CRITERIOS DE DISEÑO.

The second element of Boeren’s integrative lifelong learning participation model concerns factors operating at an institutional level. These include ‘practices and procedures that exclude or discourage… adults from participating in educational activities’, such as inconvenient schedules or locations, exclusionary course fees or the provision of learning opportunities which do not coincide with learners’ needs and interests (Cross, 1981, 98). Institutions of various sorts play an important role in facilitating adult learning. Boeren (2016) identifies formal educational institutions and workplaces as important institutions in this regard. The remainder of this section considers these factors within the context of such institutions. However, as will be demonstrated in the following chapter, third sector community organisations also play a potentially important role in providing access to learning opportunities for homeless adults.

Educational institutions

Most adult literacy and numeracy education is delivered through further education colleges and private training providers. These organisations are

currently funded to provide literacy and numeracy support to those adults who fall below Level 2. However, numerous institutional-level factors associated with such organisations have been found to present barriers to participation for homeless people and other ‘disadvantaged’ groups (Quinn et al., 2005). Common features such as rigid procedures, attendance requirements, and a lack of engaging content, result in provision which does not match the needs of many homeless learners. For adults with chaotic lives and multiple and complex needs, keeping to structured courses can be challenging and can prevent both participation in, and completion of, adult education courses. Homeless learners have been found to struggle to attend courses regularly due to other needs and commitments, and may need time to follow the course over a longer period of time or drop out of the course entirely (Olisa et al., 2010). In addition, homeless people are often receiving support for a range of issues and from multiple sources. Appointments with other agencies, for example the Job Centre or counselling can clash with structured or time limited courses and other often unpredictable demands (Barton et al., 2006). Whilst for some, a course over a set period may give a welcome source of structure and routine, many others require more flexible support that allows them to drop in and out, and that is not focused solely on hard outcomes such as the achievement of qualifications. Adults are unlikely to engage in learning opportunities that do not provide adequate routes to achieve their goals, involve activities which are enjoyable, allow them to develop relationships with others, or learn new things in which they are interested. Whatever (potential) adult learners are motivated by, the nature of learning opportunities available therefore impacts on their desire to participate – as highlighted by the BIS select committee:

‘The motivation of adults is crucial and that motivation might not fit well with participating in formal GCSE English and Maths Classes’ (House of Commons, 2014)

As noted earlier in this chapter, where a homeless adult’s previous experiences of the education system have been negative, they can be ‘reluctant to try again’ (Luby and Welch, 2006). Consequently, many homeless people are ‘unwilling and unlikely to access mainstream college provision, or community provision which appears similar’ (Barton et al., 2006). This suggests there are significant limits on the extent to which encouraging homeless people to engage with mainstream courses is possible.

The role of practitioners

As mentioned earlier, the role of the adult educator can be of particular importance in considering the reasons behind adult participation in learning. Positive, sustained, and encouraging relationships with tutors can help to motivate adults to engage in learning (Crowther et al., 2010). However, homelessness is a complex issue which can be difficult for practitioners working outside homelessness services to fully understand. Juchniewicz (2011, 8), writing about adult education in the United States, observed a dearth of understanding on the part of adult educators about the homelessness experienced by some learners. As an adult educator herself, she noted that ‘the majority of my colleagues were not aware of the prevalence of homelessness, nor of the unique needs of the homeless student’. Similarly, in the English context, Barton et al. (2007, 35) found that ‘finding tutors who were qualified

literacy and numeracy tutors as well as being experienced in working with homeless people’ was a key challenge.

Those advocating a social practice approach to literacy and numeracy provision emphasise the importance of equal, supportive relationships between tutors and learners. However, as Hamilton and Tett (2012) note, practitioners are often excluded from the process of policymaking and provision development due to the low status of the profession and a weak professional voice. Whilst often committed to a broad conception of the value of learning and its importance in achieving social justice, practitioners have needed to teach within the constraints of provision organised along the lines of more limited skills- based conceptions of what literacy and numeracy provision should look like (Barton et al., 2007). As Tett and Maclachlan (2008, 663) explain,

‘the power relationships that are part of all adult education are especially pervasive in ALN contexts because the dominant discourses surrounding ALN are constructed on a deficit model of ALN learners. This places them in a particularly subordinate position in the tutor/learner relationship’.

Furthermore, several authors (Tett and Maclachlan, 2008; Bowl, 2012) have noted that the work of the adult educator has long been characterised by low pay and casualization, which is not conducive to the provision of meaningful teacher-learner relationships and related learning opportunities.

As Cross (1981, 2) notes, ‘many agencies whose primary function is not education have entered directly into the educational process’. Boeren (2016) identifies workplaces as important educational institutions in this regard. Workplace learning includes (but is not limited to) literacy and numeracy, and can take place both formally and informally (Jackson, 2004; Wolf and Evans, 2011). In a recent survey of employers, for example, 44 per cent reported that they had organised training to tackle employees' numeracy, literacy and IT weaknesses (CBI/Pearson, 2014). Jackson (2004) and others have illustrated the range of literacy learning which takes place informally in the workplace. Learning at work may or may not be recognised or named as such, as ‘learning is embedded in practices beyond those traditionally understood as training or workplace learning’ (Chappell et al., 2009, 176)

As Green (2013, 5) notes, ‘a good learning environment enables workers to become more skilled, potentially increasing their access to future jobs that are better in quality’. However, workplace learning occupies a precarious position, and has declined significantly over the past decade (Mayhew and Keep, 2014). Employers are under no legal obligation to support their workers to develop their skills, and a focus on the day-to-day business of a firm can make workplace learning programmes difficult to establish and maintain (Wolf and Evans, 2011; Hamilton, 2012b). In addition, where managers are prepared to invest in the training of their workforces, they may choose to invest in job- specific training instead of literacy and numeracy support (Belfiore, 2004; Hamilton, 2012b).

A review of both educational and homelessness research literature has uncovered limited research on homeless people’s experiences in work, and

nothing on their experiences of in-work training and skill development. However, with long histories of unemployment and economic inactivity, it is likely that many homeless adults have again been excluded from opportunities to develop their literacy and numeracy skills both formally and informally at work. Both unemployment and working in low skilled jobs have also been shown to result in skills atrophy - whereby a person’s skills deteriorate when not in use (Reder, 2009; Kuczera et al., 2016). Relatedly, Crowther et al. (2010) provide multiple examples whereby difficult life experiences including drug and alcohol addiction and depression had led to adults losing some of the basic literacy and numeracy skills they had previously mastered. Thus, even when adults have left school with relatively strong literacy and numeracy skills, these can deteriorate through limited use. Several of the interviewees in Dumoulin and Jones’ (2014) study of homeless basic skills learners explained that despite having been employed for a large proportion of their adult lives, their skills had weakened over time as they had not had the opportunity to use them in their line of work. Where homeless people have been in work, for many this has largely been in low skilled, low paid, often manual roles (Hough et al., 2013). Such jobs often provide limited opportunity to build and develop skills due to fewer training opportunities in low paid work.