Práctica Profesional I
Prof. Cynthia Roldán
What is non-formal education? 1
Non-formal education became part of the international discourse on education policy in the
late 1960s and early 1970s. It can be seen as related to the concepts of recurrent and
lifelong learning. Tight (1996: 68) suggests that whereas the latter concepts have to do with
the extension of education and learning throughout life, non-formal education is about
‘acknowledging the importance of education, learning and training which takes place
outside recognized educational institutions’. Fordham (1993) suggests that in the 1970s,
four characteristics came to be associated with non-formal education:
Relevance to the needs of disadvantaged groups.
Concern with specific categories of person.
A focus on clearly defined purposes.
Flexibility in organization and methods.
As Fordham (1993) relates, in 1967 at an international conference in Williamsburg USA,
ideas were set out for what was to become a widely read analysis of the growing ‘world
educational crisis’ (Coombs 1968). There was concern about unsuitable curricula; a
realization that educational growth and economic growth were not necessarily in step, and
that jobs did not emerge directly as a result of educational inputs. Many countries were
finding it difficult (politically or economically) to pay for the expansion of formal
education.
The conclusion was that formal educational systems had adapted too slowly to the socio-
economic changes around them and that they were held back not only by their own
conservatism, but also by the inertia of societies themselves. If we also accept that
educational policy making tends to follow rather than lead other social trends, then it
followed that change would have to come not merely from within formal schooling, but
from the wider society and from other sectors within it. It was from this point of departure
that planners and economists in the World Bank began to make a distinction between
informal, non-formal and formal education. (Fordham 1993: 2)
What emerged was an influential tripartite categorization of learning systems. It’s best
known statement comes from the work of Coombs with Prosser and Ahmed (1973):
Formal education: the hierarchically structured, chronologically graded ‘education
system’, running from primary school through the university and including, in addition to
general academic studies, a variety of specialised programmes and institutions for full-time
technical and professional training.
Informal education: the truly lifelong process whereby every individual acquires attitudes,
values, skills and knowledge from daily experience and the educative influences and
Práctica Profesional I
Prof. Cynthia Roldán
resources in his or her environment – from family and neighbours, from work and play, 2
from the market place, the library and the mass media.
Non-formal education: any organised educational activity outside the established formal
system – whether operating separately or as an important feature of some broader activity –
that is intended to serve identifiable learning clientele and learning objectives.
Contrasts between ‘formal’ and ‘non-formal’ programmes
Simkins (1976) analysed non-formal education programme in terms of purposes, timing,
content delivery systems and control, and contrasted these with formal educational
programmes. The resulting ideal-types provide a useful framework – and bring out the
extent to which non-formal education initiatives, while emphasizing flexibility, localness
and responsiveness remain located within a curricula form of education (in contrast with
those forms driven by conversation).
Ideal-type models of normal and non-formal education
formal non-formal
purposes Long-term & Short-term & specific
General credential-based Non-credential based
timing long cycle / preparatory / full-time short cycle / recurrent / part-time
content standardized / input centred/ individualized / output centred/
practical
academic
clientele determine entry
entry requirements determine requirements
clientele
delivery system Institution-based, Environment-based,
Isolated from environment. Community related.
Rigidly structured, teacher-centred Flexible, learner-centred and
and resource intensive resource saving
control external / hierarchical self-governing / democratic
(Adapted by Fordham 1993 from Simkins 1977: 12-15)
Práctica Profesional I
Prof. Cynthia Roldán
‘Top down and bottom up’ 3
One of the enduring themes in the literature of non-formal education, according to Fordham
(1993), has been that the education provided should be in the interests of the learners and
that the organization and curriculum planning should preferably be undertaken by the
learners themselves: that it should be `bottom up’. It is also often argued that this should
empower learners to understand and if necessary change the social structure around them.
Fordham (1993) continues: ‘Examples where there is a genuine sense of ownership are not
easy to find; and almost all have an element of community outreach as part of the general
organization’.
On the other hand examples of top-down non-formal programmes are all too common.
Almost all employer-led and State provided training falls into this category. This can be
seen as paralleling the distinctions that Jeffs and Smith (1990, 1999) make between formal
and informal education via curriculum. In this way formal education would broadly
approximate to top-down curriculum formation (c); non-formal to bottom-up or negotiated
curriculum formation (b); and informal education would arguably be a non-curriculum or
conversational form (a).
Bibliography.
Smith, M. K. (2001). ‘What is non-formal education?’, the encyclopaedia of informal
education. [http://infed.org/mobi/what-is-non-formal-education/ . Retrieved: insert date].
