Abstract
AbstractThis article reframes the debate on the validation of non‐formal and informal learning by connecting it to the sociology of education and curriculum studies literatures. Building on these literatures, the article differentiates between four types of validation: (a) covert and implicit, (b) covert but embedded, (c) overt and functional and (d) overt and institutional. Based on this classification, I problematise the widespread view that there is little validation in formal education. Instead, I argue, much validation takes place in formal education, but it is mostly covert and goes unnoticed. Validation is a common practice when it contributes to the performance metrics of formal education institutions, when it enables institutions to take credit for learning that occurs outside of them, when the non‐formal and informal learning that is validated aligns with their established curricula and when it does not require changes in pedagogy or assessment practices. Validation in formal education is not so much characterised by rejection or disregard as by selectivity and instrumentality.
Highlights
Non-formal and informal learning are strange concepts
Institutionalised validation refers to practices that are explicitly designed as validation and aim to transform embodied cultural capital acquired through non-formal and informal learning into institutionalised cultural capital
This article set out to reframe the debate on validation of non-formal and informal learning, by connecting it with the sociology of education and curriculum studies literatures and by offering a fourfold typology of validation in formal education
Summary
Non-formal and informal learning are strange concepts. are these forms of learning defined with reference to what they are not (formal learning) but their denotation does not refer to the nature of what is learnt, or the depth of the learning process. The way in which learning outcomes from placements are defined varies substantially between institutions but can be strongly linked to experience without reference to the sort of powerful knowledge that Young discusses In their analysis of internships as part of academic courses, Reinagel and Gerlach This section has discussed several difficulties in the differentiation between formal, non-formal and informal learning and argued that there is no clear a-priori intrinsic difference between them in terms of learning content. The latter is reflected in most mainstream definitions of the terms. These commonalities frame the TA B L E 1 Covert and overt types of validation in formal education
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
