NIACE at 80

Vibrant, changing and facing new challenges

I want in my contribution to the NIACE 80th anniversary papers to reflect on the changing pattern of relationships between staff, Board members, other NIACE members, the wider constituency of providers working with adult learners, and with learners themselves. The relationships are never stable: they respond to constitutional change, differential levels of activism, changes in the external climate, and on the enabling or disabling role played by paid workers. They seem to me to illustrate the challenges in securing a vibrant and effective civil society contributing to policy.

At the end of the 1980s NIACE was an unincorporated charity. Its sovereign body, the Institute’s Council met twice a year, and elected an Executive, and trustee officers to direct its work. A Finance and General Purposes sub-committee reported to the Executive. The Executive had an Electoral College which secured representation of different elements of the corporate and individual members. There were in addition, 3 functional sub-committees (libraries, conferences and publications), three equal opportunities sub-committees and three quasi-autonomous units. The units were funded by central government, and had separate committees to oversee their work. Whilst the NIACE Executive might comment on the work of the units, it was clear each was primarily responsible via its committee to the Government department(s) funding it. So, whilst NIACE was accountable in law for the activities of the units, through its Director, the Institute had a greater or lesser degree of impact on the units, depending on the goodwill of their staff and chairs. However, most of the key developmental work NIACE was associated with happened through the units.

The major policy dynamic shaped by members was through the three equal opportunities committees and their dialogue with NIACE’s Executive. The wider membership seemed to me to be broadly supportive, but substantially passive in their relations with the Institute.

This state of affairs changed radically in the early 1990s. Four events, two external and two internal to the work of NIACE had a significant impact on how we work. Firstly, the externally funded units all went in 1991/2. This happened in different ways. ALBSU, as it then was, sought independence, believing it could better represent the interests of adults needing literacy and numeracy support as an independent charity. The REPLAN programme for work with unemployed adults was closed at the end of seven years in 1991, just as Britain entered a recession and jobless numbers soared. The closure of NIACE’s regional REPLAN network was followed in short order by the strengthening of the regional network of the FEU. Finally, following review, UDACE was transferred to FEU, - a transfer that saw a sharp decline in policy focused publication on adult learning. At the Department for Education the under-secretary at the time explained to me “there’s no such thing as adult education - it is all further education”. NIACE’s members had little say and no power to affect these changes. They were unwelcome, yet curiously, in hindsight they were liberating. After 1992 Government dealt with NIACE direct, without mediating structures designed to protect developments from too much influence from members.

The relationship between Government and NIACE, and between staff and members was changed more dramatically by the proposals in the 1991 White Paper, Education and Training for the 21st Century which proposed to make uncertificated adult learning ineligible for public subsidy. NIACE staff concentrated on briefing members and the wider public on the implications of the proposals. A broad coalition led by the NFWI and by local education authorities succeeded in mobilising a powerful campaign which secured change in the proposals. As often, the campaign revitalised the internal democracy of NIACE, and led to a more determined commitment to advocacy for adult learners.

Part of the rethinking of the internal arrangements led the Institute’s officers to seek agreement for NIACE to become a company limited by guarantee - to clarify the role, and limit the liability of trustees. At first, following incorporation the Institute carried on as though nothing had really changed. The Board met briefly, after the Finance and General Purposes Committee had met, to expedite the formal company business. However, through the 1990s the decision to incorporate has significantly changed power relations. The Board was now the sovereign body, reporting to the Company at an AGM and a second annual meeting. Executive and FGP, and later an Internal Audit committee were now bodies reporting to and advising the Board. Recognising the importance of engaging the wider membership, a policy focussed Assembly was established, to meet under the chairmanship of the President. A formal constitutional revision in 1995 sought to capture these changes - yet, curiously, failed to sort out a mechanism to engage individual LEAs (defacto members through the LGA grant). That had to wait until this 80th anniversary year.

Constitutional arrangements tell you little, though, of the quality of life in a network. Through the 1990s, much of the work instigated by the equal opportunities committees has been taken on by a growing professional staff. At the same time, it became harder for hard-pressed staff from corporate organisations to get release to attend committee meetings. The 1995 review ended NIACE’s formal sub-committees but through the 1990s less formal networks expanded. A growing staff, work across a broader field, and the renewed confidence of government led some members to feel that the shared corporate life for members - owning the whole NIACE agenda - was weakened.

Yet the fourth change, the establishment and success of Adult Learners’ Week provided an annual celebration that extended the Institute’s capacity to make the case for adult learners, and provided practical opportunities for members to engage with the work of the Institute whilst furthering their own activities. And out of the Week, the move to give a national voice to learners has emerged. Throughout the period NIACE’s members have pursued an enlightened policy of focusing on the interests of adult learners rather that members’ own interests. That has, I believe, helped in securing an improved policy climate for adult learning. But that very improvement brings challenges of its own. There is much more work to do, and the Institute’s staff has grown to meet the workload. An organisation with around a hundred staff absorbs a lot of energy in internal communication, and generates more work than most members can follow in detail. For members to continue to shape the agenda effectively poses fresh challenges to all of us for at least the next few years.