). The evaluation of competence perceptions of primary school teachers for the lifelong learning approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 140, 476-482.
Chiţiba, C. A. (2012). Lifelong learning challenges and opportunities for traditional universities. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 46, 1943-1947.
Chugh, R. (2016, September). Lifelong Learners and Learning Organisations: Perspective of Australian University Academics. In European Conference on Knowledge Management (p. 181). Academic Conferences International Limited.
Davis, M. (2003). Barriers to reflective practice: The changing nature of higher education. Active learning in higher education4(3), 243-255.
Deegan, J., & Martin, N. (2018). Demand Driven Education, merging work & learning to develop the human skills that matter. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com.
Dehmel, A. (2006). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality? Some critical reflections on the European Union’s lifelong learning policies. Comparative Education, 42(1), 49-62.
Delors, J. (1998). Learning: The treasure within. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Duţă, N., & Rafailă, E. (2014). Importance of the Lifelong Learning for Professional Development of University Teachers–Needs and Practical Implications. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences127, 801-806.
Eberle, J. (2009). Heutagogy: What your mother didn’t tell you about pedagogy and the conceptual age. In Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Learning. 181-188.
European Commission (EC). (2001). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality. Brussels: European Union.‏
Fischer, G. (2000). Lifelong learning—more than training. Journal of Interactive Learning Research11(3), 265-294.
Hammond, C. (2004). Impacts of lifelong learning upon emotional resilience, psychological and mental health: fieldwork evidence. Oxford Review of Education, 30(4), 551-568.
Harrison, J., & Turok, I. (2017). Universities, knowledge and regional development. REGIONAL STUDIES, VOL. 51, NO. 7, 977–981.
Jarvis, P. (2016). Towards a comprehensive theory of human learning. Abingdon, Oxford: Routledge.
Jennings, G. R. (2000). Educating students to be lifelong learners. Review of Business21(3/4), 58.
Kamyabi, M., Froughi, A., & Yarmohamadian, M. (2016). Desirable Characteristics of Higher Education Policies with Emphasis on the Lifelong Learning Approach, Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 17, 38-49. [In Persian].
Kryk, B. (2016). Accomplishment of the European Union lifelong learning objectives in Poland. Oeconomia Copernicana7(3), 389-404.
Laal, M., & Laal, A. (2012). Lifelong learning; elements. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences47, 1562-1566.
Leeuwen, M. J., & Praag, B. M. (2002). The costs and benefits of lifelong learning: The case of the Netherlands. Human Resource Development Quarterly13(2), 151-168.
Litman, J. (2005). Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information. Cognition & emotion19(6), 793-814.
Longworth, N. (2003). Lifelong Learning in Action: Transforming 21st Century Education. London: Kogan Page.
Love, D. (2011). Lifelong learning: Characteristics, skills, and activities for a business college curriculum. Journal of Education for Business86(3), 155-162.
Luţ, D. M. (2017). The role of lifelong education and training in human capital development. Quaestus, Timisoara, (11), 9-18.
Marks, A. (2002). A 'grown up' university? Towards a manifesto for lifelong learning. Journal of Education Policy, 17(1), 1-11.
Miclea, M. (2004). “Learning to do” as a pillar of education and its links to entrepreneurial studies in higher education: European contexts and approaches. Higher Education in Europe, 29(2), 221-231.
Mohammadi mehr, M., Maleki, H., Abbaspour, A., & khoshdel, A. (2016). The Role of Higher Education in Lifelong Learning. Education Strategies in Medical Sciences, 4(2), 91-94. [In Persian].
Mwaikokesya, M. J. (2014). Undergraduate students' development of lifelong learning attributes in Tanzania (Doctoral dissertation, University of Glasgow). Retrieved from http://theses.gla.ac.uk/5018/.
Nesbit, T., Dunlop, C., & Gibson, L. (2007). Lifelong learning in institutions of higher education. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education33(1), 35.‏
Popescu, A. I. (2012). Essentials of University Strategy Development in the Field of Lifelong Learning. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies4(1), 32.
Prokou, E. (2008). A comparative approach to lifelong learning policies in Europe: the cases of the UK, Sweden and Greece. European Journal of Education43(1), 123-140.
Schuetze, H. G. (2006). International concepts and agendas of lifelong learning. Compare, 36(3), 289–306.
Slantcheva-Durst, S. (2014). Mechanisms of lifelong learning: the spread of innovative short-cycle higher education qualifications within national systems. Higher Education68(1), 87-102.
Su, Y. H. (2011). The constitution of agency in developing lifelong learning ability: The ‘being’mode. Higher Education62(4), 399-412.
Su, Y. H., Feng, L. Y., Yang, C. C., & Chen, T. L. (2012). How teachers support university students’ lifelong learning development for sustainable futures: The student's perspective. Futures44(2), 158-165.
Yorke, M. (2003). Going with the flow: First-cycle higher education in a lifelong learning context. Tertiary Education and Management9(2), 117-130.
Yousefi, M. (2017). Construction and validation of an Iranian scale measuring lifelong learning approach among medical students. Education Strategies in Medical Sciences, 10 (6), 423-430. [In Persian].
Zandi, B., & Masoumifard, M. (2018). Lifelong learning priorities in the form of modern-day literatures from the perspective of faculty and students. School and virtual learning, 6 (3), 65-80. [In Persian].