Confusing lifelong learning with skilling is holding back talent development.
getty
One of the most commonly used phrases in college and university mission statements is “lifelong learning.” It’s a term that is very popular as an aspirational goal in both higher education and across corporate learning. At the same time, phrases such as “upskilling” and “reskilling” have become part of our vernacular as well. Lifelong learning and skilling are indeed two very different things. There are two distinct types of learners (with distinct motivations) in this regard: those who have a natural love for learning and intellectual fulfillment and those who have a highly specific goal in mind of getting a better job or higher wages. We should not confuse the two.
In Jamie Merisotis’ new book “Human Work In The Age Of Smart Machines,” he talks about key lessons learned in serving adult worker/learners. He describes lifelong learning as something that is “off-putting from the consumer perspective.” “It sounds more like a prison sentence than an opportunity,” as he puts it more bluntly. He also points out that lifelong learning translates in worker/learner minds to a “lifetime of paying for college – something that is…terrifying.” This term of lifelong learning is especially intimidating for those who didn’t thrive or persist in traditional schooling or higher education.
As I’ve written in the past, there is real debate about whether lifelong learning is something that can be taught or whether it is more of an innate trait in people. Even among bachelor’s degree holders in the U.S. there is essentially no evidence that their education produces lifelong learners. It appears only those who have pursued or completed master’s degrees get to this point – which simply further raises the debate of whether it can be trained or taught vs. being an artifact of people who love learning and continue to pursue more and more education. The reason this is important to point out is that if our agenda is to create lifelong learners and lifelong learning journeys, we may be sorely missing the mark.
Extensive data and insights from MOOCs paint a bit of this picture. Despite hopes and claims of democratizing learning for the world, studies have shown that 80% of MOOC users already have a bachelor’s degree and that 69% of the users come from countries categorized as ‘very high’ on human development (with only 1.43% coming from countries considered ‘low’). Further, average completion rates of those who start MOOC courses is just 3%. Although MOOCs have shifted in the past couple of years toward adding more specific skilling and training courses, their core platforms have been based on courses from universities. And their users – at least up until very recently – have largely been the lifelong learning crowd interested in sniffing around courses from top universities out of curiosity and general intellectual fulfillment. In short, they have not traditionally been skilling platforms serving the vast population of worker/learners looking to upskill or reskill (what I call ‘skill-seekers’).
Time will tell whether MOOCs can serve both lifelong learners and skill-seekers. My bet will be on the universities and other education providers who make clear distinctions between the two populations and provide real differentiation in the programs and services they offer as a result. Skill-seekers are looking for ‘just-in-time’ education and training. They are seeking the fastest, most effective and most affordable options for accomplishing very specific goals. They want raises, promotions and new jobs. They want to put more money on the table for their families. And they want real outcomes and accountability. It won’t just be whether they finished a course or program but whether doing so actually leads to a better work outcome. They aren’t doing this for fun; they’re doing it for funds. And it is critical that any educational institution or employer understand the distinction.
This is not to suggest that skill-seekers can’t and won’t pursue a skilling journey over time; they very well may. If they do, it will be driven by very clear next steps where they see direct economic benefit or improvements in their job or career quality. Programs with guaranteed raises, promotions or jobs at the end will be essential to creating lifelong journeys for skill-seekers. But please don’t pitch it as lifelong learning. Perhaps lifelong earning? It’s time we take great care in the framing, purpose and outcomes of learning. And it’s critical that we understand the distinctions in motivations between lifelong learners and skill-seekers.
