UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Development of a framework for analyzing nonformal education systems 1985

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1985_A8 M85.pdf [ 4.66MB ]
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
Citation
1.0055772.ris

Full Text

DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS by ELIZABETH CISECE MUMBA Diploma i n Teaching, Nkrumah Teacher's C o l l e g e , 1970 B.A. (Ed.), The U n i v e r s i t y of Zambia, 1976 M.S. Indiana U n i v e r s i t y , 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 A d m i n i s t r a t i v e , A d u l t And Higher Education) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA January 1985 © E l i z a b e t h C i s e c e 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 i t 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 i s 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 ( V W c J U \«. Vjfa DE-6 (3/81) ABSTRACT T h i s study analyzes the concept of nonformal education and p r o v i d e s a framework f o r a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. Nonformal education i s seen by p o l i c y makers and funding agencies as one of the a l t e r n a t i v e s to formal s c h o o l i n g t hat may a s s i s t d e veloping c o u n t r i e s i n the modernization process. Nonformal education i s d e f i n e d as any s y s t e m a t i c l e a r n i n g that i s p r o v i d e d o u t s i d e the formal system to meet the l e a r n i n g needs of a d u l t s as w e l l as children.. In order to achieve the o b j e c t i v e s of the study, two separate l i t e r a t u r e reviews are p r o v i d e d . F i r s t l y , a review of the l i t e r a t u r e on the concept of nonformal educ a t i o n i s p r o v i d e d . The review analyzes how the concept of nonformal education has developed. I t d i s c u s s e s some i s s u e s r e g a r d i n g d e f i n i t i o n a l problems; major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of nonformal education and the major d i f f e r e n c e s between nonformal education and formal e d u c a t i o n . V a r i o u s t h e o r i e s that r e l a t e to nonformal educ a t i o n and development are d i s c u s s e d . F o l l o w i n g the c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s , a review . of s e l e c t e d r e s e a r c h that has been conducted on nonformal educ a t i o n i n the l a s t twelve years i s p r o v i d e d . Only major c r o s s - c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s are reviewed as they p r o v i d e a b a s i s f o r comparison. C o n c l u s i o n s of the s t u d i e s are d i s c u s s e d . A framework i s p r o v i d e d f o r a n a l y z i n g and comparing nonformal education systems. The framework i d e n t i f i e s t h r e e l e v e l s of a n a l y s i s : n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l . The major elements of the framework are d i s c u s s e d and q u e s t i o n s are p r o v i d e d i n d i c a t i n g at which l e v e l they can be asked. Major c o n c l u s i o n s of the study are d i s c u s s e d in terms of p l a n n i n g nonformal education systems. Some recommendations f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h are p r o v i d e d . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES v i LIST OF FIGURES v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i i i CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Background of the Problem 1 O b j e c t i v e s of the Study 7 Questions to be Answered 8 D e f i n i t i o n s of Terms to be Used . 8 Adul t Education 8 Formal Education 9 Nonformal Education 10 Informal Education 11 Rura l Development 11 Le a r n i n g 12 Ex t e n s i o n Workers 12 I n t e g r a t i o n 12 Developing c o u n t r i e s 14 Mode r n i z a t i o n 15 D e l i m i t a t i o n of the Study 15 O r g a n i z a t i o n of the Remaining Chapters 16 CHAPTER TWO: NONFORMAL EDUCATION: A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS 17 Review of the L i t e r a t u r e on the Concept of Nonformal Education 17 H i s t o r i c a l Background of the Concept 17 R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Formal, Nonformal and Informal Education 20 Purpose of Nonformal Education 27 Major D i f f e r e n c e s Between Formal and Nonformal Education 27 Educatio n i n Rural and Urban Areas 31 Nonformal Education and Development 35 S t r u c t u r a l f u n c t i o n a l i s m 36 C o n f l i c t t h e o r i e s 37 C o n c l u s i o n 43 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH ON NONFORMAL EDUCATION 4 5 Review of the L i t e r a t u r e on Research on Nonformal Education 45 D e s c r i p t i v e Research Surveys 46 F i n d i n g s of the Surveys 51 Inadequate Programs 51 F a c i l i t i e s 55 Costs 55 E v a l u a t i o n 56 V C o o r d i n a t i o n 56 Other Research S t u d i e s on Nonformal Education 57 I m p l i c a t i o n s of the F i n d i n g s to Planning Nonformal Education Programs 59 C o n c l u s i o n 63 CHAPTER FOUR: FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING AND COMPARING NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS 67 Need f o r a Framework 67 O r g a n i z a t i o n of the Framework 68 Elements of the Framework 68 P o l i c i e s , Goals and O b j e c t i v e s 69 Long-term goals and p o l i c i e s 72 Short-term or immediate goals and p o l i c i e s ... 72 I n s t i t u t i o n a l g o als and p o l i c i e s 72 Community goals 73 S o c i a l c o l l e c t i v e advocacy group goals 73 I n d i v i d u a l goals 73 P o l i t i c a l and A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S t r u c t u r e s 74 S t r a t e g i e s f o r Development 76 Nonformal Education Agencies 78 P a r t i c i p a n t / P r o g r a m C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 80 V o l u n t a r y P a r t i c i p a t i o n 82 Non-voluntary P a r t i c i p a t i o n 82 L e a r n i n g Outcomes 83 E v a l u a t i o n 83 A p p l y i n g the Framework 85 C o n c l u s i o n 87 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 88 Summary 88 Research Stud i e s i n Nonformal Education 90 Areas of Future Research 92 A n a l y z i n g and Comparing N a t i o n a l Systems 92 A n a l y z i n g and Comparing Regional Systems 92 A n a l y z i n g and Comparing L o c a l Systems 93 C o n c l u s i o n s 93 REFERENCES 96 v i LIST OF TABLES Table 1: A Comparison of the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Nonformal and Formal Education 28 Table 2: I l l u s t r a t i v e R ural O c c u p a t i o n a l Groups and T h e i r Learning Needs 33 Table 3: Estimated E x t e n s i o n Workers and Farm F a m i l i e s i n S e l e c t e d C o u n t r i e s 53 Table 4: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of P o l i c i e s , Goals and O b j e c t i v e s 70 Table 5: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of P o l i t i c a l and A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S t r u c t u r e s 75 Table 6: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of S t r a t e g i e s f o r Development 77 Table 7: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of Nonformal Education Agencies 79 Table 8: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of P a r t i c i p a n t / P r o g r a m C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 81 Table 9: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of Learning Outcomes 84 Table 10: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of E v a l u a t i o n . 85 v i i LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e 1: L a B e l l e ' s Typology 24 F i g u r e 2: R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Formal and Nonformal Education Ladders 26 F i g u r e 3: V e r t i c a l l y and H o r i z o n t a l l y , the P r o v i n c e - D i s t r i c t L e v e l Committee 34 F i g u r e 4: Paulston's Framework of Nonformal Education Systems 38 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to thank a l l the people who played a r o l e i n the completion of t h i s t h e s i s . The g r e a t e s t debt of g r a t i t u d e i s owed to my two s u p e r v i s o r s , Dr. K j e l l Rubenson and Dr. Thomas Sork, whose p a t i e n c e , understanding and i n s i g h t throughout the e n t i r e process c o n t r i b u t e d immeasurably to the f i n a l r e s u l t . I am t h a n k f u l to both of them e q u a l l y f o r o f f e r i n g u n f a i l i n g support and a s s i s t a n c e during a l l stages, and were e s p e c i a l l y h e l p f u l with r e s p e c t to t h e i r own p a r t i c u l a r areas of e x p e r t i s e . I would l i k e to thank my two c h i l d r e n f o r the understanding and forbearance which they so generously d i s p l a y e d d u r i n g some of the more t r y i n g p eriods i n the w r i t i n g of t h i s t h e s i s . I am t h a n k f u l to my mother and fat h e r f o r b e l i e v i n g i n and f o r always remembering me i n t h e i r p r a y e r s . I would l i k e to thank Dr. S i t w a l a Imenda and Bruce M c G i l l i v r a y f o r ty p i n g the t h e s i s . L a s t l y , I would l i k e to thank Dr. John MacKinley of Indiana U n i v e r s i t y f o r a l l h i s support through h i s constant correspondence to me and f o r i n s p i r i n g my i n i t i a l i n t e r e s t i n t h i s area of study. T h i s work i s d e d i c a t e d to him. 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Problem One of the purposes of a d u l t education i s to help b r i n g s o c i a l and economic change to i n d i v i d u a l s and t h e i r communities (Apps, 1973). I t i s c l e a r l y e v ident that most of the developing, c o u n t r i e s of the world w i l l r e q u i r e a d u l t education programs that are responsive to the problems they are f a c i n g i n order to improve the l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s of the m a j o r i t y of t h e i r p o p u l a t i o n s . One area of education that has been i d e n t i f i e d as one of the a l t e r n a t i v e s to some of the e x i s t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l programs i s the area of nonformal education (Coombs, 1968). Coombs (1968) argued that although there have been l a r g e investments i n the e d u c a t i o n a l systems of the dev e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s , such high c o s t s of e d u c a t i o n a l expansion have not been matched or r e l a t e d to employment requirements of the urban and r u r a l s e c t o r s . T h i s has r e s u l t e d i n primary school graduates having no jobs and u s u a l l y roaming about i n towns. The schools do not f o s t e r s k i l l s that are u s e f u l e i t h e r f o r employment or f o r self-employment f o r the r u r a l c h i l d r e n . The major modernization e f f o r t s of many developing c o u n t r i e s have con c e n t r a t e d on a few urban c e n t r e s at the ne g l e c t of the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n that s t i l l l i v e i n the r u r a l areas (Coombs, 1974). Although high investments were made i n the e d u c a t i o n a l systems, there has 2 been a widening gap between the modern urban areas and the t r a d i t i o n a l r u r a l areas. Coombs (1968) recommended that p a r t of the s o l u t i o n to such problems i s the i n t r o d u c t i o n of c a p i t a l i n t e n s i v e e d u c a t i o n a l technology, improved teacher t r a i n i n g , i n c r e a s e d f o r e i g n a i d and the expansion of nonformal education (Bock & Papagiannis, 1983). Coombs (1974) advocated nonformal education as p a r t of the r u r a l development s t r a t e g y so that the p o p u l a t i o n s who are l e f t out of the modernization process can be reached. D i s c u s s i o n s on nonformal education as an a l t e r n a t i v e to formal education have tended to dwell on d e f i n i t i o n s . While some have more f a i t h i n the p o t e n t i a l of nonformal education to enhance development e f f o r t s (Coombs, 1974; C o l e s , 1982; G r a n d s t a f f , 1972), others have ca u t i o n e d that i t s c o n t r i b u t i o n s to development w i l l be l i m i t e d without changing the e x i s t i n g s o c i a l order (Carnoy, 1976; L a B e l l e , 1975; Bock, 1976; P a u l s t o n , 1976). Nonformal education i s seen by some as a powerful instrument f o r development because i t can p r o v i d e education f o r those who are l e f t out of the school system; as i t can make new s k i l l s and a t t i t u d e s a v a i l a b l e to the r u r a l poor; and because i t can use scarce e d u c a t i o n a l resources more e f f i c i e n t l y . T h i s would in turn l e a d to an improvement i n the q u a l i t y of l i f e of the m a j o r i t y of the r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n s . Since nonformal education i s d i v e r s i f i e d , i t i s hoped that i t w i l l a l l e v i a t e poverty and reduce the growing gap between r u r a l and urban areas brought about by i 3 e a r l i e r development e f f o r t s and e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s . Much has been w r i t t e n about the p o t e n t i a l of nonformal educ a t i o n as an a l t e r n a t i v e to formal s c h o o l i n g and as an important t o o l to the development process (Coombs, 1974; G r a n d s t a f f , 1972; Coles 1982) but there has been no general agreement as to the r o l e of nonformal education i n development and how nonformal education ought to f u n c t i o n i n developing c o u n t r i e s ( P a u l s t o n , 1976). While some advocate that nonformal education should be l i n k e d to other e d u c a t i o n a l systems and other i n s t i t u t i o n s of the s t a t e (Coombs, 1974, 1980; Coles, 1982) others argue that when nonformal education i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d , i t perpetuates the e x i s t i n g i n e q u a l i t i e s i n the s t a t e . They argue that nonformal education should operate independently so that group Jand i n d i v i d u a l goals may be achieved (Bock, 1976; L a B e l l e , 1975; P a u l s t o n , 1976). It has become necessary to understand the concept of nonformal education and expl o r e the best ways to organize and u t i l i z e nonformal education programs i n developing c o u n t r i e s . Nonformal education should be seen as pa r t of the l a r g e r s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l system, and p a r t of the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system (Coombs et a l , 1974). T h i s study i s important i n so f a r as i t attempts to analyze the concept of nonformal education and pr o v i d e s a framework for a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. The study makes the assumption that investment i n education, i n c l u d i n g nonformal educ a t i o n , i s a p r i o r i t y of the 4 planners and p o l i c y makers i n developing c o u n t r i e s . In the past, developing c o u n t r i e s have i n v e s t e d s u b s t a n t i a l amounts of scarce resources f o r the expansion of education at a l l l e v e l s . While governments have continued i n v e s t i n g i n e d u c a t i o n , the p u b l i c have continued t o demand more education f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n and f o r themselves. To the i n d i v i d u a l , s c h o o l i n g i s seen 6 as a t o o l of the new modernizing p r o c e s s . To the government education i s seen as a t o o l f o r p r o v i d i n g c i t i z e n s with modern values and b e l i e f s and the s k i l l s that are r e q u i r e d f o r n a t i o n a l development (Bock and Papagiannis, 1983). But although governments have i n v e s t e d l a r g e amounts of resources i n educati o n , they can n e i t h e r meet the r i s i n g high c o s t s of formal s c h o o l i n g nor the demand f o r education r e s u l t i n g from i n c r e a s i n g p o p u l a t i o n s (Simmons, 1979). The output from the formal education system cannot be absorbed by the labour market. T h i s has l e d to great disappointments, both to i n d i v i d u a l s and to governments. While many c o u n t r i e s continue to i n v e s t i n formal education i t has become i n c r e a s i n g l y c l e a r that u n i v e r s a l primary education i s f a r from being a t t a i n e d i n many c o u n t r i e s (Coles, 1982). Acco r d i n g to the Un i t e d Nations E d u c a t i o n a l , S c i e n t i f i c , and C u l t u r a l O r g a n i z a t i o n (UNESCO, 1975) p r o j e c t i o n s , the number of young people who w i l l be denied formal s c h o o l i n g world-wide i s 240 m i l l i o n i n 1985, compared to 128 m i l l i o n i n 1975. These f i g u r e s exclude a d u l t s who lack any kind of ed u c a t i o n . 5 Some of the major arguments a g a i n s t the e x i s t i n g formal e d u c a t i o n a l system in developing c o u n t r i e s i s that i t s c u r r i c u l u m does not allow young school l e a v e r s to f u n c t i o n w i t h i n r u r a l communities. The great expansion of the e d u c a t i o n a l system, both at primary and secondary l e v e l s , has not been matched with expansion of employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s . Such a t r e n d has r e s u l t e d i n r u r a l - u r b a n m i g r a t i o n of school l e a v e r s i n search of employment. The c o s t s of m a i n t a i n i n g schools have been r i s i n g while the demand f o r more s c h o o l i n g has been r i s i n g (Simmons, 1979). Formal s c h o o l i n g has c o n t r i b u t e d to the e x i s t i n g i n e q u a l i t i e s between the r u r a l and urban c e n t r e s through both labour m i g r a t i o n and the unequal d i s t r i b u t i o n of income. Nonformal education has been put forward as an a l t e r n a t i v e that can h e l p school l e a v e r s a t t a i n s k i l l s t r a i n i n g f o r s e l f employment so as to be able to f u n c t i o n w i t h i n r u r a l communities (Coombs, 1974). Nonformal education may a s s i s t those who are l e f t out of the formal system to a c q u i r e knowledge and s k i l l s f o r an improved l i f e . But, before adopting nonformal education as a s t r a t e g y f o r development i t i s important to understand the concept. Adult education programs tend to c o n c e n t r a t e t h e i r e f f o r t s on remedial a c t i v i t i e s t h a t are geared to improving q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of those who are employed and those seeking employment (Lowe, 1970). These programs tend to f o l l o w the c u r r i c u l u m of the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system. In former 6 B r i t i s h c o l o n i e s , they f o l l o w the p a t t e r n of B r i t i s h l i b e r a l a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . Such programs tend to favour urban groups and n e g l e c t the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n of r u r a l a r e a s . These programs are designed to b u i l d upon foundations a c q u i r e d i n e a r l i e r s c h o o l i n g and n e g l e c t other l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s such as nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . The developing c o u n t r i e s are faced with the dilemma of where to concentrate t h e i r e f f o r t s : whether to i n v e s t i n the education of the young or of a d u l t s (Lowe, 1970). The area of nonformal education i s o f t e n ignored and at times not t r e a t e d as pa r t of the education system i n many developing c o u n t r i e s . Coombs (1974) recommended that nonformal education should be o f f e r e d using an i n t e g r a t e d approach. A l l e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s that are o f f e r e d by d i f f e r e n t departments at the l o c a l l e v e l should be i n t e g r a t e d at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l (Coombs, 1974, 1980). They should a l s o be c o o r d i n a t e d with other a c t i v i t i e s of non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s and v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s . T h i s means that those working at the l o c a l l e v e l need to work together s i n c e they are a d d r e s s i n g the same c l i e n t s and f o c u s i n g on the a c t i v i t i e s that a f f e c t d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s of t h e i r c l i e n t e l e . At times, what i s termed nonformal education i s not seen as an e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y by the government departments. Nonformal education i s o f f e r e d by d i f f e r e n t departments and other non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s s e p a r a t e l y . These o r g a n i z a t i o n s do not c o - o r d i n a t e t h e i r e f f o r t s and sometimes compete with each 7 ot h e r . Many planners have advocated an i n t e g r a t e d approach i n o f f e r i n g nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coles, 1982). However, i n order to adopt such a s t r a t e g y , the plann i n g of nonformal education should be i n t e g r a t e d at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l (Coombs, 1974). The major problems of many developing c o u n t r i e s may be l i s t e d as: 1. 1 1 1 i t e r a c y , 2. Lack of a g r i c u l t u r a l and t e c h n i c a l s k i l l s , 3. Inadequate community o r g a n i z a t i o n and l e a d e r s h i p , 4. Lack of simple t e c h n o l o g i c a l equipment and know how f o r food p r o d u c t i o n and food p r e s e r v a t i o n , 5. Lack of r u r a l i n d u s t r i e s to r e t a i n p o p u l a t i o n s w i t h i n these r u r a l communities, 6. Lack of marketing f a c i l i t i e s i n r u r a l areas, 7. Inadequate maternal and c h i l d c a r e f a c i l i t i e s , 8. C o n s t r a i n i n g a t t i t u d e s toward changing from a t r a d i t i o n a l way of l i f e to a modern way of l i f e . These problems d i f f e r i n i n t e n s i t y from one country to another, although they are g e n e r a l i z e d i n t h i s study. O b j e c t i v e s of the Study T h i s study attempts to p r o v i d e a conceptual a n a l y s i s of the concept of nonformal education through a review of s e l e c t e d l i t e r a t u r e . I t p r o v i d e s a framework that may be u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. The a n a l y s i s of the concept i n v o l v e s the f o l l o w i n g : 8 a. H i s t o r i c a l background of the concept of nonformal education b. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between nonformal e d u c a t i o n , formal education and i n f o r m a l education c. Nonformal education and development d. Nonformal education i n urban and r u r a l areas Questions to be Answered T h i s study seeks to answer the f o l l o w i n g two q u e s t i o n s : a. Under what c o n d i t i o n s can nonformal education c o n t r i b u t e to development, e s p e c i a l l y r u r a l development i n developing c o u n t r i e s ? b. What are the p l a n n i n g i m p l i c a t i o n s of the c o n c l u s i o n s of the r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s reviewed? D e f i n i t i o n s of Terms to be Used Adult E d u c a t i o n The meaning of what c o n s t i t u t e s a d u l t education v a r i e s from country to country. However, a f t e r the three world conferences, there seems to be a general agreement of what c o n s t i t u t e s a d u l t education (Lowe, 1975). Some view a d u l t education as a p s y c h o l o g i c a l and s o c i a l process (Verner, 1964) while others c o n c e n t r a t e on the outcomes of a d u l t education ( F r e i r e , 1973; Lindeman, 1926; Coady, 1939). Yet others (Faure, 1972) views a d u l t education as a continuum f a l l i n g between formal and i n f o r m a l education. The Faure Report (1972) that was adopted by UNESCO views education as 9 a l i f e - l o n g process. In order to i n c l u d e e a r l y school l e a v e r s i n developing c o u n t r i e s , UNESCO (1975) d e f i n e s a d u l t education as: . . . o u t - o f - s c h o o l education, education provided f o r the b e n e f i t and adapted to the needs, of persons not i n the r e g u l a r school and u n i v e r s i t y system and g e n e r a l l y f i f t e e n and o l d e r (p. 6). The above d e f i n i t i o n i s adopted i n t h i s study as i t in c l u d e s the e a r l y s c h o o l - l e a v e r s found i n developing c o u n t r i e s . Formal Education Education i s a l i f e l o n g process whereby i n d i v i d u a l s l e a r n from d i f f e r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l processes ( i . e . , formal, nonformal, i n f o r m a l ) . Formal education l i e s at one end of the continuum while i n f o r m a l education l i e s at the other end. Education i s seen as a l i f e - l o n g process whereby l e a r n i n g occurs everyday of our l i v e s . Education embraces not only the c o n v e n t i o n a l "academic" s k i l l s and subject matter, but i t i n c l u d e s the a c q u i s i t i o n of o c c u p a t i o n a l , household s k i l l s ( t r a i n i n g ) , the development of a e s t h e t i c a p p r e c i a t i o n and a n a l y t i c a l modes of t h i n k i n g , formation of a t t i t u d e s , values and in f o r m a t i o n of many kinds. Formal education r e f e r s to the h i e r a r c h i c a l l y s t r u c t u r e d , c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y graded e d u c a t i o n a l systems running from primary school through the u n i v e r s i t y and i n c l u d i n g general academic s t u d i e s , a v a r i e t y of s p e c i a l i z e d programs and i n s t i t u t i o n s f o r f u l l t i m e t e c h n i c a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g (Coombs, et a l . , 1973, p. 11). 10 Although t h i s d e f i n i t i o n covers many asp e c t s of formal education, the d e f i n i t i o n by UNESCO (1975) p r e s e n t s a wider p e r s p e c t i v e of formal e d u c a t i o n than the one given above. UNESCO (1975) d e f i n e s formal education as: . . . Education i n which students are e n r o l l e d or r e g i s t e r e d r e g a r d l e s s of the mode of t e a c h i n g used; i . e . , i t i n c l u d e s an e d u c a t i o n a l s e r i e s t r a n s m i t t e d by r a d i o or t e l e v i s i o n i f l i s t e n e r s are r e g i s t e r e d (p. 39). Th i s d e f i n i t i o n i s adopted i n t h i s study. Nonformal Education Since education i s viewed as a l i f e - l o n g process whereby i n d i v i d u a l s l e a r n from t h e i r everyday e x p e r i e n c e s , from b i r t h to the time they d i e , not a l l l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s w i l l take p l a c e i n the formal s e t t i n g d i s c u s s e d above. Nonformal e d u c a t i o n has been d e f i n e d by Coombs (1973) as: . . . any organized e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y c a r r i e d on o u t s i d e the framework of the formal system to prov i d e s e l e c t e d types of l e a r n i n g to p a r t i c u l a r subgroups i n the p o p u l a t i o n , a d u l t s as w e l l as c h i l d r e n (p. 11). Coomb's d e f i n i t i o n was adopted f o r t h i s study. Nonformal education d i f f e r s from i n f o r m a l education i n that i t i s organized w h i l e informal education occurs without any o r g a n i z a t i o n . Nonformal education takes p l a c e because there i s an i n t e n t i o n to do so while i n i n f o r m a l education there i s no such i n t e n t i o n . 11 Informal Education Informal education as d i s c u s s e d above, r e f e r s to l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s that an i n d i v i d u a l a c q u i r e s from h i s f a m i l y , h i s peers and through h i s i n t e r a c t i o n with s o c i e t y as a whole. An i n d i v i d u a l does not g e n e r a l l y plan to l e a r n as a r e s u l t of such a c t i v i t i e s , nor i s there always form and o r g a n i z a t i o n i n such l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . Coombs (1974) d e f i n e s i n f o r m a l education as the l i f e - l o n g process of a c q u i r i n g and accumulating knowledge, s k i l l s and a t t i t u d e s from ones environment. Informal education i s unorganized and a c q u i r e d from ones own experiences (p. 8). The researcher adopted the above d e f i n i t i o n f o r t h i s study. Rural Development In t h i s study, the broader view of r u r a l development w i l l be adopted. In the 1960's r u r a l development was viewed as an i n c r e a s e i n a g r i c u l t u r a l output (Coombs, 1974). T h i s r e s u l t e d i n the establishment of a g r i c u l t u r a l e xtension t r a i n i n g programs that were aimed at o f f e r i n g a g r i c u l t u r a l education to farmers so that they c o u l d i n c r e a s e t h e i r a g r i c u l t u r a l y i e l d s , e s p e c i a l l y i n cash crops. In the 1970's r u r a l development was viewed i n a broader sense. I n t e r n a t i o n a l funding agencies i n v e s t e d more in r u r a l development i n the hope of t r a n s f o r m i n g the r u r a l areas which lagged behind the modernization process that was r a p i d l y t r a n s f o r m i n g urban c e n t r e s . The broad view of r u r a l development i n t e g r a t e s a l l f a c e t s of development a c t i v i t i e s that c o n t r i b u t e to an improved way 12 of l i f e f o r the r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n s . The broader view of r u r a l development r e f e r s to . . . f a r - r e a c h i n g t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of the s o c i a l and economic s t r u c t u r e s , i n s t i t u t i o n s , r e l a t i o n s h i p s and processes i n any r u r a l area (Coombs, 1974, p. 13). L e arning Learning d i f f e r s from education i n the sense that i t r e f e r s to the p s y c h o l o g i c a l processes that a f f e c t change in behaviour, c o g n i t i v e s k i l l s as w e l l as the a f f e c t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l s . I t a l s o r e f e r s to the s o c i o l o g i c a l processes that i n d i v i d u a l s pass through in shaping i n d i v i d u a l behaviour. Learning can be both i n t e n t i o n a l and i n c i d e n t a l . E xtension Workers The term r e f e r s to members of the v a r i o u s departments and o r g a n i z a t i o n s that work at the lowest l e v e l s in the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e u n i t s of the r u r a l areas. That i s , workers from the departments of h e a l t h or community development, education, a g r i c u l t u r a l extension workers, f o r e s t r y and v e t e r i n a r y workers. Extension workers as a term embraces a wide range of workers at the lowest a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l . I n t e g r a t i o n Coombs (1980) d e f i n e s i n t e g r a t i o n as: . . . Combining n a t u r a l l y r e l a t e d p a r t s i n t o a more cohesive and u n i f i e d order to enhance t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e c o s t - e f f e c t i v e n e s s . 13 Coombs (1980) has developed s i x c a t e g o r i e s of i n t e g r a t i o n : 1. I n t e g r a t e d n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g by the v a r i o u s s e c t o r s at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l which may le a d to i n t e g r a t i o n of programs at the l o c a l l e v e l . 2. I n t e g r a t i o n of the components of a p a r t i c u l a r program: t h i s i n v o l v e s mastering of s k i l l s i n one a c t i v i t y which may need to be supplemented by another a c t i v i t y ; otherwise the t r a i n i n g i n that s k i l l may go to waste. 3. I n t e g r a t i o n between separate programs: many extension programs i n t e g r a t e d i n t o one program so that extension workers do not o f f e r piecemeal education to the same c l i e n t s . 4. H o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n : programs to be t i e d together to o f f e r i n d i v i d u a l f a m i l i e s s e r v i c e s i n other b a s i c needs that may be l a c k i n g to those f a m i l i e s at the same time. T h i s i s s i m i l a r to the above i n t e g r a t i o n , but h o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n as d e f i n e d by Coombs (1980) focuses on the b a s i c needs of the i n d i v i d u a l that need to be s a t i s f i e d at the same time one need i s being taken care o f . 5. V e r t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n : t h i s r e f e r s to s u p e r v i s i o n of exte n s i o n workers from above, o f f e r i n g support both f i n a n c i a l l y and mo r a l l y to keep them motivated to work with the c l i e n t s i n the f i e l d . 6. I n t e r - o r g a n i z a t i o n a l i n t e g r a t i o n : r e f e r s to the c o l l a b o r a t i o n of the separate o r g a n i z a t i o n s accustomed 14 to working independently, i . e . , the non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s . I n t e g r a t e d r u r a l programs focus on the socio-economic c o n d i t i o n , p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e , i n s t i t u t i o n s , a t t i t u d e s and p a t t e r n s of human r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n r u r a l communities. I t i n v o l v e s i n t e g r a t e d n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g f o r r u r a l development; i n t e g r a t i o n of the e s s e n t i a l components of each program; i n t e g r a t i o n of r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s c o n v e n t i o n a l l y d e a l t with i n separate programs; h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n . I n t e g r a t e d nonformal education programs i n r u r a l areas need to r e l a t e to people's d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s , t h e i r c u l t u r a l o r i e n t a t i o n s and t h e i r a s p i r a t i o n s and not i n a vacuum so that they are e a s i l y t r a n s f e r a b l e to t h e i r d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s . Developing c o u n t r i e s T h i s term w i l l be used to r e f e r to what i s commonly known as t h i r d world c o u n t r i e s but examples w i l l be drawn mainly from A f r i c a , the term 'developing c o u n t r i e s ' seems to be b e t t e r to the author s i n c e s o c i e t i e s are always changing even i n the l e a s t developed areas. Developing c o u n t r i e s are undergoing many s o c i a l and economic changes. One may ask the q u e s t i o n , "Developing toward what?" Many s o c i e t i e s are changing from the t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i e t i e s toward modernity. Some s o c i e t i e s are moving f a s t e r than others, through s o c i a l m o b i l i t y from r u r a l to urban; through the mass media and, i n some cases, through l i t e r a c y 15 (Lerner,1958). Modernizat ion 'Modernization' r e f e r s to a process of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n from t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i e t i e s where i n s t i t u t i o n a l r o l e s are d i f f u s e to s o c i e t i e s where r o l e s are d i f f e r e n t i a t e d . Other changes that may occur may r e l a t e to the f o l l o w i n g areas (Smelser, 1968, p28): 1. the change from simple and t r a d i t i o n a l i z e d techniques toward a p p l i c a t i o n of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge. 2. i n a g r i c u l t u r e , the e v o l u t i o n from s u b s i s t e n c e farming toward commercial p r o d u c t i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l goods. 3. i n i n d u s t r y , the t r a n s i t i o n from the use of human and animal power toward i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n . 4. movement from the farm and v i l l a g e toward urban c e n t r e s . D e l i m i t a t i o n of the Study The study w i l l be l i m i t e d to the conceptual a n a l y s i s of nonformal education as i t i s p e r c e i v e d to be an a l t e r n a t i v e i n a s s i s t i n g to b r i n g about s o c i a l and economic change to developing c o u n t r i e s . I t has to be planned as pa r t of the whole modernization process i n these c o u n t r i e s . I t w i l l a l s o be l i m i t e d to the development of a framework f o r a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. Although g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s are made, d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s have unique problems and the i n t e n s i t y of the problems d i f f e r s from one country to another. How s u c c e s s f u l l y nonformal education can be adopted by the i n d i v i d u a l c o u n t r i e s i s dependent on 16 t h e i r n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s and t h e i r n a t i o n a l developmental g o a l s . O r g a n i z a t i o n of the Remaining Chapters The second chapter of the study reviews the l i t e r a t u r e on nonformal education, i t s major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and i t s development. I t w i l l analyze the major t h e o r e t i c a l p o s i t i o n s found i n the l i t e r a t u r e . Chapter Three c o n t a i n s a systematic a n a l y s i s of s e l e c t e d s t u d i e s that have been conducted on nonformal education and i n t e g r a t e d r u r a l development. I t a n a l y z e s the c o n c l u s i o n s and i m p l i c a t i o n s that have been drawn from these s t u d i e s . Chapter Four h i g h l i g h t s the major elements of a framework that has been developed f o r a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. Chapter F i v e presents the major c o n c l u s i o n s from the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed and provides recommendations. 17 CHAPTER TWO NONFORMAL EDUCATION: A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS Review of the L i t e r a t u r e on the Concept of Nonformal Education The s e l e c t i o n of l i t e r a t u r e i n c l u d e d i n t h i s review was drawn from j o u r n a l s and other p u b l i c a t i o n s through an ERIC search and from some recent p u b l i c a t i o n s i n the Comparative Education Review (1976) and Year Book of Education (1975). L i t e r a t u r e that has been p u b l i s h e d i n the l a s t 12 years was s e l e c t e d . Only l i t e r a t u r e c o n t a i n i n g d i s c u s s i o n of the concept of nonformal e d u c a t i o n was i n c l u d e d . The review of l i t e r a t u r e on the concept of nonformal education i s organized under the f o l l o w i n g headings: a. H i s t o r i c a l background of the concept; b. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal, nonformal and inf o r m a l education; c. Nonformal education i n r u r a l and urban c e n t r e s ; and d. Nonformal education and development. H i s t o r i c a l Background of the Concept The concept of nonformal education has developed out of the pla n n e r s ' and educators' search f o r a l t e r n a t i v e s i n s o l v i n g some of the e d u c a t i o n a l problems d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s are f a c i n g . Coombs (1968) saw nonformal education as a major a l t e r n a t i v e to formal s c h o o l i n g . In h i s a n a l y s i s , he saw the e d u c a t i o n a l c r i s i s i n d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s as a consequence of the u n s a t i s f i e d and ever 18 i n c r e a s i n g s o c i a l demand f o r e d u c a t i o n . Although there has been enormous e d u c a t i o n a l expansion i n a l l the developing c o u n t r i e s , the e d u c a t i o n a l systems are faced with numerous problems r e s u l t i n g from r i s i n g e d u c a t i o n a l c o s t s , i n e f f i c i e n t management and teaching methods, l a r g e i n c r e a s e s i n student enrollment, u n s u i t a b i l i t y of the present output and s c a r c i t y of resources a v a i l a b l e f o r e d u c a t i o n a l expansion. Coombs (1968) saw one dimension of the s o l u t i o n to be i n the r a p i d development of nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l systems. P o l i c y makers and. a i d agencies, the World Bank in p a r t i c u l a r , became i n t e r e s t e d i n nonformal education as i t r e l a t e d to i t s concern f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l and r u r a l development. Nearly a l l the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed emphasizes the development of the concept as an a l t e r n a t i v e to i n v e s t i n g more in the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system (Brembeck, 1973; Harbison, 1973; G r a n d s t a f f , 1972). The modernization process i n d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s c o n t i n u e s to p l a c e an emphasis on the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system at the expense of the m a j o r i t y of the r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n s . The r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n s cannot be l e f t out of the development process (Coombs, 1974; Coles, 1982). Both Coombs and Coles argue that nonformal education seems to be able to p r o v i d e the channel through which these p o p u l a t i o n s are to be reached. Some of the e a r l y r e s e a r c h on the concept of nonformal education has been conducted at the Michigan State 19 U n i v e r s i t y under the l e a d e r s h i p of Brembeck. Brembeck (1973) analyzed the need f o r nonformal education as an a l t e r n a t i v e to formal s c h o o l i n g as i t can provide l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r the m a j o r i t y of youth who drop out of the formal system. I t can as w e l l a s s i s t i n meeting the newer conceptions of development which are r e l a t e d to an improvement i n p u b l i c h e a l t h , p o p u l a t i o n c o n t r o l , a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n and b e t t e r f a m i l y l i f e . Brembeck (1973) views s c h o o l i n g as separate from nonformal education, each has d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l f u n c t i o n s . Since nonformal education i s f l e x i b l e , he argues, i t can e a s i l y adapt to in n o v a t i o n and to the immediate needs of the l e a r n e r s . He a l s o sees nonformal education c o n t r i b u t i n g to e q u a l i t y s i n c e education p r o v i d e s access to e l i t e p o s i t i o n s and power. Nonformal education as a concept i s based on the idea of l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g , which views education as a l i f e - l o n g process f o l l o w i n g UNESCO recommendations (Faure, 1972). Since 1968, many o r g a n i z a t i o n s have accepted the concept of nonformal education as part of the concept of l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g . The o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n c l u d e UNESCO, The Commonwealth I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o u n c i l f o r Adult Education, the O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r Economic Co-operation and Development, and the r e g i o n a l Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n s of A s i a and A f r i c a . There has been an i n c r e a s e i n pl a n n i n g nonformal education w i t h i n the context of n a t i o n a l plans f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development i n many c o u n t r i e s (Lowe, 1982). In 20 some c o u n t r i e s m i n i s t r i e s have been e s t a b l i s h e d to plan and co o r d i n a t e nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s (Coles, 1982). There has been development i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n i n the promotion of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s through v a r i o u s i n t e r n a t i o n a l , governmental, and non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s (Lowe, 1982). R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Formal, Nonformal and Informal Education D e f i n i t i o n s of nonformal education have f o l l o w e d Coombs' d e f i n i t i o n . Coombs (1974; 1976) argued that there i s a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal, nonformal and inf o r m a l systems of e d u c a t i o n . In order to determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p s , there ought to be a new view of education that does not equate education with formal s c h o o l i n g . Coombs (1974) argues that a broader view of education should equate education with l e a r n i n g r e g a r d l e s s of where or how i t occurs. Education i s viewed as a l i f e - l o n g process whereby i n d i v i d u a l s are l e a r n i n g from b i r t h u n t i l death. Using t h i s view of educat i o n , nonformal education i n c l u d e s those a c t i v i t i e s i n a g r i c u l t u r a l e xtension, farmer t r a i n i n g programs, a d u l t l i t e r a c y programs, o c c u p a t i o n a l s k i l l s t r a i n i n g p r o v i d e d o u t s i d e the formal system, youth c l u b s , community development programs i n h e a l t h , n u t r i t i o n , f a m i l y p l a n n i n g , c o o p e r a t i v e s and income-generating a c t i v i t i e s . Coombs (1974) argued that both formal and nonformal education are organized to complement and improve 21 upon i n f o r m a l l e a r n i n g - such as l i t e r a c y and numeracy s k i l l s that i n d i v i d u a l s cannot e a s i l y a c q u i r e through t h e i r environment. But formal and nonformal education systems of education d i f f e r i n t h e i r sponsorship, i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements, i n t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s and i n the t a r g e t groups they t r y to ser v e . Many nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l programs may use formal methods i n t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n and d e l i v e r y . Although Coombs (1974) argued that there are no marked d i f f e r e n c e s between formal and nonformal edu c a t i o n systems, he was not c l e a r on the c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t e x i s t s between the two systems since formal education i s l a r g e l y funded by the s t a t e while nonformal edu c a t i o n programs may be funded by p r i v a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n s or the s t a t e . I t may be d i f f i c u l t f o r the p r i v a t e l y funded nonformal education programs to have a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p with the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system. While Coombs (1974) argues that there i s a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal, nonformal and i n f o r m a l systems of e d u c a t i o n , Brembeck (1973) saw formal and nonformal education as two d i s t i n c t systems each having i t s own me r i t s i n f o s t e r i n g l e a r n i n g . The m e r i t s of nonformal education l i e i n i t s a b i l i t y to be used f o r immediate needs (Brembeck, 1973). He argued t h a t l e a r n e d behaviour i s determined by the environment i n which i t takes p l a c e and the l e a r n i n g environments of formal and nonformal education tend to have of d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . These c h a r a c t e r s i t i c s i n turn shape lea r n e d behaviour. The 2 2 e d u c a t i o n a l s t r a t e g y i s to determine the kind of behaviour r e q u i r e d and to c r e a t e those e d u c a t i o n a l environments which support and encourage i t . He s t r o n g l y argued that formal education alone i s not a b l e to produce a l l the behaviours r e q u i r e d i n s o c i e t y as i t i s o f t e n assumed. He f u r t h e r p o i n t e d out that there i s a need to develop knowledge of e d u c a t i o n a l environments that c h a r a c t e r i z e nonformal education and s c h o o l i n g so that the e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y w i l l r e f l e c t the t r u e p o t e n t i a l of each. I t may appear that Brembeck (1973) was proposing two d i s t i n c t kinds of e d u c a t i o n a l systems, i . e . , s c h o o l i n g and nonformal e d u c a t i o n . What i s r e q u i r e d i s to determine the l e a r n i n g environments that w i l l be p r o v i d e d by each separate system in order to produce the r e q u i r e d behaviour demanded by a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i e t y . T h i s a n a l y s i s of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal education and nonformal education d i f f e r s from Coombs. Coombs (1974) saw the r e l a t i o n s h i p between nonformal and formal education to l i e i n t h e i r sponsorship, i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements and i n t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s , but there i s no d i s t i n c t d i v i d i n g l i n e between them. He argues that n a t i o n s should s t r i v e f o r ' l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g systems' designed to p r o v i d e every i n d i v i d u a l with a f l e x i b l e and d i v e r s i f i e d range of u s e f u l l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s throughout the i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e time. He recommends a system which s y n t h e s i z e s many elements of i n f o r m a l , nonformal and formal e d u c a t i o n . Such a l e a r n i n g system would be strengthened, d i v e r s i f i e d and 23 l i n k e d more c l o s e l y to the needs and processes of n a t i o n a l development. The d i f f e r e n c e s i n the a n a l y t i c a l t o o l s used by Coombs (1974) and Brembeck (1973) seem to be r e f l e c t e d i n the way they v i s u a l i z e formal and nonformal education systems. L a B e l l e (1975) has o u t l i n e d a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal, nonformal and inf o r m a l e d u c a t i o n a l systems by a n a l y z i n g the predominant l e a r n i n g modes through which each one takes p l a c e . He f o l l o w s the d e f i n i t i o n s of Coombs in h i s a n a l y s i s . Coombs and Ahmed (1974) seem to t r e a t the three modes of education as d i s c r e t e e n t i t i e s . L a B e l l e (1975) sees the three e d u c a t i o n a l modes, that i s , i n f o r m a l , nonformal and formal, to e x i s t a l l at the same time, and at times i n harmony with each other and at times i n c o n f l i c t . T h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 1. Fi g u r e 1 i l l u s t r a t e s the three i n t e r a c t i v e modes of i n f o r m a l , nonformal and formal education systems. In formal education what i s taught i n the c u r r i c u l u m i s r e l a t e d to other processes l i k e peer group pressures, school r e g u l a t i o n s and o r g a n i z a t i o n . At the same time the school o f f e r s nonformal education programs through e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s . Along the v e r t i c a l l i n e are the predominant modes of education or l e a r n i n g . These r e f l e c t the dominant type of l e a r n i n g process from the p e r s p e c t i v e of the observer or the l e a r n e r . For example, an observer may decide to choose to conc e n t r a t e h i s o b s e r v a t i o n on the l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s that the teacher i s o f f e r i n g based on 24 FIGURE 1: LABELLE'S TYPOLOGY the c u r r i c u l u m r a t h e r than what i s l e a r n t from the peer groups. At the top of the c h a r t a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the e d u c a t i o n a l t y p e s . Here the emphasis i s on the s t r u c t u r e r a t h e r than the p r o c e s s of e d u c a t i o n . Formal e d u c a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e f l e c t h i e r a r c h i c a l o r d e r i n g , compulsory attendence, admission .requirements and c e r t i f i c a t e s . Nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n d i c a t e t h a t the a c t i v i t y must be s e p a r a t e from s t a t e - s a n c t i o n e d s c h o o l i n g but be p replanned and s y s t e m a t i c and l e a d l e a r n e r s to toward a s p e c i f i c g o a l . I t may be d e f i n e d by the i n t e n t i o n s of t e a c h e r s or l e a d e r s . Informal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e f l e c t the i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n t a c t with a v a r i e t y of e n vironmental i n f l u e n c e s that r e s u l t i n day-to-day l e a r n i n g . 25 The aim of the f i g u r e i s to d i s p l a y the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the three e d u c a t i o n a l modes. However, apart from the three e d u c a t i o n a l modes, there e x i s t other l e a r n i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s that occur s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n the same i n s t r u c t i o n a l s e t t i n g . L a B e l l e p o i n t s out the importance of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e - t i m e and h i s c o n t a c t with e d u c a t i o n a l modes, depending on h i s access and need. He argues that nonformal education should be assessed through the l i f e span. Coles sees the r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal and nonformal education as l i n k a g e s between the d i f f e r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l systems of a country (as i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 2). F i g u r e 2 i l l u s t r a t e s the l i n k a g e s between formal education and nonformal e d u c a t i o n . I t i n d i c a t e s the la d d e r s f o r nonformal education graduate i n t o the formal s e c t o r . I t excludes nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l programs o f f e r e d by other departments l i k e h e a l t h , a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n , community development and ot h e r s which are o f f e r e d f o r those i n d i v i d u a l s who cannot p a r t i c i p a t e i n the formal education system. The f i g u r e i l l u s t r a t e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal e d u c a t i o n a l and i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d nonformal education systems at the d i f f e r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l s . 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 p e r c e i v e d f u n c t i o n s of nonformal education are ( G r a n d s t a f f , 1974; Harbison, 1973): 1. A c t i v i t i e s o r i e n t e d p r i m a r i l y to the development of the s k i l l and knowledge of members of the labour f o r c e f o r those a l r e a d y employed; 2. A c t i v i t i e s designed p r i m a r i l y to prepare persons, mostly the youth, f o r e n t r y i n t o employment; 3. A c t i v i t i e s designed to develop s k i l l , knowledge and understanding which transcend the work world; 4. A c t i v i t i e s that p r o v i d e a wide range of l e a r n i n g s e r v i c e s beyond the scope of formal education and to extend s k i l l s and knowledge gained i n formal education; and 5. A c t i v i t i e s designed to open up n e g l e c t e d domains of e d u c a t i o n a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s . Major D i f f e r e n c e s Between Formal and Nonformal Education Table 1 provides a comparison of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of nonformal and formal e d u c a t i o n . 28 Table 1: A Comparison of the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Nonformal and Formal Education Nonformal Formal S t r u c t u r e F l e x i b l e . Low degree of s t r u c t u r e . L i t t l e i n t e r r e l a t e d - ness of components. H i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d f u n c t i o n a l l y i n t e r - r e l a t e d sets of u n i t s . Graded s e q u e n t i a l system. Content S k i l l c e n t e r e d . D i c t a t e d by func- t i o n a l needs of par- t i c i p a n t s . At times may c o n f l i c t with s t a t u s quo and e l i t e v a l u e s . S t a n d a r d i z e d . Aca- demic emphasis on c o g n i t i v e knowledge. Less emphasis on psychomotor s k i l l s . A b s t r a c t and founded on t h e o r y . R e f l e c t s s t a t u s quo and e l i t e v a l u e s . Timing P e r i o d depends on achievement of t a s k . Based on immediate l e a r n i n g needs a r i s i n g from the i n - d i v i d u a l ' s r o l e s and stages i n l i f e . U s u a l l y p a r t - t i m e and may be timed i n a v a r i e t y of ways. Long i n d u r a t i o n . Future o r i e n t e d . P r o v i d e s the b a s i s f o r i n d i v i d u a l par- t i c i p a t i o n i n soc- i e t y . U s u a l l y f u l l - time. Does not per- mit other p a r a l l e l a c t i v i t i e s to take p l a c e . C o n t r o l C o n t r o l u s u a l l y un- c o o r d i n a t e d , f r a g - mented, d i f f u s e , and i n v o l v e s a v a r i e t y of a g e n c i e s . Greater degree of l o c a l c o n t r o l . C u r r i c u l a and s t a n - dards e x t e r n a l l y c o n t r o l l e d at na- t i o n a l and r e g i o n a l l e v e l s . D e l i v e r y system Takes p l a c e i n a va- r i e t y of s e t t i n g s . Learning i s func- t i o n a l l y r e l a t e d to l e a r n i n g . Takes p l a c e i n i n - s t i t u t i o n s . Learn- ing i s p h y s i c a l l y i s o l a t e d from a p p l i - c a t i o n . 2 9 Table 1 (continued) Nonformal Formal F u n c t i o n s Meets short-term l e a r n i n g needs of i n d i v i d u a l s . Stu- dents r e s o c i a l i - z a t i o n , a c c u l t u r - a t i o n and l e a r n i n g of p r a c t i c a l s k i l l s and knowledge to be used at work or com- munity s i t u a t i o n . T e r m inal, c l o s e - ended and seeks to b r i n g d i s t i n c t groups of people i n t o c o n formity with p r i n c i p l e s and p r a c - t i c e s of other groups or a g e n c i e s . Provides b a s i s f o r i n d i v i d u a l ' s f u t u r e . Based on credent- i a l s . S t r e s s e s so- c i a l i z a t i o n , e n c u l - t u r a t i o n and perpet- u a t i o n of education b u r e a u c r a c i e s . Le- g i t i m i z e s e x i s t i n g e l i t e s , t h e i r values and behaviours. Confers s t a t u s , seeking f o r more s c h o o l i n g and seeks to b r i n g youth i n t o c onformity with the c o n t r o l l i n g body. Reward system P a y o f f s tend to be t a n g i b l e . Immediate short-term gains r e - l a t e d to work or d a i l y l i f e : employ- ment, b e t t e r pay, higher a g r i c u l t u r a l y i e l d , s e l f - a w a r e - ness, power to con- t r o l environment. P a y o f f s tend to be d e f e r r e d i n long- term gain i n s o c i a l and economic s t a t u s . Method of I n s t r u c t i o n Methods r e l a t i v e l y f l e x i b l e ; r e l a t e d to a p p l i c a t i o n due to f l e x i b l e nature of nonformal education programs. Teaching methods are d i c t a t e d by p o l i c y s i n c e knowledge i s s t a n d a r d i z e d . In- f l e x i b l e . Noninno- vat i v e . Part i c i p a n t s Learners are from a l l age groups. J o b - m o b i l i t y con- cerns predominate among the l e a r n e r s . Great v a r i e t y of teacher q u a l i f i c a - t i o n s and moti- v a t i o n s . Learners age d e f i n e d p r e d i c t a b l e . S o c i a l - m o b i l i t y con- s c i o u s . Teachers f o r m a l l y c e r t i f i e d and t h e i r s t a t u s c o r r e l a t e d with t h e i r l o c a t i o n i n the school h i e r - archy . 30 Table 1 (continued) Nonformal Formal Cost Costs have great Costs are standard- v a r i a t i o n depending i z e d by l e v e l and on a p a r t i c u l a r pro- i n c r e a s e moving up gram. the s t r u c t u r a l h i e r - archy . Although Table 1 i n d i c a t e s the d i f f e r e n c e s between formal and nonformal education, these d i f f e r e n c e s are not always so d i s t i n c t . Some nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s do take p l a c e i n the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system and are h i g h l y f o r m a l i z e d (Coombs, 1974). Some methods of t e a c h i n g i n nonformal education programs at times may be very a u t h o r i t a r i a n and student p a r t i c i p a t i o n may be very minimal (Pau l s t o n , 1973). Such d i f f e r e n c e s may be a matter of degree and may not always be h i g h l y v i s i b l e . We have attempted to d e f i n e the concept of nonformal education and how i t i s r e l a t e d to the formal and inf o r m a l e d u c a t i o n a l systems. We have a l s o d i s c u s s e d the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and f u n c t i o n s of nonformal education and how i t d i f f e r s from the formal e d u c a t i o n a l system. We w i l l now d i s c u s s the d i s p a r i t i e s that e x i s t between r u r a l and urban areas. 31 Education i n Rural and Urban Areas The education systems of many de v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s have shown a d i s p a r i t y i n t h e i r p r o v i s i o n between r u r a l and urban areas (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The urban areas have more schools at a l l l e v e l s with b e t t e r equipment and lower t e a c h e r - p u p i l r a t i o s (Lowe, 1975). The type of education given by the formal system does not h e l p the r u r a l young people to f u n c t i o n i n a meaningful way w i t h i n r u r a l communities (Simmons, 1979). T h i s has r e s u l t e d i n a r u r a l - u r b a n m i g r a t i o n i n which young people leave the r u r a l areas on completion of t h e i r s c h o o l i n g i n search of g a i n f u l employment i n the c i t y . Education has become a c o n t r i b u t i n g f a c t o r i n the d i s p a r i t y that e x i s t s between r u r a l and urban a r e a s . While the urban areas are f o r g i n g ahead with the modernization process, the r u r a l areas remain entangled i n the t r a d i t i o n a l peasant economy. There are no i n c e n t i v e s f o r young people to remain in the t r a d i t i o n a l economies. I t i s argued that there should be a d i f f e r e n t c u r r i c u l u m f o r the r u r a l s c h ools (Barber, 1976). The argument f o l l o w s the premise that what i s o f f e r e d i n schools does not develope the s k i l l s and a t t i t u d e s necessary to f u n c t i o n i n r u r a l communities. I t may be b e t t e r to have a t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t c u r r i c u l u m than i s o f f e r e d i n urban s c h o o l s . But Evans (1976) s t r o n g l y argues that there should be the same c u r r i c u l u m f o r urban and r u r a l s c h o o l s . For p o l i t i c a l reasons and f a i r 32 r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of a n a t i o n s resources, i t seems the idea that r u r a l schools should have the same type of education as urban schools might be the b e t t e r i d e a . I t appears d i f f i c u l t though to accept t h i s argument, because having two separate systems would perpetuate the a l r e a d y e x i s t i n g gap between the urban and r u r a l communities. The r u r a l people would f e e l n e g l e c t e d i f t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s would have a d i f f e r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l system fo r t h e i r c h i l d r e n . The r a t i o n a l e f o r nonformal education i s i n i t s p o t e n t i a l f o r reaching those who are l e f t out of the formal system, and i n i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of supplementing or complementing formal s c h o o l i n g . Nonformal education has a r o l e of importance to formal s c h o o l i n g i n g e n e r a t i n g s k i l l s , i n f l u e n c i n g a t t i t u d e s and molding v a l u e s . Nonformal education embraces e d u c a t i o n a l components of programs designed to serve broad developmental goals (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Such programs are u s u a l l y o r g a n i z e d by d i f f e r e n t m i n i s t r i e s and v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s and serve a very small number of r u r a l youths and a d u l t s . They need to be c o o r d i n a t e d and i n t e g r a t e d i n t o other economic and s o c i a l developmental goals (Coombs, 1974). Table 2 shows the d i f f e r e n t l e a r n i n g needs of r u r a l populat i o n s . There i s need f o r c a p i t a l investment i n the r u r a l areas before e d u c a t i o n a l programs can make a c o n t r i b u t i o n . Even where nonformal education programs e x i s t i n the r u r a l a r e a s , they are u s u a l l y i n f e r i o r to those found i n the T a b l e 2: I l l u s t r a t i v e R u r a l O c c u p a t i o n a l Groups and T h e i r L e a r n i n g 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 a r e a s . Coombs and Ahmed (1974) a t t r i b u t e s t h i s d i s p a r i t y t o both n a t i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s r e g a r d i n g the a l l o c a t i o n of e d u c a t i o n a l r e s o u r c e s . W i t h i n the n a t i o n a l development p l a n s , f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n r e c e i v e s a l a r g e r share of r e s o u r c e s both i n r u r a l and urban a r e a s . Urban areas get a l a r g e r share of funds f o r nonformal e d u c a t i o n than r u r a l a r e a s . Such a s i t u a t i o n leaves' the r u r a l areas v e r y l i t t l e t o work w i t h . T r a d i t i o n a l s k i l l s a re o f t e n i g n o r e d and regarded as p r i m i t i v e . S k i l l s t h a t r e q u i r e modern machinery are promoted. In o r d e r t o meet the l e a r n i n g needs of the r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n , a model developed by C o l e s (9182) may be u s e f u l (see F i g u r e 3 ) . N a c l o n a l c o t o * Local Coosnl CCees FIGURE 3: VERTICALLY AND HORIZONTALLY, THE PROVINCE-DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE 3 5 The diagram t r i e s to i l l u s t r a t e v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n of nonformal education at the l o c a l l e v e l . I f nonformal education i s an i n t e g r a l p a r t of n a t i o n a l development, i t should be a means of communication between o f f i c i a l s at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l and those at the l o c a l l e v e l . A person's v o l u n t a r y p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s an e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e of nonformal e d u c a t i o n . Nonformal education can f l o u r i s h i n c o u n t r i e s where there i s democracy and i n d i v i d u a l s are allowed the freedom to develop (Coles, 1982). L i k e Coombs, Coles argues s t r o n g l y that nonformal education programs should be r e l a t e d to the needs of the people. Nonformal Education and Development The concept of nonformal education i s being promoted because i t holds promise of being able to c o n t r i b u t e to the modernization process of developing c o u n t r i e s (Coombs, 1980; Harbison, 1973). Nonformal education i s one area of education that i s hoped w i l l b r i n g s o c i a l and economic change i n these c o u n t r i e s . I t may be important to look at t h e o r i e s of s o c i a l change as they r e l a t e to education i n order to h e l p us understand how nonformal education may he l p to b r i n g change to these s o c i e t i e s . Major t h e o r i e s of education and s o c i a l change tend to view s o c i e t y bending toward e i t h e r e q u i l i b r i u m or c o n f l i c t and that w i t h i n these two main c a t e g o r i e s numerous p e r s p e c t i v e s e x i s t . Included 36 in these are some t h e o r i e s which d i s p l a y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of both the e q u i l i b r i u m and c o n f l i c t p o s i t i o n s . S t r u c t u r a l f u n c t i o n a l i s m . E q u i l i b r i u m theory shows the s o c i a l system as one which moves toward a p r e f e r r e d s t a t e . Such a s t a t e i s a r r i v e d at as a r e s u l t of both n a t u r a l order as w e l l as c e r t a i n mechanisms such as s o c i a l i z a t i o n and s o c i a l c o n t r o l processes (Karabel & Halsey, 1977). S t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t theory shows change to be e i t h e r i n t e r n a l or e x t e r n a l to the system. I n t e r n a l changes are adjustments to some d i s e q u i l i b r a t i n g p r e s s u r e which r e s u l t s i n some a l t e r a t i o n s i n the system. Parson (1970) b e l i e v e s that s t r u c t u r a l changes occur when d i s t u r b a n c e s i n the system are s u f f i c i e n t to overcome the fo r c e s of e q u i l i b r i u m . S t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t s b e l i e v e in e q u i l i b r i u m , and the s o c i a l i z a t i o n process i s what holds s o c i e t y t o g e t h e r . They view e d u c a t i o n a l systems as being able to o f f e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r m o b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l s . Coombs (1968) and Harbison (1973) use the s t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t assumptions i n t h e i r a n a l y s i s of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between nonformal education and development. Nonformal education i s seen as a v e h i c l e to b r i n g d e s i r e d change w i t h i n a system. Hence they b e l i e v e that the s t a t e should o r g a n i z e nonformal programs i n order f o r d e s i r e d change to occur. 37 C o n f l i c t t h e o r i e s . The other category i s c o n f l i c t theory which r e s t s upon the assumption that human i n t e r v e n t i o n i s the d e c i s i v e f o r c e i n the shaping of h i s t o r y and s o c i a l change. T h i s i n t e r v e n t i o n r e s u l t s as c o n f l i c t i n g groups gain or l o s e r e l a t i v e p o l i t i c a l power and thus the a b i l i t y to i n f l u e n c e change. Education i s seen to p l a y an important r o l e i n the a c q u i s i t i o n of s k i l l s , a t t r i b u t e s and the e x p e r t i s e necessary to f u n c t i o n in an approximately e f f e c t i v e manner to i n f l u e n c e change. While s t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t s view e d u c a t i o n a l systems as being able to o f f e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r m o b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l s , c o n f l i c t t h e o r i s t s have s t r e s s e d the r o l e of education in m a i n t a i n i n g a system of s t r u c t u r e d i n e q u a l i t y . Carnoy (1976), Bock (1976), and L a B e l l e (1976) use the c o n f l i c t t h e o r e t i c a l assumptions in t h e i r a n a l y s i s of nonformal education and development. The two d i f f e r i n g views about education and s o c i a l change r e f l e c t the way the d i f f e r e n t authors p e r c e i v e the o p e r a t i o n of nonformal edu c a t i o n i n a p a r t i c u l a r country. The s t r u c t u r a l i s t s / f u n c t i o n a l i s t s t h e o r i s t s b e l i e v e i n the human c a p i t a l theory. They b e l i e v e that there should be more investment i n both formal and nonformal education. Nonformal education may e x i s t and operate under many d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s . Paulston (1976) o u t l i n e s the d i f f e r e n t , c o n d i t i o n s under which nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l programs may e x i s t and f u n c t i o n . 38 P a r t i c i p a n t C o n t r o l P o l e Non-formal E d u c a t i o n C o n t r o l Continuum Government Imposed C o n t r o l P o l e Dimensions o f Non-formal E d u c a t i o n and 'Development' L i t e r a t u r e I " E d u c a t i o n i n R e f o r m i s t S o c i a l E t h n i c Movements O r i e n t a t i o n " I I I " L i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g Or i en ca t i on" I I I n d i v i d u a l •Change Pole Coa I s IV " E c o l o g i c a l or Func t i o n a 1 i s c O r i en ta t i or." Con t i nuum kSystems Change P o l e FIGURE 4: PAULSTON'S FRAMEWORK OF NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS F i g u r e 4 i n d i c a t e s , the v a r i o u s p o l i c y s t r a t e g i e s taken on two axes. The h o r i z o n t a l a x i s i n d i c a t e s the goals f o r nonformal e d u c a t i o n programs. This a x i s i s a continuum from those who view t h a t the goal of nonformal education i s to change i n d i v i d u a l a t t i t u d e s and behavior, t o those who view nonformal e d u c a t i o n as a t o o l f o r s o c i a l and economic change. The v e r t i c a l a x i s i n d i c a t e s the continuum of the degree of c o n t r o l f o r those who p a r t i c i p a t e i n nonformal education. I t runs from f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n t o complete c o n t r o l by the p o l i t i c a l system. 39 The framework looks at four d i f f e r e n t approaches i n fo r m u l a t i n g p o l i c i e s f o r development. Quadrant IV i s the ' e c o l o g i c a l ' or f u n c t i o n a l i s t approach. Such an approach t r e a t s development as a process f o r harmonious c o e x i s t e n c e of a l l the f o r c e s of p r o d u c t i o n from the s u b s i s t e n c e l e v e l to i n d u s t r i a l l e v e l . T h i s view i s concerned with maximum u t i l i z a t i o n of a l l human r e s o u r c e s . I t a l s o encourages s t r u c t u r a l changes i n the v a r i o u s p o l i t i c a l and economic i n s t i t u t i o n s which are best a b l e t o support such a system. Such an approach encourages investment i n a l l s e c t o r s of the e d u c a t i o n a l system - for m a l , nonformal and in f o r m a l systems, i n order to ensure maximum use of the human res o u r c e s . Examples of the e c o l o g i c a l or f u n c t i o n a l i s t approach to development are those proposed by (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coles, 1982; Callaway, 1973). These programs are developed to serve the l e a r n i n g needs of a d u l t s who are l e f t out of the formal system; to supplement the l i m i t e d formal s c h o o l i n g f o r the e a r l y s c h o o l l e a r n e r s , and, to o f f e r s k i l l s to a d u l t s . Such an approach a l s o assumes l i m i t e d s o c i a l change c o n t r o l l e d by the s t a t e p r i o r i t i e s . An example of t h i s approach w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l l a t e r . In Quadrant III i s the " l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g " , which has c o n t r o l imposed from the o u t s i d e as the one o u t l i n e d by Lengrad (1973). According to Lengrad (1973), the present education system must f i n d ways of l i n k i n g with the past and the f u t u r e so that changes being made are r e l a t e d to 40 the past and the f u t u r e . The l i t e r a t u r e on l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g i s o f t e n too vague and i s i n t e r p r e t a t e d d i f f e r e n t l y by v a r i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s (OECD, UNESCO and the Club of Rome). Each of these o r g a n i z a t i o n s use the concept of l i f e - l o n g education with d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t i v e s i n mind. No l i t e r a t u r e on nonformal education and l i f e - l o n g l e a r n i n g e x i s t s so that no separate examples are a v a i l a b l e to i l l u s t r a t e Quadrant I I I . The Faure (1972) r e p o r t and the work of Lengrad d i s c u s s the concept i n i t s general terms without s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t i n g to nonformal ed u c a t i o n . Quadrant I c o n t a i n s the l i t e r a t u r e on nonformal education which c o n c e n t r a t e s on s o c i a l and e t h n i c movements. L i b e r a t i n g nonformal education programs have a s s i s t e d s o c i a l movements to achieve movement goals i n a l t e r i n g s o c i a l and economic r e l a t i o n s through c o l l e c t i v e e f f o r t s . Examples may be drawn from the A n t i g o n i s h Movement i n Canada, the f o l k high schools i n Scandinavia and the Black Panther e d u c a t i o n a l programs in the U.S.A.. Quadrant II i n d i c a t e s an u t o p i a which i s u n l i k e l y to e x i s t i n any system. Coombs (1974) and Harbison (1973) b e l i e v e d i n the establishment of nonformal education programs that are c o n t r o l l e d by the s t a t e . They see the r o l e of nonformal education as a development s t r a t e g y which can aim at r e a c h i n g major s e c t i o n s of the s o c i e t y who are l e f t out of the formal school system. For development to occur i n the 41 d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s , human resources need be developed and u t i l i z e d at i t s f u l l e s t . Harbison (1973) saw the r o l e of nonformal education to be a means of c o u n t e r - b a l a n c i n g some d i s t o r t i o n s c r e a t e d by formal e d u c a t i o n . He b e l i e v e s that nonformal education may provide people with s k i l l s f o r high l e v e l jobs i n the economy in order to maintain e q u i l i b r i u m . Coombs' (1974) model d i f f e r s as i t emphasizes r u r a l development and the improvement of l i f e f o r the r u r a l people. Both Coombs' (1974) and Harbison's (1973) models assume that there should be government c o n t r o l to allow only the s t r u c t u r a l changes r e q u i r e d to maximize the development and u t i l i z a t i o n of human r e s o u r c e s . They assume that governments are only w i l l i n g to fund programs that are seen as important i n the development s t r a t e g y . Bock (1976) and Carnoy (1976), using the c o n f l i c t t r a d i t i o n , argue that the i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n and l e g i t i m i z a t i o n of nonformal education by the n a t i o n a l e l i t e s f u r t h e r perpetuates the d i s t o r t i o n s and i n e q u a l i t i e s that e x i s t between the urban and r u r a l s e c t o r s . From t h e i r argument, i t would appear l o c a l l y i n i t i a t e d nonformal education programs would serve the needs of the p o p u l a t i o n b e t t e r . However, t h i s does not seem to be very common in developing c o u n t r i e s . Such programs must be seen as o p e r a t i n g a c c o r d i n g to the development goals of the s t a t e even when funded by p r i v a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n s . I f not they may be seen as t h r e a t s to governments. 42 Coombs' (1974) s t r a t e g y f o r r u r a l development addresses the b a s i c needs of the r u r a l people. Coombs (1975) assumes that there i s concensus and harmony w i t h i n a country because he makes s t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t assumptions. Although he o f f e r s recommendations on how nonformal education programs ought to f u n c t i o n , he i s not c l e a r as to how the b a s i c needs of the r u r a l communities w i l l be served, s i n c e the s t a t e ought to c o n t r o l such programs. He assumes that the people a t the top know the needs of the people and that both the r u r a l people and the s t a t e are c l e a r on t h e i r developmental g o a l s . I t appears that where there i s democracy, such an argument i s workable. Those who b e l i e v e i n c o n f l i c t e x i s t i n g with s o c i e t y (Carnoy, 1976; L a B e l l e , 1981; Bock, 1976) may argue that the s t a t e may sponsor nonformal education programs to extend the i n f l u e n c e of the s t a t e beyond the formal s c h o o l s . At the same time the s t a t e may promote nonformal education programs to f o s t e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n and promotion of i d e o l o g i c a l n a t i o n a l i s t i c values to maintain the e x i s t i n g s o c i a l o r d e r . They argue a g a i n s t i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal e d u c a t i o n , as i t l e g i t i m i z e s the i n f e r i o r s t a t u s of i t s graduates and t h e r e f o r e perpetuates the e x i s t i n g i n e q u a l i t i e s i n s o c i e t y . Using the c o n f l i c t assumptions, they encourage nonformal education systems that may be a b l e to a l t e r power r e l a t i o n s i n s o c i e t y ( L a B e l l e , 1976; Bock & Papagiannis, 1983). 43 C o n c l u s i o n The l i t e r a t u r e review t r a c e d the development of the concept as a r e s u l t of Coomb's (1968) work i n which the major f a i l u r e s of e d u c a t i o n a l systems were analyzed. Although l a r g e investments i n education have been made, the c o s t s of m a i n t a i n i n g schools and teacher t r a i n i n g have been r i s i n g f a s t e r than these c o u n t r i e s are a b l e to a f f o r d them (Coombs, 1968). Such investments have not matched with employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s and t h i s has c r e a t e d a l a r g e pool of unemployed youths (Simmons, 1979). There i s a general agreement in the l i t e r a t u r e on the development of the concept and on i t s d e f i n i t i o n (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; P a u l s t o n , 1973, 1976; L a B e l l e , 1976). The concept of nonformal education has been developed by p o l i c y makers and planners of funding agencies as an a l t e r n a t i v e to funding formal e d u c a t i o n a l systems whose outcomes have been d i s a p p o i n t i n g i n a l l developing c o u n t r i e s (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Simmons, 1979). The l i t e r a t u r e reviewed recognizes nonformal education because of i t s f l e x i b i l i t y and i t s a b i l i t y to reach l a r g e numbers of people, e s p e c i a l l y i n r u r a l areas (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; G r a n d s t a f f , 1973; P a u l s t o n , 1976; Callaway, 1973). Nonformal education may a l s o a s s i s t i n the human resource development (Harbison, 1973). Except f o r the work that i s being done by Paulston (1976), most of the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed ignores the r o l e nonformal education has played i n a s s i s t i n g s o c i a l movements in d i f f e r e n t 44 c o u n t r i e s . Nonformal education has the p o t e n t i a l to a s s i s t m i n o r i t y groups i n s o c i e t y to achieve group g o a l s . The l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t e s that the d i f f e r e n t t h e o r e t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n s i n f l u e n c e how the t h e o r i s t s p e r c e i v e the r o l e of nonformal education i n r e l a t i o n to development, and how i t may be implemented. Those that are i n f l u e n c e d by the s t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t t h e o r i e s s t r e s s s t a t e - p l a n n e d nonformal education systems which may c o n t r i b u t e to the modernization process (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; G r a n d s t a f f , 1972; Harbison, 1973). Those that are i n f l u e n c e d by the c o n f l i c t t h e o r i e s argue that nonformal education should not be i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d as t h i s w i l l perpetuate the e x i s t i n g i n e q u a l i t i e s i n s o c i e t y (Bock, 1976; Carnoy, 1976; L a B e l l e , 1976; Pa u l s t o n , 1976). They view the r o l e of nonformal edu c a t i o n as an a l t e r n a t i v e system i n development that may h e l p i n d i v i d u a l s b r i n g changes i n s o c i e t y . The l i t e r a t u r e reviewed shows lack of e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s to support some of the a s s e r t i o n s that are being made (Bock & Papagiannis, 1983). L i t t l e r e s e a r c h has been conducted on the me r i t s of nonformal education systems. The next chapter attempts to analyze a few major s t u d i e s that have been conducted i n the f i e l d of nonformal education systems. The s t u d i e s are reviewed to f i n d out what nonformal education systems e x i s t , how these systems have been developed, and what the major recommendations are . 4 5 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH ON NONFORMAL EDUCATION Review of the L i t e r a t u r e on Research on Nonformal Education T h i s chapter w i l l c r i t i c a l l y review some of the res e a r c h s t u d i e s that have been conducted i n the f i e l d on nonformal education i n the l a s t 12 y e a r s . The f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i a were used i n s e l e c t i n g the s t u d i e s to be reviewed: (a) the s t u d i e s were r e l a t e d to the l i t e r a t u r e review covered i n the pr e v i o u s chapter, (b) the s t u d i e s were l a r g e , covered a number of the developing c o u n t r i e s that formed a good b a s i s f o r comparison, (c) most of the s t u d i e s were conducted a f t e r 1970. The research w i l l be reviewed in order to analyze r e s u l t s and c o n c l u s i o n s which have i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r p l a n n i n g nonformal education programs. G e n e r a l l y there are two kinds of r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s that w i l l be reviewed in the f i e l d of nonformal education, i . e . , d e s c r i p t i v e surveys and resea r c h s t u d i e s designed to eval u a t e the impact of nonformal education on the p o p u l a t i o n s . The d e s c r i p t i v e surveys are those that have been conducted i n A f r i c a by S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972) and Coombs et a l . (1974, 1980). Other d e s c r i p t i v e s t u d i e s i n c l u d e those that have been conducted i n E t h i o p i a by Niehoff (1979) and i n Botswana by Coles (1982). The res e a r c h s t u d i e s that w i l l be reviewed are those conducted by Bock (1975) i n Mal a y s i a and L a t i n America ( L a B e l l e , 1983). 46 D e s c r i p t i v e Research Surveys S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972) conducted a survey that covered many types of nonformal education p r o j e c t s i n A f r i c a . There has been no follow-up s t u d i e s conducted to date. The survey was a response to p o l i c y makers i n A f r i c a and of funding agencies to look at c r i t i c a l dimensions of the unemployment problem. The African-American I n s t i t u t e conducted the study through funds from the U.S. Agency f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l Development. A f t e r a decade of l a r g e investments i n formal s c h o o l i n g , i t was r e a l i z e d that the c o s t s f o r formal s c h o o l i n g were i n c r e a s i n g much f a s t e r than the n a t i o n a l budgets. Investments i n s c h o o l i n g d i d not pay o f f i n jobs f o r many who completed d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of s c h o o l i n g , e s p e c i a l l y those with low l e v e l s . Such o b s e r v a t i o n s l e d the p o l i c y makers to gain i n t e r e s t i n nonformal e d u c a t i o n . The o b j e c t i v e s of the survey were to i d e n t i f y p r o d u c t i v e nonformal education programs in s e l e c t e d c o u n t r i e s e s p e c i a l l y those that were s u c c e s s f u l , i n n o v a t i v e and t r a n s f e r a b l e so that A f r i c a n governments and e x t e r n a l a i d agencies c o u l d l e a r n from these p r o j e c t s and develop u s e f u l p r o j e c t s elsewhere ( S h e f f i e l d & Dejomaoh, 1972: x i i ) . S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972) looked at nonformal education programs that had the f o l l o w i n g q u a l i t i e s : 1. programs that served as a l t e r n a t i v e s to formal s c h o o l i n g ; 2. programs that served as an extension of formal s c h o o l i n g f o r s k i l l s t r a i n i n g f o r employment; 47 3. programs that were designed f o r upgrading the s k i l l s of those a l r e a d y employed; 4. programs that were designed f o r self-employment f o r e a r l y s c h o o l - l e a v e r s . Most programs developed i n response to the needs of the the community. Some programs were developed f o r s k i l l s t r a i n i n g i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r wage employment. Some developed as on-job t r a i n i n g f o r the u r g e n t l y needed s k i l l e d manpower. Coombs et a l . (1973) c a r r i e d out a survey funded by UNICEF to look at ways of a s s i s t i n g r u r a l youths i n s k i l l s t r a i n i n g . Included i n the study were c o u n t r i e s from A s i a (China, Indonesia, Korea, M a l a y s i a , S r i Lanka, T h a i l a n d ) , the Caribbean and L a t i n America ( B r a z i l , Columbia, Cuba, Jamaica). The study was aimed at f i n d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n and g u i d e l i n e s that would a s s i s t both developing c o u n t r i e s and funding agencies in these a r e a s : 1. assess the needs w i t h i n a given country f o r nonformal education f o r r u r a l c h i l d r e n and youth, p a r t i c u l a r l y the o u t - o f - s c h o o l s , 2. plan e f f e c t i v e and economical programs to meet these needs, i n c l u d i n g a t t e n t i o n to the r e l a t i o n s h i p between nonformal and formal e d u c a t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n s , 3. develop means to e v a l u a t e and strengthen such programs over time, and 48 4. d e f i n e the ways i n which e x t e r n a l agencies can be of g r e a t e s t h e l p to c o u n t r i e s in implementing t h e i r nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s and programs. T h i s survey was conducted at the same time as another survey was being conducted but whose report was p u b l i s h e d l a t e r (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The 1973 r e p o r t aimed at o u t - o f - s c h o o l youth while the 1974 report aimed at the a d u l t p o p u l a t i o n s of the r u r a l areas. The 1974 re p o r t covers the same range of c o u n t r i e s from A f r i c a , A s i a , the Caribbean, and L a t i n America, although many other p r o j e c t s were i n c l u d e d from other developing c o u n t r i e s . The World Bank funded the survey with the o v e r a l l purpose of f i n d i n g out: 1. what extent c o u l d the World Bank's e d u c a t i o n a l f i n a n c i n g be extended to nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l programs, and 2. what s t r a t e g y should the World Bank pursue i n t h i s f i e l d and what might be the most promising and a p p r o p r i a t e types of p r o j e c t to support. The s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s of the study were to develop the b a s i s of examining past experience, present evidence, and any f r e s h ideas - improved i n f o r m a t i o n , a n a l y t i c a l methods and p r a c t i c a l g u i d e l i n e s , that would be u s e f u l to those a c t u a l l y in p l a n n i n g , implementing and e v a l u a t i n g programs of nonformal education geared to r u r a l development (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, p. 4). The survey was concerned with nonformal education programs that were designed to improve the knowledge and 49 s k i l l s of farmers, r u r a l a r t i s a n s , c r a f t workers, and small entrepeneurs. Some nonformal education programs were developed i n response to some s p e c i f i c needs as i d e n t i f i e d by the n a t i o n a l government as pa r t of the modernization process. Some took the shape they took i n response to community needs as we l l as to achieve the o b j e c t i v e s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n i n v o l v e d . Most of the programs surveyed seemed to be l a r g e l y government programs designed to b r i n g changes to communities. Most programs i n the 1973 survey conducted by Coombs sponsored by UNICEF s p e c i f i c a l l y looked at youth programs that were a v a i l a b l e i n r u r a l areas of the d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s . Youth programs were sponsored by governmental and nongovernmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Coombs (1980) conducted a r e s e r c h survey of some r u r a l i n t e g r a t e d programs i n Asian c o u n t r i e s ( I n d i a , S r i Lanka, Korea). The study focused on the fa m i l y as a b a s i c u n i t and the community as i t s b a s i c environment. Most of the s t u d i e s were funded by non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s and were autonomous and f r e e from v e r t i c a l s u p e r v i s i o n . One major f i n d i n g of t h i s r e s e a r c h study was the q u e s t i o n of l o c a l p e r s o n n e l . The l o c a l young educated people were not w i l l i n g to work i n these r u r a l a r e a s . The i n t e g r a t e d r u r a l development p r o j e c t s that were surveyed were small s c a l e programs developed by non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s (and i n some cases by governmental departments). These p r o j e c t s were intended to 5 0 h e l p the r u r a l poor to have an improved f a m i l y l i f e . In a l l the p r o j e c t s surveyed, p r i v a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n s p l a y a major r o l e by working very c l o s e l y with government m i n i s t r i e s i n v o l v e d i n the a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d to the f a m i l y such as h e a l t h , l a b o u r , r u r a l i n d u s t r i e s and c r a f t s , e d u c a t i o n , and a g r i c u l t u r e . V o l u n t a r y and p r i v a t e a s s o c i a t i o n s have cooperated with government departments in improving the f a m i l y l i f e of these p o p u l a t i o n s . T h i s i s a major f i n d i n g of t h i s study, and a l e s s o n which can be t r a n s f e r a b l e to other d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s . The p r o j e c t s i n d i c a t e c l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n between the p r i v a t e and p u b l i c agencies in p l a n n i n g , f i n a n c i n g , and e v a l u a t i n g these i n t e g r a t e d programs aimed at f a m i l y l i f e improvement. The government departments provide both f i n a c i a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e support. Part of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e support i s to r e o r i e n t personnel to the program o b j e c t i v e s , so that they view the p r o j e c t programs in the context of the socio-economic c u l t u r a l m i l i e u of the suroundings. The survey of these p r o j e c t s was an attempt to follow-up recommendations of the p r e v i o u s surveys which recommended an i n t e g r a t e d approach to r u r a l development. It o f f e r s l e s s o n s i n c o o p e r a t i o n among the p u b l i c and p r i v a t e agencies i n p l a n n i n g , f i n a n c i n g , and e v a l u a t i n g i n t e g r a t e d nonformal education programs. The p r o j e c t s t r i e d to i n c o r p o r a t e a p p r o p r i a t e e d u c a t i o n a l components of v a r i o u s -programs for improving the q u a l i t y of r u r a l f a m i l y 51 l i f e . They a l s o i n d i c a t e some element of community p a r t i c i p a t i o n . F i n d i n g s of the Surveys The major f i n d i n g s of the surveys are s i m i l a r even though each survey had a d i f f e r e n t focus. In a l l the surveys, there was great r e l i a n c e on e x i s t i n g data and i n t e r v i e w s with the a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and personnel of the nonformal education p r o j e c t s surveyed. In n e a r l y a l l the c o u n t r i e s surveyed, n a t i o n a l development plans i n d i c a t e d very low p r i o r i t y to a g r i c u l t u r a l and r u r a l development i n a l l o c a t i n g t h e i r resources through some kind of a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n s e r v i c e s with a g r i c u l t u r a l c o l l e g e s , r e s e a r c h i n s t i t u t e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . But even with such developments, they f e l l s hort of the a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n t a r g e t s f o r the UN Second Development Decade (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Inadequate Programs The e x t e n s i o n s e r v i c e s are g e n e r a l l y inadequate with the e x t e n s i o n workers o f t e n having an a u t h o r i t a r i a n a t t i t u d e of "teacher knows best." In some cases, i t was observed that they served the a l r e a d y prosperous farmers at the n e g l e c t of the smaller farmers. T h i s c o n t r i b u t e d to the gap between the r i c h farmers and the peasant farmers. In most s i t u a t i o n s the extension workers are overburdened in t h e i r jobs i n terms of the p o p u l a t i o n s i z e they are supposed to serve. T h i s r e l a t e s to the inadequacy of other personnel at the l o c a l l e v e l , who cannot d e a l broadly with 52 a l l education and development f a c t o r s . They are only i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e i r narrow area of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and are not i n t e r e s t e d i n e v a l u a t i n g nonformal education i n order to f i n d ways of improving such programs. T h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e d by Table 3. A l l the surveys i n d i c a t e that there i s a m a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of e d u c a t i o n a l , o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r r u r a l people and the evidence i n d i c a t e s that those who are most de p r i v e d of formal education are s i m i l a r l y most d e p r i v e d of e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t y through nonformal e d u c a t i o n . I t was found that the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of g i r l s and women i n nonformal education programs was very low. Although women a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n farming, marketing of crop s , and other farm management f u n c t i o n s , they have been overlooked. Women have the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of c a r i n g f o r c h i l d r e n , the s i c k and the e l d e r l y ( i n t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i e t i e s ) . T h i s may e x p l a i n t h e i r low p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Such r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g other household chores, leave them l i t t l e time to p a r t i c i p a t e i n nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . Another f i n d i n g of the s t u d i e s i s the lack of r e l a t i o n s h i p between formal and nonformal education programs. Nonformal education can add on to where the school l e f t o f f , e s p e c i a l l y f o r the e a r l y school l e a v e r s (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). At the same time, the formal education system can support nonformal education systems in many ways i f a c l o s e l i n k between the two systems i s maintained. T h i s can be r e l a t e d to the use of f a c i l i t i e s , Estimated E x t e n s i o n Workers and Farm Families in S e l e c t e d C o u n t r i e s , 1 1971 Farm Ex t e n s i o n Farm F a m i l i e s per F a m i l i e s Workers Extension Worker 1 - 2 M a l i 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 I n d i a 53,594,242 64,720 828 3 Korea Rep. of ' 2,506,000 J 3 ,628 4 4 691 | 5 5 I 6,049 414 A r g e n t i n a 1,074,883 239 4,497 B o l i v i a 571,600 70 8,165 B r a z i l 8,624,902- 1,556 6 5,543 C h i l e 389,206 368 1,057 Colombia 1,832,453 350 5,236 Costa Rica 140,000 37 3,784 E l 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 i s h e a v i l y drawn from the L a t i n American region because of a r e c e n t study on the s u b j e c t . Data on other c o u n t r i e s of A f r i c a , the Far E a s t and the Near E a s t were h a r d l y comparable p.nd were t h e r e f o r e not i n c l u d e d As f a r ar p o s s i b l e , o n l y extension personnel i n d i r e c t contact with farmers were i n c l u d e d . 2 1967. J 1965. The Economy o f Korea, V o l . 3, Seoul, 1966. 4 Includes only general guidance workers ( v i l l a g e l e v e l ) . Includes a l s o s u b j e c t s p e c i a l i s t s of a g r i c u l t u r a l extension (excluding p r o v i n c i a l and n a t i o n a l l e v e l s ) . Host are i n d i r e c t contact with farmers. 6 ^ • Includes v e t e r i n a r i a n s and o t h e r t e c h n i c a l s t a f f hot d i r e c t l y d e a l i n g with a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n . . ' SOURCE: Food and A g r i c u l t u r e O r g a n i z a t i o n , StDfce of Food and A g r i c u l t u r e 1972 (Rornet 1972), p. 137, Table 3-4. 54 p e r s o n n e l , and p r o v i s i o n of resea r c h p l a n n i n g and e v a l u a t i o n s e r v i c e s f o r nonformal education by u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o l l e g e s . While such a l i n k i s necessary, nonformal education ought to remain f l e x i b l e and i n n o v a t i v e (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The surveys observed that there i s a l a c k of l i n k a g e between nonformal education and formal e d u c a t i o n and employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s . F i r s t l y , there i s need f o r a l i n k a g e between nonformal education and the labour market and self-employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s that are a v a i l a b l e i n the community. T h i s may ensure that the graduates of the nonformal education programs are absorbed i n t o the s o c i a l economic systems of the communities. But where t h i s l i n k a g e does not e x i s t , the s k i l l s gained i n nonformal education programs may not be u t i l i z e d and t h i s leads to f r u s t r a t i o n s among the p a r t i c i p a n t s of such programs. Such l i n k a g e i s d i f f i c u l t to maintain where employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s are sc a r c e , but the s k i l l s gained should be u t i l i z e d i n self-employment f o r an improved way of l i f e (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The labour market sometimes does not value c e r t i f i c a t e s from nonformal education programs. T h i s i n turn leads to apathy among the people towards nonformal education programs, as they judge them to be i n f e r i o r to formal s c h o o l i n g . In most of the nonformal education programs, i t was found that formal methods of teaching were used and the i n s t r u c t o r s used a u t h o r i t a r i a n methods. Such methods 5 5 reduce the f l e x i b i l e q u a l i t i e s of nonformal education programs. I t was found that most programs d i d not u t i l i z e a u d i o - v i s u a l a i d s and p r i n t e d m a t e r i a l s even where they were a v a i l a b l e due to those a u t h o r i t a r i a n a t t i t u d e s which are mainly concerned with the o l d methods of t e a c h i n g . T h i s g i v e s nonformal education an i n f e r i o r p o s i t i o n to formal s c h o o l i n g . F a c i l i t i e s The 1973 and 1974 surveys i n d i c a t e that most nonformal education programs r e q u i r e lower c a p i t a l expenditure than formal e d u c a t i o n . Most nonformal education programs do not r e q u i r e f a c i l i t i e s of t h e i r own as these can be borrowed from e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s of other i n s t i t u t i o n s . The survey recommends t h a t , i n some s i t u a t i o n s , i t i s b e t t e r f o r nonformal education programs to have t h e i r own f a c i l i t i e s . There i s a need f o r more investment i n nonformal education t h a t , i n the r u r a l areas, use low-cost equipment. Costs Athough the c o s t of nonformal education programs i s u s u a l l y lower than that of formal e d u c a t i o n , i t i s d i f f i c u l t to know some c o s t s i n nonformal education programs. Such c o s t s vary from one program to another. The u t i l i z a t i o n of other e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s and the use of v o l u n t a r y i n s t r u c t o r s makes i t d i f f i c u l t to account f o r such a c t i v i t i e s . Most programs d i d not i n d i c a t e c o s t a ccounting procedures f o r t h e i r programs. Since many nonformal education programs are conducted by d i f f e r e n t 5 6 o r g a n i z a t i o n s , i t i s d i f f i c u l t to have a common accounting system. E v a l u a t i o n The other major f i n d i n g of the surveys was the l a c k of systematic e v a l u a t i o n of the nonformal education programs, whether i t be the program's i n t e r n a l e f f i c i e n c y (cost e f f e c t i v e n e s s ) or i t s b e n e f i c i a l s o c i a l and economic impact i n r e l a t i o n to the investment made i n i t ( c o s t - b e n e f i t r e l a t i o n s h i p ) . Such e v a l u a t i o n ought to be a c t i o n r e s e a r c h supported by n a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h i n s t i t u t e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , as d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). But such resea r c h e f f o r t s even at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l are l a c k i n g . Coordinat ion The f i n a l , but important, o b s e r v a t i o n from the surveys i s the l a c k of c o o r d i n a t i o n among the agencies p r o v i d i n g nonformal programs. T h i s was observed by S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972) as we l l as Coombs et a l . (1973, 1974). Although i n many A f r i c a n c o u n t r i e s , Adult Education Advisory Boards have been i n s t i t u t e d , they o f t e n l a c k s t a t u t o r y powers. D i f f e r e n t agencies and government departments have d i f f e r e n t i n s t i t u t i o n a l g o a l s . Such c o o r d i n a t i o n , r e f e r r e d to as i n t e g r a t i o n Coombs (1980), r e q u i r e s c o o r d i n a t i o n at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l from the planni n g stage to implementation so that each arm of government i s aware of the othe r ' s a c t i v i t i e s . 57 Other Research S t u d i e s on Nonformal E d u c a t i o n The surveys that have been conducted by S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972); Coombs and Ahmed (1974); Coombs et a l . (1973); and Coombs, (1980) tend to be d e s c r i p t i v e and p r e s c r i p t i v e emphasizing s t r a t e g i e s that ought t o be used in the planni n g , f i n a n c i n g , and e v a l u a t i n g of nonformal education programs. They provide v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n on nonformal education systems that e x i s t i n the f i e l d without using much of the s t a t i s t i c a l t o o l s a v a i l a b l e t o determine the impact of these programs on t h e i r t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . The surveys, although r e c o g n i z i n g small s c a l e nonformal education programs, tend to favour i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d nonformal education programs. Bock (1976) and L a B e l l e (1983), have argued a g a i n s t such i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d nonformal education systems. They c h a l l e n g e the s t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t approach which Coombs et a l . (1973) use i n t h e i r a n a l y s i s of nonformal education programs. Bock (1976), using an e m p i r i c a l study i n M a l a y s i a , argues that the i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal education serves to extend l e g i t i m i z a t i o n of s t a t e a u t h o r i t y j u s t as formal education does. At the same time nonformal education helps to c o o l out e x c e s s i v e demand by lowering the o c c u p a t i o n a l a s p i r a t i o n s of i t s graduates s i n c e i t l e g i t i m i z e s t h e i r p o s i t i o n s i n b l u e - c o l l a r jobs ( D a l l , 1983; Bock, 1983; Papagiannis, 1983)-. L a B e l l e (1983) conducted a study to f i n d out the impact of nonformal education on income i n i n d u s t r y i n Venezuela. 58 The f i n d i n g s of the study i n d i c a t e that engaging in nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s o f f e r s few income b e n e f i t s . The s a l a r y b e n e f i t s of e d u c a t i o n a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n were a s s o c i a t e d with the amount of formal s c h o o l i n g . I t may appear that the b e l i e f that nonformal education can be s u b s t i t u t e d by nonformal education does not always seem to be t r u e . T h e r e f o r e , i t i s u n r e a l i s t i c to use nonformal education programs in order to improve income b e n e f i t s f o r those with l e s s formal s c h o o l i n g . Bock and Papagiannis (1983) use a c o n f l i c t paradigm in t h e i r a n a l y s i s of the r o l e of nonformal educ a t i o n to the modernization process. They look a t the p o l i t i c a l , economic and c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s i n determining the r o l e of nonformal education i n n a t i o n a l development. The o c c u p a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s i n developing c o u n t r i e s are c l e a r l y segmented between the primary w h i t e - c o l l a r , managerial p r o f e s s i o n a l and the secondary b l u e - c o l l a r labor and a g r i c u l t u r a l workers. T h i s makes m o b i l i t y from the secondary to the primary s e c t o r d i f f i c u l t . Formal s c h o o l i n g i s seen as a t o o l that maintains such i n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s while nonformal education l e g i t i m i z e s those i n the secondary s e c t o r to be content i n t h e i r i n f e r i o r p o s i t i o n . They argue, t h e r e f o r e , that nonformal education should not be i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d as i t w i l l be used to l e g i t i m i z e the s o c i a l i n e q u a l i t i e s that a l r e a d y e x i s t i n s o c i e t y . Although Bock (1976) and L a B e l l e (1976) argue ag a i n s t the i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal 59 e d u c a t i o n , they do not o f f e r s p e c i f i c g u i d e l i n e s on how s m a l l s c a l e nonformal educa-tion programs w i l l be organized. I m p l i c a t i o n s of the F i n d i n g s to Planning Nonformal Education Programs The f i n d i n g s of n e a r l y a l l the surveys are s i m i l a r ( S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh, 1972; Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, 1974; Coombs, 1980; Coles, 1982). While the surveys were l o o k i n g f o r nonformal education programs that were s u c c e s s f u l to f i n d ways to improve funding, they tended to be too p r e s c r i p t i v e of the best ways of p l a n n i n g nonformal education programs. The surveys i n d i c a t e d a l a c k of r e s e a r c h and systematic e v a l u a t i o n of nonformal education, e s p e c i a l l y i n a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n . I t i s not p o s s i b l e to have s u c c e s s f u l programs without adequate rese a r c h and systematic e v a l u a t i o n . Such a gap i n r e s e a r c h a f f e c t s the p l a n n i n g of nonformal education programs. There i s a need f o r i n t e g r a t i n g agronomic r e s e a r c h and r e l a t e d s o c i a l s c i e n c e r e s e a r c h both at the l e v e l of f o r m u l a t i n g n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s and at the l e v e l of the farmer (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Another i m p l i c a t i o n of the f i n d i n g s r e l a t e s to c o s t s and r e s o u r c e s . There i s a great need f o r most developing c o u n t r i e s to i n v e s t i n the r u r a l areas i n order to develop e f f e c t i v e nonformal education programs. Such investments may r e l a t e to the b u i l d i n g of multipurpose l e a r n i n g c e n t r e s in many r u r a l areas with low cost equipment to t r a i n people in the r e q u i r e d s k i l l s f o r an improved l i f e s t y l e (Coombs & 60 Ahmed, 1974; Coombs, 1980). There i s a need f o r the r e t r a i n i n g of personnel who are s p e c i a l i z e d i n t h e i r own area so that they view t h e i r work as p a r t of the whole modernization process and not as a s i n g l e e f f o r t by t h e i r own department ( r e f e r r e d to as h o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n by Coombs (1980)). I t i s a l s o necessary to r e t r a i n p e r s onnel i n the u t i l i z a t i o n of modern teaching methods and the use of v i s u a l a i d s and p r i n t e d m a t e r i a l s . It i s important to have a l i n k a g e between nonformal and formal education e s p e c i a l l y f o r r u r a l youth so that nonformal education i s a b l e to complement the s k i l l s l e arned i n the formal education system (Coombs et a l . , 1973; C o l e s , 1982). Nonformal education systems should be s i m i l a r to the a c t i v i t i e s of the formal e d u c a t i o n a l s e c t o r so that i t r e i n f o r c e s some of the s k i l l s l e a r n e d at s c h o o l . T h i s would a s s i s t youths to f u n c t i o n w i t h i n t h e i r r u r a l s e c t o r (Coles, 1982). I t might be necessary here to emphasize the l i n k with the i n f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s so that t r a d i t i o n a l c r a f t s and s k i l l s are i n c o r p o r a t e d i n nonformal education programs. Very o f t e n the t r a d i t i o n a l c r a f t s are l e f t out. The surveys (Coombs et a l . , 1973; Coombs & Ahmed 1974) tend to be h i g h l y p r e s c r i p t i v e i n t h e i r a n a l y s i s of the nonformal education programs surveyed. They recommend an i n t e g r a t e d approach to p l a n n i n g nonformal education programs that w i l l be e f f e c t i v e i n transforming the l i v e s 61 of the r u r a l youths and a d u l t s . The two surveys have been the l a r g e s t s i n g l e surveys that have t r i e d to review and analyze what goes on i n many dev e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s . They pro v i d e a framework f o r c r o s s - c u l t u r a l a n a l y s i s of v a r i o u s nonformal education programs i n n a t i o n a l development s t r a t e g i e s . They a l s o p r o v i d e a b a s i s f o r comparison and t r a n s f e r a b i l i t y of the v a r i o u s nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s . One major weakness of the surveys i s that they tend to be h i g h l y p r e s c r i p t i v e . They o f f e r recommendations on how best nonformal educ a t i o n programs may be planned without c o n s i d e r i n g the s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l a s p i r a t i o n s of the d i f f e r e n t d eveloping c o u n t r i e s or the consumer's t r a d i t i o n a l value systems. They assume that the p o l i c y makers of the developing c o u n t r i e s w i l l accept such p r e s c r i p t i o n s s i n c e they are coming from the funding agenc i e s . In the survey (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974), four d i f f e r e n t approaches to r u r a l development are analyzed i n the case s t u d i e s t h a t are d i s c u s s e d . These four approaches are: the extension approach, the t r a i n i n g approach, the c o o p e r a t i v e approach, and the i n t e g r a t e d approach. The study recommends that nonformal education programs ought to be i n t e g r a t e d i n the p l a n n i n g , o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e , management, and s t a f f i n g . Such i n t e g r a t i o n should s t a r t with n a t i o n a l l e v e l p l a n n i n g to the lowest a d m i n i s t r a t i o n u n i t (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Such i n t e g r a t i o n c a l l s f o r d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of a u t h o r i t y so that l o c a l personnel are 62 a llowed to make some d e c i s i o n s while a l l o w i n g f o r community p a r t i c i p a t i o n as w e l l . I t a l s o c a l l s f o r f l e x i b i l i t y so t h a t programs are r e l a t e d to the needs of the c l i e n t system. The i n t e g r a t e d approach r e q u i r e s i n t e g r a t i o n of programs at a l l l e v e l s , both h o r i z o n t a l l y and v e r t i c a l l y between the d i f f e r e n t r u r a l education a c t i v i t e s and between such a c t i v i t i e s and r e l a t e d non-educational development a c t i v i t i e s and s e r v i c e s . Such an approach can only be achieved i f a l l people i n v o l v e d have a broad view of development. T h i s study makes the f o l l o w i n g s p e c i f i c recommendations to be undertaken by the d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, p. 240): 1. A l l o r g a n i z a t i o n s concerned ( e x t e r n a l as w e l l as i n t e r n a l ) must f i n d ways to c o l l a b o r a t e much more c l o s e l y , guided by a broad view of r u r a l development that transcends t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r s p e c i a l i t i e s . 2. Each country needs to evolve a coherent n a t i o n a l s t r a t e g y f o r r u r a l development and to overhaul any of i t s n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s ( a p p l y i n g , f o r example, to a g r i c u l t u r e , and water, t r a d e , p r i c e s , and f i s c a l a f f a i r s ) that are imcompatible with the g o als of t h e i r r u r a l development s t r a t e g y . 3. Within t h i s n a t i o n a l framework, development plans can be t a i l o r made f o r each r u r a l area, adapted to i t s p a r t i c u l a r p o t e n t i a l i t i e s and c o n s t r a i n t s . 4. To d e s ign and implement such s p e c i f i c area development plan r e q u i r e s a g r e a t e r d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of a u t h o r i t y , i n c l u d i n g more l a t i t u d e i n f i n a n c i a l c o n t r o l , to d i s t r i c t and s u b d i s t r i c t l e v e l s , a corresponding b u i l d u p of competent a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and expert s t a f f at these l e v e l s and strengthen mechanisms whereby l o c a l people can p a r t i c i p a t e i n the whole process of p l a n n i n g 63 and d e c i s i o n making and implementation. These recommendations have i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r the pla n n i n g of nonformal education programs. I t would be necessary to plan nonformal education programs at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l to i n c l u d e a l l r e l e v a n t departments i n v o l v e d i n the development process of r u r a l areas. Apart from such m i n i s t e r i a l and departmental involvement i n p l a n n i n g nonformal education programs, there should be n a t i o n a l commitment i n i n v e s t i n g and f i n a n c i n g nonformal education programs. There should be b u i l t i n systems of e v a l u a t i o n and f i n a n c i a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y from the n a t i o n a l to the lowest a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l s (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). Such i n t e g r a t e d systems have been adopted i n s e v e r a l d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s ( E t h i o p i a , Botswana, Kenya, Zambia, and some Asian c o u n t r i e s ) . C o n c l usion The surveys conducted by S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972) and Coombs et a l . (1973, 1974, 1980) use a s t r u c t u r a l / f u n c t i o n a l i s t assumption i n t h e i r a n a l y s i s of nonformal education systems. They use the systems approach and view nonformal education as one of the subsystems of the l a r g e r system. They o f f e r s p e c i f i c g u i d e l i n e s which d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s may f o l l o w i n p l a n n i n g , implementing, and systematic e v a l u a t i o n of nonformal education programs. They s t r e s s that nonformal education should be seen as a p r i o r i t y and needs to be planned at the n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g l e v e l where a l l m i n i s t r i e s and departments concerned with 64 nonformal education programs should plan together so that e d u c a t i o n a l components of t h e i r programs are seen as one system. While i n t e g r a t i o n i s recommended at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l , t here i s need f o r v e r t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n so that there i s c l o s e s u p e r v i s i o n of a c t i v i t i e s from the lowest l e v e l s to the top as w e l l as h o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n among the v a r i o u s agencies o f f e r i n g nonformal education programs at the community l e v e l . There i s u s u a l l y no guarantee that t r a i n e e s from nonformal education systems w i l l be absorbed i n t o the economy.. There are many nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s that are designed f o r s k i l l s t r a i n i n g f o r e i t h e r g a i n f u l employment or self-employment, But there i s no l i n k between employing agencies and nonformal education s k i l l s t r a i n i n g programs. Many young t r a i n e e s hope to get employed on completion of t h e i r t r a i n i n g . S ince there i s a lack of employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n dev e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s (Simmons, 1979; Coombs and Ahmed, 1974) there i s a need to encourage p a r t i c i p a n t s of the t r a i n i n g program to develop self-employment a t t i t u d e s and a s s i s t them to arrange c r e d i t f a c i l i t i e s to enable them to get s t a r t e d . T h i s i s a d i f f i c u l t venture but a necessary one. I t i s u s e l e s s f o r the nonformal education system to develop l i n k s with employing agenc i e s , when i t i s c l e a r that there are very few employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s . Systematic e v a l u a t i o n and r e s e a r c h i s an i n v a l u a b l e t o o l f o r any program to be e f f e c t i v e . These surveys 65 i n d i c a t e the need for c o o r d i n a t e d r e s e a r c h i n the d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s . Such rese a r c h can a l s o determine c o s t - e f f e c t i v e n e s s and c o s t - e f f i c i e n c y of e x i s t i n g programs, and i n so doing, determine f u r t h e r investment i n the program. Systematic f i n a n c i a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y seems d i f f i c u l t i n programs that are only run s e p a r a t e l y by non-governemental o r g a n i z a t i o n s . But i t i s s t i l l necessary to conduct systematic r e s e a r c h (Coombs, 1980; Coles, 1982). The surveys by Coombs et a l . (1973, 1974, 1980) and by S h e f f i e l d and Dejomaoh (1972) reco g n i z e both i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d and p r i v a t e l y sponsored nonformal education programs. I t seems more l i k e l y that t h e i r recommendations may e a s i l y be adopted. Although the focus of these s t u d i e s was on the r u r a l nonformal education programs, t h e i r f i n d i n g s and recommendations may be u s e f u l in the modern urban s e c t o r . A l l the s t u d i e s have tended to be p r e s c r i p t i v e as t h e i r o b j e c t i v e was to analyze nonformal education programs that are e f f e c t i v e i n terms of funding by the a i d agencies. The other r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s conducted by Bock (1976) and L a B e l l e (1976, 1983) use a c o n f l i c t t h e o r e t i c a l paradigm. They do not see the i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal education programs as a way i n a s s i s t i n g i n the modernization p r o c e s s . They seem to favour small s c a l e nonformal education p r o j e c t s as most e f f e c t i v e . The governments of developing c o u n t r i e s may f e e l threatened by such l o c a l i n i t i a t i v e s . I t may be necessary to have both 6 6 i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d nonformal education programs as w e l l as small s c a l e nonformal education p r o j e c t s developed through l o c a l i n i t i a t i v e s . In the f o l l o w i n g chapter a framework i s developed f o r a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. In reviewing the l i t e r a t u r e on the concept of nonformal education and r e s e a r c h that has been conducted on nonformal education programs, c e r t a i n elements have been i d e n t i f i e d which may be u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g nonformal education systems. 67 CHAPTER FOUR A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING AND COMPARING NONFORMAL EDUCATION SYSTEMS Need for a Framework The review of the l i t e r a t u r e on nonformal education r e v e a l s that the concept was developed by planners as an a l t e r n a t i v e to i n v e s t i n g i n formal education i n d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s . Because the formal schools are too c o s t l y and there i s a mismatch between what the schools are producing and what employers, c i t i z e n s , young people and parents need, nonformal education has been promoted because i t i s assumed to be f l e x i b l e , d i v e r s e i n i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and i s capable of reaching many people who are l e f t out of the formal system. Most rese a r c h on nonformal education has c o n c e n t r a t e d on t r y i n g to f i n d out what nonformal education programs e x i s t and f o r which groups they are designed. The r e s e a r c h surveys that have been conducted to f i n d out what programs e x i s t have made an important c o n t r i b u t i o n i n p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s that e x i s t i n developing c o u n t r i e s . Although nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s are d i v e r s e , previous s t u d i e s have c l a r i f i e d the elements which are common to most programs. A f t e r reviewing and a n a l y z i n g r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s on nonformal education, a framework was been developed f o r a n a l y z i n g and comparing nonformal education systems. The framework p r o v i d e s a s t r u c t u r e f o r s y s t e m a t i c a l l y 6 8 c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r comparative a n a l y s i s . O r g a n i z a t i o n of the Framework The framework d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s chapter i s based on an a n a l y s i s of nonformal education systems at three l e v e l s : n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l s . The framework may use the three l e v e l s as the b a s i s f o r a n a l y s i s and comparison. I t may use elements and ask q u e s t i o n s on each element at three l e v e l s . The framework that f o l l o w s d i s c u s s e s major elements. Elements of the Framework Based on the r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s and the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed, the f o l l o w i n g elements were developed: • p o l i c i e s , goals and o b j e c t i v e s ; • p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s ; • s t r a t e g i e s f o r development; • nonformal education agencies; • p a r t i c i p a t i o n / p r o g r a m c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; • l e a r n i n g outcomes; • e v a l u a t i o n . Questions that may be u s e f u l i n c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n at the d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s are i n c l u d e d under each element. Some of the q u e s t i o n s may be asked a t a l l l e v e l s while some questi o n s may only be asked at one of the l e v e l s . T h i s i s i n d i c a t e d i n the t a b l e of q u e s t i o n s f o r each element. 6 9 P o l i c i e s , Goals and O b j e c t i v e s The planning of nonformal education, and other e d u c a t i o n a l systems at a l l l e v e l s , ought to be i n l i n e with the major p o l i c i e s and goals of a country. P o l i c i e s may be determined by p o l i t i c a l and economic c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Such p o l i c i e s are d i r e c t e d by a country's broad goals and o b j e c t i v e s which may be p o l i t i c a l l y determined. The p l a n n i n g of nonformal education i n v o l v e s j o i n t p l a n n i n g with r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from o p e r a t i o n a l m i n i s t r i e s working together harmonously. I t may be important to i d e n t i f y the i n d i v i d u a l s , bodies and m i n i s t r i e s that are i n v o l v e d i n f o r m u l a t i n g p o l i c i e s at a l l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l s so that they i d e n t i f y nonformal education as part of the whole development s t r a t e g y . Committees may e x i s t at the n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l s that are i n v o l v e d i n the n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . I t i s important to i d e n t i f y such committees and t h e i r membership. I t i s important to f i n d out communication l i n k s that may e x i s t between n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l committees. Table 4 c o n t a i n s a l i s t of q u e s t i o n s that may be u s e f u l f o r c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n to understand the p l a n n i n g process at each l e v e l . The l i s t of q u e s t i o n s i s not exhaustive but i t does i n c l u d e e s s e n t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n f o r a n a l y z i n g and comparing the p l a n n i n g process of d i f f e r e n t nonformal education systems. 7 0 Table 4 : L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of P o l i c i e s , Goals and O b j e c t i v e s Quest ions N R L • What are the p o l i c i e s , goals and o b j e c t i v e s ? • What i s the o f f i c i a l p l a n n i n g framework? • v/ • Which a d m i n i s t r a t o r s are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r • planning? • How many p r o f e s s i o n a l s a ct i n the plann i n g v/ • • capac i t y ? • What are the major p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d to the / e d u c a t i o n a l system? • Which other people c o n t r i b u t e to the pl a n n i n g / process (e.g., s c h o l a r s , business l e a d e r s , e x p a t r i a t e c o n s u l t a n t s , i n t e r n a t i o n a l agencies, e t c . ) ? What i s the source of plann i n g funds (e.g., / j / / d i r e c t to planning agency, s e c t o r budgeting p r o j e c t a l l o c a t i o n s ) ? What are the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a p a c i t i e s of the / / V p l a n n i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n i n l i g h t of i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ? What i s the degree of i n t e g r a t i o n between / / / pla n n i n g agencies? How much data and in f o r m a t i o n resources are / / y/ a v a i l a b l e ? What types of plans u t i l i z e d ( i . e . , s e c t o r a l j / y/ p r o j e c t , e t c . ) ? What are the e s t a b l i s h e d time h o r i z o n s and the y/ y/ V amount of f l e x i b i l i t y and a d a p t a b i l i t y allowed i n the plans? What are the means f o r improving the pl a n n i n g / y/ \J process b u i l t i n t o the development plans? Are there any d i s c r e p a n c i e s i n p o l i c i e s , / / / goals and o b j e c t i v e s between the three l e v e l s ? 1 N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional L e v e l L - L o c a l L e v e l 71 The above i n f o r m a t i o n may h e l p understand who plans at each a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l . T h i s may i n c l u d e the v a r i o u s m i n i s t r i e s , c o u n c i l s and other o r g a n i z a t i o n s that may be i n v o l v e d at a l l l e v e l s of p l a n n i n g . M i n i s t r i e s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s that deal with nonformal e d u c a t i o n may be represented at each l e v e l of p l a n n i n g . The i n f o r m a t i o n may a l s o t e l l us how p l a n n i n g i s conducted, the degree of i n t e g r a t i o n that e x i s t s between those m i n i s t r i e s i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g and implementing nonformal edu c a t i o n as w e l l as whether the nonformal education system i s i n c o r p o r a t e d i n the major p o l i c i e s and o b j e c t i v e s of a c o u n t r y at the d i f f e r e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l s : n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l and l o c a l . D i s c r e p a n c i e s and c o n f l i c t s may e x i s t between p o l i c i e s , o b j e c t i v e s , and goals at the n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l s . I t i s important to ask q u e s t i o n s that w i l l provide such i n f o r m a t i o n . I t i s important to analyze p r i o r i t y o b j e c t i v e s at a l l l e v e l s and to understand how these are c h a n n e l l e d to the higher planning l e v e l s . I t i s necessary to f i n d out the comprehensiveness of the p l a n n i n g process at a l l l e v e l s . T h i s may r e f e r to how the v a r i o u s government departments and other e d u c a t i o n a l agencies are c o o r d i n a t e d or i n t e g r a t e d . P o l i c i e s , goals and o b j e c t i v e s may be analyzed by f i n d i n g out whether they are short-term or long-term i n nature. They may be analyzed whether they are i n s t i t u t i o n a l , or community, or s o c i a l c o l l e c t i v e group, or 7 2 i n d i v i d u a l g o a l s . We w i l l b r i e f l y d i s c u s s each type of p o l i c i e s and goals that may be analyzed. Long-term goals and p o l i c i e s . Long-term goals and p o l i c i e s r e l a t e to broad n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s and o b j e c t i v e s . Such p o l i c i e s and goals may r e l a t e to n a t i o n a l t a r g e t s r e g a r d i n g the p r o v i s i o n of e d u c a t i o n , h e a l t h s e r v i c e s , a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n , employment, and community development. The p o l i c i e s and goals of nonformal education r e l a t e to n a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s and t a r g e t s . Short-term or immediate goals and p o l i c i e s . Short term goals r e l a t e to the type of nonformal education a c t i v i t y as w e l l as the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . These goals are e a s i l y i d e n t i f i a b l e by the planners as w e l l as the consumers of nonformal e d u c a t i o n . Such goals may r e l a t e to s k i l l s and knowledge a c q u i r e d f o r employment; they may r e l a t e to improving s k i l l s f o r promotion f o r those who are a l r e a d y g a i n f u l l y employed; and they may r e l a t e to the use of the s k i l l s and knowledge gained f o r changing the l i f e s t y l e s of i n d i v i d u a l s . I n s t i t u t i o n a l g o als and p o l i c i e s . Each nonformal educ a t i o n agency has p o l i c i e s and o b j e c t i v e s that guide i t s a c t i v i t i e s . Short term goals r e l a t e to the immediate s k i l l s and knowledge to be gained by those that p a r t i c i p a t e i n the nonformal education a c t i v i t y ; while long-term p o l i c i e s and goals guide nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . 73 Community g o a l s . Community goals r e l a t e to the a s p i r a t i o n s of the community and what t h e i r needs ar e . They r e l a t e both to t h e i r p r e s c r i p t i v e needs as w e l l as t h e i r m o t i v a t i o n a l needs. Communities u s u a l l y have a general idea of what they u r g e n t l y r e q u i r e , e i t h e r i n s k i l l s and knowledge or i n economic terms. S o c i a l c o l l e c t i v e advocacy group g o a l s . Some groups are organized in order to f u r t h e r t h e i r i n t e r e s t s and b r i n g change to s o c i e t y . These groups have t h e i r own group goals and p o l i c i e s which they t r y to promote i n order to improve the groups' w e l l being. T h i s may be economic or s o c i a l i n nature. Groups that may f a l l under t h i s group may i n c l u d e trade unions, worker's education, r e l i g i o u s and e t h n i c groups. I n d i v i d u a l g o a l s . I n d i v i d u a l s u s u a l l y have short-term goals and i n some cases long-term g o a l s . I n d i v i d u a l s r e l a t e to t h e i r needs both m o t i v a t i o n a l and p r e s c r i p t i v e . I n d i v i d u a l s may l a c k the s k i l l s and knowledge r e q u i r e d i n the labour market. Such an i n d i v i d u a l may p a r t i c i p a t e in a nonformal a c t i v i t y that may provide him with s k i l l s f o r a job. I t i s important to f i n d out how a l l these p o l i c i e s and goals are a r t i c u l a t e d at each l e v e l . I t may be e q u a l l y important to f i n d out what p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s have been e s t a b l i s h e d to a r t i c u l a t e the p o l i c i e s and g o a l s . The next element that i s d i s c u s s e d i s p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s . 74 P o l i t i c a l and A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S t r u c t u r e s The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s may be e s t a b l i s h e d at each a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l to plan and implement the o b j e c t i v e s and goals o u t l i n e d i n the n a t i o n a l p l a n s . Such o b j e c t i v e s w i l l i n c l u d e those that d i r e c t nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . The o b j e c t i v e s r e l a t e to the d i f f e r e n t m i n i s t r i e s i n v o l v e d i n implementing nonformal a c t i v i t i e s . The l i s t may i n c l u d e some of the f o l l o w i n g m i n i s t r i e s : education, h e a l t h , a g r i c u l t u r e , labour and s o c i a l s e r v i c e s e t c . The o r g a n i z a t i o n of such m i n i s t r i e s may vary i n d i f f e r e n t d e v e l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s . I t may be necessary to i d e n t i f y communication l i n k s between the m i n i s t r i e s at the n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l planning l e v e l s by i d e n t i f y i n g committees that may e x i s t . The committees may be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r l e g i s l a t i o n of new p o l i c i e s . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s a v a i l a b l e may a l s o h e l p s o l i c i t funds in the p l a n n i n g process as w e l l the c o n t i n u a t i o n of the flow of funds in the implementation of the plans which a f f e c t nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . The q u e s t i o n s of Table 5 may a s s i s t the c o l l e c t i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n on p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s . The q u e s t i o n s i n the t a b l e may be u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g and comparing p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s that are i n v o l v e d i n the o p e r a t i o n of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . 75 Table 5: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of P o l i t i c a l and A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S t r u c t u r e s Questions N R L • What major a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s e x i s t ? V • • What p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s e x i s t ? • • • What i n s t i t u t i o n s are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r f i n a n c i n g personnel and c u r r i c u l a a s s o c i a t e d with nonformal education? • • • • What communication networks e x i s t ? • • V • What are the major sources of funding f o r nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s ? • yj • What l i n k s e x i s t between the nonformal education system and the labour market? • • V • To what extent are the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s responsive to the demands of c i t i z e n s ? V • To what degree i s there d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n to r e g i o n a l and l o c a l governments? • • • • What are the channels of communication? • • • What are the major i n t e r e s t groups ( t r i b a l , l a bour, r e l i g i o u s , b u s i n e s s ) ? • • V • What are the major i n t e r n a t i o n a l pressure groups (e.g., i n t e r n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , trade a s s o c i a t i o n s , f o r e i g n a i d donors, m u l t i - n a t i o n a l c o r p o r a t i o n s , e t c . ) ? v/ • What are the sources of funding? v/ • What are the unemployment l e v e l s ? v/ • • What are the education and s k i l l s l e v e l s ? V • Are there d i s c r e p a n c i e s between what V • • the n a t i o n a l government r e q u i r e s and what i s done at the r e g i o n a l and l o c a l l e v e l s ? N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional L e v e l L - L o c a l L e v e l 76 A l l the d i f f e r e n t government m i n i s t r i e s and departments are represented at each l e v e l . I d e a l l y , there i s c o o r d i n a t i o n in p l a n n i n g and implementing p o l i c i e s that are formulated at the n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l s f o r e f f e c t i v e n e s s and e f f i c i e n c y . These government s t r u c t u r e s may work together i n v a r i o u s committees. The no t i o n of h o r i z o n t a l i n t e g r a t i o n i s very necessary at a l l l e v e l s so that nonformal a c t i v i t i e s and others are i n t e g r a t e d from the n a t i o n a l l e v e l down to the l o c a l l e v e l . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s at the r e g i o n a l l e v e l serve as a communication l i n k between the n a t i o n a l and l o c a l l e v e l s , so that p o l i c i e s can be t a i l o r e d to the needs of the r e g i o n . The s t r u c t u r e s ensure that v e r t i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n i s maintained through r e p o r t s from e i t h e r l o c a l or n a t i o n a l l e v e l s . They are a l s o r e s p o n s i b l e f o r c o l l e c t i n g data on education and s k i l l s l e v e l s , unemployment r a t e , and p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s i n nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s o f f e r e d by each o p e r a t i o n a l m i n i s t r y . S t r a t e g i e s f o r Development S t r a t e g i e s f o r development can be equated with a l t e r n a t i v e methods of a c h i e v i n g s t a t e d g o a l s , given the means and c o n s t r a i n t s of the e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e s . S t r a t e g i e s d e a l i n terms of how the problems may be r e s o l v e d . Some of the qu e s t i o n s that may be r a i s e d i n order t o c o l l e c t i n f o r m a t i o n on development s t r a t e g i e s may in c l u d e some of the q u e s t i o n s in Table 6. 77 Table 6: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of S t r a t e g i e s f o r Development Questions N • What are the major development s t r a t e g i e s 1/ / \f (major economic a c t i v i t i e s ) ? • To what extent i s the n a t i o n a l government / i n v o l v e d i n the c o n t r o l of economic a c t i v i t i e s ( s e l f - r e l i a n c e , s o c i a l i s m ) ? • What s t r u c t u r e s are e s t a b l i s h e d to adopt such development s t r a t e g i e s ? • What are the p r o d u c t i o n techniques a v a i l a b l e ( c a p i t a l versus labour i n t e n s i v e ) ? • What are the p r o d u c t i v i t y l e v e l s i n v a r i o u s economic a c t i v i t i e s ( a g r i c u l t u r e , manufacturing, i n d u s t r y ) ? • To what d e g r e e . i s a g r i c u l t u r e mechanized? What are the p r o d u c t i v i t y and technology l e v e l s ? What are the b a s i c primary resource products and annual outputs? What exte n s i o n s e r v i c e s are a v a i l a b l e ? What are the p h y s i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s to a g r i c u l t u r e (e.g., c l i m a t e ) ? What i s the extent of s u b s i s t e n c e farming and cash c r o p farming? What communication networks e x i s t ( r a d i o , telephones, newspapers, t e l e v i s i o n ) ? What i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s e x i s t (roads, r a i l w a y s ) ? What p h y s i c a l f a c i l i t i e s e x i s t (marketing c e n t e r s , c r e d i t unions, c o o p e r a t i v e s , and other f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s ) ? What s o c i a l s e r v i c e s are a v a i l a b l e ( s c h o o l s , h o s p i t a l s , h e a l t h c e n t e r s , farmer t r a i n i n g c e n t e r s ) ? / / • • • V • • / V V V V / V • V • • • • • V • 1 N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional Level L - L o c a l L e v e l 78 S t r a t e g i e s that are adopted f o r n a t i o n a l development are important because they r e f l e c t the p r i o r i t i e s i n the modernization process. S t r a t e g i e s may be d i r e c t e d from the n a t i o n a l l e v e l to the r e g i o n a l and l o c a l l e v e l s . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s that have been d i s c u s s e d are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r adopting such s t r a t e g i e s . Information on major economic a c t i v i t i e s , the i n f r a s t r u c t u r e and s o c i a l s e r v i c e s a v a i l a b l e and the degree of mechanization i n a g r i c u l t u r e are important because these may determine what type of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s are o f f e r e d by a l l l e v e l s . Nonformal Education Agencies I t i s important to e s t a b l i s h which agencies sponsor nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s and who t h e i r t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n s are at a l l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l s . Agencies that are i n v o l v e d i n nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d e government, non-governmental, and v o l u n t a r y o r g a n i z a t i o n s . While i t i s important to i d e n t i f y nonformal education agencies, i t i s e q u a l l y important to i d e n t i f y s p e c i f i c types of a c t i v i t i e s , the t a r g e t groups, types of l e a r n i n g s k i l l s r e q u i r e d , p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e , drop-out r a t e , education and h e a l t h standards. The q u e s t i o n s l i s t e d i n Table 7 may be u s e f u l i n p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on the agencies i n v o l v e d , types of a c t i v i t i e s , l e a r n i n g s k i l l s r e q u i r e d and t a r g e t groups f o r the types of a c t i v i t i e s . 7 9 Table 7 : L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of Nonformal Education Agencies Questions N R L • What are the major government agencies that p r o v i d e nonformal e d u c a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s (government, non-governmental, and v o l u n t a r y assoc i a t i o n s ) ? • V • What are the major types of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s that e x i s t ? • • Who are the major consumers f o r each type of nonformal education a c t i v i t y ? • • 0 What are the p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s ? • • • What are the communication channels w i t h i n the agency and between agencies? • Is there a c o o r d i n a t i n g body f o r a l l the o r g a n i z a t i o n s (whether i t e x i s t s or not)? • • What are the sources of funding f o r p a r t i c u l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n s ? • • What are the education and s k i l l s l e v e l s ? • / • • What communication networks and i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s e x i s t ? • / • What major s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and • / / o r g a n i z a t i o n s e x i s t ? N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional L e v e l L - L o c a l L e v e l These q u e s t i o n s are u s e f u l i n o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on the types of a c t i v i t i e s , the consumers of nonformal education, and communication channels that are a v a i l a b l e . T h i s leads us i n t o the next element: p a r t i c i p a n t / p r o g r a m c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 80 P a r t i c i p a n t / P r o g r a m C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Important i n f o r m a t i o n that may be u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g l e a r n e r and program c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s may i n c l u d e ; demographic i n f o r m a t i o n about sex, age, e d u c a t i o n a l background, p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e , and the l e a r n i n g s k i l l s r e q u i r e d . The i n f o r m a t i o n on age, sex and e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l s may be c o l l e c t e d and compiled d u r i n g r e g i s t r a t i o n of a program and kept by the o r g a n i z a t i o n . The o r g a n i z a t i o n may be a good source of i n f o r m a t i o n . Information c o l l e c t e d on the p a r t i c i p a n t may be a l s o r e l a t e to the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e of the c l i e n t system. Questions may be asked on the socio-economic s t a t u s and r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n s of those who p a r t i c i p a t e i n nonformal a c t i v i t i e s . Information i s needed on the programs that r e l a t e to who manages the program, who sponsors the program, what type of l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s are planned in the program and what are the d e l i v e r y systems of the l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . The q u e s t i o n s i n Table 8 may a s s i s t i n the c o l l e c t i o n of such data. T h i s l i s t i s not exhaustive but may be u s e f u l i n p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e procedures of a program. Such i n f o r m a t i o n may be u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g and comparing d i f f e r e n t nonformal education programs. 81 Table 8: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of Pa r t i c i p a n t / P r o g r a m C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Questions N R L 1 • What are the demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of / yf l e a r n e r s (sex, age, number)? • What i s the nature of p a r t i c i p a t i o n ( v o l u n t a r y / or non-voluntary) • What i s the e d u c a t i o n a l background of l e a r n e r s ? j/ • What s k i l l l e v e l s do they have? / • What i s the primary occupation of l e a r n e r s ? y/ y/ • What are the h e a l t h and n u t r i t i o n standards? y/ V y/ • What i s t h e i r r e l i g i o u s or e t h n i c a f f i l i a t i o n ? / • What are the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the standard of / / l i v i n g and the d i s t r i b u t i o n of wealth? • What are the unemployment l e v e l s and s p a t i a l y/ y/ y/ d i s t r i b u t i o n ? • What i s the work f o r c e composition and labour / y/ p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s ? • What are the o b j e c t i v e s of the program? v/ • Which type of agency manages the program? y/ • What a c t i v i t i e s are planned i n the program? / \J • What s t r a t e g i e s are o u t l i n e d f o r the d e l i v e r y y/ of the. l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s (methods, techniques)? • Who i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r managing the programs? / • How do plan n e r s communicate with the t a r g e t y/ p o p u l a t i o n ? • Who are the members of the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n ? y/ y/ • What are the communication channels used with yf y/ community l e a d e r s and the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n (formal or i n f o r m a l ) ? • How i s the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n segmented? y/ / • How are community needs assessed? / • What are the e d u c a t i o n a l and s k i l l l e v e l s of / the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n ? • What are the h e a l t h and n u t r i t i o n standards? / / • What are t h e i r r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s and a t t i t u d e s ? y/ • What are the unemployment l e v e l s ? / • Who i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r each task? / y/ • Does the program have a time schedule f o r y/ y/ y/ implementation? • What about f l e x i b i l i t y ? What i f something goes y/ y/ wrong? N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional L e v e l L - L o c a l L e v e l 8 2 I t may not be p o s s i b l e to c o l l e c t a l l the infor m a t i o n from the l i s t of quest i o n s i n the t a b l e . However, s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the l e a r n e r s w i l l p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on who p a r t i c i p a t e s i n nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s . The i n f o r m a t i o n i s u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g and comparing l e a r n e r c h a r a c t e r i s i t i c s between systems. Some of the que s t i o n s w i l l p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on program c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as: the o b j e c t i v e s of the program; the communication l i n k s between the agency and the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n ; the types of l e a r n i n g outcomes planned; and the time schedule f o r implementation. The nature of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n nonformal education may be determined by askin g whether i t i s v o l u n t a r y or non-voluntary. V o l u n t a r y P a r t i c i p a t i o n . Most nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s that i n v o l v e f a m i l y l i f e e d ucation, a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n , community development, and l i t e r a c y programs are vo l u n t a r y i n nature. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in these programs i s determined by i n d i v i d u a l or s o c i a l need. Non-voluntary P a r t i c i p a t i o n . Some programs o f f e r e d for youth s k i l l s t r a i n i n g and i n - s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g programs may not be v o l u n t a r y . The o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n v o l v e d r e q u i r e that i n d i v i d u a l s improve t h e i r knowledge and s k i l l s i n t h e i r work s i t u a t i o n s . The element f o l l o w i n g the p a r t i c i p a n t / p r o g r a m c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s the l e a r n i n g outcomes that are expected from the nonformal education a c t i v i t y . 83 L e a r n i n g Outcomes Le a r n i n g outcomes may be determined by the type of the nonformal education a c t i v i t y . For the purpose of t h i s element, the type of l e a r n i n g outcome w i l l be c l a s s i f i e d by the g e n e r a l goal of the nonformal education a c t i v i t y . The goals may be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from l e a r n i n g goal outcomes by a s k i n g q u e s t i o n s on l e a r n i n g outcomes of each general g o a l . Information concerning l e a r n i n g outcomes or s k i l l s t o be a t t a i n e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s may be c o l l e c t e d by l o o k i n g at each type of nonformal education a c t i v i t y . The type of a c t i v i t y i n which a l e a r n e r i s e n r o l l e d determines the kinds of l e a r n i n g outcomes he may a c q u i r e . The q u e s t i o n s of Table 9 are u s e f u l i n determining the type of l e a r n i n g outcomes. Under each q u e s t i o n , other q u e s t i o n s on s p e c i f i c l e a r n i n g outcomes may be asked. The q u e s t i o n s w i l l p r ovide more s p e c i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n on what s k i l l s p a r t i c i p a n t s a c q u i r e . E v a l u a t ion E v a l u a t i o n i s an important element in p l a n n i n g nonformal education systems. E v a l u a t i o n a l l o w s educators to give an account of the outcomes to sponsors of nonformal education systems i n order to ensure f u t u r e funding. I t i s a l s o r e q u i r e d i n order to r e v i s e and improve ongoing p r o j e c t s and as a b a s i s f o r f u t u r e p l a n n i n g . I t i s important to decide e a r l y how the impact of the e d u c a t i o n a l system w i l l be assessed. E v a l u a t i o n i s a process of measuring progress towards achievement of o b j e c t i v e s . 84 Table 9 : L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of Learning Outcomes Questions N • Are a c t i v i t i e s designed p r i m a r i l y to prepare \/ j/ / persons, mostly youth, f o r e n t r y i n t o employment? • Are a c t i v i t i e s designed f o r i n - s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g / a c t i v i t i e s o r i e n t e d p r i m a r i l y to the development of s k i l l s and knowledge of the members of the labour f o r c e ? • Are a c t i v i t i e s designed to o f f e r e d u c a t i o n a l \f \f p o s s i b i l i t i e s i n a g r i c u l t u r a l e x t e n s i o n , h e a l t h , f a m i l y l i f e e d u c a t i o n , f u n c t i o n a l l i t e r a c y , b a s i c l i t e r a c y , income-generating a c t i v i t i e s ? • Are a c t i v i t i e s designed f o r community 1/ / improvement which i n c l u d e community development, s e l f - h e l p p r o j e c t s , income-generating a c t i v i t i e s (at community l e v e l ) , and c o o p e r a t i v e education? • Are a c t i v i t i e s designed to o f f e r c i v i c s k i l l s , \J \/ / e.g., knowledge of how l o c a l and n a t i o n a l governments f u n c t i o n ? N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional L e v e l L - L o c a l L e v e l There are two kinds of e v a l u a t i o n : formative and summative e v a l u a t i o n . Some of the q u e s t i o n s i n Table 10 may be u s e f u l i n p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on e v a l u a t i o n . These qu e s t i o n s are u s e f u l i n p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f o r a n a l y z i n g e v a l u a t i o n of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s at the three l e v e l s . 85 Table 10: L i s t of Questions f o r A n a l y s i s of E v a l u a t i o n Questions N R L • What procedures are used to assess the impact of the program? • • • Who conducts the e v a l u a t i o n ( i n s t r u c t o r s , o u t s i d e c o n s u l t a n t s , p a r t i c i p a n t s , sponsors)? • Who i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the e v a l u a t i o n ? • • • What i s the r o l e of each type of e v a l u a t i o n and how are t h e i r e f f o r t s coordinated? • • • When does e v a l u a t i o n take p l a c e (formative and summative)? • • How i s the e v a l u a t i o n achieved ( d a i l y , weekly, monthly assessments, d i s c u s s i o n s , meetings, i n t e r i m r e p o r t s ) ? • • What are the sources f o r funding the e v a l u a t i o n process? • • • How are the data be c o l l e c t e d ? • • What kind of data are c o l l e c t e d ? / • How are the data analyzed? • • V a How are the data used? V • • N - N a t i o n a l L e v e l R - Regional L e v e l L - L o c a l L e v e l Applying the Framework The framework that has been d e s c r i b e d i s a t o o l that can be used to analyze nonformal education systems. I t i s p o s s i b l e to use the framework to compare and c o n t r a s t d i f f e r e n t nonformal education systems. The framework uses three l e v e l s of a n a l y s i s : n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l . Questions developed under each element w i l l p r ovide the inf o r m a t i o n f o r a n a l y s i s and comparison at a l l three l e v e l s . Since the ques t i o n s that are provided i n the framework have not been t e s t e d , a l t e r n a t i v e q u e s t i o n s may be used when c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on a l l elements. 86 In the n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g process the framework may be u s e f u l i n i d e n t i f y i n g those who p l a n ; n a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s , g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s ; government departments that are i n v o l v e d i n planning nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s ; the degree of i n t e g r a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g and implementation of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s between the v a r i o u s government m i n i s t r i e s and other nongovernment o r g a n i z a t i o n s and a s s o c i a t i o n s . I t i s p o s s i b l e to i d e n t i f y whether p o l i c i e s and goals at r e g i o n a l and l o c a l l e v e l s are congruent with those at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l . I t w i l l p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s and funding of nonformal ed u c a t i o n . Such i n f o r m a t i o n i s u s e f u l f o r a n a l y z i n g and comparing nonformal education programs of d i f f e r e n t systems. Information c o l l e c t e d on the p a r t i c i p a n t / p r o g r a m c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s u s e f u l for the a n a l y s i s and comparison of l e a r n e r and program c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s from d i f f e r e n t systems. I t p r o v i d e s the b a s i s f o r comparing the consumers of nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s : whether they have s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s or not. The l i s t of q u e s t i o n s used may vary from s i t u a t i o n to s i t u a t i o n but the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the l e a r n e r s would be i d e n t i f i e d and form the b a s i s f o r a n a l y s i s and comparison. 87 C o n c l u s i o n The framework developed i s a u s e f u l t o o l f o r a n a l y z i n g and comparing nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s of d i f f e r e n t systems. Nonformal education takes d i f f e r e n t forms and operates under d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s i n d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s , but the o v e r a l l purpose of nonformal edu c a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s i s to p r o v i d e e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s to d i v e r s e groups of people. T h i s may be achieved through f a c e - t o - f a c e communication, through r a d i o , or through t e l e v i s i o n . In order to achieve such o b j e c t i v e s i t has to be planned w i t h i n the broad n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g and modernization p r o c e s s . Although as yet untested, the framework developed i n t h i s study p r o v i d e s a p o t e n t i a l l y u s e f u l s t r u c t u r e f o r a n a l y z i n g and comparing the p l a n n i n g process of d i f f e r e n t nonformal education systems at three l e v e l s : n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l . The q u e s t i o n s r a i s e d on each element would be used to provide the necessary i n f o r m a t i o n f o r a n a l y s i s and comparison. 88 CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary One of the purposes of a d u l t education i s to b r i n g s o c i a l and economic change to i n d i v i d u a l s (Apps, 1973; F r e i r e , 1973). Although most a d u l t education programs tend to emphasize i n d i v i d u a l s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n (Knowles, 1980; Verner, 1969), i t i s important to focus on a d u l t education programs that emphasize l e a r n i n g outcomes that may a s s i s t i n d i v i d u a l l e a r n e r s to change t h e i r s o c i a l and economic s i t u a t i o n (Lowe, 1970). T h i s i s important i n developing c o u n t r i e s where the l a r g e m a j o r i t y of a d u l t s l i v e i n very d i f f i c u l t c o n d i t i o n s r e l a t i n g to h e a l t h , food p r o d u c t i o n , maternal and c h i l d care and the general r u r a l i n f r a s t r u c t u r e . These c o n d i t i o n s can only change i f the a d u l t s have o p p o r t u n i t i e s to l e a r n s k i l l s , knowledge and a t t i t u d e s that are r e q u i r e d . Nonformal education i s the area of education that i s concerned with s a t i s f y i n g d i v e r s e l e a r n i n g needs of the m a j o r i t y of a d u l t s i n r u r a l areas of deve l o p i n g c o u n t r i e s (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coles, 1982). The study has attempted to analyze the concept of nonformal education by l o o k i n g at i t s development as r e f l e c t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e of the past 12 y e a r s . Although there i s general agreement on the d e f i n i t i o n of nonformal education as developed by Coombs (1974), there i s no general agreement on the r o l e of nonformal education i n 89 n a t i o n a l development. The concept of nonformal education was developed as a response to f i n d i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s to formal s c h o o l i n g and other a d u l t education s t r u c t u r e s . Nonformal education i s seen as one of the major a l t e r n a t i v e s that can be u s e f u l to developing c o u n t r i e s to u p l i f t the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n who are l e f t out by formal s c h o o l i n g . Nonformal education has r e c e i v e d much a t t e n t i o n by both planners and funding agencies which has r e s u l t e d i n b u i l d i n g s u p p o r t i n g s t r u c t u r e s i n t o e x i s t i n g nonformal education programs and e s t a b l i s h i n g new ones (Coombs, 1980; Evans, 1983; Co l e s , 1982). For nonformal education programs to have a grea t e r impact on the p o p u l a t i o n they are to serve, some t h e o r i s t s argue that programs need to be planned at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l (Coombs, 1974, 1980; C o l e s , 1982). Such plan n i n g should i n v o l v e the s e t t i n g up of a c o o r d i n a t i n g body to give d i r e c t i o n to nonformal programs both conducted by government and non-governmental agencies though the l a t t e r may continue to maintain t h e i r autonomy. It i s b e l i e v e d that such c o o r d i n a t i o n would a s s i s t i n ensuring that the most d e p r i v e d i n d i v i d u a l s i n s o c i e t y are reached and through t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n nonformal education programs, improve t h e i r s o c i a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n . But others argue that i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal education programs may l i m i t t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s s i n c e most programs are run by non-governmental 90 o r g a n i z a t i o n s (Bock, 1976; Paulston, 1976; L a B e l l e , 1976) The i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal encourages the s t a t e to extend i t s powers by l e g i t i m i z i n g the low s t a t u s of the p a r t i c i p a n t s from nonformal education programs. T h i s process may a l s o l i m i t the f l e x i b i l i t y of nonformal education as one of i t s p o t e n t i a l s . From such p o s i t i o n s , i t i s important that developing c o u n t r i e s set up both g o v e r n m e n t - i n s t i t u t e d nonformal education programs as w e l l as nonformal education programs that are orga n i z e d by the i n i t i a t i v e of non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s and v o l u n t a r y a s s o c i a t i o n s . The p o l i t i c a l environment, s o c i a l , economic f a c t o r s of a p a r t i c u l a r country w i l l determine how much s t a t e c o n t r o l w i l l set up fo r s u p e r v i s i n g nonformal education programs and how much c o o r d i n a t i o n w i l l be e s t a b l i s h e d of the d i f f e r e n t nonformal education programs. Research S t u d i e s i n Nonformal Education The study i n c l u d e d a review of s e l e c t e d major r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s that have been conducted on nonformal education (Coombs & Ahmed, 1974; Coombs, 1980; L a B e l l e , 1975, 1976; S h e f f i e l d & Diejomaoh, 1972). The s t u d i e s by Coombs and Ahmed (1974) and S h e f f i e l d and Diejomaoh (1972) i n d i c a t e d that most of the nonformal education p r o j e c t s were r e l a t i v e l y small i n s i z e , i n v o l v i n g a very small f r a c t i o n of c l i e n t e l e f o r which they were designed. Even those nonformal education programs that were l a r g e , were small i n comparison to t h e i r o v e r a l l needs f o r e d u c a t i o n a l s e r v i c e s 91 of a dev e l o p i n g country. Such f i n d i n g s are r e f l e c t e d i n ne a r l y a l l p r o j e c t s i n A f r i c a , A s i a and L a t i n America ( L a B e l l e (1976), f o r the L a t i n American s t u d i e s ) . One major o b s e r v a t i o n made by L a B e l l e (1976) i n L a t i n America was the idea f o r changing i n d i v i d u a l a t t i t u d e s , knowledge and s k i l l s . Such change w i l l not he l p an i n d i v i d u a l to f u n c t i o n b e t t e r i n a s o c i e t y where s o c i a l , economic, and p o l i t i c a l r e l a t i o n s are changed. L a B e l l e (1976) s t r o n g l y argues that u n l e s s other s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s change, the impact of nonformal education programs w i l l be minimal. Some f i n d i n g s of the s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e a lack of li n k a g e between nonformal education and employment agencies. Bock and Papagiannis (1976) argue that nonformal education g e n e r a l l y l a c k s the c r e d e n t i a l i n g power which formal education possesses. P a r t i c i p a t i n g i n nonformal education programs does not i n c r e a s e the p r o b a b i l i t y of f i n d i n g employment as i s the case with formal s c h o o l i n g . At the same time s i n c e nonformal education r e q u i r e s a c e r t a i n amount of s c h o o l i n g as entrance requirements, i t does exclude l a r g e groups of people i n the p o p u l a t i o n most in need of t r a i n i n g . As such nonformal education does not hel p to reduce the i n e q u a l i t i e s that e x i s t i n s o c i e t y . 9 2 Areas of Future Research A framework that has been developed i s u s e f u l i n a n a l y z i n g and comparing nonformal education systems on a l l the elements that were developed. I t i s p o s s i b l e to conduct r e s e a r c h and c o l l e c t data f o r an a n a l y s i s and comparison between d i f f e r e n t systems at the three l e v e l s : n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l . A n a l y z i n g and Comparing N a t i o n a l Systems The n a t i o n a l p l a n n i n g process of d i f f e r e n t nonformal education systems can be compared using i n f o r m a t i o n gathered through some of the q u e s t i o n s p r o v i d e d . I t i s p o s s i b l e to analyze how p l a n n i n g of nonformal education i s conducted i n d i f f e r e n t systems by l o o k i n g at the p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s , and other o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . A n a l y z i n g and Comparing Regional Systems A n a l y s i s and comparison of the planning process of nonformal education systems can be performed at the r e g i o n a l l e v e l . The q u e s t i o n s that have been p r o v i d e d i n the framework would form the b a s i s f o r a n a l y s i s and comparison between systems on each element d i s c u s s e d . The r e g i o n a l p o l i c i e s , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s , nonformal education agencies and other o r g a n i z a t i o n s that are i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s w i t h i n the d i f f e r e n t systems can be compared. 93 A n a l y z i n g and Comparing L o c a l Systems Since nonformal education a c t i v i t i e s are so d i v e r s e and f l e x i b l e , the l o c a l l e v e l a n a l y s i s i s very important. I t i s at the l o c a l l e v e l where those that are l e f t out of the formal education system can be reached. Planning of nonformal education at the l o c a l l e v e l i s important, as i t i s at t h i s l e v e l that peoples' demands are a r t i c u l a t e d . Research can be conducted to analyze and compare l o c a l l e v e l systems using the q u e s t i o n s p r o v i d e d i n the framework. Con c l u s i o n s Most research on nonformal education has d e a l t with two major areas, the d e f i n i t i o n a l problem and the impact on nonformal education on the c l i e n t e l e and i t s impact or c o n t r i b u t i o n to n a t i o n a l development. Several r e s e a r c h surveys have t r i e d to i d e n t i f y nonformal education p r o j e c t s which e x i s t . They have t r i e d to i d e n t i f y t h e i r major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , t h e i r c l i e n t systems, t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n and l i n k a g e with other e d u c a t i o n a l systems ( S h e f f i e l d & Diejomaoh, 1972; Coombs & Ahmed, 1974). The s t u d i e s were conducted i n order to f i n d out the impact of nonformal e d u c a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s on the community in order to f i n d ways of improving them. Research on nonformal education tends to be d e s c r i p t i v e . E m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s that have been conducted focus on the impact of nonformal education on the p o p u l a t i o n without f i n d i n g out 9 4 what changes r e a l l y occur a f t e r these programs are over. Although nonformal programs are f l e x i b l e enough to ensure p a r t i c i p a t i o n of t h e i r c l i e n t system, l i t t l e r e s e a r c h has been done i n the area of c l i e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n , i n order to f i n d out how l i f e s t y l e s change through p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The type of p a r t i c i p a t i o n that i s encouraged i n most nonformal education programs i s i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . But l i t t l e r e s e a r c h has been conducted on group or community p a r t i c i p a t i o n to f i n d out how communities have been transformed through p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n nonformal e d u c a t i o n . I t i s very d i f f i c u l t f o r an i n d i v i d u a l to implement change i n h i s l i f e s t y l e but i t i s e a s i e r f o r groups of people to change t h e i r s o c i a l and economic s i t u a t i o n through working together. I n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n a l s o encourages only those who have a p o s i t i v e s e l f - c o n c e p t and w e l l - o f f to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a program. P i g o z z i (1979) argued a g a i n s t the negative e f f e c t s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . She argued that while p a r t i c i p a t i o n of c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s i n a program may have p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s on communities, i n some s i t u a t i o n s , p a r t i c i p a t i o n of some i n d i v i d u a l s may be, have negative e f f e c t s because others may not wish to come to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a program where those i n d i v i d u a l s are p a r t i c i p a t i n g . Research on nonformal education has conc e n t r a t e d on determining what nonformal education programs e x i s t and where they e x i s t . Few re s e a r c h s t u d i e s have been conducted to determine the impact of nonformal education programs. 9 5 Research i n t o what s o c i a l and economic changes occur f o r those who p a r t i c i p a t e i n a nonformal education program needs to be done. I t i s a l s o necessary to assess the type of s t r u c t u r a l changes that are r e q u i r e d i n the community to f o s t e r change. Another area of r e s e a r c h r e l a t e s to the m o t i v a t i o n of those who p a r t i c i p a t e i n nonformal e d u c a t i o n . An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s which impede or f o s t e r change i s needed. Many t h e o r i s t s have w r i t t e n on the p o t e n t i a l of nonformal education i n reaching l a r g e p o p u l a t i o n s of people who are excluded from other education systems, but l i t t l e work has been done to t e s t the t h e o r i e s of i n t e g r a t e d nonformal education programs at the n a t i o n a l , r e g i o n a l , and l o c a l l e v e l s of p l a n n i n g . T h i s kind of r e s e a r c h would determine the f a c t o r s that promote or hinder i n t e g r a t i o n and i n t h i s way i n f l u e n c e f u t u r e p l a n n i n g . 96 REFERENCES Ahmed, M. & Coombs, P. (1975). Education f o r r u r a l development. New York: Praeger. American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n . (1983). Manual of the American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c a i t i o n . Washington: Author. Anderson, C.A. (1973). F o s t e r i n g and i n h i b i t i n g f a c t o r s . In C.S. (Ed.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. L e x i n g t o n : Lexington Books. Anderson, C.A. (1974). E f f e c t i v e education f o r a g r i c u l t u r e . In P. F o r s t e r and J.R. S h e f f i e l d ( E ds.), Education f o r R u r a l Development. The World Book of Education. London: Evans B r o t h e r s . Apps, J.W. (1973). Towards a working philosophy of a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . Syracuse: ERIC. Apter, D.E. (1968). System, process and the p o l i t i c s of economic development. In J.L. F i n k l e and R.W. Galde (Eds.), P o l i t i c a l development and s o c i a l change. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Barber, E.G. (1981). General education versus s p e c i a l education f o r r u r a l development. Comparative Education Review, 25(2), 216-243. Bennett, C.F. (1975). Up the h i e r a r c h y . J o u r n a l of E x t e n s i o n , 13, 7-12. B e r t e l s e n , P.H. (1980). The r o l e of a d u l t education i n reducing i n e q u a l i t i e s and r a i s i n g l e v e l s of p r o f e s s i o n a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and standards. Paper presented to UNESCO Conference of A d u l t E d u c a t i o n . New D e l h i . Bock, J.C. (1976). The i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of non-formal e d u c a t i o n . Comparative Education, 20(3), 346-367. Bock, J.C. (1983). I n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n of nonformal ed u c a t i o n : a response to c o n f l i c t i n g needs. J.C. Bock and G.J. Papagiannis (Eds.), Nonformal education and n a t i o n a l development. New York: Praeger. Bock, J.C. & Papagiannis, G.J. (Eds). (1983a). Nonformal education and n a t i o n a l development. New York: Praeger. 97 Bock, J.C. & Papagiannis, G.J. (1983b). The paradoxes of nonformal education: the unplanned emergence of str o n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n . In J.C. Bock and G.J. Papagiannis (Eds.), Nonformal education and n a t i o n a l development. New York: Praeger. Borg, W.R. & G a l l , M.D. (1979). E d u c a t i o n a l Research. New York: Longman. Bowles, S. (1979). Education, c l a s s , c o n f l i c t , and uneven development. In J . Simmons (Ed.), The education dilemma. New York: Pergamon Press. Brembeck, C.S. (1973). The s t r a t e g i c uses of formal and nonformal e d u c a t i o n . In C.S. Brembeck (Ed.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Buskey, J.H. & Sork, T.J. (1982). From chaos to order i n program p l a n n i n g . Paper presented at the 23rd Ad u l t Education Research Conference. L i n c o l n . Callaway, A. (1973). F r o n t i e r s of o u t - o f - s c h o o l e d u c a t i o n . In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Cardasco, F. & Gatner, E.S.M. (1964). Research and Report W r i t i n g . New York: Barnes & Noble Inc. Carnoy, M. (1980). Can education alone s o l v e the problem of unemployment? In J . Simmons (Ed.), The education dilemma. New York: Pergamon Press. Carnoy, M. (1982). Education f o r a l t e r n a t i v e development. Comparative Education Review, 26(2): 160-177. Coady, M.M. (1939). Masters of t h e i r d e s t i n y . New York: Harper. Coleman, J.S. (1966). Education and p o l i t i c a l development. P r i n c e t o n , N.J.: P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . C o l e s , E.K.T. (1982). The maverick of the education f a m i l y : two essays i n nonformal e d u c a t i o n . New York: Pergamon Press. Coombs, P.H. (1968). The world e d u c a t i o n a l c r i s i s : a systems a n a l y s i s . London: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. 98 Coombs, P.H. (1973). How s h a l l we plan nonformal education? In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New s t r a t e g i e s for e d u c a t i o n a l development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Coombs, P.H. (1974). A t t a c k i n g r u r a l poverty, The John Hopkins U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . B a l t i m o r e : Coombs, P.H. (1976). Nonformal e d u c a t i o n : myths, r e a l i t i e s , and o p p o r t u n i t i e s . 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 a l . York: UNICEF. P. (1981). Jossey-Bass. (1973). New paths to l e a r n i n g . New Ad u l t s as l e a r n e r s . San F r a n c i s c o : Duverger, M. (1961). I n t r o d u c t i o n to the s o c i a l s c i e n c e s . London: George A l l e n & Unwin L t d . D.R. (1981). E d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y dilemma f o r r u r a l a r e a s . Comparative Education Review, 25(2), 232-243. Evans Evans, D.R. (1981). The planning of nonformal e d u c a t i o n . P a r i s : UNESCO I n t e r n a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e f o r E d u c a t i o n a l P l anning. Evans, D.R. (1983). P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n nonformal education at the l o c a l l e v e l : Ghana and Indonesia. In J.C. Bock and G.J. Papagiannis (Eds.), Nonformal education and n a t i o n a l development. New York: Praeger. Faure, E. (1972). Learning to be: education f o r tomorrow. P a r i s : UNESCO. Fo l e y , G. (1976). D i f f u s i o n or m o b i l i s a t i o n ? An important t h e o r e t i c a l i s s u e . A u s t r a l i a n J o u r n a l of Adult Education, J_6( 1 ) , 18-23. F o r s t e r , P. & S h e f f i e l d , J.R. (1974). Education and r u r a l development. The World Year Book of E d u c a t i o n . London: Evans B r o t h e r s . F r e i r e , P. (1973). The pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press. 99 F r e i r e , P. (1982). Education f o r c r i t i c a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s . In R. Gross (Ed.), I n v i t a t i o n to l i f e l o n g l e a r n i n g . Chicago: F o u l e t t . G r a n d s t a f f , M. (1973). Are formal schools the best schools f o r education? In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (E d s . ) , New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. Lexington: Lexington Books. G r a n d s t a f f , M. (1974). A l t e r n a t i v e s i n ed u c a t i o n . Study Team Reports. East Lansing: Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y . G r a n d s t a f f , M. (1976). Nonformal e d u c a t i o n : some i n d i c a t i o n s f o r use. Comparative Education Review, 20(3) . Green, D.G. (1974). Nonformal education f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l development: a systems p e r s p e c t i v e . In P. F o r s t e r and J.R. S h e f f i e l d ( Eds.), Education f o r r u r a l development. The world book of ed u c a t i o n . London: Evans B r o t h e r s . Guyot, J . (1973). Who gets what when education i s d e f o r m a l i z e d . In C.S. Brembeck (Ed.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. Lexington: Lexington Books. H a l l , B. (1975). P a r t i c i p a t o r y r e s e a r c h : an approach f o r change. Convergence, 2, 24-32. H a l l , B. (1978). C r e a t i n g knowledge; breaking the monopoly, r e s e a r c h methods, p a r t i c i p a t i o n and development. P a r t i c i p a t o r y Research P r o j e c t , Working Paper No. 1_. Toronto: Toronto I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o u n c i l f o r Adult E d u c a t i o n . Harbison, F.H. (1973). Human resources and nonformal e d u c a t i o n . In C.S. Brembeck (Ed.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. Lexington: Lexington Books. Hoghielm, R. & Rubenson, K. (E d s . ) . (1980). Adult education f o r s o c i a l change. Stockholm: Lund. Houle, C. (1972). The design of e d u c a t i o n . San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. K a r a b e l , J . & Halsey, A.H. (E d s . ) . (-1977). Power and idealogy i n ed u c a t i o n . New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. 100 Reesing, R.M. (1981)- From the ground up: towards development without dependency. A u s t r a l i a n J o u r n a l of Adult Education, J_6(4), 122-126. L a B e l l e , T . J . (1976). Goals and s t r a t e g i e s of nonformal education i n L a t i n America. Comparative Education Review, 20(3), 328-345. L a B e l l e , T .J. (1979). L i b e r a t i o n , development and r u r a l nonformal ed u c a t i o n . In R.O. N i e h o f f (Ed.), Nonformal education and the r u r a l poor. East L a n s i n g : Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . L a B e l l e , T . J . (1981). An i n t r o d u c t i o n of the nonformal education of c h i l d r e n and youth. Comparative Education Review, 25(3), 313-329. Lengrad, P. (1980). An i n t r o d u c t i o n to l i f e l o n g l e a r n i n g . P a r i s : UNESCO Press. Lindeman, E.C. (1961). The meaning of a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . M o n t r e a l : Harvest House. Lerner, D. (1958). The p a s s i n g of t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i e t y i n the Middle E a s t . Lowe, J . (1970). Adult education and n a t i o n b u i l d i n g . A symposium on a d u l t education i n developing c o u n t r i e s . Edinburgh: Edinburgh U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Lowe, J . (1975). The education of a d u l t s : a world p e r s p e c t i v e . P a r i s : UNESCO. Muluso, T. (1982). S t r u c t u r e d courses a s t r a t e g y f o r r u r a l development. Unpublished Ph. D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Massachusetts. Muyeed, A. (1982). Some r e f l e c t i o n s on education f o r r u r a l development. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review of Education, 28(2), 227-238. Myrdal, G. (1957). Economic theory and underdeveloped r e g i o n s . London: Methuen & Co. L t d . Neff, K. (1979). Working on nonformal education and the r u r a l poor. In R.O. Niehof f (Ed.), Nonformal education and the r u r a l poor. East Lansing: Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y . N i e h o f f , R.O. (Ed.). (1979). Nonformal education and the r u r a l poor. East Lansing: Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y . 101 Oxenham, J . ( 1 9 7 5 ) . Nonformal e d u c a t i o n : approaches to teac h i n g l i t e r a c y . East L a n s i n g : Michigan State U n i v e r s i t y . - Parson, T. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . A paradigm f o r the a n a l y s i s of s o c i a l systems and change. In N.J. Demerath and R.W.K. Paterson (Eds.), System, change and c o n f l i c t . New York: Free Press. Paterson, R.W.K. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . Aspects of a d u l t education. In Stud i e s i n Adult Education, 3 ( 1 ) , 1 5 - 2 7 . P a u l s t o n , R.G. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . Nonformal e d u c a t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s . In C.S. Brembeck and Thompson (Eds.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s . Lexington: Lexington Books. Pa u l s t o n , R.G. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . Nonformal e d u c a t i o n : a symposium. Comparative Education Review, 2 0 ( 3 ) , 2 7 8 - 3 6 7 . P a u l s t o n , R.G. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . S o c i a l and e d u c a t i o n a l change: conceptual frameworks. Comparative Education Review, 2J_( 2 / 3 ) , 3 7 0 - 3 9 5 . P a u l s t o n , R.G. & LeRoy, G. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . Other dreams, other s c h o o l s : f o l k c o l l e g e s i n s o c i a l and e t h n i c movements. P i t t s b u r g h : U n i v e r s i t y of P i t t s b u r g h . P i g o z z i , M.J. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n nonformal education p r o j e c t s : some p o s s i b l e negative outcomes. Convergence: I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of Adult Education. Rubenson, K. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . Adult education and the q u a l i t y of l i f e . L e arning, 3 ( 4 ) , 6 - 8 . Rubenson, K. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . I n t e r a c t i o n between formal and nonformal e d u c a t i o n . Paper presented at the ICAE conference, P a r i s : ICAE. Rubenson, K. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . B a r r i e r s to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . D i s c u s s i o n paper prepared f o r S k i l l s Development Leave Task Force. Ottawa: M i n i s t r y of Labour Canada. S h e f f i e l d , J.R. & Diejomaoh. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . Nonformal education in A f r i c a . New York: African-American I n s t i t u t e . Simkins, J.T. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . Nonformal education and development. Manchester Monograph S e r i e s . 1 02 Simmons, J . (1979). An overview of the p o l i c y i s s u e s i n 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. F i n k l e and R.W. Gable (Eds.), P o l i t i c a l development and s o c i a l change. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Sork, T . J . (1981). The postmortem a u d i t : improving programs by examining f a i l u r e s . L i f e l o n g L e a r n i n g : The Adult Years, 5(3), 6-7, 31. S t e e l e , S.M. (1970). Program e v a l u a t i o n - a broader d e f i n i t i o n . J o u r n a l of Exte n s i o n , 8, 5-17. Schatz, S. (1969). Crude p r i v a t e n e o - c o l o n i a l i s m . J o u r n a l of Modern A f r i c a n S t u d i e s , 7 ( 4), 677-688. Turabian, K.L. (1973). A manual f o r w r i t e r s of term papers, theses and d i s s e r t a t i o n s . Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press. Tuckman, B.W. (1978). Conducting e d u c a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h . New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. UNESCO. (1975). Manual f o r the c o l l e c t i o n of a d u l t education s t a t i s t i c s . P a r i s : UNESCO. UNESCO. (1976). L i f e l o n g l e a r n i n g . P a r i s : UNESCO. Verner, C. (1964). D e f i n i t i o n s of terms. In G. Jensen, A.A. L i v e r g e r t , & W. Hallenbeck (Eds.), Adult educat i o n . Waisenen, F.B. (1973). I n d i v i d u a l modernity and nonformal e d u c a t i o n . In C.S. Brombeck (Ed.), New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l development. L e x i n g t o n : Lexington Books.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 8 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
Santiago 2 0
Nashville 2 0
Ashburn 2 0
Tokyo 2 0
Sunnyvale 1 1
San Juan 1 0
Hanoi 1 1
Mountain View 1 1
Redmond 1 0

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

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items