8880
Computer education programmes (CEP) in Swedish adult education
Hans A. Winter, University of Linköping
Abstract
CEP educators and participants responded to a questionnaire focusing on two main hypotheses: (l) CEP calls for solutions not naturally provided by adult educational traditions; (2) the interpretation of CEP policy by educators and participants is mainly due to chance. Hypothesis (2) was partly supported by the findings, hypothesis (1) was not.
Computer educational programme (CEP) in Swedish adult education
In this article you will experience the classical tension between intentions and reality. Intention in this paper is defined as the policy regarding the new technology and related computer educational programmes (CEP), forwarded by the Swedish authorities (government and politicians). But there are two other, partly competing policy levels, namely the labour market and the citizens (the presumptive participants) as individuals. Reality here is defined as386 CEP actors (22 teachers and administrators, 364 participants) responses to a questionnaire concerning frames for, realisation and effects of CEP.
Introduction
As a consequence of the rapid development of the computer and information technology a new object for policy-making has emerged in this country. The first government bill on the matter was issued in 1982, termed ‘A co-ordinated computer-policy’ (Samordnad datapolitik). The idea of co-ordination encompasses the computer technology itself, the use of computers in production and in (public) administration, and the consequences of this use. Thus there is an articulated ambition of Swedish politicians to control the computer technology and to assess and influence the effects of it[1]. Traditionally the planning for the introduction of large educational programme in Sweden is done on the level of the minister-department and in more details worked out by a central authority. Often such planning is based on the results of a national commission investigation. In the field of computer technology where the last decade’s development went on extremely fast and the for education increased overwhelmingly, some preliminary decisions had to be taken already before the commissions had finished their work. In the fall of 1984 the Swedish Parliament made the statement (inmy translation) ‘It is very important that a comprehensive computer-policy programme is worked out immediately’[2]. As another initiative for a better overview over the new technology development our Parliament made a proposal for working out a ‘National programme for information technology’[3] (NU 1983/84:11). During 1984 one of the government’s central commissions finished its work and presented a final report called (in my translation) ‘Computers and changes in working life’[4]. Finally, in June 1985, our Minister for Future Affairs, Ingvar Carlsson, presented to Parliament a proposition called (in my translation) ‘Computer policy’[5]. His intentions were to give a ‘general picture of how the use of computers were developing in our country, what the intended future development would be like and how the desired development could be implemented’.
The realisation of ideas and policies for CEP finally can be seen as new challenge for the adult education system. In Sweden traditionally the organisation of large educational programmes addressing adults gain from a set up of centralised, diversified and well experienced study organisations. To transform policies, authority planning and participant expectancies into practice are tasks for the local units of our study-organisations. Implementing CEP courses in reality contains at least three steps:
interpreting policies, the technology development and presumptive participants’ expectancies when planning setting and content
recruiting teachers and participants
creating the physical environment, and realising the courses.
To sum up, at least two major questions were unfolded in this introduction. The first of these questions concerns the readiness of our tradition-bound study organisations to effectuate an educational programme for the new technologies. The second question concerns about how CEP actors do interpret the policies as pre-conditions for planning and realisation of the CEP courses.
Is the Swedish system for adult education ready to face the challenge of CEP?
As mentioned earlier in this paper, the Swedish study organisations draw on long experience, strong traditions and routine settings when transforming national policies into concrete course arrangements. The answer to the question about our study-organisations’ readiness for CEP depends on a critical point of departure related to whether computer knowledge can be handled in the same way as e.g. maths, languages, sciences etc.; or if the new technology also in its educational setting and process calls for new solutions. As hypothesis (1) for this study one could argue that ‘CEP calls for solutions not naturally provided by the adult educational traditions’. This hypothesis is in accordance with the opinion that a revolutionary technology also calls for revolutionary solutions[6].
Are the educational actors ready to implement the policies for CEP?
This question very easily could be answered by a new question, namely ‘do people act rationally’? Optimism in favour of an ‘automatic’ coincidence between intentions and reality supposes a strong belief in a rationalistic model of planning (the ‘top-down-model’). On the other hand there is the possibility of a central policy as an average of common attitudes, beliefs and expectancies (the ‘bottom-up model’). Primarily related to the second view, hypothesis (2) for this study will be the following: ‘the interpretation of policy for CEP by educators and participants is mainly due to chance’.
In the next section the Swedish governmental policy in of official documents as a frame for CEP will be analysed within five key aspects, initially described in Winter[7].
Official policies for computer/information technology implementation and CEP-activities
As described in the introduction, Swedish politicians and authorities have made great efforts to express a governmental policy as a frame for computer technology implementation in our society and related educational activities. The central policies, as expressed in official documents were analysed in terms of five key-decisions: the decision of action and initiative (about activities for getting control over the computer technology and programmes for computer education), the decision of strategy (a choice between an ‘expert’ and a ‘citizen’ strategy), the decision of historical categorisation (to handle computer technology as one of many or as a revolutionary innovation), the decision of instrumental use (about the priority for development within the diversity of computer technology applications) and finally the decision of implementation (how to implement the new technology in society, labour market and citizens’ private sphere).
The findings in analysing the main documents show sane very explicit and sane more vague political decisions as bases for CEP-activities. The single decisions in our five key categories can be summarised as following:
The decision of action and initiative
There is a clear decision amongst politicians in Sweden in favour of an ambition to control the policies for as well as the implementation and use of the new technology. In one of the main documents the government states clearly that (in my translation) ‘Neither the ‘market’ nor the ‘technological development’ should take over as directing/controlling principles’.
The decision of strategy
There is also a clear decision in favour of a citizen-strategy. The minister of education for example states: ‘All citizens should have the right to get information and knowledge about the possibilities and risk related to the information society’[8]. Many other politicians later expressed their worries about the realisation of this statement: ‘If we don’t succeed in leading the new technology into a democratic and liberating path, we will get increasing educational gaps in our society’ (quoted from a speech in the Swedish Parliament, my translation).
The decision of historical categorisation
No clear decision is made about the important historical classification of computer technology and computer education. At the same time a lot of statements and speeches are made expressing a view of judging this technology as a very exclusive link in the technology development of mankind. Nevertheless only a minority seems to realise the consequences for CEP when classifying the computer/information technology as a revolutionary innovation.
The decision of instrumental use
The instrumental decision is handled in a pragmatic way. The technology is seen as a general instrument for modernising, restructuring, rationalising the Swedish industries and public administration. No favourite areas are made explicit.
The decision of implementation
There is no doubt in the governmental policy about the way to implement computer technology in society. Strong efforts for a nationwide computer literacy programme are made and a lot of initiatives are taken.
To sum up, the main documents expressing the official policy as a frame for computer educational programme (CEP) for Swedish adults were analysed in terms of five key decisions. As a result there can be seen clear decisions in favour of control over the technology development in this country, a citizen strategy and an educational programme for implementing the new technology. On the other hand there are no clear decisions related to the historical categorisation of computer/information technology and in terms of instrumentality.
As frames for CEP the ambiguity in relation to the historical decision opens for a struggle between those advocating an opinion that computer education can be organised and taught as other subjects and those taking the opposite position that a revolutionary technology also calls for revolutionary educational solutions. The lack of a clear decision in terms of focus for technology use and development opens for a great variety of definitions of content with following difficulties for employers to compare different kinds of education. But the lack of ponderosity also gives way to a broad and open definition of content, probably facilitating the effectuation of the citizen strategy.
The study
The general aim of this study is to replace contemporary guessing around the phenomena of computer education and CEP. Three questions are in focus:
1)How do educators and participants interpret the preconditions for CEP and what kind of policy do these interpretations mirror?
2)How do the respondents judge the education process, and does their interpretation of preconditions explain their assessment of the educational process?
3)What are the perceived effects of CEP, and does the respondents’ assessment of the educational process explain their opinion about effects?
The data described in this paper originate from a pilot study limited to the community of Linköping (approximately 125 thousand inhabitants). The population for the study are all educators (teachers/administrators) and participants in CEP during spring 1987 in this community. Vocational programmes for computer technology related occupations were excluded from the study.
Respondents to the questionnaire were 364 participants and 22 educators from four adult study organisations. Two students presented the study to each of the classes, distributed and collected the questionnaires after approximately 40 minutes, so there is no external drop out, other than those being absent, to report.
The model of inquiry
As model of inquiry the educators’ and the participants’ personal interpretations of the central policies (preconditions) for CEP are seen as independent variables for an analysis of the educational process. Several aspects of the educational process at the next step of analysis represent the independent variables for the analysis of the educational effects. These are measured as participants’ experienced effects on their roles as citizens, members of working life and as private persons. Also educators are asked to give their opinions about the effects of their work.
Summary of results and their implications
As an aim for this study three main questions and two hypotheses were brought into focus.
The ambition in question (1) was to illuminate the CEP actors’ (educators and participants) interpretation of central policies as preconditions for the computer education initiatives. In coincidence with the policy put forward by the politicians and authorities a majority of CEP actors support the citizen strategy and the decision of implementing the new technology through CEP for all adults. CEP actors show a surprisingly great ambiguity in relation to who should take initiatives and define the frames for CEP and are also weak in their opinion about focus for technology applicability. Much clearer than the central policy makers are the CEP actors in classifying the new technology as a revolutionary innovation.
In focus of question (2) was the CEP-actors' assessments of the educational process and how these assessments could be explained in term of their interpretation of preconditions. The study shows participants very satisfied with the teachers’ ability to teach the subject and medium evaluations of educators' success in effectuating the CEP goals, the study environment and the technical equipment. Rather low satisfaction was induced by the teaching materials. Educators’ and participants’ ratings on the educational process coincided well when dealing with the physical aspects of the process. When judging their own ability to teach the subject and to realise the programme educators rated strikingly lower than the participants.
On the basis of a series of multiple regressions the results showed no explanation of the educational process through the participants’ interpretations of the CEP-preconditions.
The aim of question (3) was to describe and hopefully explain the participants' experienced effects of CEP. When collecting our data 47 per cent of the participants were in the beginning of their CEP, 46 per cent in the middle and 7 per cent in the end of it. The study showed approximately 70 per cent of the CEP participants already experiencing positive effects for their role as citizens, as members of labour market or for their private sphere. Only 12 out of 22 educators believe in positive effects of CEP for their students. As main effects of CEP the participants experience personal growth, followed by formal merits and at the lowest level the ability to influence decisions. Educators judge a recurrent CEP programme as very important, participants as medium important. As a result of a series of multiple regression analyses the study shows (not surprisingly) the three dimensions of CEP-effects not mainly explained by the educational process itself but by the participants’ expectations on the programme.
Hypothesis (1) took up the argument of CEP calling for solutions not naturally provided by the Swedish traditions for adult education. A vast majority of CEP actors agree with the argument of computer and information technology as a revolutionary innovation but seem to experience a great amount of flexibility within the study organisations when dealing with the CEP challenge. Through finding rather satisfied CEP participants this hypothesis gets no support in the presented results.
Hypothesis (2) put forward the argument of a rather arbitrary relationship between central policies and local actors’ interpretations of programme preconditions. This hypothesis partly gains support by the results of the study. The two respondent groups of CEP actors show rather ambiguous attitudes as regards who (politicians/authorities, labour market parties or single individuals) should be the most influential policy-makers for CEP. On the other hand a majority of respondents do agree with the official policy-makers on a citizen strategy and on CEP as the best way of implementing the new technology in our society.
When discussing the results of this study its methodological weaknesses in some aspects should be pointed out. For example, the exclusive dependency on questionnaire data could be mentioned, as well as the difficulty in comparing central policies and actor policies, and, finally, the weak basis for the respondents to judge effects of CEP already during the ongoing courses.
In respect to the former shortcomings, the presented pilot study of course has to be extended in terms of number and types of respondents, completed by other data sources and a refined use of the presented policy-analysing taxonomy. The shortcomings of judging CEP-effects already during the course at a preliminary glance seem serious but comes in another light when considering that participants mainly experience effects of personal growth. This psychological effect one could argue (a) is a very important one, (b) is probably not directly related to the participants’ advancement in the course and (c) in its turn can be hypothesised as an independent variable for actions leading to more measurable effects later on.
Some clear implications can also been seen. On the basis of the presented study at least the following CEP aspects call on attention for improvement or change: (a) initiatives for improving the teaching materials and the technical equipment for CEP should be taken, and (b) in considering participants’ low expectancies and the low judgement of effects on the possibility of influence on decisions, nowadays CEP initiatives do not seem to gain the implementation of a citizen strategy. To support this strategy the CEP content seems to be in need of a radical change.
[1] Winter, H.A. & Riis, U. (1985) Computer education and democracy. New information technology and adult education. Published by the Europ