Current Status and Challenges of Lifelong Education Projects for Low-income Groups
Jeong-Suk Kwon
Abstract
Open-access reader
Jeong-Suk Kwon
Abstract
Open-access reader
In the past, the Korean government's lifelong education policy aimed to bridge the national education gap to resolve social polarization and build a fair society.However, according to the 2018 National Lifelong Learning Participation Rate Survey, educational inequality at the level of education and income remains.This study attempts to grasp the reality of lifelong education for low-income families and propose directions.To this end, the previous research review, the analysis of the current status of lifelong education programs, and the results of the survey of national and local governments were analyzed according to the purpose of the study.The following suggestions were derived as measures to revitalize lifelong education for alienated groups.First, proper indicators are needed so that the central and local governments' annual lifelong education white papers and survey reports can present the characteristics of survey subjects according to each background variable.Second, it is necessary to identify the causes of the low rate of participation of low-income groups in lifelong education.Third, it is necessary to provide customized programs for low-income groups.The results of the comparative analysis show that the low-income group and the other group with an average or above-average income have very different tendencies in terms of participating in programs and programs desired to participate in.Fourth, different standards for the outcomes of lifelong education for low-income groups are needed.Organizations that provide lifelong education programs are likely to focus on programs that link education and employment because they try to assess the outcomes with immediate, visible results.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In the past, the Korean government's lifelong education policy aimed to bridge the national education gap to resolve social polarization and build a fair society.However, according to the 2018 National Lifelong Learning Participation Rate Survey, educational inequality at the level of education and income remains.This study attempts to grasp the reality of lifelong education for low-income families and propose directions.To this end, the previous research review, the analysis of the current status of lifelong education programs, and the results of the survey of national and local governments were analyzed according to the purpose of the study.The following suggestions were derived as measures to revitalize lifelong education for alienated groups.First, proper indicators are needed so that the central and local governments' annual lifelong education white papers and survey reports can present the characteristics of survey subjects according to each background variable.Second, it is necessary to identify the causes of the low rate of participation of low-income groups in lifelong education.Third, it is necessary to provide customized programs for low-income groups.The results of the comparative analysis show that the low-income group and the other group with an average or above-average income have very different tendencies in terms of participating in programs and programs desired to participate in.Fourth, different standards for the outcomes of lifelong education for low-income groups are needed.Organizations that provide lifelong education programs are likely to focus on programs that link education and employment because they try to assess the outcomes with immediate, visible results.
Key concepts: Lifelong learning, Current (fluid), Low income, Economic growth, Political science, Demographic economics, Pedagogy, Sociology