While recognising the need for alternative education to provide a genuine alternative to a perhaps more rigid mainstream education system, there is a need to bring alternative education and mainstream education systems and learning environments closer together (through common system frameworks of structural indicators for inclusive systems in and around schools). This is an implication of the TWG report’s (2013, p. 21) recognition that alternative education may draw students from mainstream education, ‘Links between second chance education and mainstream education: Easy access to compensation measures risks making leaving education prematurely more attractive to some young people and schools with high numbers of young people at risk of dropping out’. Commitment to developing inclusive systems across all school levels requires a more differentiated approach, and hence a more individually tailored and flexible approach, in mainstream education. As the TWG report (2013, p. 22) highlights, ‘The successful elements of second chance schemes have the potential to inform change and practice in mainstream schools to prevent ESL’. Since the publication of the Council Recommendations 2011, a new emphasis has been placed on those aspects from second chance education that could be, as features of good practice, transferred to the mainstream education system (Ecorys, 2013).
30 This is a mesosystemic level focus
31 The ET2020 School Policy Working Group document (2015, p. 13) states that, ‘Extra-curricular and out-of school educational opportunities, including sports, arts, culture and other activities, compatible with educational aims, may provide additional opportunities for young people to 'shine' and can increase their motivation and a sense of belonging with the school. These activities should be coherently designed to complement curriculum delivery and to maximize pupil participation and social inclusion; they could be considered in the learners' overall assessment. Such activities could be developed in cooperation with parents, cultural institutions, sports and youth organisations, local services and NGOs, and with the involvement of volunteers from the community’.
It should be emphasised that all of the postprimary school structural indicators are also relevant for alternative education pathways32. The TWG report (2013, pp. 20-21) raises issues that are apt for all education systems, stating that ‘A personalised and holistic approach implies:
targeted second chance provision focused on personal development with opportunities to develop life skills and employability skills;
access to specialised support (such as psychological or emotional support), counselling, career guidance and practical support (such as financial support or help with securing accommodation);
new pedagogic approaches such as cooperative learning, peer learning, project work and more formative assessment.’
Similarly, the TWG report (2013) states that ‘Teachers should use pedagogic approaches that respond to the needs of individual students in second chance schemes’; this implies that active learning and individualised approaches, as well formative assessment, are needed across all education systems. At this stage, they are to be treated as quality pedagogical approaches rather than ‘new’ ones. That is, they should be considered as features of good practice which engage children and young people in learning. Nevertheless, some distinctive structural indicators for alternative education will also be developed.
Additionally, the TWG report (2013, p. 21), while referring to second chance education, states that ‘Young people should have an active role in shaping their physical learning environment’. In other words, alternative education physical environments need to look less physically like mainstream schools the students have previously had negative experiences of. However, a corollary should be added: there is a need to transform mainstream schools’ physical environments to better reflect the identities, needs and voices of young people for their greater ownership of their school experience. While universal features of education systems are also important for alternative education, the focus of this report is on the differentiated needs of learners. In this respect, the selected prevention and indicated prevention levels are also particularly relevant for alternative education33. Referring to second chance education, the Council Recommendations (2011, annex p.9) mention the need for ‘small learning groups, by personalised, age-appropriate and innovative teaching and by flexible pathways. As far as possible, they should be easily accessible and free of charge’. Focusing on relational aspects, the TWG report (2013, p. 21) recommends ‘Providing common areas where teachers and students share facilities and space helps to build relationships based on mutual respect and trust’.
32 Alternative education is often termed second-chance education, though this term is not used here; a lifelong learning framework better captures the notion that we are engaging in education throughout our lives rather than through first or second chances. It is also to be recognised that alternative education is similarly a less than ideal term, viewed through a lifelong learning lens.
33 For second chance education, the Council Recommendations (2011, annex p. 10) emphasize ‘Recognising and validating prior learning, including competences achieved in nonformal and informal learning, which improves the confidence and self- esteem of young people and facilitates their re-entry into education’. A number of barriers to recognition of prior learning have been identified in a range of European contexts: these include institutional attitudinal resistance, lack of communication to students of opportunities for recognition of prior learning, costs of processing recognition of prior learning and delays in doing so and lack of both criteria and institutional pathways for recognition of prior learning (Downes, 2014).