| 3.
Understanding community education |
| 3.1 The
phrase community education came into widespread use at
the time of the reorganisation of local government in the
mid- 1970s and with the publication of Adult Education:
the challenge of change (HMSO 1975), generally known as
the Alexander Report. Most local authorities combined
their informal adult education services with youth and
community work to form Community Education Services but
many voluntary organisations were less convinced that
community education was an appropriate title for them. |
| 3.2 The
nature and profile of local authority services have shown
a degree of variation ever since, often accounted for by
shifts of emphasis being required of Community Education
Services, by resource constraints and short-term funding
and, for some, year on year threats of retrenchment.
Since local government reorganisation in 1996, such
variation has grown, with excellence and innovation in
some authorities in fields of activity which are quite
under-developed in others. In some authorities, community
education is not now located in education departments.
This can provide other valuable insights and an
increasing recognition that several professional groups
share common ground in their approach to work in
communities. |
| 3.3 In
the voluntary sector there has been innovation and
change. In recent years, financial pressures on local
authorities have often been amplified for the voluntary
sector, with many voluntary organisations suffering
severe pressure. This has not stopped them from
continuing to develop their practice and has, perhaps,
encouraged new types of co-operation among them and
between them and local authorities. |
| 3.4 The
general picture facing the Working Group was one of
change, diversity, and the lack of a shared understanding
of the strengths which community education can
contribute. A Government review of the Scottish Community
Education Council (SCEC), which led to the Minister's
decision to create the Working Group, specifically
claimed that, while much valuable work was evident on the
ground, senior levels in both local and central
government needed a clearer view of where community
education was and should be going. The remit of the Group
was to achieve this clearer focus. |
| 3.5 A
functional analysis of community education was carried
out in 1989 for training purposes, in which field it has
had a major impact (see CeVe2 Training Guidelines, published at various
dates by SCEC). Despite the benefit of this focus on
functions, it did not remove the confusion in many
people's minds about the meaning of community education.
The functional analysis has sat alongside, rather than
replaced, an administrative view, which seemed to assume
that adult education plus youth work plus community work
equalled community education. It has left doubt about
when the phrase is being used to indicate an educational
process, a local authority service, an educational method
or an aggregation of services. In particular, it has led
to community education being regarded as a sector rather
than primarily a way of working. |
| 3.6 The
Group believes that it is the functions of community
education which matter and that the administrative
confusion must be removed. It therefore defines community
education primarily as an approach to education, not a
sector of it. There is a body of knowledge and experience
of practice which can and must be tapped by a wide range
of interests, both within and beyond the education
services. It is for use by the voluntary, statutory and,
indeed, private sectors in pursuit of compatible goals.
Liberating community education from the limitations which
past interpretations have imposed is a matter of urgency
as there is an opportunity now, to make a major
contribution to Government policies for learning,
inclusion and participation. |
| 3.7 The
functional analysis of 1989 started the process of
re-conceptualising community education but the process
could not be brought to fruition. The progressive and
innovative work which it implied would have required a
degree of security that was lacking when, too often,
maintaining the basic operations of community education
became a major objective for many organisations during
the 1990s. The policies of the Government now make it
essential to take the process of re-defining community
education forward so that its way of working can be
applied where appropriate in a wide range of disciplines
to meet a wide range of needs. The functions on which the
Group has concentrated are described in Section 5. |
| 3.8 The
Group's approach requires a considerable shift in
thinking. It is unhelpful to think of community education
as an aggregation of adult education, youth work and
community work but community education will continue to
be a major contributor to these fields. The key
difference is that its way of working with adults, young
people and interest groups will be a coherent practice in
relation to all ages and both individuals and groups; its
purposes will be to implement clearly identified personal
and social objectives. While the problems of target
setting in this context are genuine, properly associated
with good planning at both personal and programme levels,
it can be achieved. |
| 3.9 The
providers may be a range of local authority services,
voluntary organisations, FE colleges, LECs, Health Boards
or several others, any or all of whom may and, hopefully,
will decide to use community education methodologies.
However, not all education of adults will use community
education methods and neither will all work with young
people or communities. Equally, there are other fields,
such as housing or social work, in which community
education methods are and will be used when appropriate.
Indeed, the Group wishes to emphasise that it is picking
up a range of current, progressive methods being used in
such fields, as well as within community education, and
urging that they become more coherent. By the same token,
community education practitioners must be able and
committed to working in and with this wider range of
interests and practice settings. |
| The
particular contribution of the community education
approach is its primary focus on the use of educational
methods to develop skills, knowledge and capacity in
community contexts. |
| The focus is
on motivation and confidence, personal and group
effectiveness, widening access to formal learning
institutions and involvement in civic life. |
| The aim is
to develop the capacity of individuals and groups of all
ages and, through their actions, the capacity of
communities, to improve their quality of life. Central to
this is their ability to participate in democratic
processes. |
| The benefits
accrue in many policy fields, such as social care or
urban regeneration; community education's experience of
working in partnership will help other agencies with
their endeavours. |
| The skills
and understanding which are developed by participants are
transferable and the benefits to the community are
tangible; both can be subject to assessment. The
groundwork has been done by past practice of community
education, but it is current Government policy which will
enable community learning to grow. |
| |
| 2 Community Education Validation and
Endorsement - a committee of the Scottish Community
Education Council which is responsible for the
development of training for community education |
