APPENDIX 34
Memorandum from the National Institute
for Adult and Continuing Education (NIACE)
INTRODUCTION
1. The National Institute of Adult and Continuing
Education (NIACE) is the leading non-governmental organisation
in England and Wales representing the interests of adult learners
and those who make provision for them. Founded as the British
Institute of Adult Education in 1921, NIACE's members include
colleges, universities, local authorities, trade unions, broadcasters
and voluntary organisations. NIACE's key objectives are to secure
more and more effective provision for adult learners and to support
measures to widen participation to engage adults who have benefited
least from initial education.
2. NIACE currently represents the views
of adult learners on the Department for Education and Skills Education
for Sustainable Development Sounding Board and the Learning and
Skills Council Strategy for Sustainable Development Advisory Group.
3. NIACE welcomes the Environmental Audit
Committee inquiry into how effectively formal and informal learning
aids the delivery of the sustainable development agenda. The inquiry
is particularly timely given the convergence of political and
international events in 2005 including the launch of the United
Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-14)
and the central role of the UK in hosting the G8 Conference, holding
the EU Presidency, publication of the Commission for Africa Report
and a range of internationally important events (including the
European Year of Democratic Citizenship and the UN Millennium
Development Goals Special Summit).
4. This response is organised around the
eight questions identified in the inquiry document with an emphasis
upon question 6—The role of informal learning, including
youth work, work-based learning and adult and community learning,
in taking the environmental education agenda forward is key. Is
the Government doing enough in these crucial areas? It also
makes wider points.
Question 1. Has the term Education for Sustainable
Development lost its currency? Does it have any resonance with
the general public? Has the environmental message been lost?
5. We believe the term "environmental
education" to be widely recognised by the general public,
a recognition largely attributable to leisure activities (such
as information points detailing the natural features of nature
reserves, forests and reservoirs), school-related activities (children
engaging their parents in environmental tasks linked to the curriculum,
such as recycling or garden wildlife), local authority environmental
protection campaigns (such as waste/litter reduction and vehicle
emission initiatives) and to a lesser extent, the activities and
awareness raising promotions of NGOs working in the sector.
In contrast, we believe that the term "education
for sustainable development" and the complex interrelationships
the term implies has minimal resonance with the general public,
apart from when the environmental dimension of sustainable development
has come to prominence through one of the previously mentioned
activities. NIACE agrees that the need to educate individuals
about the scarcity of natural capital is paramount, and feels
that the environmental message has not been lost. However, equally
as compelling is the need to educate individuals about the interrelated
nature of environment, society and economy, recognising that for
many (potentially concerned and passionate) people, the hook to
engage them in dialogue and action lies not with natural capital,
but rather with more societal and quality of life questions (liveability,
deprivation, aspirations and security).
Question 2. The DfES said that the Sustainable
Development Action Plan was supposed to signal the start of a
process of change, identifying the most powerful levers—what
can be achieved immediately and what can be built upon. More than
a year on can it be said that that process of change has begun
and have there been any immediate achievements?
6. Whilst we remain unconvinced of signs
of genuine progress, the process of change has at least started,
indicated by the welcome engagement of the Learning and Skills
Council in developing a (draft) Sustainable Development Strategy
for the post-compulsory sector, the emphasis placed upon sustainable
development by the Sector Skills Development Agency (albeit championed
by LANTRA) and the range of activities and consultations undertaken
by Regional Development Agencies (RDAs). However, in late 2004,
UK secondary, further and higher education institutions have yet
to respond in a meaningful way to these initiatives, resulting
in the impact on learning and learners—the critical goal
of the DfES Action Plan—showing few signs of having been
progressed, more than a year after the launch of the Action Plan.
Question 3. Government is currently reviewing
the UK Sustainable Development Strategy. What should the Strategy
include in order to significantly strengthen the role of leaning
within it?
7. NIACE welcomes the current review of
the UK Sustainable Development Strategy and looks to see recognition
of the central role of learning in achieving a more sustainable
society, especially given the role of schools, further, higher
and community-based organisations in educating the decision-makers
of tomorrow. However, NIACE is concerned that sustainable development
is too complex a subject to be reduced to a series of learning
outcomes, and that a sustainable society would be better served
through the fostering of critical/analytical skills coupled with
the development of media and information literacy within all learning
opportunities, with curriculum developments continuously highlighting
the interconnectedness of natural, societal and economic systems.
Question 4. Does the 14-19 Working Group's
report, "14-19 Curriculum and Qualifications Reform",
go far enough? Will ESD be adequately represented if this report
is used as the basis for the forthcoming White Paper? What should
the White Paper say about ESD?
8. Generally, NIACE supports the move towards
more learner-centred, flexible and transferable qualifications
whilst remaining concerned at the emphasis of skills over learning
and the resource implications apparent within the Tomlinson Report.
With regards to coverage of ESD, the proposed reform of 14-19
qualifications falls short of adequately identifying and addressing
the critical/analytical skills required by learners in working
towards a more sustainable society, and we advocate the explicit
referencing of education for sustainable development within the
forthcoming White Paper.
Question 5. In response to our last inquiry
the DfES said they recognised that more could be done to embed
ESD in the school curriculum and that they would lead on strengthening
ESD links within geography, design and technology, science and
citizenship. Has there been any discernible improvement in these
areas? Is there evidence that this work has been taken forward
by the DfES and its agencies?
9. This question lies outside of NIACE expertise.
However, we would draw the sub-committee's attention to the OFSTED
review of education for sustainable development in schools (15
September 2003) and the mixed range of ESD/environmental education
achievements identified, and are concerned by the vulnerability
of locating ESD in subject silos (Please see article— "Pupils
desert geography lessons", The Times Thurs Nov25 2004).
Question 6. The role of informal learning,
including youth work, work-based learning and adult and community
learning, in taking the environmental education agenda forward
is key. Is the Government doing enough in these crucial areas?
10. Whilst the Transforming Youth Work/
Resourcing Excellent Youth Services (REYS) agendas have taken
significant steps in mainstreaming global citizenship and sustainable
development within youth work practice, recognising the contribution
of informal learning to societal well-being, the opposite is true
of recent developments within work-based learning and adult and
community learning. The rationalising of non-accredited and community
based learning opportunities within regions and the emphasis upon
vocational skills development means the capacity of the ACL sector
to respond to the challenge of ESD is severely diminished. This
situation becomes all the more serious when one considers that
the seven key principles of ESD[6]
closely mirror the aspirations of informal learning, and the recommended
pedagogy of student-centred, participatory learning remains core
to ACL delivery, but a significant challenge to the more regimented
approach of formal education.
Drawing out wider issues, the current policy
priorities of sustainable and learning communities and the macro
aims of regeneration and revitalised regions will struggle to
be realised without an emphasis upon the need to foster Egan's
"generic skills", many of which have clear parallels
with the principles of education for sustainable development.
The learning and skills sector has enormous potential to act as
a medium of change and advance society along the route to becoming
more sustainable, but it must first recognise that ESD is central
to the process of developing individuals and communities with
world-class aspirations and abilities, instead of viewing ESD
as yet another "bolt-on" initiative.
11. In conclusion, NIACE proposes that the
Government is failing to articulate the importance of education
for sustainable development amongst its agencies, with the resulting
message of low-importance filtering out to regional funding and
policy-makers, ultimately resulting in learners themselves being
denied the opportunity to experience ESD approaches.
Question 7. Is there any evidence to suggest
that the Government is getting better at getting the environment
message across to the general public? In particular, is there
any evidence to suggest that sufficient work is being done at
regional and local levels to support environmental education?
12. The related example of the recent "Recycle
Now!" campaign (although admittedly not a DfES initiative)
has failed to re-energise the environmental message of recycling
at a local and regional level, whilst in education and learning,
the few examples of good-practice in environmental education are
isolated and lack the resources to become beacons of best practice
regionally.
Question 8. Are there sufficient resources
available to deliver against the government's commitment to education
for sustainable development in light of the loss of the Landfill
Tax Credit Scheme and the loss of the education criteria from
DEFRA's Environmental Action Plan, for example?
12. NIACE remains generally concerned at
the low level of resources made available for ESD, both in terms
of the funding deficit stunting growth in this area but also in
the message of relative unimportance low levels of funding communicate
outwards to the sector.
Recent funding initiatives, including the Landfill
Tax Credit Scheme and Environmental Action Fund, whilst welcome
have been entirely short-term project-based funding, with serious
limitations imposed on the availability and flexibility of funds
to meet core operating costs. NIACE considers that the short-term,
competitive nature of funding for environmental education is inconsistent
with Government policy which increasingly promotes co-operation
between local/regional organisations, and calls for ring-fenced
funds in support of locally-based multi-professional learning
centres, supporting the provision and integration of ESD into
informal, formal and professional learning and development.
CONCLUSION
13. NIACE would be pleased to work with
Parliament, Government and NDPBs/NGOs in promoting education for
sustainable development principles and activities within the post-16
sector. For further information about any aspect of this response,
please contact, in the first instance:
November 2004
6 Interdependence-of society, economy and natural environment;
Citizenship-participation and co-operation; Needs and
rights-of current and future generations; Diversity-Cultural,
social, economic and biological; Quality of life-safe,
fair and healthy lifestyles; Sustainable change-not exceeding
resources; Uncertainty-acceptance of risk and adoption
of a precautionary approach. Back
| 
