Later Life Learning and Older Adults

These are two extracts concerned with Later Life Learning and Older Adults from PIMA Bulletin 18, the whole of which can be found at this link. The authors Thomas Kuan and Alex Withnall will both be presenting papers related to this theme at the next PASCAL conference in Korea on 30/31 August/1 September.

Adult Learning and Education for Older Persons, Thomas Kuan, Singapore                

People are living longer, and older persons from age 60 and above (many with no jobs, no income and some with no homes) have demands for sustainable living for addition of about 25 years of life. Should nations be concerned about adult learning and education (ALE) for older adults in their education and learning policies? In the 2017 GRALE III (Third Global Report on Adult Learning and Education) monitoring survey, only 13 countries (see Figure 2 below) gave priority to their ‘senior citizens / retired people (third-age education’ as one of their five target groups of potential learners in their national ALE policies.                                      

Countries that did not select this target group of ‘third age/senior citizens’ and those who did not participate in survey are not recognising thathuman longevity and older adults’ autonomous self-directed learning can provide resource for socioeconomic and political development. 

Intergenerational war: a UK perspective, Alexandra Withnall, University of Warwick 

In the new demography of the 21^stcentury ever-increasing numbers of countries are seeing their so-called 3rd Age (‘post-retirement’ in modern economies) population numbers rapidly grow and the proportion of working age decline proportionately. This is causing increasing concern in the older economies of Europe and East Asia. Different responses are being tried and compared to reduce both the economic and the social and individual problems that arise.

PIMA takes a keen interest in this and has set up a Special Interest Group (SIG) in Later Life Learning led by Thomas Kuan, Singapore, of which I am a member. From a UK perspective, one of the unforeseen outcomes of the global financial crisis of 2008 has been the way in which the long period of austerity is said to have resulted in a kind of intergenerational war between the ‘Baby Boomers’ (those born between 1946-64) and the so-called ‘Millennials’ (born 1981-1996). This ‘war’ appears to have had its origins partly in a book, The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children’s Future – and Why They Should Give It Back written by a former British Conservative Government Minister for Education David Willetts, and published in 2011.

Willett’s basic argument - that Baby Boomers have continued to enrich themselves at the expense of their children and future generations - has since been enthusiastically adopted by various other commentators and continues to be promulgated largely by the right-wing press in the UK. Similar debates have emerged in the USA, Australia and New Zealand. However, the ‘war’ in the UK has doubtless been intensified by the result of the 2016 Referendum in which, by a very small majority, people voted for the UK to leave the European Union (an intention now known as Brexit). Analysis of voting patterns revealed that a majority of those aged 55 plus in every class voted to leave, whilst a majority of younger people (aged 18-34) voted to remain. At this time of confused negotiation and internal UK political conflict we cannot predict how the economy will behave when, as is intended, Brexit comes to fruition in 2019. Some research studies suggest that the results of the Referendum have done nothing to decrease generational tensions and distrust, amplifying the belief that this generation of young adults will never enjoy the prosperity and privileges of their parents. 

Accordingly, we have also seen a considerable rise in debates about ‘intergenerational fairness’ in the UK. An independent think-tank, the Resolution Foundation, recently convened an Intergenerational Commission to further explore issues about intergenerational fairness and to set out policy options. Over the last few years, national newspapers in the UK have hugely increased their coverage of articles about intergenerational fairness coupled with a proliferation of articles about Baby Boomers and Millennials in the same paragraph. Nevertheless, emerging evidence demonstrates conclusively that the intergenerational war is largely a myth, and that it is levels of economic inequality, not age itself, that is at the root of any problems. This might be coupled with evidence of a pervasive and widespread ageismthat still exists across the UK as shown in a recent report from the Royal Society for Public Health. It certainly seems that ‘intergenerational war’, as depicted in the media, is largely responsible for deflecting attention from the major policy issues which affect older and younger people alike in the UK today such as health and social care and housing. Policies that set generations against each other will do nothing to help address growing inequalities and what some see as the erosion of social citizenship.

To what extent is this notion of intergenerational warfare restricted to English-speaking countries? Has the media elsewhere tried to paint an exaggerated picture of intergenerational relationships? Or are different cultural traditions, especially those that respect and celebrate ageing, strong enough to withstand this onslaught from a powerful and influential media operating on a global stage? Comment and comparison from other places would be of great interest.

Finally, what if anything can lifelong learning strategies and provision, at all ages, do to address the requirements and challenges of this new demography and secure equitable and well-based life of high quality for all ages?