ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational

Learning and Social Capital. ERIC

Digest.

ERIC Development Team

www.eric.ed.gov

Table of Contents

If you're viewing this document online, you can click any of the topics below to link directly to that section.

Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest............... 1

HOW INTERGENERATIONAL LEARNING BUILDS SOCIAL

CAPITAL.................................................................... 2

OUTCOMES OF INTERGENERATIONAL LEARNING.................. 3

REFERENCES.................................................................. 6

ERIC Identifier: ED478947

Publication Date: 2003-00-00

Author: Kerka, Sandra

Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education Columbus OH.

Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital.

ERIC Digest.

THIS DIGEST WAS CREATED BY ERIC, THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER. FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ERIC, CONTACT

ACCESS ERIC 1-800-LET-ERIC

The elder cannot be an elder if there is no community to make him an elder. The young

child cannot feel secure if there is no elder, whose silent presence gives him or her

hope in life. The adult cannot be who he or she is unless there is a strong sense of the

other people around. (M. P. Some, Ritual Power, Healing, and Community. Portland,

ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest. Page 1 of 7
OR: Swan/Raven & Co., 1993, p. 2)

Knowledge has been transmitted from one generation to another throughout history,

often informally or incidentally. In the last 40 years, more systematic and formal

intergenerational programs have arisen, with growing recognition of their integral

relationship to lifelong learning and broader social purposes (Hanks and Icenogle 2001).

Ideally, the generations derive mutual benefits from participation and the learning is

reciprocal. Features of effective intergenerational learning have commonalities with the

characteristics of social capital. This Digest examines the relationship between

intergenerational learning and social capital and describes research findings and

promising programs illustrating how intergenerational programs contribute to learning

and the development of social capital.

HOW INTERGENERATIONAL LEARNING

BUILDS SOCIAL CAPITAL

The concept of social capital refers to the resources of networks, norms or shared

values, and trust to which individuals have access as community members; it is both an

individual and a community asset (Balatti and Falk 2002). Individuals who can draw on

these tangible and intangible resources and relationships will have enhanced life

opportunities, and communities in which trust, reciprocity and social networks are strong

will benefit from collective action and cooperation (ibid.). Two dimensions of social

capital development (chronological and external) bear a resemblance to features of

intergenerational programs:

[The chronological dimension] is fundamental in the processes that transmit social and

cultural norms. The research makes clear how past learning needs to be reconciled with

the present, in the context of...a future gaze or "vision." Externality refers to the

relationships that people have with the outside world... Externality is not only about

developing and using networks...It is about having the identity resource that allows one

to see oneself as a member of the larger community of communities that comprise

society. (ibid., pp. 286-287)

One reason to consider intergenerational learning in this context is awareness of

unequal access to positive social capital and the risk that social exclusion and

disadvantage will result in negative social capital (Bostrom 2002). The family is typically

the individual's initial source of social capital, but the social changes of the last half

century are having an impact on this source: increased life expectancy, greater mobility,

increased reliance on nonfamilial caregivers at both ends of the life span, a more

age-segregated society (e.g., retirement communities and youth culture), and decline in

civic participation (Bostrom 2002; Loewen 1996). Economic and social changes have

resulted in "changes in the social contract and evolving expectations about the relative

position of generations in society" (Hanks and Icenogle 1999, p. 52). The issue of

generational equity arises: to some, older people are a burden rather than a resource,

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 2 of 7 ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest.
and in light of the increased time it takes to become economically productive today,

children may be viewed this way as well. These factors work against characteristics of

positive social capital such as mutual acceptance of obligations, exchange of ideas and

information, and action for the common good (Schuller et al. 2002).

Although not usually tied explicitly to a social capital framework, a frequent rationale for

intergenerational programming is its effectiveness in reducing stereotypes of young and

old and improving mutual understanding and trust. Such attitudinal changes are a focus

of much of the research, and many of the findings show more positive perceptions of

aging and the elderly among children and young adults, more willingness to work with

the elderly among health occupations students, and changed perceptions of youth on

the part of older adults (e.g., Granville 2001; Kaplan 2001; Loewen 1996). However, in

other studies, the findings about attitude changes are mixed or demonstrate that the

changes may not last long (Kaplan 2001; Loewen 1996).

Attitudinal changes are a worthy goal, yet some suggest that making them the primary

justification and outcome of programs trivializes intergenerational interaction and

ignores the larger social purpose (Hanks and Icenogle 2001). For Loewen (1996), a

more compelling rationale is the learning inherent in effective intergenerational

activities. Learning, as a social activity, results from drawing on and building social

capital through interactions with others (Schuller et al. 2002). Research by Balatti and

Falk (2002) and Schuller et al. (2002) demonstrates how learning creates conditions

that help develop the building blocks of social capital: it (1) extends, enriches, and

reconstructs social networks and builds trust and relationships; (2) influences the

development of shared norms and the values of tolerance, understanding, and respect;

and (3) affects individual behaviors and attitudes that influence community participation.

OUTCOMES OF INTERGENERATIONAL

LEARNING

Intergenerational programs are usually one of the following types (Kaplan 2001):

children and youth serving older people, elders serving children and youth, and adults

and youth collaborating in service and/or learning. Research cited by Loewen (1996),

Granville (2001), and Kaplan (2001) suggests that successful intergenerational learning

fulfills age-appropriate developmental needs of youth and adults, is relational and

reciprocal (drawing on the strengths or assets of each generation), and creates a

community in which learning results through collective engagement in authentic

activities. A few studies explicitly link social capital and the outcomes of

intergenerational programs (e.g., Bostrom 2002; Granville 2002; Kaplan 2001). In other

research demonstrating learning outcomes, links to social capital may be inferred, and

some promising new programs reinforce these findings. Some of these studies and

programs are described next.

Granville (2001) examined the outcomes of a British project that brought together two

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest. Page 3 of 7
groups with "negative" social capital who are usually excluded from powerful social

networks: youth offenders undergoing rehabilitation and older adults with physical

disabilities or dementia. An instance of youth serving elders, the program provided

community service placements for offenders in elder care centers. Each generation

offered its own strengths: the youth brought energy, enthusiasm, companionship, and

physical strength; the elders shared concern for the younger generation, nonjudgmental

and accepting attitudes, and appreciation for the youths' contributions. Trust worked on

multiple levels: prison and care center officials trusting offenders, youth trusting that

their service would not be exploited, the elders trusting their caregivers to provide a safe

environment, and young and old learning to trust each other. The project emphasized

the shared values of mutual respect, tolerance, and inclusiveness. Interview and

observational data showed that the youth learned employability skills and the value of

service, developed self-esteem, and built their stock of social capital for future life and

work. The elders benefitted from social and mental stimulation, the opportunity to

support the youth by ensuring that they were not placed in compromising situations, and

the reduction of stereotypes about aging and dementia.

The Alabama Intergenerational Network for Service-Learning (Hanks and Icenogle

2001) demonstrates the links between human capital and social capital. College

students in gerontology and business helped adults over 50 in career transition develop

work-related skills such as self-esteem, resume development, and computer skills. Data

from pre/postprogram surveys showed that trust and communication were built through

the shared norms of the workplace, allaying misconceptions older and younger workers

had about each other. However, the activities were not intentionally designed for this

purpose, but resulted from the synergy surrounding authentic engagement in learning:

"This project found its major success in addressing concrete training needs. Certainly,

attitudes and feelings did change, but as a byproduct of interaction that centered on the

two generations working together in skill-building activities" (p. 66).

An example of elders serving youth, the Swedish Granddad program involved men over

age 55 as educators, companions, co-learners, mentors, and tutors for elementary

students (Bostrom 2002). Surveys of the men and students showed that new social

networks were created among teachers, elders, and children; the elders provided

models of social norms and values that met developmental needs, especially for boys.

The "granddads" benefitted from participation in lifelong learning, the opportunity to

contribute to the community, and the expansion of their social network. A key factor was

that the interaction was regularly scheduled and long term (6 months-2 years), resulting

in "an intergenerational transmission of both learning and social capital" (p. 523).

Other examples of adults helping youth are the Foster Grandparent Programs and

Retired and Senior Volunteer Programs. Blake (2000) found that older adult tutors in

these programs had a measurable impact on students' reading performance, attitudes

about reading, self-confidence, and motivation to read. More than that, the frequency of

tutoring sessions enabled participants to develop trusting relationships. Literacy is a

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 4 of 7 ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest.
social practice and its development is intensely social: "Something unique stems from

the nature of the intergenerational relationship. The dynamic of that

relationship--reciprocal and accepting--gives rise to opportunities for learning, growth,

and understanding for both participants" (ibid., p. 1).

Intergenerational programs typically focus on two generations separated from one

another and opinion is divided as to whether the generation in between should be

included (Granville 2002; Whitehouse et al. 2002). The following examples of programs

in which adults and youth work together in service and/or learning involve all

generations. In the Public Policy Institute (Murdock and Paterson 2002), youth and

adults learn the core concepts of civic engagement and the value of deliberative

dialogue. Different learning and interaction styles between the generations resulted

initially in some mistrust and dissatisfaction. Alterations to the teaching methods and

group procedures enabled a learning community to develop in which adults recognized

the young people as a source of information and alternative perspectives; the youth

learned to express their opinions on issues.

Community Builders is a promising program at Wartburg College that displays many

characteristics of social capital development ("About Community Builders" 2002).

Community members of all ages participate in real and virtual

"neighborhoods"--intergenerational learning communities mediated by college students.

The link to social capital is explicit in the project rationale:

The purpose of this project is to use the assets of community members with different

cognitive, social, civic, and intergenerational backgrounds and skills to build and

strengthen the community they share. These "community builders" are individuals who

learn from one another in the quest to attain this common goal while developing and

enhancing their own respective skill sets, which add value to their individual lives and

the larger communities of which they are a part.. This creation of "social capital" is

consequential to the health and well-being of a democratic society. (ibid., executive

summary, p. 1)

Another new program example is The Intergenerational School in Cleveland, Ohio

(http://www.intergenschool.org/; Whitehouse et al. 2002). Intentionally multidirectional

and multigenerational, the school is based on the premises that learning is a lifelong

process and that knowledge is socially constructed in the context of community. It

represents the highest level of a typology of intergenerational programs: a shared

learning environment designed to meet learning goals of individuals in different age

groups. Individual and community learning goals focus on behavioral and cognitive

abilities, learners' relationships to their families and community, and their broader

contribution to civic life.

Granville's (2002) review of intergenerational practice in the United Kingdom supports

the ability of intergenerational activity to develop community capacity and build social

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest. Page 5 of 7
capital through creation of new community networks and support systems. Research

(Granville 2002; Kaplan 2001; Loewen 1996) demonstrates that effective

intergenerational programs (1) are intentional, reciprocal, sustained, and asset or

strength based; (2) provide training for young and old to prepare them for participation;

(3) involve the targeted age groups in the planning; and (4) use the strengths of one

generation to meet the needs of the other. Research on programs that have an explicit

social capital focus, such as Community Builders and The Intergenerational School, is

needed to provide more evidence of this broader outcome of intergenerational learning.

Such research not only may lead to better intergenerational programs but may also be

an opportunity to examine social policy and rethink how we construct our basic

institutions (Kaplan 2001).

REFERENCES

"About Community Builders." 2002. http://cb.wartburg.edu/about.html

Balatti, J., and Falk, I. "Socioeconomic Contributions of Adult Learning to Community: A

Social Capital Perspective." ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY 52, no. 4 (August

2002): 281-298.

Blake, A. R. SENIOR VOLUNTEERS IN LITERACY PROGRAMS: A STUDY OF

DESIGN AND PRACTICE. Washington, DC: Corporation for National Service, 2000.

http://www.nationalservice.org/research/fellows_reports/2000/blake.p df

Bostrom, A.-K. "Informal Learning in a Formal Context: Problematizing the Concept of

Social Capital in a Contemporary Swedish Context." INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF

LIFELONG EDUCATION 21, no. 6 (November-December 2002): 510-524.

Granville, G. "An 'Unlikely Alliance': Young Offenders Supporting Elderly People in Care

Settings." EDUCATION AND AGEING 16, no. 1 (2001): 9-25.

Granville, G. A REVIEW OF INTERGENERATIONAL PRACTICE IN THE UK.

Stoke-on-Trent, England: Centre for Intergenerational Practice, Beth Johnson

Foundation, 2002. http://www.centreforip.org.uk/research.htm

Hanks, R. S., and Icenogle, M. "Preparing for an Age-Diverse Workforce:

Intergenerational Service-Learning in Social Gerontology and Business Curricula."

EDUCATIONAL GERONTOLOGY 27, no. 1 (January-February 2001): 49-70.

Kaplan, M. S. SCHOOL-BASED INTERGENERATIONAL PROGRAMS. Hamburg,

Germany: UNESCO Institute for Education, 2001.

http://www.unesco.org/education/uie/pdf/schoolbasedip.pdf

Loewen, J. "Intergenerational Learning: What If Schools Were Places Where Adults and

Children Learned Together?" 1996. (ED 404 014)

www.eric.ed.gov ERIC Custom Transformations Team

Page 6 of 7 ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest.
Murdock, S., and Paterson, C. "Youth and Adults Learning Together: Setting Up for

Success." JOURNAL OF EXTENSION 40, no. 3 (June 2002).

http://www.joe.org/joe/2002june/iw4.html

Schuller, T. et al. LEARNING, CONTINUITY AND CHANGE IN ADULT LIFE. London:

Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning, University of London, 2002.

ftp://cls.ioe.ac.uk/pub/Wbl/Acrobat/ResRep3.pdf

Whitehouse, P. J.; Bendezu, E.; FallCreek, S.; and Whitehouse, C. "Intergenerational

Community Schools: A New Practice for a New Time." EDUCATIONAL

GERONTOLOGY 26, no. 8 (December 2000): 761-770.

-----

This project has been funded at least in part with Federal funds from the U.S.

Department of Education under Contract No. ED-99-CO-0013. The content of this

publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of

Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations

imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Digests may be freely reproduced.

Title: Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest.

Note: Digest number 244.

Document Type: Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs)

(071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073);

Available From: For full text: http://www.ericacve.org/pubs.asp.

Descriptors: Adult Education, Age Differences, Attitude Change, Demonstration

Programs, Educational Benefits, Employment Potential, Human Capital,

Intergenerational Programs, Mixed Age Grouping, Older Adults, Self Esteem, Social

Capital, Social Development, Social Networks, Socialization

Identifiers: ERIC Digests, Intergenerational Learning

###

[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]

ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov

ED478947 2003-00-00 Intergenerational Learning and Social Capital. ERIC Digest. Page 7 of 7