Publikace UTB
Repozitář publikační činnosti UTB

Revisiting the triadic classification of learning activities: rethinking their measurement

Repozitář DSpace/Manakin

Zobrazit minimální záznam


dc.title Revisiting the triadic classification of learning activities: rethinking their measurement en
dc.contributor.author Kalenda, Jan
dc.contributor.author Boeren, Ellen
dc.relation.ispartof International Journal of Lifelong Education
dc.identifier.issn 0260-1370 Scopus Sources, Sherpa/RoMEO, JCR
dc.date.issued 2025
utb.relation.volume 44
utb.relation.issue 3
dc.citation.spage 257
dc.citation.epage 272
dc.type article
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher Routledge
dc.identifier.doi 10.1080/02601370.2025.2489506
dc.relation.uri https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02601370.2025.2489506
dc.relation.uri https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/02601370.2025.2489506?needAccess=true
dc.subject adult education and learning activities en
dc.subject international comparative surveys en
dc.subject participation en
dc.description.abstract International organisations have measured adult learning participation since the 1990s, using surveys like the Adult Education Survey (AES) and the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). These surveys employ a ‘triadic’ classification of learning activities–formal (FAE), non-formal (NFE) and informal learning (IFL)–to compare participation rates. However, historical and conceptual advancements have highlighted that these categories often overlap, challenging their validity and reliability. Despite this, the triadic classification remains in use, raising concerns about the accuracy of participation data. This article critically examines the continued use of the triadic classification, arguing for a conceptual shift to better reflect the contemporary learning landscape. We review the evolution of the triadic conceptualisation, particularly within the EC’s Classification of Learning Activities (CLA), and critique its practical application in the recent AES (2022) survey. Based on our critique, we propose two alternative scenarios: (1) treating learning categories as fuzzy, overlapping concepts, and (2) conceptualising learning activities along a continuum of formality/informality. We conclude by discussing the implications of these scenarios for future data collection and measurement practices, advocating for instruments that adapt to the evolving digital and blended learning landscapes accelerated by the pandemic. © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. en
utb.faculty Faculty of Humanities
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10563/1012459
utb.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-105002632693
utb.source j-scopus
dc.date.accessioned 2025-06-20T09:36:17Z
dc.date.available 2025-06-20T09:36:17Z
dc.rights Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.access openAccess
utb.ou Research Centre
utb.contributor.internalauthor Kalenda, Jan
utb.fulltext.sponsorship -
utb.scopus.affiliation Faculty of Humanities, Research Centre of FHS, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Zlín, Czech Republic; School of Education, University of Glasgow, UK, Glasgow, United Kingdom
utb.fulltext.projects -
Find Full text

Soubory tohoto záznamu

Zobrazit minimální záznam

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Kromě případů, kde je uvedeno jinak, licence tohoto záznamu je Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International