Competences of adult education professionals in the European and Slovene context

Abstract

International and European intergovernmental organisations and the adult education research community all emphasise the importance of well-qualified personal working in the field of adult education. However, as previous research has shown, the diversity of the field is a ‘challenge’ to the greater professionalisation of adult education. Therefore, this paper investigates how the European Union conceptualises adult education professionalisation in the 21st century and how this is reflected in the Slovene adult education policy. For this purpose, the core official European Union and Slovene policy documents on the professionalisation of adult educators were analysed using documentary analysis. The theoretical framework of the Europeanisation of education was used, along with international and comparative perspectives in studies of adult education. Our findings indicate that in the Slovene context, the emphasis is on the recognition of different professional roles and competences that adult educators need to work successfully in different contexts rather than on the unification of their competences, which can be found in the European context.

Keywords

Adult education competences Europeanisation of education professional development Slovenia

Introduction

International and European intergovernmental organisations (see, e.g. Council, 2011; European Commission [EC], 2006; UNESCO, 2009) as well as the adult education research community (see, e.g. Buiskool & Broek, 2011; Jarvis & Chadwick, 1991; Jütte & Lattke, 2014; Nuissl & Lattke, 2008) are emphasising the importance of well-qualified personal working in the field of adult education. However, the range of professionals working in this field is wide and diverse – depending on the sector and the institution in which they work, for example, adult educators working in folk high schools, commercial institutes, business companies, higher education institutions, parties, unions, (political) foundations and the church (Jütte, Nicoll, & Salling Olesen, 2011, p. 9), as adult education is linked with a country’s social structure, its socio-economic, cultural and political traditions, low regulation of the adult education system and different understandings of ‘adult education’. This diversity is often seen as a ‘challenge’ to the greater professionalisation of adult education.

In this paper, we aim to investigate how the EU conceptualises adult education ‘professionalisation’ in the 21st century as well as how this conceptualisation is reflected and incorporated in the Slovene regulatory and policy documents on adult education. Furthermore, by applying the theoretical framework of the Europeanisation of education (Klatt, 2014; Lawn & Grek, 2012) as well as international and comparative perspectives on adult education and lifelong learning (Egetenmeyer, 2016; Jütte & Lattke, 2014), we strive to identify similarities and differences in the European and Slovene cross-contextual efforts to ensure better professionalisation (and quality) of the people working in the adult education field.

In the following, we first briefly introduce the analytical framework. Next, we outline our methodological approach and provide an analysis of European and Slovene conceptualisations of the professionalisation of adult education. In the final section, we discuss the identified similarities and differences in the European and Slovene policies regarding the professionalisation of people working in the adult education field of practice. We argue that the emphasis in Slovenia is on the recognition of the different professional roles and competences that adult educators need to work successfully in different contexts and not so much on the unification of their competences, which is the focus in the European context.

Analytical framework

The theoretical framework of the Europeanisation of education can be used for the analysis of the interdependencies between international and national adult education and lifelong learning policies on professionalisation in the European context (see, e.g. Jütte & Lattke, 2014; Singh, Bora, & Egetenmeyer, 2016). The concept of Europeanisation first emerged in the 1980s in political studies literature and achieved greater recognition in the 1990s, although it lacks a single, clear-cut definition (Klatt, 2014). Radaelli (2004) provides one of the most cited definitions:

Europeanisation consists of processes of (a) construction, (b) diffusion and (c) institutionalisation of formal and informal rules, procedures, policy paradigms, styles, ‘ways of doing things’ and shared beliefs and norms which are first defined and consolidated in the EU policy process and then incorporated in the logic of domestic (national and subnational) discourse, political structures and public policies. (p. 3)

In addition to this ‘top-down’ dimension, Europeanisation can also be understood as a ‘bottom-up’ process that incorporates member state policies at the EU level, as well as a three-dimensional process that includes a horizontal exchange process (Klatt, 2014). As noted by Lawn and Grek (2012), Europeanisation reflects ‘the complexity of processes which include, first, transnational flows and networks of people, ideas and practices across European borders; second, direct effects of EU policy; and, finally, the Europeanizing effect of international institutions and globalization’ (p. 8).

Discussions about the Europeanisation of education appeared at the turn of the millennium, when the Lisbon Strategy was launched. This opened the door for the formation of a European (adult) education policy, defined by common goals, implementation tools and financial resources, in spite of the EC’s limited formal competences in the field of (adult) education, due to the subsidiarity rule (Alexiadou, 2014; Dale, 2009; Nóvoa, 2010; Rasmussen, 2014). To establish a new form of (multilevel) governance in the education and implementation of a European (adult) education policy, the EC introduced an open method of coordination (OMC) ‘as a means of spreading best practices and achieving greater convergence towards the main EU goals’ (EC, 2000, paragraph 37). European (adult) education policy is spread through ‘soft law’, that is, recommendations, guidelines, indicators, benchmarks, statistical data, monitoring and peer learning, and is formed through established networks at the European level with the participation of public and private experts, national representatives, nongovernmental organisations and the principal EU institutions (Lawn & Grek, 2012; Milana, 2017). Therefore, it is through mechanisms such as financial resources, institutional requirements, learning and the creation of discourses that Europeanisation of education process can affect power relationships domestically and in the EU (Radaelli, 2008).

One of the basic characteristics of European adult education policy, which developed relatively late at the beginning of the 21st century – but with the turning point in 2006, when the EC issued ‘Adult Learning: It Is Never Too Late to Learn’ (see Milana, 2012) – is its orientation towards lifelong learning and the outcome dimension of learning, rather than strictly focusing on education (Milana, 2013). This orientation is also strongly embedded in the EC’s endeavours (see EC, 2006, 2007; Research voor Beleid, 2010) to ensure a greater quality of adult education by improving the professionalisation of the people working in adult education based on standardisation of the broad and diverse field of practice through outcome-oriented competency descriptions, while other identifiers, such as academic qualification, professional organisation and autonomy have been somehow neglected (Doyle, Egetenmeyer, Singai & Devi, 2016; Jütte et al., 2011). Report commissioned by the EC (Research voor Beleid, 2010), which seems to be ‘a basis for the EC in defining adult learning professionalism’ (Egetenmeyer & Käpplinger, 2011, p. 29), established seven generic and 12 specific competencies, which adult education providers should achieve at an organisational level (and individuals; general competencies at a personal level). This resulted in the formulation of ‘standards for adult learning professionals’ (p. 22).

However, this conceptualisation of adult education professionalisation has been challenged by the research community in a variety of ways: (1) the proposed model has a strong economic focus and is based on a managerial perspective (Egetenmeyer & Käpplinger, 2011); (2) competences identified through functional analysis only encompass what can be described and measured technically through job analysis, and by listing single tasks, the profession cannot be defined (Jütte et al., 2011); (3) the model does not distinguish between professionalisation as a process for developing the professionalism of people working in adult education as a field of practice¹ and quality management professionalisation, which targets adult education providers and their organisational development, the latter being understood as a reference point for the professionalisation of adult education (Egetenmeyer & Käpplinger, 2011); 4) the model positions adult educators as a unified group as well as ‘not yet professional’, i.e. diversity of practices in Europe is seen as a problem to be overcome through a professionalisation of the sector that can be achieved with standardisation and identification of the ‘common elements’ (Nicoll & Edwards, 2012, p. 237).

Finally, the dominance of the ‘competence regime’ (Nicoll & Salling Olesen, 2013) in the professional development of adult educators, as well in European adult education and lifelong learning policy more generally, should not pass without notice. Competence-based education, which is rooted, at least in Europe, in vocational education in England and is tied to the neoliberal economic policies of the 1980s, has strongly influenced European (adult) education policy and the conceptualisation of its instruments, although evidence regarding the effectiveness of such education is lacking (Clarke & Winch, 2015). Similarly, it can be argued that the Anglo-Saxon notion of competence, based on a functional-behaviouristic conceptualisation of an individual’s ability to perform to an expected standard in a work context (Winterton, 2009), is evident in the EC’s framework for ‘adult education professionals’. However, in the European context, more comprehensive and multidimensional notions of competence have been adopted. For example, in German and French traditions, the notion of competence is understood as the integration of theoretical and practical knowledge, which covers a wide range of professional, social and personal attributes (cognitive, functional and social competences) (Brockmann et al., 2008; Winterton, 2009). Surprisingly, this perspective is neglected in the EC’s proposed framework.

Having said that, we can highlight the following characteristics of European adult education policy regarding the issue of better professionalisation (and quality) of adult educators: (i) it is governed by the OMC; (ii) promoted through ‘soft law’ (Commission’s and Council’s recommendation; see next chapter); (iii) discourse creation (studies, reports, projects issued or commissioned by the Commission and contracting agencies in the last 10–15 years; see, e.g. Németh, 2017, pp. 15–18); (iv) common goals (quality, standardisation and competencies); (v) monitoring (better quality of provision and adult education staff; see chapter ‘Results’); (vi) peer learning activities (see ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-framework/expert-groups/adult-learning_en) and peer pressure (through appointed national representatives in working groups on adult learning).

Against this background, the following research questions were formulated in order to guide our research endeavours: (i) how is professionalisation of adult educators conceptualised in European and Slovene policy? (ii) How is European conceptualisation on professionalisation incorporated in the Slovene policy and practice end vice versa? (iii) What are the similarities and differences in approaching professionalisation in European and Slovene contexts?

Method and sources

The main empirical intention of this article was to investigate how the EU conceptualises the professionalisation of adult educators in European adult education policy and how the latter conceptualisation is reflected and incorporated into Slovene regulatory and policy documents on adult education. For this purpose, a documentary analysis method (i.e. content–analytical approach to analysing historical and contemporary documents) was used (Atkinson & Coffey, 2010), through which the central concepts of professionalisation that to which the documents are referring could be investigated. Field and Schemmann (2017) recently showed that documentary analysis is an established research method in the field of adult education, although it is not always explicitly mentioned in studies (p. 5).

The research design mainly addressed two of the proposed ‘societal factors’ on professionalisation by Egetenmeyer and Schüßler (2014, pp. 98–99), that is, the professional context and education policy (regulations, policy) and academia (study programmes) and further training.

Furthermore, when analysing the ‘top-down’, ‘bottom-up’ and ‘horizontal’ effects of the Europeanisation of education in Slovene and European contexts, Hall’s (1993) notion of three-order policy change was applied: (a) adoption of policy instruments, (b) development of new instruments and (c) fundamental change in ideology and ideas. In this way, the scope of changes that the European adult education policy on the professionalisation of adult educators has brought (or not) in the Slovene context can be evaluated as well as whether the Slovene historical context on professionalisation has influenced the European one.

With regard to the selection of sources, we selected core official EU policy documents on ‘adult learning’ and the professionalisation of adult educators in the period from 2000 on, as the EU started paying more attention to adult education policies beginning in 2000 (Milana, 2012), as well as the more general teacher competences and qualifications framework which also applies to adult educators. In addition, we examined core official Slovene research and policy documents on adult education from the 1950s on, as the system of education and training of adult educators was at that time first established at the People’s and Worker’s Universities and later complemented at the university level (Krajnc, 2011; Savićević, 1999). Therefore, eight documents produced by or for the EC on the professionalisation of adult educators were included in the analysis, including the following: two communications by the Commission of the European Communities ([CEC], 2006, 2007a), one common European principle by the CEC (2007b), one report commissioned by the EC (Research voor Beleid, 2010), one resolution from the Council (Council of the EU [CEU], 2011), two reports from working groups on adult learning (EU, 2015; ‘Thematic Working Group on Quality in Adult Learning’, 2013) and one recommendation from the Council (CEU, 2016). Moreover, the following documents and data covering the Slovene professionalisation of adult educators context were included in the analysis: historical texts from Slovenian (and Yugoslav) studies (Krajnc, 2011; Savićević, 1999); law adopted by the Slovenian government (‘Zakon o izobraževanju odraslih’ [ZIO], 2018); two core policy documents, one adopted by the National Assembly (2013) and the other by the Slovenian Ministry of Education (‘Bela knjiga’, 2011) as well as other related policy documents prepared by the Slovenian Institute for Adult Education (SIAE) (2015); data from the SIAE (2015) and the University of Ljubljana (‘Drugostopenjski študijski program’, 2017; ‘Filozofska fakulteta’, 2017) on the further professional training (competence profiles) and the initial professional education of adult educators (master study programme in adult education).

Results

The results are first presented for the European and then for the Slovene context.

The European context

The CEC’s (2006) ‘Adult Learning: It Is Never Too Late to Learn’ recognises the importance of the professional development of adult educators. In the EU member states, little attention has been given to the initial education of adult educators, the fact that many different routes for entering the profession exist or the reality that a high percentage of adult educators are working in part-time jobs. The EC sees the professional development of adult educators as a ‘vital determinant of the quality of adult learning’. Therefore, it recommends that member states should establish ‘regulatory frameworks’ and ‘quality standards’ and invest in ‘teaching methods and materials’ for adult learners, to establish ‘initial and continuing professional’ education and training programmes for adult educators and to ‘up-skill’ adult educators (p. 7). A year after releasing this document, the EC adopted the ‘Action Plan on Adult Learning: It Is Always a Good Time to Learn’ (CEC, 2007a), which states that the quality of adult educators ‘is crucial in motivating adult learners to participate’ (p. 8). Moreover, the EC established a framework for monitoring the progress of member states, with specific timelines and methods of implementation (e.g. by developing standards and guiding service for adult educators in 2009). In the same year, the EC issued the ‘Common European Principles for Teacher Competences and Qualifications’ (CEC, 2007b), in which the crucial role of teachers in supporting learning experience of the young and adult learners is emphasised, as well as common European principles are set: teachers should be well qualified, their profession should be based on initial education and continuing professional development; they should be mobile in European educational area, and they should be working in partnership with the other stakeholders (pp. 4–5). All of the EC’s documents were related to the Lisbon Strategy and the framework of ‘Education and Training 2010’.

In January 2010, the final report commissioned by the EC on ‘Key competences for adult learning professionals’ was published (Research voor Beleid, 2010). The report identified the diversity of the field of adult education in the European context (i.e. various target groups, subjects, education and training pathways, employment situations and competences) as an obstacle to establishing adult learning professionals. To overcome this obstacle, the report suggested finding common elements for adult learning professionals, that is, key competences related to the ‘work adult professionals do’ (p. 9). By identifying competences from ‘existing competence profiles, job descriptions, educational programmes, academic literature’ and European studies on the competences of educational workers (p. 9), a set of seven generic and twelve specific competencies were identified. One is directly linked to the learning process (B1–B6) while the others are supportive of the learning process (B7–B12) (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Key competences for adult learning professionals. Source: Research voor Beleid (2010, p. 11).

Furthermore, 13 fields of activity were identified: learning needs assessment; course preparation; facilitation of learning; monitoring and evaluation; counselling and guidance; programme development; financial management; human resource management; overall management; marketing and public relations (PR); administrative support; information and communications technology (ICT) support and overarching activities. In addition, four contexts in which adult educators take action were identified: (i) learning/teaching context; (ii) programme/programme development context; (iii) institutional organisation/management context and (iv) leadership/continuous professional development context (pp. 11–12). While general competences are applicable to all activities in the field of adult education and required for all adult educators, as ‘these competences define what it means to be an adult learning professional’ (p. 39), specific competences are related to and needed only in the specific field of activity, and they are not required for all adult educators.

In 2011, the CEU (2011) adopted the ‘Resolution on a Renewed European Agenda for Adult Learning’, which refers, following the Lisbon period, to the ‘Europe 2020’ strategy. It includes five identified priority areas of the European agenda upon which member states should focus. The second priority refers to ‘improving the quality and efficiency of education and training’. In line with this priority area, member states are invited to focus on developing ‘quality assurance for adult-learning providers’ and improving ‘the quality of adult education staff’ based on identified competence profiles, established systems for initial and continuing education, the training of adult educators and the mobility of adult educators.

In 2013, ‘Thematic Working Group on Quality in Adult Learning’ (2013), which refers to the ‘ET 2020’ programme, published its final report focusing, among others, on ‘staff quality’ and based on the Key competences for adult learning professionals (Research voor Beleid, 2010) framework developed a ‘profiling grid’ for providers or practitioners’ level of self-evaluation. A starting point for raising quality of adult learning professionals is recognised in defining ‘units of competences with a common core and elective competences to take account of different typologies of roles and functions of staff in adult learning’ (p. 35). In 2015, the Working Group on Adult Learning (2014–2015) prepared a report ‘Improving Policy and Provision for Adult Learning in Europe’ (EU, 2015) in which emphasis is put more on the quality programmes, curricula and resources for adult learners than on adult learning professionals. However, quality initial education and ‘ongoing professional development’ for adult educators are emphasised, based on cognitive skills and ‘adult-specific teaching strategies (andragogy)’ – as well as appropriate employment conditions and career pathways (p. 51).

In 2016, the CEU (2016) adopted ‘Upskilling Pathways: New Opportunities for Adults’, in which initial education and continuing professional development of teaching professionals are recognised as important support measures for ‘delivery of upskilling pathways’ (p. 5).

The Slovene context

We will first briefly introduce the historical context and then continue with the contemporary context of professionalisation, which is our central focus.

Historical context

The professional development of adult educators in Slovenia can be traced back to the late 1950s, when Slovenia was part of Yugoslavia.² The training of the non-qualified adult population, mainly to meet the needs of the economy, and the growth of institutional structures of adult education created a need for trained adult educators (organisers of adult education, managers, instructors, foremen, andragogues). Consequently, the systematic training of adult educators was first established at the People’s and Worker’s Universities (1957–1959), which organised professional conferences, lectures, workshops and summer and winter schools, with the aim of training adult educators. These were the principal institutions offering further training of adult educators at that time (Krajnc, 2011; Savićević, 1999).

Moreover, in the 1960s, Yugoslavian universities opened the door to systematic theoretical and empirical research in the field of adult education and introduced adult education study programmes on ‘andragogy’ at the Faculties of Arts. The first course on andragogy was introduced by the faculty of Belgrade (Serbia) in 1963, with another appearing in Ljubljana (Slovenia) a decade later in 1972, at the Department for Pedagogy of the Faculty of Arts. In 1976, andragogy was introduced as one of the three possible fields of study at the Slovene Department of Pedagogy and was conceptualised as a relatively independent scientific discipline. Finally, in 1993, an independent study university programme was established. Subsequently, in 1995, the Faculty of Arts changed its name to the Department of Pedagogy and Andragogy (Krajnc, 2011; Savićević, 1999).

The professionalisation of adult education at the university level started in Yugoslavia in the 1960s. As a consequence of greater social demand and a helpful social climate, a new profession called ‘andragogue’ emerged. An andragogue refers to an adult educator qualified to work in the fields of education, culture, economics and the sociopolitical sphere and able to organise educational processes, prepare programmes and plans, provide counsel and direct and evaluate educational and cultural work – but not to teach one specific subject (Savićević, 1999, p. 133). Yugoslav (and thus Slovene) experience therefore points to the ‘mutual interdependence of andragogy as a science and the andragogue as a professional’ (p. 131; see also Németh, 2017, p. 11 for this conceptualisation in the Netherlands). Although this approach was not without constraints, as other professions were also ‘covering’ the field of adult education, the main outcome of this process was the awareness that people working in the field of adult education needed to acquire a certain amount of andragogical knowledge. For this reason, andragogy became one of five obligatory courses in Slovenia in 1981 for graduates of tertiary education, who are required to possess pedagogical and andragogical knowledge to enter their professions (Krajnc, 2011).

The contemporary context

Professional context and education policy

Adult education in Slovenia is one of the areas where the educational requirements for professionals – these being defined as teachers, organisers of adult education, counsellors in adult education and ‘other professionals’ – working in formal and non-formal educational programmes for adults, financed by public funds, are regulated by the law.³ The obligatory conditions that adult educators working in formal and non-formal adult education programmes must fulfil are as follows: (i) mastery of the Slovene language; (ii) education acquired through master study programs; (iii) pedagogical–andragogical education⁴; (iv) successful completion of a professional examination in the field of education; that is, graduates who finish higher education studies are obliged to complete a traineeship lasting from 8 to 10 months before employment (Bela Knjiga, 2011; ZIO, 2018).

A white paper on education in Slovenia also addresses the issue of professional development of the people working in adult education, concluding that a system of quality initial education for adult education staff, as well as a system for further education and training based on the actual adult needs of the educators and their employment fields, needs to be established (Bela Knjiga, 2011, p. 405). Furthermore, the Resolution on the Master Plan for Adult Education in the Republic of Slovenia [ReMPAE] for the period 2013–2020 (National Assembly, 2013), that is very much in line with the European adult education policy (Mikulec & Jelenc Krašovec, 2016, pp. 157–158), defines priority areas, goals and implementation measures for the national adult education policy. Specifically, the Resolution sets more concrete goals for the development of adult education professionals: (a) a sufficient number of professionals should be trained for different target groups and needs; (b) a database of adult educators will be maintained for the purpose of providing public service in adult education; (c) pedagogical–andragogical education will be adapted to different target groups; (d) training will be provided for professional staff in nationally important activities and programmes and (e) quality teaching materials, learning resources and ICT support will also be provided (p. 18).

The main institution responsible for the development of the system of further education and training of adult educators – those already working in the field or those working in other fields, but who also deal with adult education – in Slovenia is SIAE. SIAE developed competence-based professional training programmes for adult educators – with financial support of the European Social Fund (ESF) and under priority area ‘Improving the quality and efficiency of education and training’ in the period 2011–2014 (cf. CEU, 2011, p. 5), which aim to develop new knowledge and skills, allow them to share their experience with others, evaluate their practices and help them to develop their own and common professional identity of an adult educator. Three main types of professional training were developed: general basic and continuing training of adult educators (knowledge of the discipline of adult education, andragogical cycle), basic training on the special roles of adult educators (e.g. head and mentor in study circles, teacher in literacy programmes, counsellor in adult education guidance centres) and further training of adult educators (upgrading their knowledge and reflecting their practice) (SIAE, 2015).

For this purpose, SIAE referred to the ‘Common European Principles for Teacher Competences and Qualifications’ (EC, 2007b) as well as to the andragogical cycle known in the theory of adult education (see Krajnc, 1989) and the concept of competence that incorporates cognitive (principles, theories, concepts), functional (use of knowledge) and personal–social (values, attitudes, personal growth) dimensions that are mutually intertwined (SIAE, 2015, pp. 13–15). Therefore, professional training is associated with the following roles of adult educators (p. 19): head of adult education, teacher in adult education, counsellor in adult education (counsellor in adult education guidance centre, quality counsellor in adult education, counsellor for self-directed learning) and mentor in adult education (mentor in study circles, mentor in e-learning, mentor in project learning for young adult programmes). As the profile of ‘counsellor in adult education’ was recently recognised by the newly adopted adult education law (ZIO, 2018), we will further discuss (in the next section) the competences of the counsellor in an adult education guidance centre. Their main general professional competences are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Competences of counsellor in adult education guidance centre.

Counsellor in adult education guidance centre	General professional competences
Is able to:	identify social, regional and business needs as well as the needs of different target groups and individuals to provide them information and counselling for inclusion in education;
	plan and organise counselling;
	motivate adults and institutions in local environment to use counselling services and different forms of educational support;
	provide information and counselling as well as learning support to individuals and groups for inclusion in education, during the education and for inclusion in further education;
	evaluate individual progress, the effects of counselling work and the quality of the counselling activity;
	work in teams and with partners in regional, national and international environment;
	provide development work and strengthen his professional identity as consultant;
	plan and implement promotional counselling activities;
	do business and financial planning activities in counselling work.

Source: Modified according to Možina et al. (2013, pp. 34–42).

Academia (study programmes) and further training

In Slovenia, the University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts offers doctoral and master study programmes on Andragogy (adult education), while subjects covering the field of adult education can be studied at a bachelor level in the study programme ‘Pedagogy and Andragogy’. The University of Koper, Faculty of Education offers a master study programme entitled ‘Adult Education and Career Development’, while subjects covering the field of adult education can be studied at a bachelor level in the study programme ‘Educational Sciences/Pedagogy’. Furthermore, adult education as a subject can also be studied through the first- and second-cycle study programme of ‘Pedagogy’ at the University of Maribor, Faculty of Arts.⁵

As the majority of European university study programmes offer two-cycle study programmes for adult education professionals, with specialisation in adult education at the master level (Research voor Beleid, 2010, pp. 105–106), and as the University of Ljubljana has the longest tradition and experience with studies in adult education, we will further discus and analyse in the next section the competences of its master study programme in Andragogy. The study programme, prepared in line with Bologna requirements that took force in 2009, provides students with the competences presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Competences of the andragogue in master study programme of andragogy.

Andragogue	Competences
Is able to:	General: collect and use information, perform analyses and syntheses, transfer knowledge into practice, and create new knowledge;
	understand the procedures for argumentation and verification of scientific theories;
	apply interdisciplinary approach to critical and comprehensive thinking;
	readily communicate and balance different interests;
	reflect alternative views and solutions;
	work with others in a group or independently within a team;
	understand and embrace the complexity of adult education and establish and develop relationships with learning adults;
	Professional:
	analyse educational interests and needs of human resource development on different levels and plan their implementation;
	develop adult education (formal, non-formal) programmes and prepare and develop new didactical materials and methods for adult education;
	organise and provide assistance in implementation of educational programmes as well as to encourage informal learning;
	manage evaluation and self-evaluation process with individuals and adult education institutions;
	manage the work and operation of adult education institutions and centres;
	cooperate in developmental and research projects in the field of adult education and to lead action research and innovation projects in adult education institutions;
	independently plan and implement activities related to the education and learning of different target groups at different ages;
	provide andragogical counselling guidance on different levels and for personal and professional development of adult learners.

Source: Modified according to ‘Drugostopenjski študijski program’ (2017, pp. 6–7).

At the University level, professional training for education professionals called ‘pedagogical–andragogical education’ is also organised. These advanced education programmes (for professionals working in primary and secondary schools and vocational colleges) aim at upgrading and expanding the knowledge acquired in the academic education programmes. The programmes are worth 30–60 credit points and include pedagogical, psychological, andragogical, general and specialised didactic knowledge as well as pedagogical or andragogical practice. They are defined by laws and regulations and are mandatory prior to engaging in other professional or management work in the field of education (Filozofska fakulteta, 2017).

Further non-formal professional training of adult educators is offered by SIAE. These programmes, which aid adult educators in acquiring or updating their andragogical knowledge, are associated with identifying educational needs (1 programme), planning of education (8 programmes), implementation of education (18 programmes), evaluation of education (2 programmes), management and administration (6 programmes, 4 of which are devoted to ‘professional development of adult educators)’ and general adult education (3 programmes).⁶ The design and implementation of some of these programmes were co-financed by the ESF under priority area ‘Improving the quality and efficiency of education and training’.

By summarising this section and examining how European policy and discourses on adult education professionalisation entered in the Slovene contemporary regulatory and policy documents, along with study and training programmes, we can emphasise that European agenda works as a ‘regulatory ideal’ (see Mikulec & Jelenc Krašovec, 2016) that influences Slovene policy and programmes through common goals (quality initial and continuing professional education and training programmes), concepts (quality standards, programme design, i.e. competences), indicators (competence profiles, mobility of staff, guiding service for adult educators), tools (quality teaching materials) and financial mechanisms (mainly ESF), as well as that European agenda on professionalisation is filtered through the existing national, political and cultural traditions.

Discussion

By investigating how the EU conceptualised adult education professionalisation in the 21st century as well as how the latter conceptualisation is reflected in the Slovene regulatory and policy documents on adult education, along with study and training programmes we can identify the following similarities and differences in the European and Slovene contexts.

From the policy context point of view, we can first observe that, as European adult education policy developed relatively late, endeavours aimed at ensuring greater professionalism on the part of adult educators in the European context started to develop with the EC’s initiatives in 2006. These efforts reached a peak with the report on ‘Key Competences for Adult Learning Professionals’ in 2010, which some researchers (Egetenmeyer & Käpplinger, 2011) already recognised to serve as a basis for the EC conceptualisation of adult learning professionalism, as well this being reflected in documents of European adult education policy adopted latter on (CEU, 2011; ‘Thematic Working Group on Quality in Adult Learning’, 2013), which states that the quality of adult education staff should be based on (common) identified competence profiles. In this sense it might be argued, that identified key competences aimed to define professional standards for adult education professionals in Europe and suggested that member states use this outcome-led competency-based model as a ‘frame of reference for improving or changing existing adult learning practices’ (Research voor Beleid, 2010, p. 101). Consequently, the concrete goals for the development of adult education professionals were set in Slovene ReMPAE, while with the support of the ESF and under the priority area ‘Improving the quality and efficiency of education and training’, new programmes for professional training of adult educators were developed by SIAE in the period 2011–2014.

However, examining the Slovene historical context reveals that systematic further training of adult educators started at the end of 1950s at the People’s and Worker’s Universities, while initial education of adult educators (andragogues) was established in 1970s at the university level. This historical context that established interdependence of andragogy as a science and andragogue as a professional and still has important implications for today’s policy context seems not to influence European approach to professionalisation. In initial education at the university level, the profile of andragogue has been established as one of the main roles of the adult education professional, although now prepared in line with the Bologna requirements. Meanwhile, other professionals working in the field of adult education coming from other disciplines (teachers) need to acquire andragogical knowledge through pedagogical–andragogical education, which is legally mandated for all professionals working in formal and non-formal adult education programmes. Besides initial education, the system of further education and training of adult educators for different purposes is established and strongly supported by European adult education policy and funds.

While different backgrounds influenced the European and Slovene policy contexts on professionalisation, some similarities between the contexts can also be observed. The European orientation towards standardisation and the outcome-led competency-based model of professionalism can be seen in the Slovene adult education policy and programmes’ design as well. Initial education programmes are, due to the Bologna reform of higher education in Slovenia, based on competences as well as programmes of further training that have been significantly influenced by the EC’s ‘Common European Principles for Teacher Competences and Qualifications’. However, the extent to which this shift towards ‘learning outcomes’, that is, the shift from education objectives (intent, or what teachers should be teaching) to outcomes (competence assessment, or what learners should know), has been implemented in curricular practice remains debatable in Slovene educational practice (Caspersen, 2017).

Moreover, the same approach used in identifying competences of adult learning staff at the European level can be identified when preparing the programmes of further training for adult educators in Slovenia; the competences for the different roles adult educators perform were identified through functional analysis, although this technical approach, which only encompasses what can be described and measured through job analysis, is not sufficient for describing and defining the profession and professionalism of adult educators. As Biesta (2017) argues, the professionalism of people working in education is not merely a technical/managerial exercise tied to the achievement of prescribed standards (particular outcomes); rather, it includes a normative dimension that is connected to the accountability of professionals for the quality of their professional actions (judgment, reflection) in their dialogical relationship with their learners as well as to the ‘telos’ (purpose) of the educational profession.

Finally, competences (learning outcomes) analysed in the European and Slovene adult education policy are understood similarly but not identically. In the European context, the focus is on ensuring a combination of knowledge (body of facts, principles, concepts, theories), skills (capacity to perform actions by applying knowledge) and abilities/attitudes (physical, emotional and/or mental capacity to perform a task). In the Slovene context, the focus is directed at a multidimensional concept combining cognitive, functional/action and personal/social (ethical dimension of personal and social values) dimensions. It is this third dimension – abilities/attitudes in the European context and the personal/social dimension in the Slovene context – where we can identify differences. Whereas in the European context the capacity to perform tasks is emphasised, in the Slovene context, the ethical dimension of personal and social values as well as attitudes towards one’s professional role and personal growth is highlighted.

Furthermore, when comparing the general and specific competences identified in the European adult education policy and its conceptualisation of adult learning professionalism with those in the initial education programmes in the Slovene context, the following findings can be given: (1) a general set of European key competences (A1–A7, see Figure 1 and Table 2) is reflected in the competence profile of Slovene andragogues; however, in that profile, some additional (more academic) general competences are also emphasised, for example, being capable of critical and reflective thinking, argumentation and verification of scientific theories; (2) the set of specific European key competences that can be found in the competence profile of andragogues includes competences B1–B6, B8–B9 and B12 but not competences B7, B10 and B11. Meanwhile, the competences of cooperation and development of research and innovation projects, which are not part of the European framework of key competences, are emphasised in the Slovene andragogue profile. Moreover, comparing identified European key competences with the given example of the Slovene profile of a counsellor in an adult education guidance centre (see Table 1), we can see that this profile can be linked to the B5 competence of the European framework. However, as the Slovene policy distinguishes between at least three profiles of counsellors in adult education performing different roles, the competences of counsellors in an adult education guidance centre are more specific (tied to concrete profile) and broader and differ from their European counterpart. For example, Slovene counsellors also motivate adults and institutions in the local environment using different forms of educational support and evaluate individual progress as well as the effects of counselling work, plan and implement promotional counselling activities and strengthen counsellors’ professional identity as consultants. However, they have no knowledge or ability to use tests in counselling work, as emphasised in the European framework’s B5 competence.

Conclusion

The European and international education policy concepts do not always have a direct causal impact on national/local education policy and practice; instead, they cut across local and regional histories and have intended and unintended impacts on domestic concepts and practices. This is also seen in the European endeavours to promote the professionalisation of adult education. Our results show that (1) the Slovene historical context of professionalisation in adult education did not influence the European adult education policy regarding conceptualisation of adult learning professionalism; (2) the European influence on professionalisation in adult education in Slovenia is the strongest with regard to imposing a ‘competence regime’ – through the Bologna process in higher education and European adult education policy and its conceptualisation of adult learning professionalism (i.e. competence profile development for adult education professionals/professions) in the programmes of further training, also strongly supported by European funds – signalling Hall’s notion of first- and second-order policy change; (3) in Slovenia, as the analysis of the selected ‘societal factors’ on professionalisation in adult education reveals, the focus is on the recognition of different professional roles and competences that adult educators require to work successfully in different contexts and not on the unification of their competences, which is the focus in the European framework of adult learning professionals.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

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

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency under Grant P5-0174d th.

Notes

References

Alexiadou

(2014). Policy learning and Europeanisation in education: The governance of a field and the transfer of knowledge. In: Nordin

Sundberg

(Eds.), Transnational policy flows in European education: The making and governing of knowledge in the education policy field (pp. 123–140). Oxford, UK: Symposium Books.

Atkinson

Coffey

(2010). Analysing documentary realities. In: Silverman

(Ed.), Qualitative research (pp. 77–92). London: SAGE.

Bela knjiga v vzgoji in izobraževanju v. Republiki Sloveniji. (2011). Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport.

Biesta

(2017). Education, measurement and the professions: Reclaiming a space for democratic professionality in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(4), 315–330.

Brockmann

Clarke

Winch

(2008). Knowledge, skills, competence: European divergences in vocational education and training (VET) – The English, German and Dutch cases. Oxford Review of Education, 34(5), 547–567.

Buiskool

B. J.

Broek

(2011). Identifying a common set of key competences for adult learning staff: An inventory of European practices. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 17(1), 40–62.

Caspersen

(2017). Editorial: Higher education learning outcomes – Transforming higher education?. European Journal of Education, 52(1), 3–7.

Clarke

Winch

(2015). Have Anglo-Saxon concepts really influenced the development of European qualifications policy?. Research in Comparative & International Education, 10(4), 593–606.

Commission of the European Communities. (2006). Adult learning: It is never too late to learn. Brussels: Author.

10.

Commission of the European Communities. (2007a). Action plan on adult learning: It is always a good time to learn. Brussels: Author.

11.

Commission of the European Communities. (2007b). Common European principles for teacher competences and qualifications. Retrieved from http://www.pef.uni-lj.si/bologna/dokumenti/eu-common-principles.pdf

12.

Council of the European Union. (2011). Council resolution on a renewed European agenda for adult learning. OJ No. C 372/1, 20.12.2011.

13.

Council of the European Union. (2016). Council recommendation of 19 December 2016 on upskilling pathways: New opportunities for adults. OJ No. C 484/1, 24.12.2016.

14.

Dale

(2009). Contexts, constraints and resources in the development of European education space and European education policy. In: Dale

Robertson

(Eds.), Globalisation and Europeanisation in education (pp. 23–44). Wallingford, UK: Symposium.

15.

Doyle

Egetenmeyer

Singai

Devi

(2016). Professionalisation as development and as regulation: Adult education in Germany, the United Kingdom and India. International Review of Education, 62(3), 317–341.

16.

Drugostopenjski študijski program andragogika. (2017). Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta.

17.

Egetenmeyer

(2016). Comparing adult education and lifelong learning in Europe and beyond: An introduction. In: Egetenmeyer

(Ed.), Adult education and lifelong learning in Europe and beyond comparative perspectives from the 2015 Würzburg Winter School (pp. 13–28). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang GmbH.

18.

Egetenmeyer

Käpplinger

(2011). Professionalisation and quality management: Struggles, boundaries and bridges between two approaches. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 2(1), 21–36.

19.

Egetenmeyer

Schüßler

(2014). Academic professionalization in Mastre’s programmes in adult and continuing education. Towards an internationally comparative research design. In: Lattke

Jütte

(Eds.), Professionalisation of adult educators (pp. 91–104). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

20.

European Council. (2000). Lisbon European council 23 and 24 March 2000 presidency conclusions. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm

21.

European Union. (2015). Improving policy and provision for adult learning in Europe: Report of the education and training 2020 working group on adult learning 2014–2015. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

22.

Field

Schemmann

(2017). International organisations and the construction of the learning active citizen: An analysis of adult learning policy documents from a Durkheimian perspective. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 36(1–2), 164–179.

23.

Filozofska fakulteta. (2017). Retrieved from http://www.ff.uni-lj.si/an/activities/centre_pedagogical_education/advanced_training_programmes_pai_vis_ovd_and_spik

24.

Hall

P. A.

(1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–296.

25.

Jarvis

Chadwick

(1991). Training adult educators in Western Europe. London: Routledge.

26.

Jütte

Lattke

(2014). International and comparative perspectives in the field of professionalisation. In: Lattke

Jütte

(Eds.), Professionalisation of adult educators: International and comparative perspectives (pp. 7–21). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

27.

Jütte

Nicoll

Salling Olesen

(2011). Editorial: Professionalisation – The struggle within. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 2(1), 7–20.

28.

Klatt

(2014). Understanding the European Union and its political power. In: Milana

Holford

(Eds.), Adult education policy and the European Union: Theoretical and methodological perspectives (pp. 53–72). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

29.

Krajnc

(1989). Andragogy. In: Titmus

C. J.

(Ed.), Lifelong education for adults: An international handbook (pp. 19–21). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

30.

Krajnc

(2011). Študij andragogike in izobraževanje andragogov. Andragoška Spoznanja, 17(2), 12–27.

31.

Lawn

Grek

(2012). Europeanizing education: Governing a new policy space. Oxford, UK: Symposium Books.

32.

Mikulec, B., & Jelenc Krašovec, S. (2016). Marketising Slovene adult education policies and practices using mechanisms of the Europeanisation of education. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 7(2), 151–170.

33.

Milana

(2012). Political globalization and the shift from adult education to lifelong learning. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 3(2), 103–117.

34.

Milana

(2013). Afterword. In: C. A.

Torres

(Ed.), Political sociology of adult education (pp. 93–102). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

35.

Milana

(2017). Global networks, local actions: Rethinking adult education policy in the 21st century. Oxon and New York: Routledge.

36.

Milana

Skrypnyk

(2009). Professionals vs. role professionals: Conceptualizing professionalism among teachers of adults: Pathways towards professionalisation. Retrieved from https://www.die-bonn.de/asem/asem0922.pdf

37.

Možina

T., O.

Cunja

Jurič Rajh

A., Z.

Frantar

(2013). Kompetenčna zasnova za mentorje in svetovalce v izobraževanju odraslih: Zaključno poročilo. Ljubljana: ACS.

38.

National Assembly. (2013). Resolucija o Nacionalnem programu izobraževanja odraslih v Republiki Sloveniji za obdobje 2013–2020 (ReNPIO). Retrieved from http://www.uradnilist.si/files/RS_-2013-090-03262-OB∼P001-0000.PDF#!/pdf

39.

Németh

(2017). The role of person and personality in adult education. Adult educators with changing missions and engagements. Andragogical Studies, 2, 9–26.

40.

Nicoll

Edwards

(2012). Positioning adult educators in discourses of professional development. Studies in Continuing Education, 34(3), 233–249.

41.

Nicoll

Salling Olesen

(2013). Editorial: What’s new in a new competence regime? European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 4(2), 103–109.

42.

Nóvoa

(2010). Governing without governing: The formation of a European educational space. In: Apple

M. W.

Ball

S. J.

Gandin

L. A.

(Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of the sociology of education (pp. 264–273). London and New York: Routledge.

43.

Nuissl

Lattke

(Eds.). (2008). Qualifying adult learning professionals in Europe. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.

44.

Radaelli

C. M.

(2004). Europeanisation: Solution or problem? European Integration Online Papers, 8(16), 1–26.

45.

Radaelli

C. M.

(2008). Europeanization, policy learning, and new modes of governance. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 10(3), 239–254.

46.

Rasmussen

(2014). Adult learning policy in the European Commission. In: Milana

Holford

(Eds.), Adult education policy and the European Union: Theoretical and methodological perspectives (pp. 17–34). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

47.

Research voor Beleid. (2010). Key competencies for adult learning professionals, contribution to the development of a reference framework of key competences for adult learning professionals, final report. Zoetermeer: Research voor Beleid.

48.

Savićević

(1999). Adult education: From practice to theory building. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang GmbH.

49.

Singh

Bora

Egetenmeyer

(2016). Adult education policies in India and international influences. International Yearbook of Adult Education, 39, 17–35.

50.

Slovenian Institute for Adult Education. (2015). Professional training of adult educators at the Slovenian Institute for Adult education. Ljubljana: ACS.

51.

SotUNESCO. (2009). Harnessing the power and potential of adult learning and education for a viable future. Belém Framework for Action. Retrieved from http://www.dvv-international.ba/fileadmin/files/bosnia-and-herzegovina/Documents/Relevantni_dokumenti/Belem_Framework_for_Action_-_Confintea_VI.pdf

52.

Thematic Working Group on Quality in Adult Learning: Final Report (2013). Retrieved from https://www.hm.ee/sites/default/files/thematic_wg_quality_report.pdf

53.

Winterton

(2009). Competence across Europe: Highest common factor or lowest common denominator?. Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(8–9), 681–700.

54.

Zakon o izobraževanju odraslih. (2018). Retrieved from https://e-uprava.gov.si/drzava-in-druzba/e-demokracija/predlogi-predpisov/predlog-predpisa.html?id=8064