UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Development of a framework for analyzing nonformal education systems Mumba, Elizabeth Cisece 1985

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1985_A8 M85.pdf [ 4.66MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0055772.json
JSON-LD: 1.0055772+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0055772.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0055772+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0055772+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0055772+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0055772 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0055772.txt
Citation
1.0055772.ris

Full Text

DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS by ELIZABETH CISECE MUMBA Diploma in Teaching, Nkrumah Teacher's College, 1970 B.A. (Ed.), The University of Zambia, 1976 M.S. Indiana University, 1979 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Administrative, Adult And Higher Education) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA January 1985 © Elizabeth Cisece Mumba, 1985 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of ^^^^cvUr>^->IVl/aJU; frwJ V^AaSJ ^CAA^CJM^L&T^. The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date (VWcJU \«. Vjfa DE-6 (3/81) ABSTRACT This study analyzes the concept of nonformal education and provides a framework for analyzing nonformal education systems. Nonformal education is seen by policy makers and funding agencies as one of the alternatives to formal schooling that may assist developing countries in the modernization process. Nonformal education is defined as any systematic learning that is provided outside the formal system to meet the learning needs of adults as well as children.. In order to achieve the objectives of the study, two separate literature reviews are provided. Firstly, a review of the literature on the concept of nonformal education is provided. The review analyzes how the concept of nonformal education has developed. It discusses some issues regarding definitional problems; major characteristics of nonformal education and the major differences between nonformal education and formal education. Various theories that relate to nonformal education and development are discussed. Following the conceptual analysis, a review . of selected research that has been conducted on nonformal education in the last twelve years is provided. Only major cross-cultural studies are reviewed as they provide a basis for comparison. Conclusions of the studies are discussed. A framework is provided for analyzing and comparing nonformal education systems. The framework identifies three levels of analysis: national, regional, and local. The major elements of the framework are discussed and questions are provided indicating at which level they can be asked. Major conclusions of the study are discussed in terms of planning nonformal education systems. Some recommendations for further research are provided. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES viACKNOWLEDGEMENTS viiCHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Background of the ProblemObjectives of the Study 7 Questions to be Answered 8 Definitions of Terms to be Used . 8 Adult EducationFormal Education 9 Nonformal Education 10 Informal Education 1 Rural DevelopmentLearning 12 Extension Workers 1IntegrationDeveloping countries 4 Modernization 5 Delimitation of the Study 1Organization of the Remaining Chapters 16 CHAPTER TWO: NONFORMAL EDUCATION: A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS 17 Review of the Literature on the Concept of Nonformal EducationHistorical Background of the Concept 17 Relationship Between Formal, Nonformal and Informal Education 20 Purpose of Nonformal Education 7 Major Differences Between Formal and Nonformal EducationEducation in Rural and Urban Areas 31 Nonformal Education and Development 5 Structural functionalism 6 Conflict theories 37 Conclusion 43 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH ON NONFORMAL EDUCATION 4 5 Review of the Literature on Research on Nonformal Education 45 Descriptive Research Surveys 46 Findings of the Surveys 51 Inadequate ProgramsFacilities 5Costs 5 Evaluation 6 V Coordination 56 Other Research Studies on Nonformal Education 57 Implications of the Findings to Planning Nonformal Education Programs 59 Conclusion 63 CHAPTER FOUR: FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING AND COMPARING NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS 67 Need for a Framework 6Organization of the Framework 68 Elements of the FrameworkPolicies, Goals and Objectives 69 Long-term goals and policies 72 Short-term or immediate goals and policies ... 72 Institutional goals and policies 7Community goals 73 Social collective advocacy group goals 7Individual goalsPolitical and Administrative Structures 74 Strategies for Development 76 Nonformal Education Agencies 8 Participant/Program Characteristics 80 Voluntary Participation 82 Non-voluntary Participation 8Learning Outcomes 83 EvaluationApplying the Framework 5 Conclusion 87 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 88 SummaryResearch Studies in Nonformal Education 90 Areas of Future Research 92 Analyzing and Comparing National Systems 9Analyzing and Comparing Regional Systems 2 Analyzing and Comparing Local Systems 93 Conclusions 9REFERENCES 6 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1: A Comparison of the Characteristics of Nonformal and Formal Education 28 Table 2: Illustrative Rural Occupational Groups and Their Learning Needs 33 Table 3: Estimated Extension Workers and Farm Families in Selected Countries 53 Table 4: List of Questions for Analysis of Policies, Goals and Objectives 70 Table 5: List of Questions for Analysis of Political and Administrative Structures 75 Table 6: List of Questions for Analysis of Strategies for Development 77 Table 7: List of Questions for Analysis of Nonformal Education Agencies 9 Table 8: List of Questions for Analysis of Participant/Program Characteristics 81 Table 9: List of Questions for Analysis of Learning Outcomes 84 Table 10: List of Questions for Analysis of Evaluation . 85 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: LaBelle's Typology 24 Figure 2: Relationship Between Formal and Nonformal Education Ladders 6 Figure 3: Vertically and Horizontally, the Province-District Level Committee 34 Figure 4: Paulston's Framework of Nonformal Education Systems 38 vi i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank all the people who played a role in the completion of this thesis. The greatest debt of gratitude is owed to my two supervisors, Dr. Kjell Rubenson and Dr. Thomas Sork, whose patience, understanding and insight throughout the entire process contributed immeasurably to the final result. I am thankful to both of them equally for offering unfailing support and assistance during all stages, and were especially helpful with respect to their own particular areas of expertise. I would like to thank my two children for the understanding and forbearance which they so generously displayed during some of the more trying periods in the writing of this thesis. I am thankful to my mother and father for believing in and for always remembering me in their prayers. I would like to thank Dr. Sitwala Imenda and Bruce McGillivray for typing the thesis. Lastly, I would like to thank Dr. John MacKinley of Indiana University for all his support through his constant correspondence to me and for inspiring my initial interest in this area of study. This work is dedicated to him. 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Problem One of the purposes of adult education is to help bring social and economic change to individuals and their communities (Apps, 1973). It is clearly evident that most of the developing, countries of the world will require adult education programs that are responsive to the problems they are facing in order to improve the living conditions of the majority of their populations. One area of education that has been identified as one of the alternatives to some of the existing educational programs is the area of nonformal education (Coombs, 1968). Coombs (1968) argued that although there have been large investments in the educational systems of the developing countries, such high costs of educational expansion have not been matched or related to employment requirements of the urban and rural sectors. This has resulted in primary school graduates having no jobs and usually roaming about in towns. The schools do not foster skills that are useful either for employment or for self-employment for the rural children. The major modernization efforts of many developing countries have concentrated on a few urban centres at the neglect of the majority of the population that still live in the rural areas (Coombs, 1974). Although high investments were made in the educational systems, there has 2 been a widening gap between the modern urban areas and the traditional rural areas. Coombs (1968) recommended that part of the solution to such problems is the introduction of capital intensive educational technology, improved teacher training, increased foreign aid and the expansion of nonformal education (Bock & Papagiannis, 1983). Coombs (1974) advocated nonformal education as part of the rural development strategy so that the populations who are left out of the modernization process can be reached. Discussions on nonformal education as an alternative to formal education have tended to dwell on definitions. While some have more faith in the potential of nonformal education to enhance development efforts (Coombs, 1974; Coles, 1982; Grandstaff, 1972), others have cautioned that its contributions to development will be limited without changing the existing social order (Carnoy, 1976; LaBelle, 1975; Bock, 1976; Paulston, 1976). Nonformal education is seen by some as a powerful instrument for development because it can provide education for those who are left out of the school system; as it can make new skills and attitudes available to the rural poor; and because it can use scarce educational resources more efficiently. This would in turn lead to an improvement in the quality of life of the majority of the rural populations. Since nonformal education is diversified, it is hoped that it will alleviate poverty and reduce the growing gap between rural and urban areas brought about by i 3 earlier development efforts and educational policies. Much has been written about the potential of nonformal education as an alternative to formal schooling and as an important tool to the development process (Coombs, 1974; Grandstaff, 1972; Coles 1982) but there has been no general agreement as to the role of nonformal education in development and how nonformal education ought to function in developing countries (Paulston, 1976). While some advocate that nonformal education should be linked to other educational systems and other institutions of the state (Coombs, 1974, 1980; Coles, 1982) others argue that when nonformal education is institutionalized, it perpetuates the existing inequalities in the state. They argue that nonformal education should operate independently so that group Jand individual goals may be achieved (Bock, 1976; LaBelle, 1975; Paulston, 1976). It has become necessary to understand the concept of nonformal education and explore the best ways to organize and utilize nonformal education programs in developing countries. Nonformal education should be seen as part of the larger socio-political system, and part of the formal educational system (Coombs et al, 1974). This study is important in so far as it attempts to analyze the concept of nonformal education and provides a framework for analyzing nonformal education systems. The study makes the assumption that investment in education, including nonformal education, is a priority of the 4 planners and policy makers in developing countries. In the past, developing countries have invested substantial amounts of scarce resources for the expansion of education at all levels. While governments have continued investing in education, the public have continued to demand more education for their children and for themselves. To the individual, schooling is seen6 as a tool of the new modernizing process. To the government education is seen as a tool for providing citizens with modern values and beliefs and the skills that are required for national development (Bock and Papagiannis, 1983). But although governments have invested large amounts of resources in education, they can neither meet the rising high costs of formal schooling nor the demand for education resulting from increasing populations (Simmons, 1979). The output from the formal education system cannot be absorbed by the labour market. This has led to great disappointments, both to individuals and to governments. While many countries continue to invest in formal education it has become increasingly clear that universal primary education is far from being attained in many countries (Coles, 1982). According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 1975) projections, the number of young people who will be denied formal schooling world-wide is 240 million in 1985, compared to 128 million in 1975. These figures exclude adults who lack any kind of education. 5 Some of the major arguments against the existing formal educational system in developing countries is that its curriculum does not allow young school leavers to function within rural communities. The great expansion of the educational system, both at primary and secondary levels, has not been matched with expansion of employment opportunities. Such a trend has resulted in rural-urban migration of school leavers in search of employment. The costs of maintaining schools have been rising while the demand for more schooling has been rising (Simmons, 1979). Formal schooling has contributed to the existing inequalities between the rural and urban centres through both labour migration and the unequal distribution of income. Nonformal education has been put forward as an alternative that can help school leavers attain skills training for self employment so as to be able to function within rural communities (Coombs, 1974). Nonformal education may assist those who are left out of the formal system to acquire knowledge and skills for an improved life. But, before adopting nonformal education as a strategy for development it is important to understand the concept. Adult education programs tend to concentrate their efforts on remedial activities that are geared to improving qualifications of those who are employed and those seeking employment (Lowe, 1970). These programs tend to follow the curriculum of the formal educational system. In former 6 British colonies, they follow the pattern of British liberal adult education. Such programs tend to favour urban groups and neglect the majority of the population of rural areas. These programs are designed to build upon foundations acquired in earlier schooling and neglect other learning activities such as nonformal education activities. The developing countries are faced with the dilemma of where to concentrate their efforts: whether to invest in the education of the young or of adults (Lowe, 1970). The area of nonformal education is often ignored and at times not treated as part of the education system in many developing countries. Coombs (1974) recommended that nonformal education should be offered using an integrated approach. All educational activities that are offered by different departments at the local level should be integrated at the national level (Coombs, 1974, 1980). They should also be coordinated with other activities of non-governmental organizations and voluntary organizations. This means that those working at the local level need to work together since they are addressing the same clients and focusing on the activities that affect daily activities of their clientele. At times, what is termed nonformal education is not seen as an educational activity by the government departments. Nonformal education is offered by different departments and other non-governmental organizations separately. These organizations do not co-ordinate their efforts and sometimes compete with each 7 other. Many planners have advocated an integrated approach in offering nonformal educational activities (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coles, 1982). However, in order to adopt such a strategy, the planning of nonformal education should be integrated at the national level (Coombs, 1974). The major problems of many developing countries may be listed as: 1. 111iteracy, 2. Lack of agricultural and technical skills, 3. Inadequate community organization and leadership, 4. Lack of simple technological equipment and know how for food production and food preservation, 5. Lack of rural industries to retain populations within these rural communities, 6. Lack of marketing facilities in rural areas, 7. Inadequate maternal and childcare facilities, 8. Constraining attitudes toward changing from a traditional way of life to a modern way of life. These problems differ in intensity from one country to another, although they are generalized in this study. Objectives of the Study This study attempts to provide a conceptual analysis of the concept of nonformal education through a review of selected literature. It provides a framework that may be useful in analyzing nonformal education systems. The analysis of the concept involves the following: 8 a. Historical background of the concept of nonformal education b. The relationship between nonformal education, formal education and informal education c. Nonformal education and development d. Nonformal education in urban and rural areas Questions to be Answered This study seeks to answer the following two questions: a. Under what conditions can nonformal education contribute to development, especially rural development in developing countries? b. What are the planning implications of the conclusions of the research studies reviewed? Definitions of Terms to be Used  Adult Education The meaning of what constitutes adult education varies from country to country. However, after the three world conferences, there seems to be a general agreement of what constitutes adult education (Lowe, 1975). Some view adult education as a psychological and social process (Verner, 1964) while others concentrate on the outcomes of adult education (Freire, 1973; Lindeman, 1926; Coady, 1939). Yet others (Faure, 1972) views adult education as a continuum falling between formal and informal education. The Faure Report (1972) that was adopted by UNESCO views education as 9 a life-long process. In order to include early school leavers in developing countries, UNESCO (1975) defines adult education as: . . . out-of-school education, education provided for the benefit and adapted to the needs, of persons not in the regular school and university system and generally fifteen and older (p. 6). The above definition is adopted in this study as it includes the early school-leavers found in developing countries. Formal Education Education is a lifelong process whereby individuals learn from different educational processes (i.e., formal, nonformal, informal). Formal education lies at one end of the continuum while informal education lies at the other end. Education is seen as a life-long process whereby learning occurs everyday of our lives. Education embraces not only the conventional "academic" skills and subject matter, but it includes the acquisition of occupational, household skills (training), the development of aesthetic appreciation and analytical modes of thinking, formation of attitudes, values and information of many kinds. Formal education refers to the hierarchically structured, chronologically graded educational systems running from primary school through the university and including general academic studies, a variety of specialized programs and institutions for fulltime technical and professional training (Coombs, et al., 1973, p. 11). 10 Although this definition covers many aspects of formal education, the definition by UNESCO (1975) presents a wider perspective of formal education than the one given above. UNESCO (1975) defines formal education as: . . . Education in which students are enrolled or registered regardless of the mode of teaching used; i.e., it includes an educational series transmitted by radio or television if listeners are registered (p. 39). This definition is adopted in this study. Nonformal Education Since education is viewed as a life-long process whereby individuals learn from their everyday experiences, from birth to the time they die, not all learning activities will take place in the formal setting discussed above. Nonformal education has been defined by Coombs (1973) as: . . . any organized educational activity carried on outside the framework of the formal system to provide selected types of learning to particular subgroups in the population, adults as well as children (p. 11). Coomb's definition was adopted for this study. Nonformal education differs from informal education in that it is organized while informal education occurs without any organization. Nonformal education takes place because there is an intention to do so while in informal education there is no such intention. 11 Informal Education Informal education as discussed above, refers to learning activities that an individual acquires from his family, his peers and through his interaction with society as a whole. An individual does not generally plan to learn as a result of such activities, nor is there always form and organization in such learning activities. Coombs (1974) defines informal education as the life-long process of acquiring and accumulating knowledge, skills and attitudes from ones environment. Informal education is unorganized and acquired from ones own experiences (p. 8). The researcher adopted the above definition for this study. Rural Development In this study, the broader view of rural development will be adopted. In the 1960's rural development was viewed as an increase in agricultural output (Coombs, 1974). This resulted in the establishment of agricultural extension training programs that were aimed at offering agricultural education to farmers so that they could increase their agricultural yields, especially in cash crops. In the 1970's rural development was viewed in a broader sense. International funding agencies invested more in rural development in the hope of transforming the rural areas which lagged behind the modernization process that was rapidly transforming urban centres. The broad view of rural development integrates all facets of development activities that contribute to an improved way 12 of life for the rural populations. The broader view of rural development refers to . . . far-reaching transformation of the social and economic structures, institutions, relationships and processes in any rural area (Coombs, 1974, p. 13). Learning Learning differs from education in the sense that it refers to the psychological processes that affect change in behaviour, cognitive skills as well as the affective orientations of individuals. It also refers to the sociological processes that individuals pass through in shaping individual behaviour. Learning can be both intentional and incidental. Extension Workers The term refers to members of the various departments and organizations that work at the lowest levels in the administrative units of the rural areas. That is, workers from the departments of health or community development, education, agricultural extension workers, forestry and veterinary workers. Extension workers as a term embraces a wide range of workers at the lowest administrative level. Integration Coombs (1980) defines integration as: . . . Combining naturally related parts into a more cohesive and unified order to enhance their collective cost-effectiveness. 13 Coombs (1980) has developed six categories of integration: 1. Integrated national planning by the various sectors at the national level which may lead to integration of programs at the local level. 2. Integration of the components of a particular program: this involves mastering of skills in one activity which may need to be supplemented by another activity; otherwise the training in that skill may go to waste. 3. Integration between separate programs: many extension programs integrated into one program so that extension workers do not offer piecemeal education to the same clients. 4. Horizontal integration: programs to be tied together to offer individual families services in other basic needs that may be lacking to those families at the same time. This is similar to the above integration, but horizontal integration as defined by Coombs (1980) focuses on the basic needs of the individual that need to be satisfied at the same time one need is being taken care of. 5. Vertical integration: this refers to supervision of extension workers from above, offering support both financially and morally to keep them motivated to work with the clients in the field. 6. Inter-organizational integration: refers to the collaboration of the separate organizations accustomed 14 to working independently, i.e., the non-governmental organizations. Integrated rural programs focus on the socio-economic condition, political structure, institutions, attitudes and patterns of human relationships in rural communities. It involves integrated national planning for rural development; integration of the essential components of each program; integration of related activities conventionally dealt with in separate programs; horizontal and vertical integration. Integrated nonformal education programs in rural areas need to relate to people's daily activities, their cultural orientations and their aspirations and not in a vacuum so that they are easily transferable to their daily activities. Developing countries This term will be used to refer to what is commonly known as third world countries but examples will be drawn mainly from Africa, the term 'developing countries' seems to be better to the author since societies are always changing even in the least developed areas. Developing countries are undergoing many social and economic changes. One may ask the question, "Developing toward what?" Many societies are changing from the traditional societies toward modernity. Some societies are moving faster than others, through social mobility from rural to urban; through the mass media and, in some cases, through literacy 15 (Lerner,1958). Modernizat ion 'Modernization' refers to a process of transformation from traditional societies where institutional roles are diffuse to societies where roles are differentiated. Other changes that may occur may relate to the following areas (Smelser, 1968, p28): 1. the change from simple and traditionalized techniques toward application of scientific knowledge. 2. in agriculture, the evolution from subsistence farming toward commercial production of agricultural goods. 3. in industry, the transition from the use of human and animal power toward industrialization. 4. movement from the farm and village toward urban centres. Delimitation of the Study The study will be limited to the conceptual analysis of nonformal education as it is perceived to be an alternative in assisting to bring about social and economic change to developing countries. It has to be planned as part of the whole modernization process in these countries. It will also be limited to the development of a framework for analyzing nonformal education systems. Although generalizations are made, different countries have unique problems and the intensity of the problems differs from one country to another. How successfully nonformal education can be adopted by the individual countries is dependent on 16 their national policies and their national developmental goals. Organization of the Remaining Chapters The second chapter of the study reviews the literature on nonformal education, its major characteristics, and its development. It will analyze the major theoretical positions found in the literature. Chapter Three contains a systematic analysis of selected studies that have been conducted on nonformal education and integrated rural development. It analyzes the conclusions and implications that have been drawn from these studies. Chapter Four highlights the major elements of a framework that has been developed for analyzing nonformal education systems. Chapter Five presents the major conclusions from the literature reviewed and provides recommendations. 17 CHAPTER TWO NONFORMAL EDUCATION: A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS Review of the Literature on the Concept of  Nonformal Education The selection of literature included in this review was drawn from journals and other publications through an ERIC search and from some recent publications in the Comparative Education Review (1976) and Year Book of  Education (1975). Literature that has been published in the last 12 years was selected. Only literature containing discussion of the concept of nonformal education was included. The review of literature on the concept of nonformal education is organized under the following headings: a. Historical background of the concept; b. The relationship between formal, nonformal and informal education; c. Nonformal education in rural and urban centres; and d. Nonformal education and development. Historical Background of the Concept The concept of nonformal education has developed out of the planners' and educators' search for alternatives in solving some of the educational problems developing countries are facing. Coombs (1968) saw nonformal education as a major alternative to formal schooling. In his analysis, he saw the educational crisis in developing countries as a consequence of the unsatisfied and ever 18 increasing social demand for education. Although there has been enormous educational expansion in all the developing countries, the educational systems are faced with numerous problems resulting from rising educational costs, inefficient management and teaching methods, large increases in student enrollment, unsuitability of the present output and scarcity of resources available for educational expansion. Coombs (1968) saw one dimension of the solution to be in the rapid development of nonformal educational systems. Policy makers and. aid agencies, the World Bank in particular, became interested in nonformal education as it related to its concern for agricultural and rural development. Nearly all the literature reviewed emphasizes the development of the concept as an alternative to investing more in the formal educational system (Brembeck, 1973; Harbison, 1973; Grandstaff, 1972). The modernization process in developing countries continues to place an emphasis on the formal educational system at the expense of the majority of the rural populations. The rural populations cannot be left out of the development process (Coombs, 1974; Coles, 1982). Both Coombs and Coles argue that nonformal education seems to be able to provide the channel through which these populations are to be reached. Some of the early research on the concept of nonformal education has been conducted at the Michigan State 19 University under the leadership of Brembeck. Brembeck (1973) analyzed the need for nonformal education as an alternative to formal schooling as it can provide life-long learning opportunities for the majority of youth who drop out of the formal system. It can as well assist in meeting the newer conceptions of development which are related to an improvement in public health, population control, agricultural production and better family life. Brembeck (1973) views schooling as separate from nonformal education, each has different social functions. Since nonformal education is flexible, he argues, it can easily adapt to innovation and to the immediate needs of the learners. He also sees nonformal education contributing to equality since education provides access to elite positions and power. Nonformal education as a concept is based on the idea of life-long learning, which views education as a life-long process following UNESCO recommendations (Faure, 1972). Since 1968, many organizations have accepted the concept of nonformal education as part of the concept of life-long learning. The organizations include UNESCO, The Commonwealth International Council for Adult Education, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the regional Adult Education Associations of Asia and Africa. There has been an increase in planning nonformal education within the context of national plans for educational development in many countries (Lowe, 1982). In 20 some countries ministries have been established to plan and coordinate nonformal education activities (Coles, 1982). There has been development in international cooperation in the promotion of nonformal education activities through various international, governmental, and non-governmental organizations (Lowe, 1982). Relationship Between Formal, Nonformal  and Informal Education Definitions of nonformal education have followed Coombs' definition. Coombs (1974; 1976) argued that there is a close relationship between formal, nonformal and informal systems of education. In order to determine the relationships, there ought to be a new view of education that does not equate education with formal schooling. Coombs (1974) argues that a broader view of education should equate education with learning regardless of where or how it occurs. Education is viewed as a life-long process whereby individuals are learning from birth until death. Using this view of education, nonformal education includes those activities in agricultural extension, farmer training programs, adult literacy programs, occupational skills training provided outside the formal system, youth clubs, community development programs in health, nutrition, family planning, cooperatives and income-generating activities. Coombs (1974) argued that both formal and nonformal education are organized to complement and improve 21 upon informal learning - such as literacy and numeracy skills that individuals cannot easily acquire through their environment. But formal and nonformal education systems of education differ in their sponsorship, institutional arrangements, in their educational objectives and in the target groups they try to serve. Many nonformal educational programs may use formal methods in their organization and delivery. Although Coombs (1974) argued that there are no marked differences between formal and nonformal education systems, he was not clear on the close relationship that exists between the two systems since formal education is largely funded by the state while nonformal education programs may be funded by private organizations or the state. It may be difficult for the privately funded nonformal education programs to have a close relationship with the formal educational system. While Coombs (1974) argues that there is a close relationship between formal, nonformal and informal systems of education, Brembeck (1973) saw formal and nonformal education as two distinct systems each having its own merits in fostering learning. The merits of nonformal education lie in its ability to be used for immediate needs (Brembeck, 1973). He argued that learned behaviour is determined by the environment in which it takes place and the learning environments of formal and nonformal education tend to have of different characteristics. These charactersitics in turn shape learned behaviour. The 22 educational strategy is to determine the kind of behaviour required and to create those educational environments which support and encourage it. He strongly argued that formal education alone is not able to produce all the behaviours required in society as it is often assumed. He further pointed out that there is a need to develop knowledge of educational environments that characterize nonformal education and schooling so that the educational policy will reflect the true potential of each. It may appear that Brembeck (1973) was proposing two distinct kinds of educational systems, i.e., schooling and nonformal education. What is required is to determine the learning environments that will be provided by each separate system in order to produce the required behaviour demanded by a particular society. This analysis of the relationship between formal education and nonformal education differs from Coombs. Coombs (1974) saw the relationship between nonformal and formal education to lie in their sponsorship, institutional arrangements and in their educational objectives, but there is no distinct dividing line between them. He argues that nations should strive for 'life-long learning systems' designed to provide every individual with a flexible and diversified range of useful learning activities throughout the individual's life time. He recommends a system which synthesizes many elements of informal, nonformal and formal education. Such a learning system would be strengthened, diversified and 23 linked more closely to the needs and processes of national development. The differences in the analytical tools used by Coombs (1974) and Brembeck (1973) seem to be reflected in the way they visualize formal and nonformal education systems. LaBelle (1975) has outlined a close relationship between formal, nonformal and informal educational systems by analyzing the predominant learning modes through which each one takes place. He follows the definitions of Coombs in his analysis. Coombs and Ahmed (1974) seem to treat the three modes of education as discrete entities. LaBelle (1975) sees the three educational modes, that is, informal, nonformal and formal, to exist all at the same time, and at times in harmony with each other and at times in conflict. This is illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 1 illustrates the three interactive modes of informal, nonformal and formal education systems. In formal education what is taught in the curriculum is related to other processes like peer group pressures, school regulations and organization. At the same time the school offers nonformal education programs through extra curricular activities. Along the vertical line are the predominant modes of education or learning. These reflect the dominant type of learning process from the perspective of the observer or the learner. For example, an observer may decide to choose to concentrate his observation on the learning activities that the teacher is offering based on 24 FIGURE 1: LABELLE'S TYPOLOGY the curriculum rather than what is learnt from the peer groups. At the top of the chart are characteristics of the educational types. Here the emphasis is on the structure rather than the process of education. Formal educational characteristics reflect hierarchical ordering, compulsory attendence, admission .requirements and certificates. Nonformal educational characteristics indicate that the activity must be separate from state-sanctioned schooling but be preplanned and systematic and lead learners to toward a specific goal. It may be defined by the intentions of teachers or leaders. Informal characteristics reflect the individual's contact with a variety of environmental influences that result in day-to-day learning. 25 The aim of the figure is to display the interrelationships among the three educational modes. However, apart from the three educational modes, there exist other learning opportunities that occur simultaneously in the same instructional setting. LaBelle points out the importance of an individual's life-time and his contact with educational modes, depending on his access and need. He argues that nonformal education should be assessed through the life span. Coles sees the relationship between formal and nonformal education as linkages between the different educational systems of a country (as illustrated in Figure 2). Figure 2 illustrates the linkages between formal education and nonformal education. It indicates the ladders for nonformal education graduate into the formal sector. It excludes nonformal educational programs offered by other departments like health, agricultural extension, community development and others which are offered for those individuals who cannot participate in the formal education system. The figure illustrates the relationship between formal educational and institutionalized nonformal education systems at the different educational levels. 26 FORMAL LADDERS NON-FORMAL LADDERS DOCTORATE EXAMPLES OF VOCATIONAL MASTERS FIRST DEGREE SCHOOL CERTIFICATE JUNIOR CERTIFICATE THE "ACADEMIC LADDER NATIONAL CERTIFICATE PRIMARY LEAVING ADULT CERTIFICATE BASIC EDUCATION CERTIFICATE INTERMEDIATE CERTIFICATE LITERACY CERTIFICATE FIGURE 2: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FORMAL AND NONFORMAL EDUCATION LADDERS 27 Purpose of Nonformal Education Some of the perceived functions of nonformal education are (Grandstaff, 1974; Harbison, 1973): 1. Activities oriented primarily to the development of the skill and knowledge of members of the labour force for those already employed; 2. Activities designed primarily to prepare persons, mostly the youth, for entry into employment; 3. Activities designed to develop skill, knowledge and understanding which transcend the work world; 4. Activities that provide a wide range of learning services beyond the scope of formal education and to extend skills and knowledge gained in formal education; and 5. Activities designed to open up neglected domains of educational possibilities. Major Differences Between Formal and Nonformal Education Table 1 provides a comparison of the characteristics of nonformal and formal education. 28 Table 1: A Comparison of the Characteristics of Nonformal and Formal Education Nonformal Formal Structure Flexible. Low degree of structure. Little interrelated-ness of components. Highly structured functionally inter related sets of units. Graded sequential system. Content Skill centered. Dictated by func tional needs of par ticipants. At times may conflict with status quo and elite values. Standardized. Aca demic emphasis on cognitive knowledge. Less emphasis on psychomotor skills. Abstract and founded on theory. Reflects status quo and elite values. Timing Period depends on achievement of task. Based on immediate learning needs arising from the in dividual's roles and stages in life. Usually part-time and may be timed in a variety of ways. Long in duration. Future oriented. Provides the basis for individual par ticipation in soc iety. Usually full-time. Does not per mit other parallel activities to take place. Control Control usually un coordinated, frag mented, diffuse, and involves a variety of agencies. Greater degree of local control. Curricula and stan dards externally controlled at na tional and regional levels. Delivery system Takes place in a va riety of settings. Learning is func tionally related to learning. Takes place in in stitutions. Learn ing is physically isolated from appli cation . 29 Table 1 (continued) Nonformal Formal Functions Meets short-term learning needs of individuals. Stu dents resociali-zation, accultur ation and learning of practical skills and knowledge to be used at work or com munity situation. Terminal, close-ended and seeks to bring distinct groups of people into conformity with principles and prac tices of other groups or agencies. Provides basis for individual's future. Based on credent ials. Stresses so cialization, encul-turation and perpet uation of education bureaucracies. Le gitimizes existing elites, their values and behaviours. Confers status, seeking for more schooling and seeks to bring youth into conformity with the controlling body. Reward system Payoffs tend to be tangible. Immediate short-term gains re lated to work or daily life: employ ment, better pay, higher agricultural yield, self-aware ness, power to con trol environment. Payoffs tend to be deferred in long-term gain in social and economic status. Method of Instruction Methods relatively flexible; related to application due to flexible nature of nonformal education programs. Teaching methods are dictated by policy since knowledge is standardized. In flexible. Noninno-vat ive. Part ic ipants Learners are from all age groups. Job-mobility con cerns predominate among the learners. Great variety of teacher qualifica tions and moti vations . Learners age defined predictable. Social-mobility con scious. Teachers formally certified and their status correlated with their location in the school hier archy . 30 Table 1 (continued) Nonformal Formal Cost Costs have great Costs are standard-variation depending ized by level and on a particular pro- increase moving up gram. the structural hier archy . Although Table 1 indicates the differences between formal and nonformal education, these differences are not always so distinct. Some nonformal education activities do take place in the formal educational system and are highly formalized (Coombs, 1974). Some methods of teaching in nonformal education programs at times may be very authoritarian and student participation may be very minimal (Paulston, 1973). Such differences may be a matter of degree and may not always be highly visible. We have attempted to define the concept of nonformal education and how it is related to the formal and informal educational systems. We have also discussed the characteristics and functions of nonformal education and how it differs from the formal educational system. We will now discuss the disparities that exist between rural and urban areas. 31 Education in Rural and Urban Areas The education systems of many developing countries have shown a disparity in their provision between rural and urban areas (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The urban areas have more schools at all levels with better equipment and lower teacher-pupil ratios (Lowe, 1975). The type of education given by the formal system does not help the rural young people to function in a meaningful way within rural communities (Simmons, 1979). This has resulted in a rural-urban migration in which young people leave the rural areas on completion of their schooling in search of gainful employment in the city. Education has become a contributing factor in the disparity that exists between rural and urban areas. While the urban areas are forging ahead with the modernization process, the rural areas remain entangled in the traditional peasant economy. There are no incentives for young people to remain in the traditional economies. It is argued that there should be a different curriculum for the rural schools (Barber, 1976). The argument follows the premise that what is offered in schools does not develope the skills and attitudes necessary to function in rural communities. It may be better to have a totally different curriculum than is offered in urban schools. But Evans (1976) strongly argues that there should be the same curriculum for urban and rural schools. For political reasons and fair 32 redistribution of a nations resources, it seems the idea that rural schools should have the same type of education as urban schools might be the better idea. It appears difficult though to accept this argument, because having two separate systems would perpetuate the already existing gap between the urban and rural communities. The rural people would feel neglected if their counterparts would have a different educational system for their children. The rationale for nonformal education is in its potential for reaching those who are left out of the formal system, and in its characteristic of supplementing or complementing formal schooling. Nonformal education has a role of importance to formal schooling in generating skills, influencing attitudes and molding values. Nonformal education embraces educational components of programs designed to serve broad developmental goals (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Such programs are usually organized by different ministries and voluntary organizations and serve a very small number of rural youths and adults. They need to be coordinated and integrated into other economic and social developmental goals (Coombs, 1974). Table 2 shows the different learning needs of rural populat ions. There is need for capital investment in the rural areas before educational programs can make a contribution. Even where nonformal education programs exist in the rural areas, they are usually inferior to those found in the Table 2: Illustrative Rural Occupational Groups and Their Learning Needs 33 GROUPS TYPES OF LEARNING NEEDS (at varying levels of sophistication and specialization)  Persons directly engaged in agriculture 1. Commerical farmers 2. Small subsistence and semi-subsistence farm families 3. Landless farm workers Persons engaged in off-farm commercial activities 1. Retailers and wholesalers of farm supplies and equipment, consumer goods and other items. 2. Suppliers of repair and main tenance services. 3. Processors, storers and shippers of agricultural commodities. 4. Suppliers of banking and credit services. 5. Construction and other artisans. 6. Suppliers of general trans port services. 7. Small manufacturers. General services personnel; rural administrators, planners, technical experts 1. General public admini strators , broad-gauged analysts and planners of subnational levels. 2. Managers, planners, technicians, and trainers for specific public services (e.g. agriculture/ trans port, irrigation, health, small industry, educations, family services, local government, etc.) 3. Managers of cooperatives and other farmer associations. Farm planning and management; rational decision making; record keeping; cost and revenue computations; use of credit. Application of new inputs improved farm practices. Storage, processing, food preservation. Supplementary skills for farm maintenance and improvement and sideline jobs for extra income. Knowledge of government services, policies, programs, targets. Knowledge and skills for family, improvement of ref. health, nutrition, home economics, child care, family planning. Civic skills ref. knowledge of how cooperatives, local govern ment , national government function. New and improved technical skills applicable to particular goods and services. Quality control. Technical knowledge of goods handled sufficient to advise customers on their use, maintenance, etc. Management skills (business planning; record keeping and cost accounting; procurement and inventory control; market analysis and sales methods; customer and employee relations; knowledge of government services, regulations, taxes; use of credit. General skills for administration planning, implementation, information flows, promotional activities. Technical and management skills applying to particular specialties. Leadership skills for generating community enthusiasm and collective action, staff team work and support from higher education. 4. Managers and other personnel of credit services. 34 urban areas. Coombs and Ahmed (1974) attributes this disparity to both national and international policies regarding the allocation of educational resources. Within the national development plans, formal education receives a larger share of resources both in rural and urban areas. Urban areas get a larger share of funds for nonformal education than rural areas. Such a situation leaves' the rural areas very little to work with. Traditional skills are often ignored and regarded as primitive. Skills that require modern machinery are promoted. In order to meet the learning needs of the rural population, a model developed by Coles (9182) may be useful (see Figure 3). Naclonal co to* Local Coosnl CCees FIGURE 3: VERTICALLY AND HORIZONTALLY, THE PROVINCE-DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE 35 The diagram tries to illustrate vertical and horizontal integration of nonformal education at the local level. If nonformal education is an integral part of national development, it should be a means of communication between officials at the national level and those at the local level. A person's voluntary participation is an essential feature of nonformal education. Nonformal education can flourish in countries where there is democracy and individuals are allowed the freedom to develop (Coles, 1982). Like Coombs, Coles argues strongly that nonformal education programs should be related to the needs of the people. Nonformal Education and Development The concept of nonformal education is being promoted because it holds promise of being able to contribute to the modernization process of developing countries (Coombs, 1980; Harbison, 1973). Nonformal education is one area of education that is hoped will bring social and economic change in these countries. It may be important to look at theories of social change as they relate to education in order to help us understand how nonformal education may help to bring change to these societies. Major theories of education and social change tend to view society bending toward either equilibrium or conflict and that within these two main categories numerous perspectives exist. Included 36 in these are some theories which display characteristics of both the equilibrium and conflict positions. Structural functionalism. Equilibrium theory shows the social system as one which moves toward a preferred state. Such a state is arrived at as a result of both natural order as well as certain mechanisms such as socialization and social control processes (Karabel & Halsey, 1977). Structural/functionalist theory shows change to be either internal or external to the system. Internal changes are adjustments to some disequilibrating pressure which results in some alterations in the system. Parson (1970) believes that structural changes occur when disturbances in the system are sufficient to overcome the forces of equilibrium. Structural/functionalists believe in equilibrium, and the socialization process is what holds society together. They view educational systems as being able to offer opportunities for mobility of individuals. Coombs (1968) and Harbison (1973) use the structural/ functionalist assumptions in their analysis of the relationship between nonformal education and development. Nonformal education is seen as a vehicle to bring desired change within a system. Hence they believe that the state should organize nonformal programs in order for desired change to occur. 37 Conflict theories. The other category is conflict theory which rests upon the assumption that human intervention is the decisive force in the shaping of history and social change. This intervention results as conflicting groups gain or lose relative political power and thus the ability to influence change. Education is seen to play an important role in the acquisition of skills, attributes and the expertise necessary to function in an approximately effective manner to influence change. While structural/functionalists view educational systems as being able to offer opportunities for mobility of individuals, conflict theorists have stressed the role of education in maintaining a system of structured inequality. Carnoy (1976), Bock (1976), and LaBelle (1976) use the conflict theoretical assumptions in their analysis of nonformal education and development. The two differing views about education and social change reflect the way the different authors perceive the operation of nonformal education in a particular country. The structuralists/functionalists theorists believe in the human capital theory. They believe that there should be more investment in both formal and nonformal education. Nonformal education may exist and operate under many different conditions. Paulston (1976) outlines the different, conditions under which nonformal educational programs may exist and function. 38 Participant Control Pole Non-formal Education Control Continuum Government Imposed Control Pole Dimensions of Non-formal Education and 'Development' Literature I "Education in Reformist Social Ethnic Movements Orientation" III "Life-long learning Or i en ca t i on" II Individual •Change Pole Coa I s IV "Ecological or Func t i ona1i s c Ori en ta ti or." Con t i nuum kSystems Change Pole FIGURE 4: PAULSTON'S FRAMEWORK OF NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS Figure 4 indicates, the various policy strategies taken on two axes. The horizontal axis indicates the goals for nonformal education programs. This axis is a continuum from those who view that the goal of nonformal education is to change individual attitudes and behavior, to those who view nonformal education as a tool for social and economic change. The vertical axis indicates the continuum of the degree of control for those who participate in nonformal education. It runs from full participation to complete control by the political system. 39 The framework looks at four different approaches in formulating policies for development. Quadrant IV is the 'ecological' or functionalist approach. Such an approach treats development as a process for harmonious coexistence of all the forces of production from the subsistence level to industrial level. This view is concerned with maximum utilization of all human resources. It also encourages structural changes in the various political and economic institutions which are best able to support such a system. Such an approach encourages investment in all sectors of the educational system - formal, nonformal and informal systems, in order to ensure maximum use of the human resources. Examples of the ecological or functionalist approach to development are those proposed by (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coles, 1982; Callaway, 1973). These programs are developed to serve the learning needs of adults who are left out of the formal system; to supplement the limited formal schooling for the early school learners, and, to offer skills to adults. Such an approach also assumes limited social change controlled by the state priorities. An example of this approach will be discussed in detail later. In Quadrant III is the "life-long learning", which has control imposed from the outside as the one outlined by Lengrad (1973). According to Lengrad (1973), the present education system must find ways of linking with the past and the future so that changes being made are related to 40 the past and the future. The literature on life-long learning is often too vague and is interpretated differently by various organizations (OECD, UNESCO and the Club of Rome). Each of these organizations use the concept of life-long education with different objectives in mind. No literature on nonformal education and life-long learning exists so that no separate examples are available to illustrate Quadrant III. The Faure (1972) report and the work of Lengrad discuss the concept in its general terms without specifically relating to nonformal education. Quadrant I contains the literature on nonformal education which concentrates on social and ethnic movements. Liberating nonformal education programs have assisted social movements to achieve movement goals in altering social and economic relations through collective efforts. Examples may be drawn from the Antigonish Movement in Canada, the folk high schools in Scandinavia and the Black Panther educational programs in the U.S.A.. Quadrant II indicates an utopia which is unlikely to exist in any system. Coombs (1974) and Harbison (1973) believed in the establishment of nonformal education programs that are controlled by the state. They see the role of nonformal education as a development strategy which can aim at reaching major sections of the society who are left out of the formal school system. For development to occur in the 41 developing countries, human resources need be developed and utilized at its fullest. Harbison (1973) saw the role of nonformal education to be a means of counter-balancing some distortions created by formal education. He believes that nonformal education may provide people with skills for high level jobs in the economy in order to maintain equilibrium. Coombs' (1974) model differs as it emphasizes rural development and the improvement of life for the rural people. Both Coombs' (1974) and Harbison's (1973) models assume that there should be government control to allow only the structural changes required to maximize the development and utilization of human resources. They assume that governments are only willing to fund programs that are seen as important in the development strategy. Bock (1976) and Carnoy (1976), using the conflict tradition, argue that the institutionalization and legitimization of nonformal education by the national elites further perpetuates the distortions and inequalities that exist between the urban and rural sectors. From their argument, it would appear locally initiated nonformal education programs would serve the needs of the population better. However, this does not seem to be very common in developing countries. Such programs must be seen as operating according to the development goals of the state even when funded by private organizations. If not they may be seen as threats to governments. 42 Coombs' (1974) strategy for rural development addresses the basic needs of the rural people. Coombs (1975) assumes that there is concensus and harmony within a country because he makes structural/functionalist assumptions. Although he offers recommendations on how nonformal education programs ought to function, he is not clear as to how the basic needs of the rural communities will be served, since the state ought to control such programs. He assumes that the people at the top know the needs of the people and that both the rural people and the state are clear on their developmental goals. It appears that where there is democracy, such an argument is workable. Those who believe in conflict existing with society (Carnoy, 1976; LaBelle, 1981; Bock, 1976) may argue that the state may sponsor nonformal education programs to extend the influence of the state beyond the formal schools. At the same time the state may promote nonformal education programs to foster participation and promotion of ideological nationalistic values to maintain the existing social order. They argue against institutionalization of nonformal education, as it legitimizes the inferior status of its graduates and therefore perpetuates the existing inequalities in society. Using the conflict assumptions, they encourage nonformal education systems that may be able to alter power relations in society (LaBelle, 1976; Bock & Papagiannis, 1983). 43 Conclusion The literature review traced the development of the concept as a result of Coomb's (1968) work in which the major failures of educational systems were analyzed. Although large investments in education have been made, the costs of maintaining schools and teacher training have been rising faster than these countries are able to afford them (Coombs, 1968). Such investments have not matched with employment opportunities and this has created a large pool of unemployed youths (Simmons, 1979). There is a general agreement in the literature on the development of the concept and on its definition (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Paulston, 1973, 1976; LaBelle, 1976). The concept of nonformal education has been developed by policy makers and planners of funding agencies as an alternative to funding formal educational systems whose outcomes have been disappointing in all developing countries (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Simmons, 1979). The literature reviewed recognizes nonformal education because of its flexibility and its ability to reach large numbers of people, especially in rural areas (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Grandstaff, 1973; Paulston, 1976; Callaway, 1973). Nonformal education may also assist in the human resource development (Harbison, 1973). Except for the work that is being done by Paulston (1976), most of the literature reviewed ignores the role nonformal education has played in assisting social movements in different 44 countries. Nonformal education has the potential to assist minority groups in society to achieve group goals. The literature indicates that the different theoretical orientations influence how the theorists perceive the role of nonformal education in relation to development, and how it may be implemented. Those that are influenced by the structural/functionalist theories stress state-planned nonformal education systems which may contribute to the modernization process (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Grandstaff, 1972; Harbison, 1973). Those that are influenced by the conflict theories argue that nonformal education should not be institutionalized as this will perpetuate the existing inequalities in society (Bock, 1976; Carnoy, 1976; LaBelle, 1976; Paulston, 1976). They view the role of nonformal education as an alternative system in development that may help individuals bring changes in society. The literature reviewed shows lack of empirical studies to support some of the assertions that are being made (Bock & Papagiannis, 1983). Little research has been conducted on the merits of nonformal education systems. The next chapter attempts to analyze a few major studies that have been conducted in the field of nonformal education systems. The studies are reviewed to find out what nonformal education systems exist, how these systems have been developed, and what the major recommendations are. 45 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH ON NONFORMAL EDUCATION Review of the Literature on Research on Nonformal Education This chapter will critically review some of the research studies that have been conducted in the field on nonformal education in the last 12 years. The following criteria were used in selecting the studies to be reviewed: (a) the studies were related to the literature review covered in the previous chapter, (b) the studies were large, covered a number of the developing countries that formed a good basis for comparison, (c) most of the studies were conducted after 1970. The research will be reviewed in order to analyze results and conclusions which have implications for planning nonformal education programs. Generally there are two kinds of research studies that will be reviewed in the field of nonformal education, i.e., descriptive surveys and research studies designed to evaluate the impact of nonformal education on the populations. The descriptive surveys are those that have been conducted in Africa by Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972) and Coombs et al. (1974, 1980). Other descriptive studies include those that have been conducted in Ethiopia by Niehoff (1979) and in Botswana by Coles (1982). The research studies that will be reviewed are those conducted by Bock (1975) in Malaysia and Latin America (LaBelle, 1983). 46 Descriptive Research Surveys Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972) conducted a survey that covered many types of nonformal education projects in Africa. There has been no follow-up studies conducted to date. The survey was a response to policy makers in Africa and of funding agencies to look at critical dimensions of the unemployment problem. The African-American Institute conducted the study through funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development. After a decade of large investments in formal schooling, it was realized that the costs for formal schooling were increasing much faster than the national budgets. Investments in schooling did not pay off in jobs for many who completed different levels of schooling, especially those with low levels. Such observations led the policy makers to gain interest in nonformal education. The objectives of the survey were to identify productive nonformal education programs in selected countries especially those that were successful, innovative and transferable so that African governments and external aid agencies could learn from these projects and develop useful projects elsewhere (Sheffield & Dejomaoh, 1972: xii ) . Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972) looked at nonformal education programs that had the following qualities: 1. programs that served as alternatives to formal schooling; 2. programs that served as an extension of formal schooling for skills training for employment; 47 3. programs that were designed for upgrading the skills of those already employed; 4. programs that were designed for self-employment for early school-leavers. Most programs developed in response to the needs of the the community. Some programs were developed for skills training in preparation for wage employment. Some developed as on-job training for the urgently needed skilled manpower. Coombs et al. (1973) carried out a survey funded by UNICEF to look at ways of assisting rural youths in skills training. Included in the study were countries from Asia (China, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Thailand), the Caribbean and Latin America (Brazil, Columbia, Cuba, Jamaica). The study was aimed at finding information and guidelines that would assist both developing countries and funding agencies in these areas: 1. assess the needs within a given country for nonformal education for rural children and youth, particularly the out-of-schools, 2. plan effective and economical programs to meet these needs, including attention to the relationship between nonformal and formal educational provisions, 3. develop means to evaluate and strengthen such programs over time, and 48 4. define the ways in which external agencies can be of greatest help to countries in implementing their nonformal educational strategies and programs. This survey was conducted at the same time as another survey was being conducted but whose report was published later (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The 1973 report aimed at out-of-school youth while the 1974 report aimed at the adult populations of the rural areas. The 1974 report covers the same range of countries from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin America, although many other projects were included from other developing countries. The World Bank funded the survey with the overall purpose of finding out: 1. what extent could the World Bank's educational financing be extended to nonformal educational programs, and 2. what strategy should the World Bank pursue in this field and what might be the most promising and appropriate types of project to support. The specific objectives of the study were to develop the basis of examining past experience, present evidence, and any fresh ideas - improved information, analytical methods and practical guidelines, that would be useful to those actually in planning, implementing and evaluating programs of nonformal education geared to rural development (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, p. 4). The survey was concerned with nonformal education programs that were designed to improve the knowledge and 49 skills of farmers, rural artisans, craft workers, and small entrepeneurs. Some nonformal education programs were developed in response to some specific needs as identified by the national government as part of the modernization process. Some took the shape they took in response to community needs as well as to achieve the objectives of the organization involved. Most of the programs surveyed seemed to be largely government programs designed to bring changes to communities. Most programs in the 1973 survey conducted by Coombs sponsored by UNICEF specifically looked at youth programs that were available in rural areas of the different countries. Youth programs were sponsored by governmental and nongovernmental organizations. Coombs (1980) conducted a reserch survey of some rural integrated programs in Asian countries (India, Sri Lanka, Korea). The study focused on the family as a basic unit and the community as its basic environment. Most of the studies were funded by non-governmental organizations and were autonomous and free from vertical supervision. One major finding of this research study was the question of local personnel. The local young educated people were not willing to work in these rural areas. The integrated rural development projects that were surveyed were small scale programs developed by non-governmental organizations (and in some cases by governmental departments). These projects were intended to 50 help the rural poor to have an improved family life. In all the projects surveyed, private organizations play a major role by working very closely with government ministries involved in the activities related to the family such as health, labour, rural industries and crafts, education, and agriculture. Voluntary and private associations have cooperated with government departments in improving the family life of these populations. This is a major finding of this study, and a lesson which can be transferable to other developing countries. The projects indicate close cooperation between the private and public agencies in planning, financing, and evaluating these integrated programs aimed at family life improvement. The government departments provide both finacial and administrative support. Part of the administrative support is to reorient personnel to the program objectives, so that they view the project programs in the context of the socio-economic cultural milieu of the suroundings. The survey of these projects was an attempt to follow-up recommendations of the previous surveys which recommended an integrated approach to rural development. It offers lessons in cooperation among the public and private agencies in planning, financing, and evaluating integrated nonformal education programs. The projects tried to incorporate appropriate educational components of various -programs for improving the quality of rural family 51 life. They also indicate some element of community participation. Findings of the Surveys The major findings of the surveys are similar even though each survey had a different focus. In all the surveys, there was great reliance on existing data and interviews with the administrators and personnel of the nonformal education projects surveyed. In nearly all the countries surveyed, national development plans indicated very low priority to agricultural and rural development in allocating their resources through some kind of agricultural extension services with agricultural colleges, research institutes and universities. But even with such developments, they fell short of the agricultural production targets for the UN Second Development Decade (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Inadequate Programs The extension services are generally inadequate with the extension workers often having an authoritarian attitude of "teacher knows best." In some cases, it was observed that they served the already prosperous farmers at the neglect of the smaller farmers. This contributed to the gap between the rich farmers and the peasant farmers. In most situations the extension workers are overburdened in their jobs in terms of the population size they are supposed to serve. This relates to the inadequacy of other personnel at the local level, who cannot deal broadly with 52 all education and development factors. They are only interested in their narrow area of administration and are not interested in evaluating nonformal education in order to find ways of improving such programs. This is illustrated by Table 3. All the surveys indicate that there is a maldistribution of educational, opportunities for rural people and the evidence indicates that those who are most deprived of formal education are similarly most deprived of educational opportunity through nonformal education. It was found that the participation of girls and women in nonformal education programs was very low. Although women actively participate in farming, marketing of crops, and other farm management functions, they have been overlooked. Women have the responsibilities of caring for children, the sick and the elderly (in traditional societies). This may explain their low participation. Such responsibilities, including other household chores, leave them little time to participate in nonformal education activities. Another finding of the studies is the lack of relationship between formal and nonformal education programs. Nonformal education can add on to where the school left off, especially for the early school leavers (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). At the same time, the formal education system can support nonformal education systems in many ways if a close link between the two systems is maintained. This can be related to the use of facilities, Estimated Extension Workers and Farm Families in Selected Countries,1 1971 Farm Extension Farm Families per Families Workers Extension Worker 1 -2 Mali 936,444 111 8,4 36 Senegal 448,333 206 . 2,176 . 2 Uganda 1,432,200 125 11,458 Zambia 470,000 560 839 .. 2 India 53,594,242 64,720 828 3 Korea Rep. of ' 2,506,000 J 3 ,6284 4 691 | 5 5 I 6,049 414 Argentina 1,074,883 239 4,497 Bolivia 571,600 70 8,165 Brazil 8,624,902- 1,5566 5,543 Chile 389,206 368 1,057 Colombia 1,832,453 350 5,236 Costa Rica 140,000 37 3,784 El Salvador 351,000 61 5,756 Guatemala 627 ,170 40 15,679 Honduras 323,653 51 6,346 Mexico 4,585,4 61 514 9,452 Nicaragua 169,531 38 4,461 Peru 1,220,000 """558 2,383 .Venezuela 559,811 272 2,058 The sample is heavily drawn from the Latin American region because of a recent study on the subject. Data on other countries of Africa, the Far East and the Near East were hardly comparable p.nd were therefore not included As far ar possible, only extension personnel in direct contact with farmers were included. 2 1967. J 1965. The Economy of Korea, Vol. 3, Seoul, 1966. 4 Includes only general guidance workers (village level). Includes also subject specialists of agricultural extension (excluding provincial and national levels). Host are in direct contact with farmers. 6 ^ • Includes veterinarians and other technical staff hot directly dealing with agricultural extension. . ' SOURCE: Food and Agriculture Organization, StDfce of Food and Agriculture 1972 (Rornet 1972), p. 137, Table 3-4. 54 personnel, and provision of research planning and evaluation services for nonformal education by universities and colleges. While such a link is necessary, nonformal education ought to remain flexible and innovative (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The surveys observed that there is a lack of linkage between nonformal education and formal education and employment opportunities. Firstly, there is need for a linkage between nonformal education and the labour market and self-employment opportunities that are available in the community. This may ensure that the graduates of the nonformal education programs are absorbed into the social economic systems of the communities. But where this linkage does not exist, the skills gained in nonformal education programs may not be utilized and this leads to frustrations among the participants of such programs. Such linkage is difficult to maintain where employment opportunities are scarce, but the skills gained should be utilized in self-employment for an improved way of life (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The labour market sometimes does not value certificates from nonformal education programs. This in turn leads to apathy among the people towards nonformal education programs, as they judge them to be inferior to formal schooling. In most of the nonformal education programs, it was found that formal methods of teaching were used and the instructors used authoritarian methods. Such methods 55 reduce the flexibile qualities of nonformal education programs. It was found that most programs did not utilize audio-visual aids and printed materials even where they were available due to those authoritarian attitudes which are mainly concerned with the old methods of teaching. This gives nonformal education an inferior position to formal schooling. Facilities The 1973 and 1974 surveys indicate that most nonformal education programs require lower capital expenditure than formal education. Most nonformal education programs do not require facilities of their own as these can be borrowed from existing facilities of other institutions. The survey recommends that, in some situations, it is better for nonformal education programs to have their own facilities. There is a need for more investment in nonformal education that, in the rural areas, use low-cost equipment. Costs Athough the cost of nonformal education programs is usually lower than that of formal education, it is difficult to know some costs in nonformal education programs. Such costs vary from one program to another. The utilization of other existing facilities and the use of voluntary instructors makes it difficult to account for such activities. Most programs did not indicate cost accounting procedures for their programs. Since many nonformal education programs are conducted by different 56 organizations, it is difficult to have a common accounting system. Evaluation The other major finding of the surveys was the lack of systematic evaluation of the nonformal education programs, whether it be the program's internal efficiency (cost effectiveness) or its beneficial social and economic impact in relation to the investment made in it (cost-benefit relationship). Such evaluation ought to be action research supported by national research institutes and universities, as discussed earlier (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). But such research efforts even at the national level are lacking. Coordinat ion The final, but important, observation from the surveys is the lack of coordination among the agencies providing nonformal programs. This was observed by Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972) as well as Coombs et al. (1973, 1974). Although in many African countries, Adult Education Advisory Boards have been instituted, they often lack statutory powers. Different agencies and government departments have different institutional goals. Such coordination, referred to as integration Coombs (1980), requires coordination at the national level from the planning stage to implementation so that each arm of government is aware of the other's activities. 57 Other Research Studies on Nonformal Education The surveys that have been conducted by Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972); Coombs and Ahmed (1974); Coombs et al. (1973); and Coombs, (1980) tend to be descriptive and prescriptive emphasizing strategies that ought to be used in the planning, financing, and evaluating of nonformal education programs. They provide valuable information on nonformal education systems that exist in the field without using much of the statistical tools available to determine the impact of these programs on their target population. The surveys, although recognizing small scale nonformal education programs, tend to favour institutionalized nonformal education programs. Bock (1976) and LaBelle (1983), have argued against such institutionalized nonformal education systems. They challenge the structural/functionalist approach which Coombs et al. (1973) use in their analysis of nonformal education programs. Bock (1976), using an empirical study in Malaysia, argues that the institutionalization of nonformal education serves to extend legitimization of state authority just as formal education does. At the same time nonformal education helps to cool out excessive demand by lowering the occupational aspirations of its graduates since it legitimizes their positions in blue-collar jobs (Dall, 1983; Bock, 1983; Papagiannis, 1983)-. LaBelle (1983) conducted a study to find out the impact of nonformal education on income in industry in Venezuela. 58 The findings of the study indicate that engaging in nonformal education activities offers few income benefits. The salary benefits of educational participation were associated with the amount of formal schooling. It may appear that the belief that nonformal education can be substituted by nonformal education does not always seem to be true. Therefore, it is unrealistic to use nonformal education programs in order to improve income benefits for those with less formal schooling. Bock and Papagiannis (1983) use a conflict paradigm in their analysis of the role of nonformal education to the modernization process. They look at the political, economic and cultural factors in determining the role of nonformal education in national development. The occupational structures in developing countries are clearly segmented between the primary white-collar, managerial professional and the secondary blue-collar labor and agricultural workers. This makes mobility from the secondary to the primary sector difficult. Formal schooling is seen as a tool that maintains such institutional structures while nonformal education legitimizes those in the secondary sector to be content in their inferior position. They argue, therefore, that nonformal education should not be institutionalized as it will be used to legitimize the social inequalities that already exist in society. Although Bock (1976) and LaBelle (1976) argue against the institutionalization of nonformal 59 education, they do not offer specific guidelines on how small scale nonformal educa-tion programs will be organized. Implications of the Findings to Planning  Nonformal Education Programs The findings of nearly all the surveys are similar (Sheffield and Dejomaoh, 1972; Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, 1974; Coombs, 1980; Coles, 1982). While the surveys were looking for nonformal education programs that were successful to find ways to improve funding, they tended to be too prescriptive of the best ways of planning nonformal education programs. The surveys indicated a lack of research and systematic evaluation of nonformal education, especially in agricultural extension. It is not possible to have successful programs without adequate research and systematic evaluation. Such a gap in research affects the planning of nonformal education programs. There is a need for integrating agronomic research and related social science research both at the level of formulating national policies and at the level of the farmer (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Another implication of the findings relates to costs and resources. There is a great need for most developing countries to invest in the rural areas in order to develop effective nonformal education programs. Such investments may relate to the building of multipurpose learning centres in many rural areas with low cost equipment to train people in the required skills for an improved life style (Coombs & 60 Ahmed, 1974; Coombs, 1980). There is a need for the retraining of personnel who are specialized in their own area so that they view their work as part of the whole modernization process and not as a single effort by their own department (referred to as horizontal integration by Coombs (1980)). It is also necessary to retrain personnel in the utilization of modern teaching methods and the use of visual aids and printed materials. It is important to have a linkage between nonformal and formal education especially for rural youth so that nonformal education is able to complement the skills learned in the formal education system (Coombs et al., 1973; Coles, 1982). Nonformal education systems should be similar to the activities of the formal educational sector so that it reinforces some of the skills learned at school. This would assist youths to function within their rural sector (Coles, 1982). It might be necessary here to emphasize the link with the informal educational activities so that traditional crafts and skills are incorporated in nonformal education programs. Very often the traditional crafts are left out. The surveys (Coombs et al., 1973; Coombs & Ahmed 1974) tend to be highly prescriptive in their analysis of the nonformal education programs surveyed. They recommend an integrated approach to planning nonformal education programs that will be effective in transforming the lives 61 of the rural youths and adults. The two surveys have been the largest single surveys that have tried to review and analyze what goes on in many developing countries. They provide a framework for cross-cultural analysis of various nonformal education programs in national development strategies. They also provide a basis for comparison and transferability of the various nonformal educational strategies. One major weakness of the surveys is that they tend to be highly prescriptive. They offer recommendations on how best nonformal education programs may be planned without considering the socio-political aspirations of the different developing countries or the consumer's traditional value systems. They assume that the policy makers of the developing countries will accept such prescriptions since they are coming from the funding agenc ies. In the survey (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974), four different approaches to rural development are analyzed in the case studies that are discussed. These four approaches are: the extension approach, the training approach, the cooperative approach, and the integrated approach. The study recommends that nonformal education programs ought to be integrated in the planning, organizational structure, management, and staffing. Such integration should start with national level planning to the lowest administration unit (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Such integration calls for decentralization of authority so that local personnel are 62 allowed to make some decisions while allowing for community participation as well. It also calls for flexibility so that programs are related to the needs of the client system. The integrated approach requires integration of programs at all levels, both horizontally and vertically between the different rural education activites and between such activities and related non-educational development activities and services. Such an approach can only be achieved if all people involved have a broad view of development. This study makes the following specific recommendations to be undertaken by the developing countries (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, p. 240): 1. All organizations concerned (external as well as internal) must find ways to collaborate much more closely, guided by a broad view of rural development that transcends their particular specialities. 2. Each country needs to evolve a coherent national strategy for rural development and to overhaul any of its national policies (applying, for example, to agriculture, and water, trade, prices, and fiscal affairs) that are imcompatible with the goals of their rural development strategy. 3. Within this national framework, development plans can be tailor made for each rural area, adapted to its particular potentialities and constraints. 4. To design and implement such specific area development plan requires a greater decentralization of authority, including more latitude in financial control, to district and subdistrict levels, a corresponding buildup of competent administrative and expert staff at these levels and strengthen mechanisms whereby local people can participate in the whole process of planning 63 and decision making and implementation. These recommendations have implications for the planning of nonformal education programs. It would be necessary to plan nonformal education programs at the national level to include all relevant departments involved in the development process of rural areas. Apart from such ministerial and departmental involvement in planning nonformal education programs, there should be national commitment in investing and financing nonformal education programs. There should be built in systems of evaluation and financial accountability from the national to the lowest administrative levels (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Such integrated systems have been adopted in several developing countries (Ethiopia, Botswana, Kenya, Zambia, and some Asian countries). Conclusion The surveys conducted by Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972) and Coombs et al. (1973, 1974, 1980) use a structural/ functionalist assumption in their analysis of nonformal education systems. They use the systems approach and view nonformal education as one of the subsystems of the larger system. They offer specific guidelines which developing countries may follow in planning, implementing, and systematic evaluation of nonformal education programs. They stress that nonformal education should be seen as a priority and needs to be planned at the national planning level where all ministries and departments concerned with 64 nonformal education programs should plan together so that educational components of their programs are seen as one system. While integration is recommended at the national level, there is need for vertical integration so that there is close supervision of activities from the lowest levels to the top as well as horizontal integration among the various agencies offering nonformal education programs at the community level. There is usually no guarantee that trainees from nonformal education systems will be absorbed into the economy.. There are many nonformal education activities that are designed for skills training for either gainful employment or self-employment, But there is no link between employing agencies and nonformal education skills training programs. Many young trainees hope to get employed on completion of their training. Since there is a lack of employment opportunities in developing countries (Simmons, 1979; Coombs and Ahmed, 1974) there is a need to encourage participants of the training program to develop self-employment attitudes and assist them to arrange credit facilities to enable them to get started. This is a difficult venture but a necessary one. It is useless for the nonformal education system to develop links with employing agencies, when it is clear that there are very few employment opportunities. Systematic evaluation and research is an invaluable tool for any program to be effective. These surveys 65 indicate the need for coordinated research in the developing countries. Such research can also determine cost-effectiveness and cost-efficiency of existing programs, and in so doing, determine further investment in the program. Systematic financial accountability seems difficult in programs that are only run separately by non-governemental organizations. But it is still necessary to conduct systematic research (Coombs, 1980; Coles, 1982). The surveys by Coombs et al. (1973, 1974, 1980) and by Sheffield and Dejomaoh (1972) recognize both institutionalized and privately sponsored nonformal education programs. It seems more likely that their recommendations may easily be adopted. Although the focus of these studies was on the rural nonformal education programs, their findings and recommendations may be useful in the modern urban sector. All the studies have tended to be prescriptive as their objective was to analyze nonformal education programs that are effective in terms of funding by the aid agencies. The other research studies conducted by Bock (1976) and LaBelle (1976, 1983) use a conflict theoretical paradigm. They do not see the institutionalization of nonformal education programs as a way in assisting in the modernization process. They seem to favour small scale nonformal education projects as most effective. The governments of developing countries may feel threatened by such local initiatives. It may be necessary to have both 66 institutionalized nonformal education programs as well as small scale nonformal education projects developed through local initiatives. In the following chapter a framework is developed for analyzing nonformal education systems. In reviewing the literature on the concept of nonformal education and research that has been conducted on nonformal education programs, certain elements have been identified which may be useful in analyzing nonformal education systems. 67 CHAPTER FOUR A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING AND COMPARING NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS Need for a Framework The review of the literature on nonformal education reveals that the concept was developed by planners as an alternative to investing in formal education in developing countries. Because the formal schools are too costly and there is a mismatch between what the schools are producing and what employers, citizens, young people and parents need, nonformal education has been promoted because it is assumed to be flexible, diverse in its characteristics and is capable of reaching many people who are left out of the formal system. Most research on nonformal education has concentrated on trying to find out what nonformal education programs exist and for which groups they are designed. The research surveys that have been conducted to find out what programs exist have made an important contribution in providing information on nonformal education activities that exist in developing countries. Although nonformal education activities are diverse, previous studies have clarified the elements which are common to most programs. After reviewing and analyzing research studies on nonformal education, a framework was been developed for analyzing and comparing nonformal education systems. The framework provides a structure for systematically 68 collecting information required for comparative analysis. Organization of the Framework The framework described in this chapter is based on an analysis of nonformal education systems at three levels: national, regional, and local levels. The framework may use the three levels as the basis for analysis and comparison. It may use elements and ask questions on each element at three levels. The framework that follows discusses major elements. Elements of the Framework Based on the research studies and the literature reviewed, the following elements were developed: • policies, goals and objectives; • political and administrative structures; • strategies for development; • nonformal education agencies; • participation/program characteristics; • learning outcomes; • evaluation. Questions that may be useful in collecting information at the different levels are included under each element. Some of the questions may be asked at all levels while some questions may only be asked at one of the levels. This is indicated in the table of questions for each element. 69 Policies, Goals and Objectives The planning of nonformal education, and other educational systems at all levels, ought to be in line with the major policies and goals of a country. Policies may be determined by political and economic considerations. Such policies are directed by a country's broad goals and objectives which may be politically determined. The planning of nonformal education involves joint planning with representatives from operational ministries working together harmonously. It may be important to identify the individuals, bodies and ministries that are involved in formulating policies at all administrative levels so that they identify nonformal education as part of the whole development strategy. Committees may exist at the national, regional, and local levels that are involved in the national planning process. It is important to identify such committees and their membership. It is important to find out communication links that may exist between national, regional, and local level committees. Table 4 contains a list of questions that may be useful for collecting information to understand the planning process at each level. The list of questions is not exhaustive but it does include essential information for analyzing and comparing the planning process of different nonformal education systems. 70 Table 4: List of Questions for Analysis of Policies, Goals and Objectives Quest ions N R L • What are the policies, goals and objectives? • What is the official planning framework? • v/ • Which administrators are responsible for • planning? • How many professionals act in the planning v/ • • capac ity? • What are the major policies related to the / educational system? • Which other people contribute to the planning / process (e.g., scholars, business leaders, expatriate consultants, international agencies, etc.)? What is the source of planning funds (e.g., / j/ / direct to planning agency, sector budgeting project allocations)? What are the administrative capacities of the / / V planning organization in light of its responsibilities? What is the degree of integration between / / / planning agencies? How much data and information resources are / / y/ available? What types of plans utilized (i.e., sectoral j/ y/ project, etc.)? What are the established time horizons and the y/ y/ V amount of flexibility and adaptability allowed in the plans? What are the means for improving the planning / y/ \J process built into the development plans? Are there any discrepancies in policies, / / / goals and objectives between the three levels? 1 N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level 71 The above information may help understand who plans at each administrative level. This may include the various ministries, councils and other organizations that may be involved at all levels of planning. Ministries and organizations that deal with nonformal education may be represented at each level of planning. The information may also tell us how planning is conducted, the degree of integration that exists between those ministries involved in planning and implementing nonformal education as well as whether the nonformal education system is incorporated in the major policies and objectives of a country at the different administrative levels: national, regional and local. Discrepancies and conflicts may exist between policies, objectives, and goals at the national, regional, and local levels. It is important to ask questions that will provide such information. It is important to analyze priority objectives at all levels and to understand how these are channelled to the higher planning levels. It is necessary to find out the comprehensiveness of the planning process at all levels. This may refer to how the various government departments and other educational agencies are coordinated or integrated. Policies, goals and objectives may be analyzed by finding out whether they are short-term or long-term in nature. They may be analyzed whether they are institutional, or community, or social collective group, or 72 individual goals. We will briefly discuss each type of policies and goals that may be analyzed. Long-term goals and policies. Long-term goals and policies relate to broad national policies and objectives. Such policies and goals may relate to national targets regarding the provision of education, health services, agricultural extension, employment, and community development. The policies and goals of nonformal education relate to national objectives and targets. Short-term or immediate goals and policies. Short term goals relate to the type of nonformal education activity as well as the target population. These goals are easily identifiable by the planners as well as the consumers of nonformal education. Such goals may relate to skills and knowledge acquired for employment; they may relate to improving skills for promotion for those who are already gainfully employed; and they may relate to the use of the skills and knowledge gained for changing the life styles of individuals. Institutional goals and policies. Each nonformal education agency has policies and objectives that guide its activities. Short term goals relate to the immediate skills and knowledge to be gained by those that participate in the nonformal education activity; while long-term policies and goals guide nonformal education activities. 73 Community goals. Community goals relate to the aspirations of the community and what their needs are. They relate both to their prescriptive needs as well as their motivational needs. Communities usually have a general idea of what they urgently require, either in skills and knowledge or in economic terms. Social collective advocacy group goals. Some groups are organized in order to further their interests and bring change to society. These groups have their own group goals and policies which they try to promote in order to improve the groups' well being. This may be economic or social in nature. Groups that may fall under this group may include trade unions, worker's education, religious and ethnic groups. Individual goals. Individuals usually have short-term goals and in some cases long-term goals. Individuals relate to their needs both motivational and prescriptive. Individuals may lack the skills and knowledge required in the labour market. Such an individual may participate in a nonformal activity that may provide him with skills for a job. It is important to find out how all these policies and goals are articulated at each level. It may be equally important to find out what political and administrative structures have been established to articulate the policies and goals. The next element that is discussed is political and administrative structures. 74 Political and Administrative Structures The administrative structures may be established at each administrative level to plan and implement the objectives and goals outlined in the national plans. Such objectives will include those that direct nonformal education activities. The objectives relate to the different ministries involved in implementing nonformal activities. The list may include some of the following ministries: education, health, agriculture, labour and social services etc. The organization of such ministries may vary in different developing countries. It may be necessary to identify communication links between the ministries at the national, regional, and local planning levels by identifying committees that may exist. The committees may be responsible for legislation of new policies. The administrative structures available may also help solicit funds in the planning process as well the continuation of the flow of funds in the implementation of the plans which affect nonformal education activities. The questions of Table 5 may assist the collection of information on political and administrative structures. The questions in the table may be useful in analyzing and comparing political and administrative structures that are involved in the operation of nonformal education activities. 75 Table 5: List of Questions for Analysis of Political and Administrative Structures Questions N R L • What major administrative structures exist? V • • What political structures exist? • • • What institutions are responsible for financing personnel and curricula associated with nonformal education? • • • • What communication networks exist? • • V • What are the major sources of funding for nonformal education activities? • yj • What links exist between the nonformal education system and the labour market? • • V • To what extent are the administrative structures responsive to the demands of citizens? V • To what degree is there decentralization to regional and local governments? • • • • What are the channels of communication? • • • What are the major interest groups (tribal, labour, religious, business)? • • V • What are the major international pressure groups (e.g., international organizations, trade associations, foreign aid donors, multi-national corporations, etc.)? v/ • What are the sources of funding? v/ • What are the unemployment levels? v/ • • What are the education and skills levels? V • Are there discrepancies between what V • • the national government requires and what is done at the regional and local levels? N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level 76 All the different government ministries and departments are represented at each level. Ideally, there is coordination in planning and implementing policies that are formulated at the national, regional, and local levels for effectiveness and efficiency. These government structures may work together in various committees. The notion of horizontal integration is very necessary at all levels so that nonformal activities and others are integrated from the national level down to the local level. Administrative structures at the regional level serve as a communication link between the national and local levels, so that policies can be tailored to the needs of the region. The structures ensure that vertical integration is maintained through reports from either local or national levels. They are also responsible for collecting data on education and skills levels, unemployment rate, and participation rates in nonformal education activities offered by each operational ministry. Strategies for Development Strategies for development can be equated with alternative methods of achieving stated goals, given the means and constraints of the existing structures. Strategies deal in terms of how the problems may be resolved. Some of the questions that may be raised in order to collect information on development strategies may include some of the questions in Table 6. 77 Table 6: List of Questions for Analysis of Strategies for Development Questions N • What are the major development strategies 1/ / \f (major economic activities)? • To what extent is the national government / involved in the control of economic activities (self-reliance, socialism)? • What structures are established to adopt such development strategies? • What are the production techniques available (capital versus labour intensive)? • What are the productivity levels in various economic activities (agriculture, manufacturing, industry)? • To what degree.is agriculture mechanized? What are the productivity and technology levels? What are the basic primary resource products and annual outputs? What extension services are available? What are the physical limitations to agriculture (e.g., climate)? What is the extent of subsistence farming and cash crop farming? What communication networks exist (radio, telephones, newspapers, television)? What infrastructures exist (roads, railways)? What physical facilities exist (marketing centers, credit unions, cooperatives, and other financial institutions)? What social services are available (schools, hospitals, health centers, farmer training centers)? / / • • • V • • / V V V V / V • V • • • • • V • 1 N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level 78 Strategies that are adopted for national development are important because they reflect the priorities in the modernization process. Strategies may be directed from the national level to the regional and local levels. The administrative structures that have been discussed are responsible for adopting such strategies. Information on major economic activities, the infrastructure and social services available and the degree of mechanization in agriculture are important because these may determine what type of nonformal education activities are offered by all levels. Nonformal Education Agencies It is important to establish which agencies sponsor nonformal education activities and who their target populations are at all administrative levels. Agencies that are involved in nonformal education activities include government, non-governmental, and voluntary organizations. While it is important to identify nonformal education agencies, it is equally important to identify specific types of activities, the target groups, types of learning skills required, participation rate, drop-out rate, education and health standards. The questions listed in Table 7 may be useful in providing information on the agencies involved, types of activities, learning skills required and target groups for the types of activities. 79 Table 7: List of Questions for Analysis of Nonformal Education Agencies Questions N R L • What are the major government agencies that provide nonformal education activities (government, non-governmental, and voluntary assoc iat ions)? • V • What are the major types of nonformal education activities that exist? • • Who are the major consumers for each type of nonformal education activity? • • 0 What are the participation rates? • • • What are the communication channels within the agency and between agencies? • Is there a coordinating body for all the organizations (whether it exists or not)? • • What are the sources of funding for particular organizations? • • What are the education and skills levels? • / • • What communication networks and infrastructures exist? • / • What major social institutions and • / / organizations exist? N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level These questions are useful in obtaining information on the types of activities, the consumers of nonformal education, and communication channels that are available. This leads us into the next element: participant/program characteristics. 80 Participant/Program Characteristics Important information that may be useful in analyzing learner and program characteristics may include; demographic information about sex, age, educational background, participation rate, and the learning skills required. The information on age, sex and educational levels may be collected and compiled during registration of a program and kept by the organization. The organization may be a good source of information. Information collected on the participant may be also relate to the social structure of the client system. Questions may be asked on the socio-economic status and religious affiliations of those who participate in nonformal activities. Information is needed on the programs that relate to who manages the program, who sponsors the program, what type of learning activities are planned in the program and what are the delivery systems of the learning activities. The questions in Table 8 may assist in the collection of such data. This list is not exhaustive but may be useful in providing information on the administrative procedures of a program. Such information may be useful in analyzing and comparing different nonformal education programs. 81 Table 8: List of Questions for Analysis of Participant/Program Characteristics Questions N R L1 • What are the demographic characteristics of / yf learners (sex, age, number)? • What is the nature of participation (voluntary / or non-voluntary) • What is the educational background of learners? j/ • What skill levels do they have? / • What is the primary occupation of learners? y/ y/ • What are the health and nutrition standards? y/ V y/ • What is their religious or ethnic affiliation? / • What are the differences in the standard of / / living and the distribution of wealth? • What are the unemployment levels and spatial y/ y/ y/ distribution? • What is the work force composition and labour / y/ participation rates? • What are the objectives of the program? v/ • Which type of agency manages the program? y/ • What activities are planned in the program? / \J • What strategies are outlined for the delivery y/ of the. learning activities (methods, techniques)? • Who is responsible for managing the programs? / • How do planners communicate with the target y/ population? • Who are the members of the target population? y/ y/ • What are the communication channels used with yf y/ community leaders and the target population (formal or informal)? • How is the target population segmented? y/ / • How are community needs assessed? / • What are the educational and skill levels of / the target population? • What are the health and nutrition standards? / / • What are their religious beliefs and attitudes? y/ • What are the unemployment levels? / • Who is responsible for each task? / y/ • Does the program have a time schedule for y/ y/ y/ implementation? • What about flexibility? What if something goes y/ y/ wrong? N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level 82 It may not be possible to collect all the information from the list of questions in the table. However, specific questions on the characteristics of the learners will provide information on who participates in nonformal education activities. The information is useful in analyzing and comparing learner characterisitics between systems. Some of the questions will provide information on program characteristics such as: the objectives of the program; the communication links between the agency and the target population; the types of learning outcomes planned; and the time schedule for implementation. The nature of participation in nonformal education may be determined by asking whether it is voluntary or non-voluntary. Voluntary Participation. Most nonformal education activities that involve family life education, agricultural extension, community development, and literacy programs are voluntary in nature. Participation in these programs is determined by individual or social need. Non-voluntary Participation. Some programs offered for youth skills training and in-service training programs may not be voluntary. The organizations involved require that individuals improve their knowledge and skills in their work situations. The element following the participant/program characteristics is the learning outcomes that are expected from the nonformal education activity. 83 Learning Outcomes Learning outcomes may be determined by the type of the nonformal education activity. For the purpose of this element, the type of learning outcome will be classified by the general goal of the nonformal education activity. The goals may be differentiated from learning goal outcomes by asking questions on learning outcomes of each general goal. Information concerning learning outcomes or skills to be attained by participants may be collected by looking at each type of nonformal education activity. The type of activity in which a learner is enrolled determines the kinds of learning outcomes he may acquire. The questions of Table 9 are useful in determining the type of learning outcomes. Under each question, other questions on specific learning outcomes may be asked. The questions will provide more specific information on what skills participants acquire. Evaluat ion Evaluation is an important element in planning nonformal education systems. Evaluation allows educators to give an account of the outcomes to sponsors of nonformal education systems in order to ensure future funding. It is also required in order to revise and improve ongoing projects and as a basis for future planning. It is important to decide early how the impact of the educational system will be assessed. Evaluation is a process of measuring progress towards achievement of objectives. 84 Table 9: List of Questions for Analysis of Learning Outcomes Questions N • Are activities designed primarily to prepare \/ j/ / persons, mostly youth, for entry into employment? • Are activities designed for in-service training / activities oriented primarily to the development of skills and knowledge of the members of the labour force? • Are activities designed to offer educational \f \f possibilities in agricultural extension, health, family life education, functional literacy, basic literacy, income-generating activities? • Are activities designed for community 1/ / improvement which include community development, self-help projects, income-generating activities (at community level), and cooperative education? • Are activities designed to offer civic skills, \J \/ / e.g., knowledge of how local and national governments function? N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level There are two kinds of evaluation: formative and summative evaluation. Some of the questions in Table 10 may be useful in providing information on evaluation. These questions are useful in providing information for analyzing evaluation of nonformal education activities at the three levels. 85 Table 10: List of Questions for Analysis of Evaluation Questions N R L • What procedures are used to assess the impact of the program? • • • Who conducts the evaluation (instructors, outside consultants, participants, sponsors)? • Who is responsible for the evaluation? • • • What is the role of each type of evaluation and how are their efforts coordinated? • • • When does evaluation take place (formative and summative)? • • How is the evaluation achieved (daily, weekly, monthly assessments, discussions, meetings, interim reports)? • • What are the sources for funding the evaluation process? • • • How are the data be collected? • • What kind of data are collected? / • How are the data analyzed? • • V a How are the data used? V • • N - National Level R - Regional Level L - Local Level Applying the Framework The framework that has been described is a tool that can be used to analyze nonformal education systems. It is possible to use the framework to compare and contrast different nonformal education systems. The framework uses three levels of analysis: national, regional, and local. Questions developed under each element will provide the information for analysis and comparison at all three levels. Since the questions that are provided in the framework have not been tested, alternative questions may be used when collecting information on all elements. 86 In the national planning process the framework may be useful in identifying those who plan; national policies, goals and objectives; government departments that are involved in planning nonformal education activities; the degree of integration in the planning and implementation of nonformal education activities between the various government ministries and other nongovernment organizations and associations. It is possible to identify whether policies and goals at regional and local levels are congruent with those at the national level. It will provide information on participation rates and funding of nonformal education. Such information is useful for analyzing and comparing nonformal education programs of different systems. Information collected on the participant/program characteristics is useful for the analysis and comparison of learner and program characteristics from different systems. It provides the basis for comparing the consumers of nonformal education activities: whether they have similar characteristics or not. The list of questions used may vary from situation to situation but the characteristics of the learners would be identified and form the basis for analysis and comparison. 87 Conclusion The framework developed is a useful tool for analyzing and comparing nonformal education activities of different systems. Nonformal education takes different forms and operates under different conditions in different countries, but the overall purpose of nonformal education activities is to provide educational activities to diverse groups of people. This may be achieved through face-to-face communication, through radio, or through television. In order to achieve such objectives it has to be planned within the broad national planning and modernization process. Although as yet untested, the framework developed in this study provides a potentially useful structure for analyzing and comparing the planning process of different nonformal education systems at three levels: national, regional, and local. The questions raised on each element would be used to provide the necessary information for analysis and comparison. 88 CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary One of the purposes of adult education is to bring social and economic change to individuals (Apps, 1973; Freire, 1973). Although most adult education programs tend to emphasize individual self-actualization (Knowles, 1980; Verner, 1969), it is important to focus on adult education programs that emphasize learning outcomes that may assist individual learners to change their social and economic situation (Lowe, 1970). This is important in developing countries where the large majority of adults live in very difficult conditions relating to health, food production, maternal and child care and the general rural infrastructure. These conditions can only change if the adults have opportunities to learn skills, knowledge and attitudes that are required. Nonformal education is the area of education that is concerned with satisfying diverse learning needs of the majority of adults in rural areas of developing countries (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coles, 1982). The study has attempted to analyze the concept of nonformal education by looking at its development as reflected in the literature of the past 12 years. Although there is general agreement on the definition of nonformal education as developed by Coombs (1974), there is no general agreement on the role of nonformal education in 89 national development. The concept of nonformal education was developed as a response to finding alternatives to formal schooling and other adult education structures. Nonformal education is seen as one of the major alternatives that can be useful to developing countries to uplift the majority of the population who are left out by formal schooling. Nonformal education has received much attention by both planners and funding agencies which has resulted in building supporting structures into existing nonformal education programs and establishing new ones (Coombs, 1980; Evans, 1983; Coles, 1982). For nonformal education programs to have a greater impact on the population they are to serve, some theorists argue that programs need to be planned at the national level (Coombs, 1974, 1980; Coles, 1982). Such planning should involve the setting up of a coordinating body to give direction to nonformal programs both conducted by government and non-governmental agencies though the latter may continue to maintain their autonomy. It is believed that such coordination would assist in ensuring that the most deprived individuals in society are reached and through their participation in nonformal education programs, improve their social, economic and political situation. But others argue that institutionalization of nonformal education programs may limit their effectiveness since most programs are run by non-governmental 90 organizations (Bock, 1976; Paulston, 1976; LaBelle, 1976) The institutionalization of nonformal encourages the state to extend its powers by legitimizing the low status of the participants from nonformal education programs. This process may also limit the flexibility of nonformal education as one of its potentials. From such positions, it is important that developing countries set up both government-instituted nonformal education programs as well as nonformal education programs that are organized by the initiative of non-governmental organizations and voluntary associations. The political environment, social, economic factors of a particular country will determine how much state control will set up for supervising nonformal education programs and how much coordination will be established of the different nonformal education programs. Research Studies in Nonformal Education The study included a review of selected major research studies that have been conducted on nonformal education (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coombs, 1980; LaBelle, 1975, 1976; Sheffield & Diejomaoh, 1972). The studies by Coombs and Ahmed (1974) and Sheffield and Diejomaoh (1972) indicated that most of the nonformal education projects were relatively small in size, involving a very small fraction of clientele for which they were designed. Even those nonformal education programs that were large, were small in comparison to their overall needs for educational services 91 of a developing country. Such findings are reflected in nearly all projects in Africa, Asia and Latin America (LaBelle (1976), for the Latin American studies). One major observation made by LaBelle (1976) in Latin America was the idea for changing individual attitudes, knowledge and skills. Such change will not help an individual to function better in a society where social, economic, and political relations are changed. LaBelle (1976) strongly argues that unless other social relations change, the impact of nonformal education programs will be minimal. Some findings of the studies indicate a lack of linkage between nonformal education and employment agencies. Bock and Papagiannis (1976) argue that nonformal education generally lacks the credentialing power which formal education possesses. Participating in nonformal education programs does not increase the probability of finding employment as is the case with formal schooling. At the same time since nonformal education requires a certain amount of schooling as entrance requirements, it does exclude large groups of people in the population most in need of training. As such nonformal education does not help to reduce the inequalities that exist in society. 92 Areas of Future Research A framework that has been developed is useful in analyzing and comparing nonformal education systems on all the elements that were developed. It is possible to conduct research and collect data for an analysis and comparison between different systems at the three levels: national, regional, and local. Analyzing and Comparing National Systems The national planning process of different nonformal education systems can be compared using information gathered through some of the questions provided. It is possible to analyze how planning of nonformal education is conducted in different systems by looking at the political and administrative structures, and other organizations involved in the planning process. Analyzing and Comparing Regional Systems Analysis and comparison of the planning process of nonformal education systems can be performed at the regional level. The questions that have been provided in the framework would form the basis for analysis and comparison between systems on each element discussed. The regional policies, administrative structures, nonformal education agencies and other organizations that are involved in planning nonformal education activities within the different systems can be compared. 93 Analyzing and Comparing Local Systems Since nonformal education activities are so diverse and flexible, the local level analysis is very important. It is at the local level where those that are left out of the formal education system can be reached. Planning of nonformal education at the local level is important, as it is at this level that peoples' demands are articulated. Research can be conducted to analyze and compare local level systems using the questions provided in the framework. Conclusions Most research on nonformal education has dealt with two major areas, the definitional problem and the impact on nonformal education on the clientele and its impact or contribution to national development. Several research surveys have tried to identify nonformal education projects which exist. They have tried to identify their major characteristics, their client systems, their organization and linkage with other educational systems (Sheffield & Diejomaoh, 1972; Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The studies were conducted in order to find out the impact of nonformal educationactivities on the community in order to find ways of improving them. Research on nonformal education tends to be descriptive. Empirical studies that have been conducted focus on the impact of nonformal education on the population without finding out 94 what changes really occur after these programs are over. Although nonformal programs are flexible enough to ensure participation of their client system, little research has been done in the area of client participation, in order to find out how life styles change through participation. The type of participation that is encouraged in most nonformal education programs is individual participation. But little research has been conducted on group or community participation to find out how communities have been transformed through participating in nonformal education. It is very difficult for an individual to implement change in his life style but it is easier for groups of people to change their social and economic situation through working together. Individual participation also encourages only those who have a positive self-concept and well-off to participate in a program. Pigozzi (1979) argued against the negative effects of participation. She argued that while participation of certain individuals in a program may have positive effects on communities, in some situations, participation of some individuals may be, have negative effects because others may not wish to come to participate in a program where those individuals are participating. Research on nonformal education has concentrated on determining what nonformal education programs exist and where they exist. Few research studies have been conducted to determine the impact of nonformal education programs. 95 Research into what social and economic changes occur for those who participate in a nonformal education program needs to be done. It is also necessary to assess the type of structural changes that are required in the community to foster change. Another area of research relates to the motivation of those who participate in nonformal education. An investigation of the psychological factors which impede or foster change is needed. Many theorists have written on the potential of nonformal education in reaching large populations of people who are excluded from other education systems, but little work has been done to test the theories of integrated nonformal education programs at the national, regional, and local levels of planning. This kind of research would determine the factors that promote or hinder integration and in this way influence future planning. 96 REFERENCES Ahmed, M. & Coombs, P. (1975). Education for rural  development. New York: Praeger. American Psychological Association. (1983). Manual of the  American Psychological Assocaition. Washington: Author. Anderson, C.A. (1973). Fostering and inhibiting factors. In C.S. (Ed.), New strategies for educational  development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Anderson, C.A. (1974). Effective education for agriculture. In P. Forster and J.R. Sheffield (Eds.), Education for Rural Development. The World  Book of Education. London: Evans Brothers. Apps, J.W. (1973). Towards a working philosophy of adult  education. Syracuse: ERIC. Apter, D.E. (1968). System, process and the politics of economic development. In J.L. Finkle and R.W. Galde (Eds.), Political development and social  change. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Barber, E.G. (1981). General education versus special education for rural development. Comparative  Education Review, 25(2), 216-243. Bennett, C.F. (1975). Up the hierarchy. Journal of  Extension, 13, 7-12. Bertelsen, P.H. (1980). The role of adult education in  reducing inequalities and raising levels of  professional qualifications and standards. Paper presented to UNESCO Conference of Adult Education. New Delhi. Bock, J.C. (1976). The institutionalization of non-formal education. Comparative Education, 20(3), 346-367. Bock, J.C. (1983). Institutionalization of nonformal education: a response to conflicting needs. J.C. Bock and G.J. Papagiannis (Eds.), Nonformal  education and national development. New York: Praeger. Bock, J.C. & Papagiannis, G.J. (Eds). (1983a). Nonformal  education and national development. New York: Praeger. 97 Bock, J.C. & Papagiannis, G.J. (1983b). The paradoxes of nonformal education: the unplanned emergence of strong participation. In J.C. Bock and G.J. Papagiannis (Eds.), Nonformal education and  national development. New York: Praeger. Borg, W.R. & Gall, M.D. (1979). Educational Research. New York: Longman. Bowles, S. (1979). Education, class, conflict, and uneven development. In J. Simmons (Ed.), The education  dilemma. New York: Pergamon Press. Brembeck, C.S. (1973). The strategic uses of formal and nonformal education. In C.S. Brembeck (Ed.), New  strategies for educational development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Buskey, J.H. & Sork, T.J. (1982). From chaos to order in  program planning. Paper presented at the 23rd Adult Education Research Conference. Lincoln. Callaway, A. (1973). Frontiers of out-of-school education. In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New strategies for educational development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Cardasco, F. & Gatner, E.S.M. (1964). Research and Report  Writing. New York: Barnes & Noble Inc. Carnoy, M. (1980). Can education alone solve the problem of unemployment? In J. Simmons (Ed.), The  education dilemma. New York: Pergamon Press. Carnoy, M. (1982). Education for alternative development. Comparative Education Review, 26(2): 160-177. Coady, M.M. (1939). Masters of their destiny. New York: Harper. Coleman, J.S. (1966). Education and political development. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Coles, E.K.T. (1982). The maverick of the education  family: two essays in nonformal education. New York: Pergamon Press. Coombs, P.H. (1968). The world educational crisis: a  systems analysis. London: Oxford University Press. 98 Coombs, P.H. (1973). How shall we plan nonformal education? In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New strategies for educational development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Coombs, P.H. (1974). Attacking rural poverty, The John Hopkins University Press. Baltimore: Coombs, P.H. (1976). Nonformal education: myths, realities, and opportunities. Comparative  Education Review, 20(3), 281-293. Coombs, Coombs, Cross, P.H. (1980). Meeting the needs of the poor. New York: Pergamon Press. P.H., et al. York: UNICEF. P. (1981). Jossey-Bass. (1973). New paths to learning. New Adults as learners. San Francisco: Duverger, M. (1961). Introduction to the social sciences. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd. D.R. (1981). Educational policy dilemma for rural areas. Comparative Education Review, 25(2), 232-243. Evans Evans, D.R. (1981). The planning of nonformal education. Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning. Evans, D.R. (1983). Participation in nonformal education at the local level: Ghana and Indonesia. In J.C. Bock and G.J. Papagiannis (Eds.), Nonformal  education and national development. New York: Praeger. Faure, E. (1972). Learning to be: education for tomorrow. Paris: UNESCO. Foley, G. (1976). Diffusion or mobilisation? An important theoretical issue. Australian Journal of  Adult Education, J_6( 1 ) , 18-23. Forster, P. & Sheffield, J.R. (1974). Education and rural  development. The World Year Book of Education. London: Evans Brothers. Freire, P. (1973). The pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press. 99 Freire, P. (1982). Education for critical consciousness. In R. Gross (Ed.), Invitation to lifelong learning. Chicago: Foulett. Grandstaff, M. (1973). Are formal schools the best schools for education? In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New strategies for educational  development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Grandstaff, M. (1974). Alternatives in education. Study  Team Reports. East Lansing: Michigan State University. Grandstaff, M. (1976). Nonformal education: some indications for use. Comparative Education Review, 20(3) . Green, D.G. (1974). Nonformal education for agricultural development: a systems perspective. In P. Forster and J.R. Sheffield (Eds.), Education for rural  development. The world book of education. London: Evans Brothers. Guyot, J. (1973). Who gets what when education is deformalized. In C.S. Brembeck (Ed.), New  strategies for educational development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Hall, B. (1975). Participatory research: an approach for change. Convergence, 2, 24-32. Hall, B. (1978). Creating knowledge; breaking the  monopoly, research methods, participation and  development. Participatory Research Project, Working Paper No. 1_. Toronto: Toronto International Council for Adult Education. Harbison, F.H. (1973). Human resources and nonformal education. In C.S. Brembeck (Ed.), New strategies  for educational development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Hoghielm, R. & Rubenson, K. (Eds.). (1980). Adult  education for social change. Stockholm: Lund. Houle, C. (1972). The design of education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Karabel, J. & Halsey, A.H. (Eds.). (-1977). Power and  idealogy in education. New York: Oxford University Press. 100 Reesing, R.M. (1981)- From the ground up: towards development without dependency. Australian Journal  of Adult Education, J_6(4), 122-126. LaBelle, T.J. (1976). Goals and strategies of nonformal education in Latin America. Comparative Education  Review, 20(3), 328-345. LaBelle, T.J. (1979). Liberation, development and rural nonformal education. In R.O. Niehoff (Ed.), Nonformal education and the rural poor. East Lansing: Michigan State University. LaBelle, T.J. (1981). An introduction of the nonformal education of children and youth. Comparative  Education Review, 25(3), 313-329. Lengrad, P. (1980). An introduction to lifelong learning. Paris: UNESCO Press. Lindeman, E.C. (1961). The meaning of adult education. Montreal: Harvest House. Lerner, D. (1958). The passing of traditional society in  the Middle East. Lowe, J. (1970). Adult education and nation building. A symposium on adult education in developing countries. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Lowe, J. (1975). The education of adults: a world  perspective. Paris: UNESCO. Muluso, T. (1982). Structured courses a strategy for rural development. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts. Muyeed, A. (1982). Some reflections on education for rural development. International Review of  Education, 28(2), 227-238. Myrdal, G. (1957). Economic theory and underdeveloped  regions. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd. Neff, K. (1979). Working on nonformal education and the rural poor. In R.O. Niehoff (Ed.), Nonformal  education and the rural poor. East Lansing: Michigan State University. Niehoff, R.O. (Ed.). (1979). Nonformal education and the  rural poor. East Lansing: Michigan State University. 101 Oxenham, J. (1975). Nonformal education: approaches to  teaching literacy. East Lansing: Michigan State University.-Parson, T. (1970). A paradigm for the analysis of social systems and change. In N.J. Demerath and R.W.K. Paterson (Eds.), System, change and conflict. New York: Free Press. Paterson, R.W.K. (1971). Aspects of adult education. In  Studies in Adult Education, 3(1), 15-27. Paulston, R.G. (1973). Nonformal educational alternatives. In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New strategies for educational strategies. Lexington: Lexington Books. Paulston, R.G. (1976). Nonformal education: a symposium. Comparative Education Review, 20(3), 278-367. Paulston, R.G. (1977). Social and educational change: conceptual frameworks. Comparative Education  Review, 2J_( 2/3) , 370-395. Paulston, R.G. & LeRoy, G. (1980). Other dreams, other  schools: folk colleges in social and ethnic  movements. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh. Pigozzi, M.J. (1982). Participation in nonformal education projects: some possible negative outcomes. Convergence: International Journal of  Adult Education. Rubenson, K. (1982). Adult education and the quality of life. Learning, 3(4), 6-8. Rubenson, K. (1982). Interaction between formal and  nonformal education. Paper presented at the ICAE conference, Paris: ICAE. Rubenson, K. (1983). Barriers to participation in adult  education. Discussion paper prepared for Skills Development Leave Task Force. Ottawa: Ministry of Labour Canada. Sheffield, J.R. & Diejomaoh. (1972). Nonformal education in Africa. New York: African-American Institute. Simkins, J.T. (1975). Nonformal education and development. Manchester Monograph Series. 1 02 Simmons, J. (1979). An overview of the policy issues in the 1980's. In J. Simmons (Ed.), The education  dilemma. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Smelser, N.J. (1968). Mechanisms of change and adjustment to change. In J.L. Finkle and R.W. Gable (Eds.), Political development and social change. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Sork, T.J. (1981). The postmortem audit: improving programs by examining failures. Lifelong Learning:  The Adult Years, 5(3), 6-7, 31. Steele, S.M. (1970). Program evaluation - a broader definition. Journal of Extension, 8, 5-17. Schatz, S. (1969). Crude private neo-colonialism. Journal of Modern African Studies, 7(4), 677-688. Turabian, K.L. (1973). A manual for writers of term  papers, theses and dissertations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tuckman, B.W. (1978). Conducting educational research. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. UNESCO. (1975). Manual for the collection of adult  education statistics. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO. (1976). Lifelong learning. Paris: UNESCO. Verner, C. (1964). Definitions of terms. In G. Jensen, A.A. Livergert, & W. Hallenbeck (Eds.), Adult  educat ion. Waisenen, F.B. (1973). Individual modernity and nonformal education. In C.S. Brombeck (Ed.), New strategies  for educational development. Lexington: Lexington Books. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 9 2
Philippines 4 0
Japan 2 0
France 2 0
Brazil 2 0
Unknown 1 0
Vietnam 1 1
City Views Downloads
Unknown 7 0
Ashburn 3 0
Santiago 2 0
Nashville 2 0
Tokyo 2 0
Sunnyvale 1 1
Hanoi 1 1
San Juan 1 0
Mountain View 1 1
Redmond 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055772/manifest

Comment

Related Items