Abstract
This article presents the findings of a comparative study of values-based adult learning and education (ALE) fields; specifically, in Austria, critical-emancipatory adult basic education; Scotland, learner-centered, community-based adult learning; and South Tyrol, Italy, the Winterschule, a radical-critical popular education format. We studied the voices of experienced practitioners to understand their challenges and constraints and how they resisted changes that did not reflect their values. It highlights local practices to promote visibility, create dialogue, and strengthen the understanding and recognition of these fields in which practitioners are unequivocally committed to social justice. Our findings highlighted repertoires of resistance, affirmed pedagogy as a values-based endeavor, and elucidated practitioners’ commitments to holistic approaches that re-negotiate ideas of social justice for people and the planet. Our analysis shows that when ideas of social justice are shared amongst allies, practitioners can effectively maintain their values-based approaches and thus re-affirm and protect democratic ALE practice.
Rationale for the Study
Homogenizing tendencies in governance and funding tend to delegitimate values-based fields of adult learning and education (ALE) practice. Across three countries, we aimed to investigate what experienced practitioners consider as challenges and to identify their impact. Thus, we sought to explore how practitioners, based on their commitment to social justice, implemented, adapted to, or resisted these challenges. Tett and Hamilton (2019, p. 1) expressed “a concern that although there was much discussion and many publications that critiqued neoliberalism, very few actually suggested how its impacts might be resisted.” This signifies a gap that we address here.
We respected practitioners’ values and professional expertise by inviting them to speak up, intending to enact critical engagement with local communities to support them (Mayo, 2019). Thus, this article highlights the following local practices to promote visibility, create dialogue, and strengthen the understanding and recognition of these fields in which practitioners are unequivocally committed to social justice, including the whole person, body, and mind, acting in social situations (Jarvis, 2004) in learning processes.
Austrian adult basic education (ABE) was inspired by Freire's (1993) critical-emancipatory and learner-centered stances and New Literacy Studies, complemented by the humanistic approach to adult education. This conceptualization, based on a practitioner/activist-driven, bottom-up approach, was adopted for the Initiative Erwachsenenbildung (IEB), the national ABE funding program implemented under the aegis of the Ministry of Education in 2012. In 2019, politically motivated ruptures in the national ABE field indicated a reversal towards feasibility and control of education, fitting the bigger picture of narrowing ABE to mere upskilling of human capital (Cennamo et al., 2020; Kastner & Motschilnig, 2022) and putting this unique type of ABE practice under pressure. When practitioners focused on the challenges they experienced, this major politically motivated disruption was at the forefront. Community-based adult learning (CBAL) in Scotland has a different focus from mainstream education in its underpinning ideology, methods, and curriculum. Its ideology is based on empowering participants and aims to deepen democracy and improve the quality of life for those most disadvantaged in society. Its methods aim to encourage and engage people in learning that is relevant to them; thus, it is responsive to community priorities that are identified with people rather than for them. Rather than having a pre-set curriculum, it uses people's experiences and interests to build the learning program. When practitioners focused on the challenges they experienced, the inequalities that the pandemic had exacerbated were at the forefront. The Winterschule in the Ulten Valley, South Tyrol, Italy, was launched due to an activating survey of almost 3,000 inhabitants in the 1990s, an instrument of social research and action based on a local adaptation of Freire's theory. The survey was initiated by Waltraud Schwienbacher, a farmer and critical citizen (Cennamo, 2020). Due to the global changes in agriculture from 1970 to 1990, many farmers commuted to the nearby cities for additional earnings and/or to attend continuing education. Some of them, especially women, could not afford this flexibility and mobility; therefore, many farms were abandoned. Waltraud rejected those globalized farming models and centralized ALE in urban areas. Thus, the winter workshops in alpine Herbology, Health & Nature, Permaculture, Woodworking, Felting, Hand-Weaving, and so forth, were realized by her as a local “educator-activist” (Newman, 2006) in the tradition of radical-critical and emancipatory popular education. When practitioners focused on the challenges they experienced, they looked back at the founding history and emphasized the Winterschule as an expression of action and change.
Theoretical Considerations
Our three case examples share a history of expertise-driven social and educational movements from below and are built on ideas of social justice that manifest as a “locally relevant curriculum” (O’Cadiz et al., 1998, p. 536). We are guided by a “partial perspective” (Haraway, 1988, p. 584). Thus, we intend to elucidate the interconnections of our standpoint, the fields of values-based practice, and related theoretical concepts.
As Brookfield has argued (2016, p. 27), there will be a future of social justice in ALE “because for the most part people do not go into adult education for money, prestige, status or an easy life. […] People become adult educators because, however naïve it may sound, they want to create a better world. They want to help people get a fair bite of the cherry, increase political participation, promote activism in marginalized communities […] I see no evidence of that commitment disappearing.”
Critical education bears the necessity to re-frame the issue of justice. Fraser (2005, p. 73) argues that “parity of participation” is “the most general meaning of justice.” This “radical-democratic interpretation” requires “social arrangements that permit all to participate as peers in social life.” This claim unites our three case examples. The Scottish and Austrian case examples are fueled by critical analysis and attempt toward parity of participation by providing accessible ALE, recognizing all forms of human capabilities, and co-creating a learning space that maintains teacher-learner-reciprocity. The South Tyrolian case example incorporates the pursuit of environmental, epistemological, and social justice, referring to De Sousa Santos (2020, p. 577): “There is no global social justice without global cognitive justice (justice among different ways of knowing and of good living).” This connects with Costa et al. (2021, p. 218) idea of the “activist craft,” which is based on “critical consciousness,” both emerging during one's life history and linked to one's professional biography. Activists give “meaning to […] their activist craft and professional role, through a dynamic learning-creative process, bounded to each personal/professional experience, the influence of others involved […], and the particular geographical, historical, social and political context in and for which it happens” (Costa et al., 2021, p. 228). The practitioners in our study are “activists” because their work is informed by “partisan” (Brookfield, 2016, p. 28) commitment.
Activists develop “repertoires of resistance” (Johansson & Vinthagen, 2016) that can provide ways of counteracting imposed policy and procedural requirements because their action is based on principles of good professional practice (Santoro & Cain, 2018). In addition, Johansson and Vinthagen's (2016, p. 421) concept is “a combined result of the interplay between social structures and power relations, as well as activists’ creative experimentation with tactics and experiences of earlier attempts to practise resistance, together with the situational circumstances in which the resistance is played out.” Smythe's (2015) notion of “workarounds” signifies situations in which practitioners seize the agenda when “policies are seen to be unworkable in practice, or in conflict with professional and philosophical values” (Smythe, 2015, p. 6). Achinstein and Ogawa (2006, p. 55) contended that resistance comes with an emotional cost, especially when “technical and moralistic control systems limit dissent and debate.”
We are committed to the fields of practice we investigated in solidarity. Our shared standpoint builds on two major theoretical strands: critical theory and feminist theories and epistemologies. Fleming (2012) named Fromm and Habermas “allies for adult education and democracy” based on the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research's critique of bourgeois-capitalist society that revealed its mechanisms of domination and oppression, as similarly theorized in Gramsci's work (1975) and that of Freire (1993, 2014). Critical analysis of patriarchal, genderized, colonial, capitalist society is fueled by feminist theories and epistemologies (Harding, 1986; Hooks, 1989; Federici, 2020), analyzing gendered being and bringing neglected aspects of “life-centred values” (Mayo & Vittoria, 2021, p. 22), “care” (Lynch, 2022), and “health and well-being” (Marmot et al., 2020) to the fore. This critical approach to thinking and social action is also captured by Haraway's research standpoint: “Relativism is the perfect mirror twin of totalization in the ideologies of objectivity; both deny the stakes in location, embodiment, and partial perspective; both make it impossible to see well. (…) But it is precisely in the politics and epistemology of partial perspectives that the possibility of sustained, rational, objective inquiry rests” (Haraway, 1988, p. 584). Thus, it is also necessary to apply corresponding critical qualitative inquiry “that addresses inequities in the economy, education, employment, the environment, health, housing, food, and water, inquiry that embraces the global cry for peace and justice” (Denzin, 2017, p. 8).
Methodology
We derived research questions from the study rationale and the theoretical considerations. Committed to the qualitative-interpretative paradigm, these questions were intended as impulses for the interviews and enable the interviewees to set topics:
What challenges had practitioners experienced in the (recent) past in the focus of their work, the people they worked with, and the activities offered? What opportunities and constraints did these challenges offer? Was there resistance to any changes? What motivated this resistance? How did practitioners resist? The Austrian sample comprised seven ABE facilitators and four program managers. Practitioners with at least 10 years of expertise in ABE and affiliated with the pioneer providers who founded the national tradition of critical-emancipatory ABE, and/or who have been substantially involved in shaping it, were asked to participate. To capture the changes comprehensively from the pre-IEB era to the present, participants were asked to reflect on their experiences over the preceding ten years. The Scottish sample comprised 16 participants who were knowledgeable about CBAL projects, took a learner-focused approach to practice, and had 5 years or more experience working in CBAL. The sample was drawn from eight different Local Authority (LA) areas, including the three largest cities. Twelve participants were practitioners, and four were managers of CBAL services. Participants were asked to reflect on their experiences over the preceding three years. The South Tyrolian sample comprised eight adult educators with five or more years of professional experience at the Winterschule. Six interviewees are trainers. Waltraud, the founder, and Franziska, the current coordinator, are also responsible for conceptual matters and active as trainers. The interview with Waltraud was conducted on-site and audio recorded. Participants were asked to reflect on their experience over the preceding 5–10 years.
Consistent with our standpoint and commitment to emphasizing practitioners’ values and professional expertise, we chose a questionnaire that contained questions addressing the research problem. We applied purposive sampling (Patton, 2002), identified possible interviewees in each country, and emailed details about the project and the consent form in line with the universities’ ethical guidelines.
After receiving the completed questionnaire and consent form, we conducted an online, problem-centered interview (Witzel & Reiter, 2012) that was video-recorded. The written responses provided the basis for the face-to-face discussion. Data were collected from June to September 2021. The interviews ranged from 30 to 80 minutes.
We followed Halcomb and Davidson's (2006) reflexive, iterative process. We concurrently took notes during the interviews, followed by reflective journaling post-interview. The recordings were listened to several times, the questionnaires re-read, and the notes amended. Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was conducted separately for each case example. Finally, we ensured communicative validation based on a preliminary report written individually for each sub-project. We used pseudonyms in all three case examples, except for the founder and the coordinator of the Winterschule.
Based on the individual findings we carried out a comparative analysis. We applied Pädagogische Kasuistik (Agostini, 2020), which is not a case study approach, nor a rule-controlled deduction. Pedagogical casuistry uses case examples to let us see something that goes beyond the specific and individual example (Heidegger, 2001, p. 32) in a phenomenological-hermeneutical sense. We read the findings of the three case examples comparatively and saw common topics (commitments, ideas) to understand ALE practice in the three fields. We summarized these common topics as three main results.
Findings of Each Case Example
AUSTRIA: Five main themes emerged:
Under pressure: Bureaucracy rises above professional expertise
A dilemma: Ensuring the ABE approach under incompatible, contradictory funding requirements
Coping with challenging requirements and contradictions
The efficient learners: Expectations generate pressure
The struggle for a sustainable (national) ABE
The IEB's changing funding requirements are problematic to implement and force practitioners to make time-consuming changes to their previously proven/developed administrative practice. Over the years, the administrative burden, and most recently the documentation specifications regarding controlling, have risen sharply, putting pressure on practitioners. Their main interest is planning, facilitating, and further developing ABE based on dialogue with their participants, the target group(s), and fellow practitioners within and across organizations. The depiction of bureaucracy that elevates itself above professional expertise emerged: “Great accuracy and diligence is required to ensure that costs are not subsequently rejected” (Jule). The now limited time for andragogical tasks results in “constantly checking the clock and the workload” (Edda).
In 2019, funding requirements were dramatically altered top-down: a curriculum that prescribes learning outcomes with corresponding assessment tools was implemented, outcomes and levels were to be documented, and an IEB certificate had to be issued. This caused a massive dilemma for providers: if learning progress does not occur according to the IEB curriculum, “Are these the ‘wrong’ participants then?” (Edda). The “IEB curriculum must be translated and adapted” (Carla) to maintain the learner-centered, holistically oriented, and critical-emancipatory ABE approach. Furthermore, this new curriculum and its approach to learning require practitioners “to test” (Edda). This contradicts seeing oneself as a learning companion. Issuing a certificate is seen as highly problematic: “Learners have already achieved so much and are still at level 1, and relevant learning achievements are not part of the IEB assessment in the first place” (Ines). Participants remain at one level longer because learning progress occurs slowly. Standardization causes “demotivation and frustration, even tears” (Ines). The funding requirements dismiss previously valid, widely recognized quality standards.
These patterns discuss profound professionalism. The efficient practitioner optimizes administrative tasks, works faster, and achieves more in the given time. Hence, the “learning niche” (Carla) is safeguarded for the participants. The documentation, as required by the funding rationale, is conducted in parallel with well-proven pedagogical reflections on the learning progress together with the participants. The strategically acting practitioner maintains learner-centeredness: “For me, basic education should remain a place where the participants can learn at their own pace, voluntarily, what they would like to catch up on, without pressure and stress from outside” (Anne). However, funding regulations must be observed and openly addressed: “This course is free of charge for you, but there are requirements” (Ines). The cooperative practitioner relies on mutual trust, collegial dialogue, and shared values to handle their burden with their team. However, the disruptive intervention “has not left anyone involved unscathed” (Dora). Although the IEB was implemented to better secure ABE provision and warrant planning security for the providers, the financial pressure has increased enormously: “That ‘everything fits’ in order not to sit on costs” (Jule). The pattern of long-standing professional experience allows quality to be upheld under difficult conditions by drawing on existing learning materials and years of experience. Thus, substitutions during holidays and in case of illness, which are necessary due to accounting based on teaching units held, are feasible. The pattern of agility recognizes that ALE is embedded in social change and must also meet changing demands: “As a small niche, we have to make an effort and are principally willing to change, more than the school system” (Greta).
Multiple expectations are placed on (future) ABE participants. For example, speakers of other languages are expected to learn German quickly and smoothly, and providers are asked how long it will take until “gaps are closed” and participants are “job ready.” However, “hardly anyone in the outside world seems to grasp what ABE really means” (Carla). ABE is increasingly becoming a pre-stage of graduating from lower secondary education (compulsory school). Thus, ABE courses are seen as a “precursor,” and participants’ expectations are geared towards “school-like teaching and instruction.” When learning progress is slower than anticipated, there is “disappointment” and “counseling is needed” (Fanni). For participants who are (temporarily) unemployed, there is an increasing expectation of obtaining a job by participating in ABE. Meanwhile, ABE itself has changed within the IEB era: “I have the impression that the learners now have to adapt to the places where they want to learn more than they did 10 years ago: as if we, the providers, are not obliged to the participants, but they are obliged to us. I think this is connected to all these things, standardization, funding, and it changes our depictions of the participants (…) [what] providers offer, and participants should take what is offered to them” (Brea).
ABE has increasingly moved “away from literacy, reading and writing, toward an educational minimum, some kind of elementary school for adults” (Brea). ABE is becoming increasingly standardized, serving “utilitarian and economically exploitable conceptions of learning” (Jule). Participants become “classifiable learners who are to be made fit for the world of paid work” (Fanni). ABE originally aligned with the participants’ learning objectives and interests. However, this was fundamentally contradicted by a curriculum-driven approach with a narrowed focus on the interface with the labor market, prescribing learning content and thus setting levels to be achieved. When these funding requirements were implemented in 2019, “providers spoke up and said we can’t work like this” (Greta). However, the practitioners coped: “I see room for maneuver, which I can use, even if the curriculum itself is much narrower” (Jule). “Appreciatively, the providers were finally involved in the revision, but overall it was a lot of time that we had to invest and we didn't get paid” (Greta). Thus, the practitioners have regained their rightful seat at the table and can contribute their expertise again. “In the revised recommendations for action, a clearer recourse to the previously valid pedagogical principles became visible, and the assessment tool allows a certain orientation to the individual learning objectives” (Kaja). Nonetheless, “I consider the curriculum that prescribes learning outcomes as completely inappropriate” (Brea).
Within the IEB, quantifying indicators for measuring success have increasingly been implemented: numbers of participants, certification, drop-out, and transitions to further education or employment. However, practitioners emphasized understanding, recognizing, and facilitating learning related to all dimensions of human learning and “on what is happening on the inside” (Ines). They, therefore, use proven, provider-specific, formative procedures of validation and simultaneously report the required data to the IEB. In the first IEB period (2012–2014), the budget for know-how transfer and providers’ meetings was allocated transparently; however, recent IEB funding solely covers course provision. There are “no spare resources for innovative thinking” (Jule), regarding ABE facilitating, and “room to maneuver was not opened up, but rather withdrawn” (Fanni), regarding program planning. In addition, covering course provisions only means that counseling and outreach activities are ineligible. This significantly negatively impacts those who struggle with reading, writing, and numeracy in their jobs and everyday life, despite nine years of compulsory education in Austria, upholding a taboo and (self-)stigmatization. As word of mouth is most effective, but difficult during the pandemic, participants perceived that “I am the only one and there is no suitable course for me” (Kaja). Moreover, the Public Employment Service lacks awareness, and clients get assigned to other courses instead of appropriate ABE. Further, the trusting relationship between the funding authority and providers has significantly suffered due to the politically motivated rupture: no discussions were held with ABE experts (the practitioners) before massively altering the funding guidelines. Subsequently, they have not been involved in developing the curriculum, so it was clearly imposed “from above” (Dora). There is “a lack of trust in the professional and correct work in ABE as well as in the wealth of experience from numerous years of good practice” (Fanni).
SCOTLAND: Four themes emerged:
The impact of reduced funding
As funding for CBAL was reduced by the U.K. government's curtailment of state provision, staff became involved in externally funded projects. Applying and reporting on this funding reduced the teaching time because “it's harder to focus on the educational role when there is more monitoring and more applications to write” (Wayne). This impacted adult literacy and numeracy (ALN) learners because they “needed to be actively engaged in provision that met their interests” (Audrey). External funding also led to focusing on measurable targets “because more funding is coming with specific targets [this] creates competition and more precarious work” (Wayne). It also meant that specific types of learners had to be prioritized, “otherwise staff are overstretched” (Olivia).
Collaborating with other services could solve some funding issues, but it was difficult. Learner-centered approaches were an unfamiliar working method for other professions: “we are always fighting our corner to say what [CBAL] is” (Andy). Demonstrating the efficacy of the CBAL approach required “a common language that goes across the different professions, so we are seen as another spoke in the wheel of learning” (Mary). Resisting training-for-employability types of courses was crucial, and practitioners had to convince advocates that “our curriculum isn’t pre-set but based on negotiation with learners” (Rory).
Professionals from adult health and social care had, after considerable effort, “recognized [our] skillset when they saw how we build relationships, identify common goals, problem solve and build community capacity” (Olivia). These partnerships could enable staff to reduce expenditure “by working collaboratively through linking to partners’ plans and participating in cross-sector groups” (Melanie). Practitioners emphasized that the “value base is critical [in enabling] you to respond to learners” (Jean) and that values-based partnerships rested on respect so, “we show what we do in ways that other professions can understand, thus experiencing professional equity” (Mary).
COVID-19, pedagogy, and digital inequalities
The COVID-19 restrictions on face-to-face meetings required classes to be moved online, creating technical and pedagogical issues. Some organized “continuous professional development (CPD) to support online learning and give tutors interesting work to keep them going” (Fiona). Access for learners was difficult: “Learners want to use Facebook, WhatsApp, etc., that they understand, but we have to use Teams, which is difficult to access” (Audrey). This platform did not operate intuitively for learners and was data-heavy, causing problems for those with limited allowances. Many learners had smartphones that were ineffective for online learning; therefore, staff had to “find suitable equipment [often by applying for external funding] because going online requires confidence, having the equipment, and getting ongoing support” (Rory). Nicholas solved one group's difficulties by “making a case to the LA to use Google Meet initially and then transferring people to Teams when they were more confident.” This was effective for the learners but required many hours of the practitioner's time. Safe ways to support learners were eventually found, for example, “meeting people outside to provide 1-1 support to help set up devices” (Julie).
Adjusting teaching approaches so that learners were at the center was difficult due to the lack of teaching materials: “we had to make our own materials, and that has been time-consuming” (Jean). Online meetings limited learner interactions and made small group discussions difficult. One had “been able to support learners on a 1-1 basis because if they don’t get into a group, they lose confidence” (Nicholas). Julie reported: “Learners had a lot of input from the team to support them to go online. The staff just give it the time it takes. We now have learners helping other learners, and it has really taken off.” Online learning was difficult for beginners because “contacting them online doesn’t work as they can’t understand you and you need the face-to-face interaction” (Lucy).
Learners were encouraged to reflect on their experiences by building programs “from the lives, experiences, interests, and conditions of people involved in CBAL” (Nicholas). Practitioners said: “You have to be compassionate and genuinely interested in people and find ways of engaging them” (Rory). Working toward people's own agendas was rewarding because “when people realize that they can achieve things, it is quite addictive” (Melanie). Encouraging learners to be critically reflexive “is key to helping learners develop skills to recognize accurate information, especially in relation to vaccines” (Fiona). Others challenged and supported learners because “our role is as development workers acting as agents of change rather than accepting the existing situation” (Andy).
Health and well-being
Practitioners identified the importance of health and wellbeing and considered that the pandemic had increased isolation and loneliness. The closure of community centers meant “a growing number of people have found themselves left behind … [so] staff have done amazing things to keep in touch with learners” (Melanie). Mental health issues were “like a tsunami, and our classes give people a connection, especially those living on their own” (Jean). Learners were under pressure and experienced anxiety due to pre-existing trauma and life circumstances; thus, “staff recognized the importance of reducing any learning-related stress while retaining some challenges” (Fiona). For example, “instead of putting on the same classes, we offered confidence-building, cookery, and walking groups because learners asked for more practical things” (Julie). Learning also included helping people to obtain financial support because “when people are vulnerable, you need to help them with all of their lives; otherwise, they can’t find the space to learn” (Jean).
Online classes contributed to learners’ well-being. A learner in Rory's class said, “just coming to the group helped me to survive,” and another in Julie's group reported, “it gives me something to get up for on a Friday.” Jean said, “What we do makes a difference to learners. If they didn’t come to the group, they would flounder.” Helping to overcome isolation improves people's well-being, and the participants showed how CBAL achieved this. One way was the equal decision-making in their learning groups. This helped to reduce individuals’ anxieties and increased trust and belonging. Being part of a cooperative group also reduced isolation because people's strengths were recognized. The wide curricula that reflected each participant's interests, strengths, and needs contributed to learners’ well-being, especially when time was dedicated to reflection.
Practitioners’ responses
Practitioners mitigated reduced funding and the impact of COVID-19 by prioritizing learner-centered solutions, developing online resources, and providing one-to-one support. They also secured computing equipment and provided learning in safe outdoor spaces for those unable to get online. Learner-focused programs were changed to include adjustments to the pace of learning and activities, such as cooking or digital skills, that promoted confidence building. Practitioners reached vulnerable groups by adjusting the curriculum, caring for the whole person, and emphasizing learners’ strengths. Other professions recognized CBAL's effectiveness, and although such partnerships took time, the investment improved support for learners. This was helped by the provision of CPD for other professions that enabled the benefits of CBAL's learner-centered practices to be recognized.
SOUTH TYROL: Five main themes emerged:
Commitment to an affirmative way of ALE
“Someone has to start!” (…) “After criticism of the wrong system, start with oneself. This is done by doing things and changing supposed rules. There is a need for individual and social action, and economic change” (Livio). “Even in the hamster wheel, there is a loophole” (Lukas). There is a critical and, simultaneously, a strong, life-centered, and vital way to act, work, train, and learn at the Winterschule. Adult educators advocate for being care-and-repair oriented and stand for transformation itself.
When the practitioners were asked to comment on the changes they had experienced, most advised that they did not notice any recent changes. However, they did refer to when Waltraud founded the initiative because of the emergence of globalized agriculture. Some described the altered learning attitude of some participants; specifically, they expected more “formalized” class teaching. Waltraud suggested: “The experience of being confronted more often with output-oriented learning in school and work had probably shaped some adults. Then, the feeling of being part of a broader social and environmental project would be perceived less as purely individual learning outcomes and more as a profound holistic experience. An increased collective engagement, which is affected by the nature on site, stands instead of atomistic learning.” Franziska also shared this experience by pointing out that after a few weeks, “the participants perceive the environment quite differently.”
Holistic perspective instead of a binary ALE
The only honest way to assess is not compulsorily
The arrogance of the men of science
Issues of health, sustainability, and the human–earth relation
The interviewees expressed an interconnected and interwoven vision of everyday life, work, and ALE. Even if social and economic divides are perceived, the ALE practice at the Winterschule addresses them to a limited extent: “Society tends to divide: the employed and the non-employed, the old and the young, theory and practice. This is not the case here, that's fine” (Lukas). “Human beings cannot be divided into a professional, a politically engaged, or a leisure being” (Laura). Thus, the second main theme concerns a relational, interdependent, and interconnected view of ALE. “In plant material, you find everything, procurement, and education. Concept and education are all in one” (Livio). “The whole Winterschule is a beautiful permaculture project” (Lukas). “Three-dimensional learning is central to my subject, hand weaving. It includes the drawing, the weaving pattern, and the handloom. This work and learning needs time, and it has something contemplative and meditative as well; it is not only cognitive learning” (Laura).
Concerning aspects of educational assessment, the interviewees described their professional practice as follows: “The possibility of taking a final examination and achieving a certificate, but not having to do so, i.e., without compulsion, is probably the only honest way to assess people” (Margit). “The importance of a certificate? If you ask yourself: what is it worth? It's worth as much as what you make of it!” (Franziska). She argued: “The right question is what do the people need, and not what does the structure need!” (Franziska). “Making these governmental things (i.e., filling out ten slips of forms and papers) uncomplicated for the trainers and the participants - that's the Winterschule: It's about passing on the possibilities, bringing people together who share knowledge, skills, and experience” (Franziska). “Yes, we have to fill out some questionnaires, but if the trainer doesn’t fit [into the structure], I find out anyway, I kind of hear that” (Franziska). ALE is seen as follows: “The competency goes back to the people itself and to the local communities who take care of seeds in danger of extinction, care for the wildlife (from insects to mushrooms), the fruits and plants of the alpine valley. We share these competencies collectively and with the next generations” (Livio). Several interviewees named measurable learning outputs, not by assuming the need for control as neoliberalism would assume lack or deficits, but instead by unfolding how there is always more (and an immeasurable) output than expected: “There's something where you get out more than you put in” (Margit). “Not everything can be measured in numbers. There is more here” (Lukas). “Attending the Winterschule is not about an individual hobby, it's giving back to society” (Margit). The interviewees affirmed that agriculture removes those who do not perform well in handicrafts or on farms from the market: “You know, the practice separates the wheat from the chaff!” (Nicola).
“Little official knowledge is available or has been gathered, for example, on mixed agriculture systems [instead of the mono-cultural] in the Agricultural Sciences. In some well-known agricultural and forestry experimental centers, there is a fundamental lack of work on the local habitat and their inhabitants, such as mushrooms, and so forth, living in it at the original stadium. This is men's arrogance of science” (Livio). The collective care and safeguarding of local, mostly orally transmitted peasants’ expertise on and familiarity with alpine cultivation and traditional handicraft is a relevant issue at the Winterschule: “Standardization or homologation could not work for us. The soil and climate presuppositions and the knowledge are locally different” (Livio). “You cannot put everything into numbers because the Winterschule is also about local cycles, which are based on experience. It is related to an alpine terrain where conditions are specific and different from where there are ideal soil conditions, irrigation, and so forth.” (Lukas). So, they collect indigenous knowledge and bring together unwritten insights in order to protect this experience-based knowledge. The intergenerational transmission of knowledge was also emphasized: younger and older participants meet and exchange their expertise concerning the altered natural cycle of alpine regions and how peasants and farmers act within the changed environmental conditions.
“Education is more than just acquiring knowledge, it's about health, about making people happy. You exit the training courses motivated and want to continue” (Margit). Caring for the earth and its inhabitants was the fifth main insight. An increased need for more health and sustainability for individuals, communities, and the planet was mentioned. Some participants needed to recover from stress or address issues of health and care. Experiential narratives were made about suffering pressures and imbalances in everyday life that participants (mostly women) perceived. The pressures of peasants caused by globalized mass food production and consumption were exposed. They referred to environmental issues, such as global warming, and social matters, such as exploiting supposed subaltern people and land. They finally condemned the imperial way of life, naming the overproduction of food and artificial fibers in the inhumane food-clothes industry. The residential format in Ulten is perceived as a special (spiritual and physical) time, as reflected by the above-mentioned sense that doing handicrafts with other people can be decelerating and meditative. “Some of them even had to take a holiday in order to attend some courses of the Winterschule, but they would not want to miss this special common time in Ulten” (Nicola).
Results of the Comparative Analysis
In this section, we discuss the three main results of the comparative analysis on the basis of pedagogical casuistry: practitioners’ repertoires of resistance, pedagogy as a values-based endeavor, and holistic approaches to ideas of social justice for people and the planet.
Practitioners’ repertoires of resistance
Pedagogy as a values-based endeavor
All three case examples showed that practitioners perceived massive changes. They were harmed by the growing burden of bureaucracy, underfunding, the requirement to measure/test and control learning outcomes, technocratic-driven curricula, and the genderized/neoliberal ideal of a fit and trainable learner. This pressure has an “emotional cost” (Achinstein & Ogawa, 2006, p. 55) and affects their professional expertise by questioning their critical-emancipatory ALE practice and pedagogical values. The practitioners’ abilities and capabilities in resisting and developing strategies are visible, however, resistance is not effortless. In the Austrian and Scottish case examples, practitioners must be aware of what is allowable in the interplay between social structures, power relations, and situational circumstances. Practitioners developed a “repertoire of resistance” (Johansson & Vinthagen, 2016, p. 421). In the Austrian case example, the emphasis is on facilitating learning related to all the dimensions of human beings and using formative validation procedures. In Scotland, a different repertoire has been required because funding reductions have caused the most detrimental changes. Therefore, they have focused on finding external resources and/or forming partnerships with other professions that are compatible with their value base of responding to learners. In the South Tyrolian case example, practitioners share goals that are based on a broad social and environmental project that leads to a holistic experience grounded on collective engagement with nature (documenting indigenous knowledge). Thus, learning involves passing on a responsible respect to the environment and its inhabitants among generations based on a deep knowledge of the vital terrain. The South Tyrolian case example shows that resistance is enacted by “activists’ creative experimentation with tactics and experiences of earlier attempts to practice resistance” (Johansson & Vinthagen, 2016, p. 421). Practitioners in all three case examples could draw on sources of support to maintain their “activist craft” (Costa et al., 2021). These included their expertise in knowing what would be most effective for learners based on an understanding that it is the whole human that is learning. Resistance also came from being part of a professional culture of using learners’ experiences and knowledge rather than seeing them as empty vessels to be filled with pre-determined skills. Support stemmed from dialogue and mutual learning among learners and practitioners. Practitioners’ motivation to resist difficult or hostile messages enabled them “to create dialogic, emancipatory spaces which are affirming, positive and culturally sensitive for those participating in them” (Hamilton & Tett, 2019, p. 253). This was achieved particularly by prioritizing learner perspectives that led to social justice for the people and the planet. Support also came through forming alliances and professional cooperation that contradicted the ideal of competition. For instance, in Scotland, the practitioners developed new partnerships based on shared goals and in South Tyrol practitioners were committed to an affirmative way of acting that promoted relational, instead of binary, concepts. All three case examples share a highly relational and community-based ALE conception rather than atomistic individualization and optimization.
In all three case examples, a values-based pedagogy guided practice aimed at contributing to social justice using critical pedagogy. Practitioners used “workarounds” to seize the agenda when “policies were seen to be unworkable in practice, or in conflict with professional and philosophical values” (Smythe, 2015, p. 6). They were contesting the neoliberal ideology that underpinned many of the changes imposed on ALE fields that constructed learners as a problem, rather than as people with important knowledge to offer. The practitioners resisted this discursive construction and instead enabled ALE participants to influence the curriculum to make it relevant to their lived experiences (Freire, 1993). This has focused on assessment, where practitioners have used instruments that shift more agency to learners as meaning-makers rather than receivers of expert instruction and programs. In all three case examples, this has involved them adding another layer to their work by giving ‘the system’ the data it requires while simultaneously responding to learners’ priorities. Austrian and South Tyrolian practitioners emphasized recognizing and facilitating learning that is related to all dimensions of human and care-centered learning through formative procedures of validation. The Scottish and South Tyrolian examples show, regarding the pandemic requirements of physical distancing/online settings, that practitioners provided safe outdoor spaces for learners that could not manage online learning in a hands-on approach driven by caring and relating.
Underpinning the work of the practitioners is a commitment to ALE as solidarity, public obligation, and education as a common good for the most vulnerable learners and places, in line with Denzin's (2017) mission. This commitment involves challenging the oppressing structures that reproduce inequality and assumes that all learners have equal potential to benefit from education. Consistent with this approach, practitioners have identified the importance of educating funders about effective pedagogical approaches to working with disadvantaged groups. In Scotland, practitioners have convinced funders that building the curriculum from learners’ interests and desires is much more effective than using sets of skills that are supposed to indicate work readiness. In the Winterschule, they have valued participant perspectives in investigating ways of maintaining a healthy environment for all. In Austria, practitioners acted as intermediaries between the IEB's assessment requirements and their own inclusive values of mutual, reciprocal learning with participants.
Further values emerged, primarily: being compassionate, having a genuine interest in people/the planet, acting as agents of change rather than accepting the existing situation, creating imaginative responses that enable learners to participate in ways they were comfortable with, promoting confidence building, following the life and care-centered orientation, and relying on scholarly, practice-based, and indigenous knowledge. Most of these values are immeasurable in the neoliberal ideology of metrics and simultaneously question this ideology. Nevertheless, these values are central to this second main theme and emphasize ideas of socially just ALE.
Holistic approaches to ideas of social justice for people and the planet
All three cases have taken the perspective that human learning is about the whole person, body, and mind acting in a social situation (Jarvis, 2004). In addition, health and well-being (Marmot et al., 2020) and the social aspect of learning have emerged as crucial in both the Scottish and the Austrian case examples. The logic of caretaking (Lynch, 2022) and “life-centred values” (Mayo & Vittoria, 2021, p. 22) are especially pivotal in the South Tyrolean case example, taking care of our environment and planet. These approaches mean that practitioners resist the binary concept, dichotomizing the vocational and the general ALE, theory and practice, the market-oriented-productive and community-care-related work. Despite the pressure from funders, practitioners in all three case examples have resisted framing their practice solely in economic terms. For example, the Winterschule affirms an interdependent and relational vision of life, work, and ALE, where human beings are seen as custodians of the local environment. In the Scottish case example, learners are challenged and supported to help them develop a critical stance on the existing situation, rather than accepting it. In Austria, ABE is developed in dialogue with the participants and fellow practitioners within and across organizations. This belief also has a political dimension about becoming more fully human (Freire, 1993), where learners are treated as agentic subjects and citizens with rights.
As the focus is on the whole person and their relations to others and the environment, practitioners have responded to various issues impacting participants’ readiness to learn in the following ways. In the Scottish case example, practitioners provided less stressful courses during the Covid-19 pandemic, especially for learners who were impacted by traumatic events in their own countries. In the Austrian case example, practitioners focused on prioritizing affective dimensions of learning (what is happening on the inside). In the Winterschule, practitioners did so through community-based education that was highly relational and that increased awareness of the strong interdependency between individual, community, and planetary health and sustainability. Practitioners in all three case examples contributed to learners’ overall health and well-being, especially by reducing isolation and loneliness as an important mandate for promoting social justice. This included building relationships between learners and practitioners, working in contemplative and meditative ways based on learners’ agendas, and ensuring that learners are conscious of their achievements, echoing Fraser's (2005) concept of participating as peers in social life. Another aspect of this holistic approach is collaborating across different fields with those with similar values, enabling an understanding of the dynamics of change (Tett & Hamilton, 2019, pp. 255–256). The case examples demonstrate that the pandemic requirements of physical distancing and/or online settings engaging in dialogue with others and avoiding binary thinking can help to challenge the official narrative of standardization. Instead, it creates a space for the plurality of knowledge and experiences. This seems more possible when core values of social justice can be shared, for example, through experience-based opportunities for professional learning.
All practitioners have had to find ways of compromising to obtain the resources they need while simultaneously seizing opportunities to do things differently. In Austria, after difficulties with implementing the new funding requirements emerged, and substantiated counter-positions had been expressed by practitioners, they endeavored to improve the curriculum. In Scotland, other professionals have recognized and adopted the CBAL way of working. Meanwhile, in South Tyrol, indigenous knowledge shared between younger and older participants has demonstrated how peasants and farmers can act within the changed conditions in the natural cycle of Alpine regions.
Concluding Discussion
Despite the very different contexts in which practitioners worked, there were many commonalities. Our data indicate that practitioners have resisted managerial discourses that they perceived as detrimental to learners, especially in relation to pedagogy and a holistic approach to human learning based on critical consciousness. Practitioners have also created emancipatory, democratic spaces so that they could continue to work in the ways they value, assisted by the strengths they derive from being part of a tradition that places both the learner and the planet at its center. The support of others and a social justice approach to practice has enabled them to resist the dominant neoliberal regime. These acts can disrupt the “ideology of fatalism [and instead enable people] to dream. Without […] dreams, there is no human existence, without dreams, there are no more human beings” (Freire, 2014, p. 33). The practitioners in our three case examples went beyond dreaming, practicing stubborn—and thus powerful and effective—agency that resulted in imagined and actual vital changes. To summarize, the three main themes represent the practitioners’ persistent commitment to values-based ALE grounded in the past, evident in their professional practice as shown by the data, and pointing to future imagination and orientation. Thus, there is a future of social justice in ALE, as Brookfield (2016) anticipated. The comparative approach with three extensive case examples requires reducing huge amounts of data. However, comparison can enable readers to reflect on their own assumptions, practices, and expertise, which are often taken for granted; provoke new perspectives toward practitioners’ commitment to social justice; and guide future research to sustain this anticipated future.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge the reviewers of the manuscript. Their comments have been most helpful in preparing this version. We appreciate the opportunity given for fruitful interviews and would like to gratefully acknowledge all interviewees for sharing their expertise and professional experience. We would like to thank Editage (
) for English language editing.
Data Availability Statement
The data was stored on password-protected computers and only persons directly involved in the project have access to the data. Due to its proprietary nature and ethical concerns, supporting data cannot be made openly available.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This publication was supported by Universität Klagenfurt (Fakultät für Kultur- und Bildungswissenschaften).