Higher education transformation towards lifelong learning in a digital era – a scoping literature review

ABSTRACT

In the ongoing shift to a knowledge society, the idea of a technology-enabled lifelong learning has frequently been discussed. The shift also requires a transformation of higher education with new forms for teaching and learning deployment. This ongoing transformation was formulated in a research question that has guided this study: 1) Which key themes of lifelong learning emerge from higher education literature? This study was carried out as a scoping literature review to map literature in the field. Findings from a thematic analysis pointed out seven main themes or perspectives: The Policy perspective, The Value perspective, The Employability perspective, The Reform perspective, The Collaborative perspective, The Student perspective and The Workplace learning and Professional development perspectives. Five publications of the 26 selected publications from the literature search will be further used and analysed as part of a Delphi study. This Delphi study will involve a group of leading researchers in the field of lifelong learning as an expert panel to further explore and expand the key themes of lifelong learning in higher education and digital trends in higher education reforms.

KEYWORDS:

• Lifelong learning
• higher education reform
• technology enhanced learning

Introduction

Lifelong learning is a topic that has been widely discussed in the twenty-first century, and with an increased importance following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The ongoing shift to a knowledge society requires professional development and reskilling that preferably should be technology-enabled (Jaldemark, 2020). Furthermore, the role of lifelong learning in the educational system needs rethinking and new forms adapted to a digital era (Zgaga et al., 2019). Many educational reforms have been introduced, relating to the formal, non-formal and informal aspects of lifelong learning from a life-wide perspective (Burbules et al., 2020; Roche, 2015). Here, regional and international policies, as well as skills and employability, are seen as important for lifelong learning (Rambla & Mirana, 2020). Reforms that have also linked lifelong learning to societal development which has resulted in that transnational organisations, and countries all over the world have involved the concept of lifelong learning in their policy documents (Bostrom, 2017; Lee & Jan, 2018; Volles, 2016). There are various motives for lifelong learning in these policy documents such as social development, increased employability, global competition and sometimes also the aspect of personal development (Jaldemark, 2020). Most policy documents also have the aim to transform the current educational system to open up new opportunities for lifelong learning (Schuetze & Slowey, 2002, 2020). One example suggests, ‘The right to education needs to be broadened to be lifelong and encompass the right to information, culture, science and connectivity’ (International Commission on the Futures of Education, 2021, p. 4). At the same time, the intentions of Bologna as to widen and open universities may have been of limited success (Holford, 2014).

An ongoing transformation with a policy development that links to another global societal trend is the rapidly emerging digitalisation. Acknowledging that there are downsides and messiness related to digitalisation (Selwyn, 2016), there are also opportunities. The emergence of digitalisation also intersects with the new stronger focus on lifelong learning. From an educational perspective, digitalisation changes the conditions for teaching, learning and communication between humans. These new conditions enable new innovative ways of combining places and time-modes to facilitate the idea of anyplace and anytime (Cook & Grant-Davis, 2020; Varghese & Mandal, 2020). This trend has a strong impact on educational systems in general and higher education in particular. A creation of innovative and transformative opportunities enables both asynchronous and synchronous teaching and learning activities in formal, informal, and non-formal educational settings (Jaldemark, 2020; Matheos & Cleveland-Innes, 2018).

Digitalisation and lifelong learning are common themes in the discussion of the transformation of higher education. Policies are one approach in supporting transformation as they highlight the need of being up-to-date with the impact that the ongoing digitalisation has on working life. Further, the role of Higher Education (HE) is important in a changing society. This has led to ideas for transforming the role of higher education both in national educational systems and on a global level. Recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has further accentuated the need for fully online solutions, and a richer technology enhancement of higher education (Carius, 2020; Mozelius, 2020). This is an educational shift that also requires new pedagogical and collaborative learning approaches.

The combination of a stronger emphasis on lifelong learning enabling policies, and the emerging digitalisation creates new conditions for lifelong learning for twenty-first century citizens. Therefore, this study aims to discuss the transformation of contemporary higher education in the light of the rising emphasis on continuous lifelong learning and the rapidly emerging digitalisation. The ongoing transformation discussed above has been formulated in the following research question: Which key themes of lifelong learning emerge from higher education literature?

Background

Based upon a historical and growing literature, the main construct in this study is the transformation of lifelong learning and higher education. Seminal ideas about these two interrelated phenomena and a rationale for studying them together are presented here below. This is a research area initiated long before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic (Schuetze & Slowey, 2013; Yang et al., 2015). However, the pandemic has further highlighted the need for technology-enabled lifelong learning and how to address its challenges (Davidović, 2020; Ivenicki, 2021). In several ways, the pandemic has acted as a catalyst for the development of technology-enabled lifelong learning and the transformation of HE (Kift et al., 2021; Mozelius, 2022). The adjustments of lifelong learning to HE structures during the pandemic add evidence to the argument that learning design and its distribution ought to change. Well-planned and relevant changes in HE, in combination with the need for lifelong learning, could certainly have valuable outcomes. The overall research question that guided this literature review was the exploration of key themes of lifelong learning, if any, were emerging in HE reforms.

The need for lifelong learning

At a time when societies are increasingly dynamic, socio-economically complex and globally connected, the need for technology-enabled lifelong learning grows stronger (Hansen et al., 2020; Nygren et al., 2019). This is one of many contemporary reform requests put forward that HE institutions must address. Learning across humans’ entire lifetime is captured in the term ‘lifelong learning’, and has been defined by Jarvis (2014) as a process where humans of any age, and with a broad range of interests acquire new knowledge and skills. Established teaching institutions can be seen as one delivery mechanism but not the only one (p. 53). HE institutions can play two roles in the field of lifelong learning. First, these institutions can ensure that graduates of formal, credit and accredited progammes are empowered with skills required to be a lifelong learner. These same institutions can also offer continuing and extension education courses and programs designed for the needs of prospective and current lifelong learners. The delocalisation of education programs through the affordances of digital resources and technology-enabled learning applies when designing for lifelong learning as well as traditional programs. This fact alone positions HE institutions to be central, however, not the only purveyors of lifelong learning.

Delors etal. (1996) provide seminal thinking in four pillars of learning as fundamental principles for embracing lifelong learning. This work applies in both roles of HE for lifelong learning identified above. Learning to know means that education should provide the cognitive tools required for an individual to better comprehend the world and its complexities, and to have an appropriate and adequate foundation for future learning. Learning to know can be understood as a synonym of learning to learn in order to benefit from the opportunities offered by lifelong learning. Learning to do focuses on acquiring professional qualifications and soft skills such as the ability to cope with diverse situations and to work in a team. Education should provide the skills to help enable individuals to effectively participate in the global economy and society. Learning to live together focuses on developing an understanding of others and the reality of interdependence relating to human rights, democratic principles, intercultural understanding, and peace and harmony at all levels of society. Learning to be requires that education provide self-analytical and social skills to enable individuals to develop to their fullest potential as a whole person: psycho-socially, affectively and physically. Together, these four pillars form a base for lifelong learning (Delors etal., 1996).

Current trajectories of higher education reform

For Broucker et al. (2016), HE reform, sometimes called transformation, will include a reformed public sector. Williams (2016), who identifies a need for a more socially appropriate response from education, presents a contrasting view. Here, education cannot only be seen as maintaining the status-quo or in support of the elite, but instead towards the greater good of society. There are opportunities for education to better align to the needs of students and society, which can be seen in both views. Multiple societal transformations, acting as a catalyst for HE reform, are identified in published literature (Bryce et al., 2016, Duderstat, 2009; Keeling & Hersh, 2011). These transformations include:

• information access and quality

• cost-containment and affordability

• globalisation of human activities

• employment sector transformation

• twenty-first century core capabilities

• continuous technology expansion and integration

• changing student demand, demographics and resulting needs.

The need to reform HE to align with societal changes is well articulated in government documents and academic literature (Jones, 2013). A systematic approach to turn such demands into reforms, with an evidence-base to guide such action, underpins this study. The previous work of Slowey and Schuetze (2002) who identified a new way of seeing HE in reference to society is also of importance. According to Slowey and Schuetze (2002), HE and its traditional forms of delivery are often missing attention, and do not acknowledge the needs of more diverse learners. These researchers suggest that it may be this attention to diverse needs which will embrace the needs of lifelong learners, putting the university campus into what can be called ‘lifelong learning mode’ (Slowey & Schuetze, 2002, p. 324). A move towards a lifelong learning mode of delivery can address the broader demands for change in HE coming from government agencies and the students themselves. A diverse HE system will address the needs of diverse students and the required competencies in diverse, dynamic societies (Cleveland-Innes, 2020).

Method

This study was carried out as a scoping review to provide an overview of the studied topic (Munn et al., 2018). This approach can be appropriate as a method when used to study a topic which is complex or heterogeneous (Mays et al., 2001; Pham et al., 2014), as well as in studies with an aim of clarifying concepts and identifying knowledge gaps. Moreover, a scoping review offers a method of finding key concepts in a specific research field, and to identify the main sources and types of evidence available (Munn et al., 2018).

A central aim of this scoping review was to synthesise research results as a foundation for future research. Considering the aim and the type of literature review, the research question was formulated concretely and specifically to support this research design. Therefore, the search strategy and the eligibility criteria that were used to retrieve relevant, foundational and current published literature in the field of lifelong learning and HE reform. Furthermore, the selection process is described with search strings, and the risk for biased assessment is discussed to avoid what Auger (2009) has criticised and named as ‘inconsistent, non-critical and unsystematic reviews’ (p. 1032).

Google Scholar was used as the main search engine to identify papers of interest for the study. All literature was accessed through Google Scholar during the first half of 2021.

Thereafter, a four-step process was conducted as described by Iden and Eikebrokk (2013). The two main objectives of the review were to identify and summarise existing research on higher education transformation towards lifelong learning, and to identify areas and ideas for further research. The steps in the review process are described here below.

Step 1: The definition of a research question

The overall research question addressed in this study was defined as follows: Which key themes of lifelong learning emerge from higher education literature?

Step 2: The search process

After some initial discussions among the authors, there was an agreement on a focus on technology enabled or technology enhanced Lifelong learning and Workplace learning in HE. A first preliminary search string was composed with Boolean operators as (‘Lifelong learning’ OR ‘Workplace learning’) AND ‘Higher education (change OR reform OR policy)’ AND (‘technology enabled’ OR ‘technology enhanced’ OR ‘blended learning’ OR ‘informal learning’ OR ‘non-formal learning’). With the idea of a search string ending that should not only find literature on formal learning but also on non-formal and informal learning. The assessment of the retrieved result set from this search string, around 3,500 hits in Google Scholar, found a too high percentage of white papers, position papers and conference papers with poor methodology. Moreover, there was a high percentage of publications on pure technical aspects of technology enabled or technology enhanced learning. To avoid ‘the problem of information overload’ and that ‘scientific information largely exceeds the human capability of absorbing it all’ (Auger, 2009, p. 1032), inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined.

Step 3: Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The next step to fine-tune the search was to set inclusion and exclusion criteria and to modify the search string. Like most other research fields, this field is an evolving field, and the first criterion was set to include only articles and book chapters published in 2016 or later. The other criteria were to exclude white papers, low-quality position papers, studies with poor research methods and publications that did not relate to the aim of this study. To retrieve fewer technical studies and to get a better focus on change, reform and policy in HE, the search string was modified to (‘Lifelong learning’ OR ‘Workplace learning’) AND ‘Higher education (change OR reform OR policy)’ AND (‘blended learning’ OR ‘informal learning’ OR ‘non formal learning’). Following this, a quality assessment according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria was performed. This process of fine-tuning the search strings and inclusion and exclusion criteria resulted in 26 publications.

The 26 publications were then distributed among the authors for further close reading. Comments about the remaining publications were gathered in a common online document where authors discussed the publications assessment in online video conference meetings. Every publication assessment with ‘Yes’, ‘No’ or ‘Maybe’. All of the Maybe-marked publications were sent to one or several co-authors for a second opinion. There were also some of the Yes- and No-marked publications that were re-read and collegially discussed for second opinions.

Step 4: Data collection

The data extracted from the retrieved studies were:

• The publication source and the full reference

• Main topic area and the countries where the studies were conducted

• A summary of the study with a focus on topics that contribute to answer the research question

In the data collection, we followed the recommendation of Kitchenham et al. (2009), one researcher extracted the data, and the others checked the extractions and gave their comments.

Results from the publications assessments were grouped into themes inductively in a thematic analysis. The analysis was conducted according to the six-step method outlined by Braun and Clarke (2012). The first step is about getting familiar with the data. This was in this study carried out by reading and rereading the selected publications, and at the same time taking notes for the further coding and analysis steps. Step 2 was the start of the actual coding with finding sub-codes that later would be aggregated into codes and grouped to themes or as it is called in this study: themes. Braun and Clarke (2012, p. 5) illustrate a thematic analysis as ‘a brick-built house with a tile roof, your themes are the walls and roof and your codes are the individual bricks and tiles’. In the following third step, the found codes were grouped into themes with the idea that these themes should contain ‘something important about the data in relation to the research question, and represents some level of patterned response or meaning within the data set’ (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 82).

Step 4 in this thematic analysis was about quality assurance, and that the preliminary themes were reviewed with a cross-check of their relation to identified codes and to the aim and research questions. In this analysis, this was done as recommended with five control questions: 1) Is this a theme, or just a code?, 2) If it is a theme, what is the quality of this theme?, 3) What are the boundaries of this theme?, 4) Are there enough meaningful data to support this theme? and finally 5) Is the theme coherent? (Braun & Clarke, 2012, p. 65). When the themes had been checked, the next step was about the naming and the definition of the final themes. Finally, the sixth step was to write the presentation of the identified themes. However, this final step should not be isolated from the previous ones, and that writing is a continuous and integrated part of a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2012, p. 69).

Investigator triangulation was applied through the whole process with the idea of all the article authors in a collaborative ‘triangulating analysis’. This is a concept recommended by several researchers which has been described by Patton (2002, p. 560), as ‘having two or more persons to independently analyse the same qualitative data and compare their findings’. This triangulation analysis combined with the described six-step thematic analysis has been chosen to support the idea of triangulating analysis.

Findings

of the 26 publications in focus in this study, the largest number of publications were published in 2018 (8), followed by 2016 (6) and 2019 (6). In 2020, there were four publications and two publications in 2017. The publications show a wide variety of contexts: Australian, Canadian, Chinese, European, Russian, South African, South Asian and the US. Regarding methodology, several publications can be described as position publications (6); publications presenting models/frameworks (3); and literature or policy reviews (6). The empirically based publications are qualitative (5); quantitative (3) or mixed methods (3). An overview of the 26 publications is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. An overview of the result set of 26 publications.

	Publication	Year of publication	Methodology	Country
1	Asfiati, A., & Wekke, I. S. (2019). Lecturers’ participation in applying blended learning in Islamic higher education in Indonesia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(12), 2604–2608.	2019	Case study including observations, interviews, with lecturers and notes from researchers.	Indonesia
2	Baptista, A. (2016). Revisiting lifelong learning in light of the Bologna process and beyond. Lifelong learning: Concepts, benefits and challenges, 17–35.	2016	Policy discourse analysis.	European countries
3	Bohlinger et al (2016). Validation of non-formal and informal learning in Europe: Research, policies, legitimacy and survival. In Souto-Otero, M. Education policy. Peter Lang.	2016	Literature review of recent EU policy and (mainly European) research on the validation.	UK
4	Boyadjieva, P., & Ilieva-Trichkova, P. (2018). Lifelong learning as an emancipation process: A capability approach. In The Palgrave international handbook on adult and lifelong education and learning. (pp. 267–288). Palgrave Macmillan.	2018	Capability approach using the empirical basis of the Adult Education Survey 2007.	Bulgaria
5	Bridgstock, R. (2017). The university and the knowledge network: A new educational model for twenty-first century learning and employability. In Graduate employability in context (pp. 339–358). Palgrave Macmillan.	2017	Position paper presenting a new educational model for learning and employability.	UK
6	Cleveland-Innes, M (2020). Student Demographic Change and Pedagogical Issues in Higher Education. In Inequality, Innovation and Reform in Higher Education (pp. 159–173). Springer.	2020	Position paper regarding demographic change among students and related issues in HE.	Canada
7	Gaebel, M., Zhang, T., Bunescu, L., & Stoeber, H. (2018). Learning and teaching in the European Higher Education Area. European University Association.	2018	Quantitative study based on the Trends 2018 Online Survey.	48 European countries
8	Ishak, M. M., Ali, H., Rahim, F. A., Bakar, M. S. A., Ariffin, T. F. T., & Malaysia, S. K. (2018). Managing Learning and Teaching Orientation of Online Centered Approaches in Higher Learning: “MOOC” and Beyond. Educational Access and Excellence, (1), 119.	2018	Case study of a university in a northern region of Malaysia regarding how to transform its academicians to adopt innovative approaches in teaching and learning including via online.	Malaysia
9	Jacobs, A. H. M. (2018). Values, institutional culture and recognition of prior learning. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(4), 96–106.	2018	Critical hermeneutics review of institutional policy.	South Africa
10	Jamaludin, R., McKay, E., & Ledger, S. (2020). Are we ready for Education 4.0 within ASEAN higher education institutions? Thriving for knowledge, industry and humanity in a dynamic higher education ecosystem. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. 12(5), 1161–1173.	2020	Mixed method study using a quantative survey and open-ended questions using quantitative data of respondents’ perceptions of Education 4.0.	Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
11	Kagan, C., & Diamond, J. (2019). Massification of Higher Education and the Nature of the Student Population. In University–Community Relations in the UK (pp. 51–76). Palgrave Macmillan.	2019	Explores policies and practices targeting an increase of diversity in the student body in HE with reference to aspects of widening participation.	UK
12	Kasworm (2020) Adult Workers as Learners in the USA Higher Education Landscape. In Inequality, Innovation and Reform in Higher Education. (pp. 221–235). Springer.	2020	Using the framework of the USA scene, current statistics regarding adult student participation and the complex landscape of adult higher education are explored.	USA
13	Lim, C. P., & Wang, T. (2016). A framework and self-assessment tool for building the capacity of higher education institutions for blended learning. In Blended learning for quality higher education: Selected case studies on implementation from Asia-Pacific, 1–38.	2016	Presentation of an eight- dimension framework regarding how HE could adopt blended learning to enhance learning and teaching.	Hong Kong
14	Matheos, K., & Matheos and Cleveland-Innes (2018). Blended learning: Enabling higher education reform, Revista Eletrônica de Educação, 12(1), 238–244.	2018	Position paper exploring the need to need for blended learning to situate itself within the timely and crucial Higher Education.	Canada
15	Petersone, M., Krastins, A. V., & Ketners, K. (2016). Implementation of Lifelong Learning for Improving Customs Education System in Latvia and the World. International Journal of Education and Learning Systems, 1, 27–36.	2016	Quantitative study using empirical analysis, statistical data processing the deductive, including method and synthesis.	Latvia
16	Sá, M. J., & Serpa, S. (2018). Transversal competences: Their importance and learning processes by higher education students. Education Sciences, 8(3), 126.	2018	Literature review, including a document search and a qualitative review and analysis of the documents collected.	Portugal
17	Santos, L., Bago, J., Baptista, A. V., Ambrósio, S., Fonseca, H. M., & Quintas, H. (2016). Academic success of mature students in higher education: a Portuguese case study. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 7(1), 57–73.	2016	Case study based on quantitative and qualitative data: questionnaires and focus groups with mature university students.	Portugal
18	Sheridan, L., Gibbons, B., & Price, O. (2019). Achieving WIL Placement and Theoretical Learning Concurrently: An Online Strategy for Higher Education Institutions. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 16(3), 8.	2019	Mixed method study. Online qualitative questionnaire issued to 51 students. The quantitative subject and assessment-level grades data were derived from the Autumn 2013 WIL subject cohort as well as the other Autumn 2013.	Australia
19	Smith, G. A. (2019). Framing Faculty Development as Workplace Learning, Journal on Centers for Teaching and Learning, 11, 3–23.	2019	Model for learning-and-development practices in nonacademic organizations, a faculty-development model arises that elevates the importance of strategies and resources that enhance individuals’ informal learning where they work.	US
20	Souto-Otero, M. (2016). Validation of non-formal and informal learning in Europe: Research, policies, legitimacy and survival. Education policy. Peter Lang.	2016	Position paper regarding the way in which the Directorate General Education and Culture (DG EAC) is presented as a purely neo-liberal agent in much of the education literature, and validation practices.	UK
21	Spring, K., & Graham, C. (2017). Thematic patterns in international blended learning literature, research, practices and terminology. Online Learning Journal, 21(4).	2017	Literature review to discover and compare themes of the top blended learning (BL) articles from seven different regions of the world.	US
22	Tikhonova, E.N., & Raitskaya, L. (2018). An Overview of Trends and Challenges in Higher Education on the Worldwide Research Agenda. Journal of Language and Education, 4(4), 16.	2018	Position paper. Explores changes in HE MOOCs, trends like the Bologna process, increasing academic mobility spurred by globalization, continued development of internationalised education, worldwide.	Russia
23	Unluhisarcikli, O. (2018). Informal workplace learning experiences of graduate student employees. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 58(1), 66.	2018	Qualitative study with data collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 14 PhD students who were employed at their universities.	Turkey
24	Volungevičienė, A., Teresevičienė, M., & Ehlers, U. D. (2020. When is open and online learning relevant for curriculum change in higher education? Digital and network society perspective. Electronic journal of e-Learning.	2020	Qualitative study with 13 interviews conducted with experts working on a policy level, in international associations, HE and private companies, representing eight countries.	Lithuania
25	Webb et al. (2019). Unsettling equity frames in Australian universities to embrace people seeking asylum. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 38(1), 103–120.	2019	Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with three prospective to explore students’ backgrounds and university experiences.	Australia
26	Weil, M., & Eugster, B. (2019 Thinking outside the box: De-structuring continuing and higher education. Disciplinary Struggles in Education.	2019	Position paper exploring the deconstruction of continuing education as well as HE.	Switzerland

As noted above, after a quality assessment according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we selected these 26 publications for further close reading. In the findings from the thematic analysis, the following seven themes emerged: Policy perspective (4), Value perspective (3), Employability perspective (2), Reform perspective (5), Collaborative perspective (4), Student perspective (3) and Workplace learning and Professional development perspective (5).

Policy perspective

In this theme, there were four publications. Baptista (2016) discusses lifelong learning, and the Bologna for shaping European HE policy. Here, lifelong processes for economic progress and development; personal development and fulfilment; social inclusiveness and democratic understanding and activity are presented. The rhetorical paradox of how economic-instrumental and humanitarian-transformative ends meet is explored. Bohlinger et al. (2016) present an analysis of European research and policy-making in the area of validation of non-formal and informal learning. This publication explicates the importance of validation for EU-policy making and the consequences of validation systems in particular in terms of exclusion and inclusion. Kagan and Diamond (2019) discuss how university–community relations regard policies and practices to embrace diverse populations in widening participation, including lifelong learning and continuing professional development. According to these researchers, this is also argued to be a way for HE to meet community needs. Souto-Otero (2016) argues for the importance of validation for EU-policy and the consequences of validation systems related to exclusion and inclusion in regard to lifelong learning.

Value perspective

In this theme, there were three publications. Boyadjieva and Ilieva-Trichkova (2018) provide a theoretical outline of the heuristic potential of the capability approach in conceptualising lifelong learning and test the capacity of this approach to guide empirical studies on lifelong learning. It argues that the capability approach provides a theoretical framework for the understanding of lifelong learning as an agency process, which is embedded in different social and institutional contexts, for grasping its different meanings for individuals and society and for its critical evaluation against the background of important values, such as justice, freedom and identity development. Jacobs (2018) discussed critical hermeneutics, values, HE, policy, institutional culture and values. A link is drawn between values, institutional culture and the study applies the values element of a four-part theoretical framework developed in a conceptual analytic study of institutional culture in HE to analyse the SU Regulation for RPL and CAT. Webb, et al. (2019) explore university access for refugees and people seeking asylum using a qualitative narrative-based case study regarding university access for refugees and people seeking asylum. The study reports on one university in Australia, exploring the opportunities and blockages experienced by those seeking access. Further, there are dilemmas recognised by the admissions’ gatekeepers.

Employability perspective

This theme comprised two publications. Bridgstock (2017) discusses employability and how universities should better meet the industry. The author suggests a new university model that should be experiential, social and networked. The model presents ideas for learners to prepare for society and economy. Universities must start to move away from delivering content to meeting requirements for industrial skills. The heart of the model is situated in experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), where students learn ‘hands on’ through a progressive series of projects. Learners should move from consumers to producers. Sá and Serpa (2018) argue in favour of cross-disciplinary training in HE and new teaching methods towards initial, continuous and lifelong learning and training. The authors conclude that the uncertain future of HE provides an opportunity to add labour-market requirements to frame professional training that includes a cross-disciplinary curriculum. New teaching methods in HE are outlined as a way towards this goal.

Reform perspective

In this theme, there were five publications. Cleveland-Innes (2020) identifies different types of shifts underway and upcoming student characteristics and needs. Many complexities need to be taken for change in HE, adding teaching about learning for creating learning opportunities and levitating pressure on faculty regarding quality assessment. Kasworm (2020) argues that HE must rethink its mission, its targeted student clientele and enhance its services, with a specific focus on adult undergraduate students who more often are workers as well as students. Using the framework of the US scene, current statistics regarding adult student participation and the complex landscape of adult HE are explored. HE needs to rethink its mission, target student clientele and enhance its service with a specific focus on adult HE. Matheos and Cleveland-Innes (2018) discuss the need for blended learning to situate itself within the timely and crucial Higher Education Reform (HER) agenda. Blended learning can be considered as an enabler for HER with effects on faculty roles, student engagement and performance, including skills for lifelong learning. The need for blended learning to situate itself is necessary within the timely and crucial HER agenda. Tikhonova and Raitskaya (2018) discuss the transformation of HE, student–teacher relationship, social equity and access to HE. This publication explores changes in HE MOOCs politically launched or influenced trends like the Bologna process, increasing academic mobility spurred by globalisation and continued development of internationalised education, interculturality and multilingualism. Further, the authors discuss worldwide innovations in higher education and teaching approaches, i.e. deep active learning, blended learning methods, gamification, storytelling, alignments of higher education and work and translanguaging in higher education instruction. Volungevičienė et al. (2020) discuss open technology-enabled learning as a solution for curriculum change in HE to respond to digital and network society learning needs to support HE curricula reform.

Collaborative perspective

In this theme, there were five publications: Gaebel et al. (2018) discuss trends in HE suggesting collaboration across universities is adding attention to teaching and learning; no standard practises yet exist. Other stakeholders must be included and the report seeks to enhance the conversation and practice about teaching and learning. Ishak et al. (2018) report on a collaborative management approach, globalised online learning and learning and teaching. In this case study, a University Teaching and Learning Centre (UTLC) was used to help the university transform its academics to adopt innovative approaches in teaching and learning. This includes technology-enabled teaching to vary instructional approaches that focus on student centred learning. A model is proposed to ensure that the vision in enhancing the academicians as well as students’ capacity to learn in the HE context can be truly obtained. Jamaludin et al. (2020) present the question of whether academics are ready for Education 4.0 within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) HE institutions. Using a mixed-method approach, the publication presents the idea of educational ecosystems in higher education. Using a discussion to think globally, and act locally, and expand into the concept of ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution’ and ‘Education 4.0’. Lim et al. (2016) present a framework and self-assessment tool for building the capacity of HE to drive, sustain and scale up their blended learning practises. The framework includes eight strategic dimensions: vision and philosophy; curriculum; professional development; learning support; infrastructure, facilities, resources and support; policy and institutional structure; partnerships; and research and evaluation. Based on these dimensions, the self-assessment tool can be adopted to support HE as the necessary and sufficient conditions to sustain and scale up blended learning practises in and across programmes and courses within the institution.

Student perspective

In this theme, there were three publications: Asfiati and Wekke (2019) report findings that blended learning is very effective and efficient to improve students’ abilities. Thus, lecturers are expected to participate actively in the implementation. The application of blended learning in universities facilitates increased student involvement and performance, improved design, learning outcomes and assessment. Blended learning as a learning model is adaptive, competence-based, and new areas of collaboration that promise improved skills for lifelong learning for students. Santos et al. (2016) using a case study and mixed methods explores the academic success of mature students in HE. Spring and Graham (2017) report on thematic patterns in blended learning regarding informal workplace learning experiences of graduate student employees.

Workplace learning and professional development perspective

This theme comprised five publications: Peterson et al. (2016) discuss lifelong learning opportunities for the implementation of measures to improve the education system for the profession of customs. Sheridan et al. (2019) discuss an online strategy for HE institutions for gaining Work Integrated Learning (WIL) and theoretical learning. The Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) is presented for supporting work integrated learning and internships in HE. Smith (2019) discusses social workplace and teacher professional development. This study draws upon WIL research, learning, and development practices in nonacademic organisations. In this work, a faculty development model arises that elevates the importance of strategies and resources that enhance individuals’ informal learning in their workplace. Unluhisarcikli (2018) reports on informal workplace learning experiences of graduate student employees, providing a comparison between formal learning of the classroom that produces mainly explicit knowledge, and how informal workplace learning leads to tacit or implicit knowledge. Weil and Eugster (2019) provide a comparison of HE and Continuing Education Training (CET) in Switzerland, where CET is housed with HE institutions. The authors suggest the integration of Continuing Education and Training housed in universities offering formal learning in discipline-based programs leading to completion of study programs and qualifications.

Discussion

The overall research question that guided this literature review was the exploration of key themes of lifelong learning. In returning to the research question, which key themes of lifelong learning, if any, are emerging in HE reforms? As noted above, after a quality assessment according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and discussion, 26 publications were selected for further close reading. The review of the 26 publications resulted in seven themes and in the selection of five publications. Together, we viewed these five publications as encompassing multiple societal reforms pushing towards the reform of HE (Bryce et al., 2016; Duderstadt, 2009; Keeling & Hersh, 2011).

These publications can be said to represent and characterise global themes regarding challenges in creating a closer connection between lifelong learning and HE of interest for continued and deeper study and the transformation of HE (Kift et al., 2021; Mozelius, 2022). The five publications chosen can be said to apply to both roles of HE for lifelong learning. The publications can also be linked to Delors (1996) seminal thinking in four pillars of learning: learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be as fundamental principles for embracing lifelong learning. Together, these four pillars form a base for lifelong learning (Delors, 1996).

Learning to know means that education should provide the cognitive tools required for an individual to better comprehend the world and its complexities. This also involves acquiring an appropriate and adequate foundation for future learning. Learning to know can be understood as a synonym of learning to learn in order to benefit from the opportunities offered by lifelong learning. Here, the publication by Boyadjieva and Ilieva-Trichkova (2018) provides a theoretical outline of the heuristic potential of the capability approach in conceptualising lifelong learning and the capacity of this approach to guide empirical studies on lifelong learning. This approach is of importance for learning to know for empirical studies on how individuals can learn for future learning, i.e. learning to learn.

Learning to do focuses on acquiring professional qualifications and soft skills. This involves the ability to cope with diverse situations and to work in a team. This pillar of learning states that education should provide the skills to help enable individuals to effectively participate in the global economy and society. In their publication, Weil and Eugster (2019) argue for a stronger relationship between HE research and CET professional activity such as more collaborative engagement between HE and CET. This is most likely necessary to include the importance of applied, practitioner research in professional fields. Furthermore, Kasworm (2020) argues for a rethinking of the mission of HE with a specific focus on adult undergraduate students who more often are workers as well as students. Both of these publications are related to the learning pillar learning to do in practice as students and as practitioners.

Learning to live together focuses on developing an understanding of others, along with the reality of interdependence relating to human rights, democratic principles, intercultural understanding, and peace and harmony at all levels of society. This learning pillar could be said to be manifested in the publication by Jamaludin et al. (2020), which presents the challenges seen in HE. This publication acknowledges the need for a new, dynamic HE ecosystem and Education 4.0 as a sustainable ecosystem LL in HE.

Learning to be requires that education provide self-analytical and social skills to enable individuals to develop to their fullest potential as a whole person: psycho-socially, affectively and physically. Baptista’s (2016) publication draws upon European policy, presenting LL for economic development, personal development, social inclusiveness and democratic understanding and activity in HE. All of these aspects note the importance of policy for creating holistic view for supporting individuals’ lifelong learning throughout their lives as learning to be.

Conclusions and next steps

The research question has been answered by the findings in this literature review, leading to deeper insights into the necessary changes for the transformation of HE. The limitations of this study regard the search of publication solely in Google Scholar. Future studies may comprise searches in several data bases. Important issues for future research will be to identify the necessary conditions for lifelong learning when striving for a Higher Continuous Education and how lifelong learning fits into the current digital trends of HE reforms. Five of the 26 selected publications in this study will be further used and analysed as part of a Delphi study (Brady, 2015). This study will involve leading researchers in the field of lifelong learning in the expert panel. The Delphi study has the aim of providing a knowledge contribution regarding how technology-enabled learning could support lifelong learning, in the ongoing transformation of higher education. Each of the panel members will read two of the publications as food for thought in a focus group discussion.

All of the identified key themes seem relevant for the further work in the Delphi study, where ‘The Workplace learning and professional development perspective’ could be an interesting separate study. While the ‘Student perspective’ is the theme with the least findings in this study, but on the other hand, it is one of the most important for further investigation. One idea here might be to combine the ‘Student perspective’ with the ‘Collaborative perspective’ in a future study. Finally, the findings in the ‘Policy perspective’, the ‘Value perspective’, the ‘Employability perspective’ and ‘Reform perspective’ are the findings that more directly can add value to the ongoing Delphi study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).