ESRC
ECONOMIC
& SOCIAL
RESEARCH
COUNCIL

LEARNING SOCIETY
PROGRAMME

PRINCIPAL
RESEARCHERS

Professor Sheila Riddell
Stephen Baron
Alastair Wilson

University of Glasgow

CONTACT
ADDRESSES

Professor Sheila Riddell Strathclyde Centre for 
Disability Research
University of Glasgow
Adam Smith Building
Glasgow  G12 8RT
Tel:  0141 330 3916
Fax: 0141 330 3919
Email: s.riddell@socsci.gla.ac.uk

Stephen Baron 
Department of Education Studies
University of Glasgow
8 University Gardens
Glasgow  G12 8QH
Tel:  0141 330 6202
Fax: 0141 330 5451
Email:  S.Baron@educ.gla.ac.uk

Duration
36 months

THE MEANING OF THE LEARNING SOCIETY FOR ADULTS
WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES: INTERIM REPORT

OBJECTIVES

The rationale for studying adults with learning difficulties is twofold: first, representing perhaps 4% of the population they are a significant minority (numerically analogous to ethnic minorities), whose experience of marginalisation presents an ethical and economic challenge to any definition of a ‘Learning Society’; second, the nature of the marginalisation of adults with learning difficulties throws particular light on the nature and processes of Britain as a proto ‘Learning Society’.

APPROACH

This project consists of two Phases: Phase 1 was a telephone interview survey of 90 key informants in relevant Scottish agencies focusing on the nature of provision; Phase 2, to be completed by August 1999, is a series of 30 case studies of adults of different ages in two local authority areas (one urban, one rural) focusing on their transition to full adult citizenship and how the welfare quasi-market helps or hinders this transition.

MAIN FINDINGS

The Phase 1 Survey found that:
	Learning difficulties as a category included not only those with a background of a Record of Needs and/or special schooling but also up to one third of people in areas of social disadvantage.
	There had been an expansion of provision for people with learning difficulties in Further Education Colleges (FE) but the current funding mechanism encouraged provision for those with relatively straightforward needs, mainly in segregated settings.  The perceived low level of employability of people with learning difficulties sat uneasily with the general mission of FE to meet the needs of employers.  In urban areas there was evidence of informal coordination of FE contrary to the theory of the market: in rural areas no effective market appeared possible.
	Community Education placed comparatively little emphasis on skills directly related to employment but more on personal and social skills.
	Skillseekers programmes run by Local Enterprise Companies (LECs) provided work oriented training in normal workplaces, in special workshops and in FE.  The LEC funding regime encouraged an ethos of employability in which the person with learning difficulties could appear as a poor investment.  Practices in LECs varied from rejecting responsibility for people for whom an outcome in terms of employment and/or qualification was in doubt to accepting responsibility as a sweeper for a faulty system of community care.

Across services the following key conclusions may be drawn:
	Open labour market employment was seen as the ultimate goal of much provision but the segregated nature of training inhibited this with the potential for ‘circuits of training’ with little progression to a  job.  Supported employment schemes were seen as more likely to result in open labour market employment.
	The language of the market sat uneasily with the choice of services being very limited.  Definitions of needs were limited to those which could be met by existing services and choice of services was particularly difficult to maintain in sparsely populated areas.  Choice for service users was reported to be about small details within existing services rather than about the nature of services.
	The planning of education services for this group of learners was haphazard ranging from formal development plans agreed between agencies on a long time horizon to planning being the responsibility of individual tutors.
	Adult guidance services are of increasing importance in helping people through the complex web of provision.  With a funding structure setting provider against provider, the role of ‘honest broker’ was particularly important.

Preliminary findings from Phase 2 of the study

In depth case studies of 30 people with learning difficulties will be completed by August 1999.  The following preliminary findings have emerged:

Most people with learning difficulties rejected this label and did not wish to spend their lives in the company of other people with learning difficulties.  Services were often segregated despite a stated commitment to normalisation.

	Most individuals were not in employment, but would like a job.  Apart from those with the most significant impairments, most individuals felt they were capable of sustaining employment with appropriate support and opportunity.  Supported employment schemes were underdeveloped.
	The minority of individuals who were in employment valued their jobs greatly even when these were repetitive.
	FE courses and Adult Resource Centre (ARCs) programmes generally claimed to be geared towards training for employment but were often experienced as time fillers.
	Case study individuals had few financial resources and little autonomy.  Those who had inherited income from parents were restricted in accessing it.  Many case study individuals desired to live independently but were often restricted from doing so.
	A consequence of the lack of financial autonomy and restriction on independent living was a frequent failure to develop autonomous adult relationships. This was felt as an acute lack by most individuals. 

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

	Supported employment should be further developed.
	ARCs and FE colleges should be more closely scrutinised in terms of individual opportunities for progression and outcomes in employment.
	The benefits system for people with learning difficulties should be restructured so that it facilitates rather than inhibits participation in education, training and employment.
	The principle of social inclusion should be systematically implemented.
	At national levels, Learning Disabilities Policy Frameworks should ensure that education and employment services are given at least as much weight as health and social work.

KEY PUBLICATIONS

Baron, S, Stalker, K, Wilkinson, H and Riddell, S (1998) ‘The Learning Society: the highest stage in human capitalism?’ in Coffield, F (ed), Learning at Work, Bristol: Policy Press, 49-59
Riddell, S, Baron, S and Wilkinson, H (1998) ‘Training from cradle to grave? Local Enterprise Companies, the marketisation of training and young people with learning difficulties’ Journal of Education Policy Special Issue on Social Justice in Education 13 (4), 531-544
Baron, S, Riddell, S and Wilson, A (forthcoming 1999) ‘The secret of eternal youth: identity, risk and learning difficulties’ British Journal of Sociology of Education Special edition on Youth and Social Change