Hybridity and Governance Changes in Continuing Education

Abstract

The structure of organizations offering adult education in Germany is extremely heterogeneous concerning factors such as the legal structure, the financial basis, the internal organizational structure, the situation of the staff, the understanding of education or training, the provisions and the target groups, or the position in the field of further training. After giving a brief insight in this situation, this contribution will focus on changes of governance strategies in this field of education. On the macro level, a decreasing influence of the federal government and the Länder level can be shown. Instead of legal regulations, accreditation procedures gain importance. Besides this, publicly funded projects, including European funding, become an important actor instead of continuous public support. On the organizational level, this situation results in frequent reorganization processes and a higher commitment to economic processes. Networking can be identified also as a new governance strategy, which is supported by public financiers.

Keywords

hybridity governance continuing education

Structure of the Adult Education System

In contrast to other areas of the educational system, the landscape of adult education institutions in Germany is characterized by great heterogeneity concerning the

legal structure,

financial basis,

internal organizational structure,

situation of the staff,

understanding of education or training,

provisions and the target groups, or

position in the field of further training.¹

No exact numbers are available about how many adult education institutions there are in Germany; however, a report from the German Institute of Adult Education (Deutsches Institut für Erwachsenenbildung, 2008) estimates about 17,000 institutions (p. 84), and an empirical study (Wirtschafts- und Sozialforschung, 2005) counted 18,800 institutions.

Figure 1 provides an overview about organizations offering adult education services.

Figure 1.

Overview of organizations providing adult education.

If one counts together the private providers in the categories of employer, other company, and private provider (Figure 1), one can see that 31% of the adult education institutions are private organizations. If one looks at activities instead of volume, the proportion is even higher, at 54%. No other area of the German educational system shows similarly high private-sector involvement. The remainder of this text will focus solely on publicly funded adult education institutions, as only these can be characterized as hybrid organizations, even if employers in some cases receive funding for part of their training programs.²

Changes of the Law Based on Public Funding of Adult Education

Adult education in Germany is governed by numerous overlapping laws and regulations that sometimes serve differing purposes and leave many areas untouched. There is no coherent legal basis of adult education that would cover all relevant aspects, such as funding, program, staff, or quality, in one or few consistent principles. One reason for this outcome is that adult education is part of education-related laws as well as governed by commercial, labor, and employment laws. In addition, because of the federal structures of the Republic of Germany and the distribution of competencies within the constitution, the legal regulations of education are distributed among the federal government and the federal states, called the Länder. Finally, international law, particularly, European law, is gaining more and more importance for adult education in Germany, even if the European Commission cannot intervene directly into state law. Taken together, this overlap leads to a highly complex and unclear situation.

On the federal level, the majority of government funds flow into further education of the unemployed whereby respective training is offered by the public service agencies on the basis of the Social Security Code. These agencies mainly offer training for vocational adaptation and retraining. The policy of the Federal Agency of Employment can be characterized as a “stop-and-go” strategy, in that the policy changes according to the economic situation and the rate of unemployment. In this context, one has to consider that the public services agencies themselves do not conduct any adult education but contract it out to educational institutions. As a consequence, the situation of educational institutions changes according to the political strategies of the public sectors. Figure 2 displays the development of admissions to the public service funding. Apart from the discontinuity that can be seen over the years, it is rather obvious that short measures have gained in importance at the cost of longer-lasting measures. The shift of policies gets even clearer if one looks at the money spent on the basis of the Social Security Code (Figure 3).

Figure 2.

Numbers of entries into activities financed on the basis of the social security law.

Figure 3.

Expenses of the Federal Agency of Employment for vocational further training in billions of euros.

In addition to financial support based on the Social Security Code, money of the federal government is mainly given to the promotion of widely arranged projects; for example, the program Lernende Regionen (Learning Regions) financially supported 70 education networks between 2001 and 2008. The aim of this project was to help the different providers of adult education in a region to optimize their cooperation and as such produce synergy effects. Another aim was to look beyond the adult education sector and integrate other education sectors into the strategy. The funding given decreased over the years, in hopes that the regions would be able to finance the follow-ups on their own. In many cases, however, this principle did not work out, and some initiatives broke down after the end of funding. At the end of Lernende Regionen, a new program, Lernen vor Ort (Learning in the Community), was launched. This program provides funding for approximately 40 communities and aims to establish a community-wide education management and controlling system. What might be interesting for the discussion here is the fact that the communities could get funding only if they also received financial support from a private foundation; that approach is rather new for Germany.

As the Länder hold responsibility for general and politically oriented adult education, the former West German states passed legislation concerning adult education within the 1970s, and the former East German states adopted such laws within the 1990s after the German reunification. Similar laws exist in all Länder, with the exception of Berlin, Hamburg, and Schleswig-Holstein. Legislation has been revised multiple times ever since. The state laws mainly cover the funding, apart from a few structural issues, and the amount and content of state funds disbursed on this basis differ widely between the Länder.

In some Länder, these laws have had a considerable influence on the structure of adult education institutions since they have been established, and a large push to the institutionalization and professionalization of adult education can be observed. This effort is particularly the case in North Rhine-Westphalia, Bremen, and Hesse.

As the analysis of Kuhlenkamp (2005) revealed, the Länder funding has declined about 20% between 1995 and 2005. In addition, Kuhlenkamp states that the legal basis of adult education is about to lose its influence because the distribution of financial resources is cut back and the responsibility is given to other political departments. The analysis further indicates the scope of the state laws decreases while its depth of regulation increases. The loss of importance of the Länder funding leads to a loss of the state political influence; thus, a factual deregulation is the consequence.

In general, the funding provided by the Länder was put under retention to pay only according to the actual financial situation (Grotlüschen, Haberzeth, & Krug, 2011). This requirement means that due to the lack of public money, the amount given to the adult education institutions has been reduced.

On the local or regional level, the communities or counties give money to the community adult education centers (Volkshochschulen), and the financial support of the community adult education centers is based on their responsibility to offer a basic service of adult education for all sections of the population. This responsibility is laid down, more or less explicitly, in some of the Länder regulations; however, this funding by the communities is beyond legal regulation and therefore without any statutory obligation. The amount of funding depends, therefore, on the annual community planning. In former times, typically the community adult education centers received about one third of the money from the Länder, one third from the community, and the last third from the participants. Meanwhile, there is a shift toward increased contribution of the participants through the course fees; for example, looking at the community adult education centers of Heidelberg, the participants have to pay for 60% of the costs.

In place of the weaker legal regulations, quality management certification procedures of the adult education institutions are of growing importance. In the meantime, most of the providers of adult education, even the smaller ones, own a quality certificate; some own two or three. Some Länder laws either require the existence of a quality enforcement concept, or they demand constant evaluation certificates within certain periods of time as a prerequisite for funding (e.g., Bremen, Lower Saxony). In use are concepts like ISO, European Foundation Quality Management (EFQM), and Learner Oriented Quality System for Adult Education Organizations (LQW), as well as certificates offered by quality circles (Hartz & Meisel, 2011). As an example, one can refer to the changes in the process of quality enforcement implemented by the employment agencies. Whereas in former times the choice of training agencies was made by the employment service agencies themselves, a special system of accreditation has now been institutionalized due to serious criticism of the former procedures (Anerkennungs- und Zulassungsverordnung Weiterbildung [AZWV]).

Increasing Funding of Individuals and Decreasing Funding of Providers

In addition to the above-mentioned strategies, there is an observable shift from institutional funding toward the funding of individual learners. The intention behind this strategy is to augment the participation rate of adult learners. Some illustrating examples follow.

Since 2008, the so-called education bonus (Bildungsprämie), granted by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, is available to working people who are willing to undergo further education. Based on a law of accumulation of capital (Vermögensbildungsgesetz), which originally served to finance private housing, the Further Education Savings Program (Weiterbildungssparen) allows withdrawal of savings for adult education, even if the retention period has not been terminated. Every gainfully employed person who participates in the savings program may draw on the benefits of the Further Education Savings Program, independent of the respective yearly household income. There are €35 million available for the program for 2 years. Since January 1st, 2010, the reward of €500 (formerly €154) is offered to all working people with a yearly taxable salary less than €25,600 (single parent or household) or €51,200 (two-person household). Consultation is required before retrieval of the educational reward and the beginning of a further education program. Respective counseling is offered by nearly 6,000 information centers throughout Germany; thus, 150,000 vouchers have been distributed between the time the program was launched and the middle of 2011; 74% of the recipients were women, 89% were employees of small or medium-sized companies, and 15% have an immigrant background.

There is, though, some doubt whether such a check for training will really help to get more people into training, especially those who have not participated in adult learning programs due to a lack in finances. A study from Switzerland (Wolter & Messer, 2009) shows that only few people used a similar approach, and the program did not have a relevant impact on the participation rate.

In Northrhein-Westfalia (NRW), one can find a similar program on the Länder level, the so-called check for training (Bildungsscheck). With the help of the European Social Fund, the Ministry of Work, Health, and Social Services of the state NRW offers an extra allowance to employees of small and medium-sized companies in order to motivate them to take part in in-service training programs. This incentive implies financial support for courses leading to certain certificates, for job-related language courses, and for courses teaching German as a foreign language. Until the end of 2007, the Ministry for Work, Health, and Social Services offered an extra allowance of more than €20 million for those checks for training. Up to now, 50% of the costs (i.e., up to €750) per employee, per training program, have been taken over, while the rest has to be paid by the recipients of the check or by the companies they work for. Since June 2007, the maximum amount has been reduced to €500, so now the companies involved receive no more than 20 checks per year. This limit, however, does not apply to small companies with up to 10 employees.

Comparing the two check programs on the federal and the Länder level, one can recognize a different political context: While the federal program is structured within an educational context, the program in NRW is more closely connected with economic aspects, such as the number of employees within a firm, and is run by the labor market ministry.

Another example for funding of individuals is the law to support job advancement (Aufstiegsfortbildungsförderungsgesetz, “Meister-BAföG”), which has existed since 1996 and is financed by the Federal Government and the Länder. This law establishes an individual right to get funding for training leading to job advancement. The program was launched to back up the motivation to undertake further training, mainly of people who went through apprenticeship programs, and to offer interesting job perspectives for those people.

Promotion of Cooperation Structures and Networks as Governance Strategy

For some time, cooperation and networks among providers have been considered as an important strategy to solve structural problems and improve conditions for lifelong learning (Gnahs, 2006). Steering strategy via cooperation and network building is not a new idea, but it gained particular importance for preservation and development of adult education institutions within the last 10 years (Dollhausen & Feld, 2010). Cooperation is typically understood as a concrete working relationship between organizations or individuals, whereas the term network designates some more or less formal kind of consolidation to pursue common goals and projects (Dobischat, Stuhldreier, & Düsseldorf, 2006; Schäffter, 2004). Consensus about the future relevance of cooperation and networks prevails between and among adult education institutions, institutions and other education providers, and between adult education institutions and public representatives. Nevertheless, repeating evidence emerges about the difficulties that a continuous buildup and extension of such cooperative networks have to face (Dollhausen & Feld, 2010).

According to the wb-monitor questionnaire in 2004, 73% of all adult education institutions have cooperative relationships with other institutions, higher education centers, or business schools already in place (Ambos & Egetenmeyer, 2008). A study in 2006, conducted within the ABWF/QUEM program “Learning Culture Competence Development” (Lernkultur Kompetenzentwicklung), reported that two thirds out of 186 contacted institutions claimed to be involved in cooperative networks (Hölblin & Reglin, 2006, p. 98). A strong interest by providers in cooperation and networks is further supported by the wb-monitor survey from 2008. Within this survey, 51% of all providers indicated a high need for training of their own staff in terms of cooperation and network building. Cooperation and networks were further ranked as the second most important strategy by adult education providers to defend market position (first rank was target-group customized marketing) within the wb-monitor survey in 2009. Eighty percent of survey participants stated they already implemented cooperation and networks as a marketing strategy, and a further 14% indicated they plan to do so in the nearer future. The governments on the federal and Länder levels reinforce cooperation and network building within the adult education sector by region-oriented strategic sponsorship (see above).

On the Länder level, there are funding programs; for example, the program to support the development of the association of continuous education in Schleswig Holstein (Ausbau der Weiterbildungsverbünde) within the future program “economy.” This program has been sponsored between 2008 and 2010 by Länder funding as well as by the European Fund for Regional Development (Fehlau, 2007). The program intends to optimize the transparency of the adult education market and enable a comprehensive information and consulting network. The program Hessencampus, a development partnership, was started by the state government of Hesse. Covering eight regional initiatives, the partnership aims at creating regional centers for continuous education in cooperation with vocational schools, adult schools, community adult education centers (Volkshochschulen), and other educational providers (see http://hc-hessencampus.de).

As a summary, one can state that the promotion of networks has become a relevant governance strategy. At the same time, many promotion programs are conceived in a manner in which the funding level decreases over time. The aim, thereby, is to enable the organizations to get along without public support after project funding has ceased. Current studies show, however, that this aim will be hard to reach. Surveys point out that funding is a crucial condition for a successful cooperation and network formation (Dollhausen 2010, p. 61).

Consequences of Changing Governance Strategies for the Adult Education Providers

Since about 1990, one can observe a strong shift in adult education organizations away from the confidence in continuous public funding and concentration on the pedagogical issues, and toward criteria-like management. The economic view is gaining more and more importance, a factor that leads to tensions between the market logic and the pedagogical logic, and goal conflicts. The professionals moan about too much organizational work and too little time for the “real” pedagogical tasks. One can basically find restructuring processes at the providers from a public- to a market-related institution. This process has been well documented for the community adult education centers (Volkshochschulen) in Hamburg (Nuissl & Schuldt, 1993).

One can also observe that adult education providers more and more often ask organizational counselors to support broad change processes. In an empirical study on this in 2002 (Schiersmann & Remmele, 2004), it was found that about half of the surveyed adult education organizations answered that they asked for support for their organizational development within the past 3 years, and almost all of the other half intended to do so within in the next 3 years. This underlines how organizations are under great pressure to adjust to changing conditions.

Questions for Future Research

Due to the extremely heterogeneous structure of adult education institutions in Germany, the available data are difficult to assess. In particular, the lack of time-sequence analyses makes it difficult to depict processes of change coherently and empirically; therefore, a major challenge consists in supplying a better basis of data. In part, this aim could be achieved by a reinterpretation of existing databases; more important, however, would be to regularly retrieve new data in accordance with existing scientific theories.

To summarize, one can recognize that changing governance structures have brought a decrease of state funding, an augmentation of project funding, and support of individuals instead of institutions. This kind of deregulation has a great impact on the providers of adult education, and this is a point where we now need to start to look at these phenomena a little bit closer.

So far, though, a conceptual and empirical connection between organizational theories and governance approaches is missing. Personally, I am interested in analyzing the impact of governance strategies on the adult education organizations in order to answer the question of how the latter react to them. This aspect emerges against the background of systemic critique that doubts whether organizations directly respond to new governance strategies. The hypothesis is that a linear influence from the environment into the organizations is rather unlikely. So specific research questions arising are as follows:

What makes an organization react to a change of governance strategies? In our institute, a small study on this in the context of a program launching a new self-oriented learning strategy was done, but not yet published. The organizations were lucky to get the money but never really implemented a new learning culture in the organization.

What has to happen in an organization, or what are the preconditions for changes to be effectively undertaken?

What, for example, are the crucial reasons for developing a strategy of quality development?

Investigating these questions against hybrid organizations in adult education offers particular explanatory potential, since their multiple objectives render any change and adaption strategy perceptibly more complex than in commercial organizations or public administration.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biography

Christiane Schiersmann is a full professor for adult education and counseling at the Heidelberg University, Germany. Her main current research interests are theory of counselling, competence development, quality of counselling providers, and organizational development.

References

Ambos

Egetemeyer

(2008). wbmonitor 2008: Personalentwicklung und wirtschaftliches Klima bei Weiterbildungsanbietern. Zentrale Ergebnisse im Überblick [Human resource development und economic climate at the adult education providers. An overview on main results]. Retrieved from http://www.bibb.de

Autorengruppen Bildungsberichterstattung. (2010). Bildung in Deutschland 2010 [Education in Germany 2010]. Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

Deutsches Institut für Erwachsenenbildung. (2008). Trends in der Weiterbildung [Trends in the adult education sector]. Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

Dobischat

Stuhldreier

Düsseldorf

(2006). Netzwerkbildung und Netzwerkstruktur. In Nuissl

(Ed.), Regionale Bildungsnetze (pp. 59-88). Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

Dollhausen

(2010). Einrichtungen [Institutions]. In Deutsches Institut für Erwachsenenbildung, Trends der Weiterbildung: DIE Trendanalyse 2010 (pp. 35-74). Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

Dollhausen

Feld

T.C.

(2010). Für lebenslanges Lernen kooperieren [Cooperation for life-long learning]. DIE Zeitschrift für Erwachsenenbildung, 1, 24-26.

Fehlau

(2007). 6,1 Millionen Euro Investition in Weiterbildung [6,1 million euro investment in adult education]. Retrieved from http://www.schleswig-holstein.de

Gnahs

(2006). Management summary. In Nuissl

(Ed.), Regionale Bildungsnetze (pp. 7-17). Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

Grotlüschen

Haberzeth

Krug

(2011). Rechtliche Grundlagen der Weiterbildung [Legal basis of adult education]. In Tippelt

von Hippel

(Eds.), Handbuch Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung (5th ed., pp. 347-366). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.

10.

Hartz

Meisel

(2011). Qualitätsmanagement [Quality management] (3rd updated and rev. ed.). Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

11.

Hölblin

Reglin

(2006). Innovationen im Leistungsportfolio von Weiterbildungseinrichtungen: Vom Seminaranbieter zum Lerndienstleister [Innovation in the portfolio of achievement of adult education providers]. QUEM Materialien, 71. Berlin, Germany: QUEM.

12.

Jaich

(2010). Finanzierung der Weiterbildung [Financing of the adult education sector]. In Deutsches Institut für Erwachsenenbildung, Trends der Weiterbildung: DIE Trendanalyse 2010 (pp. 155-162). Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

13.

Kuhlenkamp

(2005). Ambivalente (De)Regulierung [Ambivalent (de)regulation]. DIE, 12(3), 27-29.

14.

Nuissl

Schuldt

H.-J.

(1993). Betrieb statt Behörde: Die Hamburger Volkshochschule im Wandel. [Company instead of administration: The change of the Hamburger adult education center] (Berichte, Materialien, Planungshilfen). Frankfurt, Germany: DIE.

15.

Schiersmann

Ch.

Remmele

(2004). Beratungsfelder in der Weiterbildung: Eine empirische Bestandsaufnahme [Fields of counseling in the adult education sector]. Baltmannsweiler, Germany: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.

16.

Von Rosenbladt

Bilger

(2010). Weiterbildungsbeteiligung 2010: Trends und Analysen auf Basis des deutschen AES [Participation in adult education 2010: Trends and analysis on the base of the German AES]. Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

17.

Wirtschafts- und Sozialforschung. (2005). Erhebung zur beruflichen und sozialen Lage von Lehrenden in Weiterbildungseinrichtungen: Schlussbericht [Survey on the job related and social situation of the teachers in adult education institutions: Final report]. Kerpen, Germany: Author.

18.

Schäffter

(2004). Auf dem Weg zum Lernen in Netzwerken: Institutionelle Voraussetzungen für lebensbegleitendes Lernen [On the way to learn in networks: Institutional preconditions for lifelong learning]. In Brödel

(Ed.), Weiterbildung als Netzwerk des Lernens (pp. 29-48). Bielefeld, Germany: W. Bertelsmann Verlag.

19.

Wolter

S. C.

Messer

(2009). Weiterbildung und Bildungsgutscheine: Resultate aus einem experimentellen Feldversuch [Adult education and vouchers for training: Results of an experimental field study]. Bern, Switzerland: Bundesamt für Berufsbildung und Technologie.