{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014383989993746092, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0006253908692933083, 'mean_word_length': 5.451612903225806, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Learner-Centred Education and Adult Education for Migrants

This chapter focuses on a comparative analysis of the four case studies presented in Part 2. Hatzopoulos, Gravani, Slade, Jogi and Brown provide a critical interpretation of the data drawing on four conceptual axes of the LCE framework outlined in . The cross-case analysis of the findings revealed significant divergences amongst the four adult language programmes across the four countries in relation to the motivations of adult migrant learners for participating in adult education, the relevance of the curriculum and the extent to which the courses build on the migrant learners knowledges and skills, the utilisation of teaching techniques and methods within the wider framework of fostering dialogic teaching, and ultimately the degree of control that migrant learners do or do not have over their learning. Importantly, the status of adult migrant learners as non-citizens is a critical factor in terms of thinking about relevant and appropriate LCE educational practices. The precariousness of the migrants’ residence status, ranging from asylum-seekers to refugees and from legal migrants and to sans-papiers, might significantly affect their motivations to participate in adult learning, it can perpetuate hierarchies between educators and learners or between learners, and it can play a deterring role in their capacity to take control of their learning. Engaging with this discussion on citizenship and precarious livelihoods and integrating it into learning activities is a critical step towards empowering migrant learners.