[NIFL-POVRACELIT:346] Discussion on NLA List on Literacy and Social Justice

From: Mary Ann Corley (macorley1@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Jan 05 2001 - 23:46:26 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f064kQ912860; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 23:46:26 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 23:46:26 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <00e501c0779b$322e3860$23bffea9@hppav>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Mary Ann Corley" <macorley1@earthlink.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:346] Discussion on NLA List on Literacy and Social Justice
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
Status: O
Content-Length: 9585
Lines: 185

The NLA list has had some postings recently that may be of interest to
subscribers on the nifl-povracelit list.  Cross-posted below are two
messages, one from Tom Sticht on social justice issues and the International
Adult Literacy Survey (IALS), and the other from Silja Kallenbach with a
somewhat different perspective.  I'm cross-posting these because they seem
to speak to the issues that are at the heart of our povracelit list.  (I
apologize to those of you who have already read these messages on the NLA
list.)

For those who wish to subscribe to the NLA list, send an e-mail to
majordomo@world.std.com

Skip the header. In the body of the message, type (only) subscribe nla


Thanks.

Mary Ann Corley
Director, National Center for
 Literacy and Social Justice
macorley1@earthlink.net

*********************************
(From Silja Kallenbach:)

Thank you, Tom Sticht for your many insightful postings on this list.  This
is a very belated response to your analysis of the International Adult
Literacy Survey, and specifically the conclusion that

"the emphasis of this recent  report using IALS data is largely on the
inequality of literacy among adults within nations, and the economic
consequences of these differences in literacy for adults
within a given nation."

As a lifelong literacy practitioner and advocate I would not argue against
the importance of adult literacy in "promoting the general health, welfare
and prosperity of the nation." And I agree with Tom's preference for that as
an argument for increased funding of  AELS rather than the argument of
increased global competitiveness.

I would like to point out that there are other ways to analyze the cause and
effect regarding social inequality and adult literacy. If I understand Tom's
statement correctly, he is proposing that more and better adult literacy
education would bring about more social equality. In my mind, the social
equality comes first and high adult literacy is the outcome, not the other
way around.

To think or argue that adult literacy is going to make a dent in the
enormous and shameful social inequality in this country is to burden adult
literacy with yet another impossible mission. Even if people's earnings do
increase with more education, the very unequal quality of K-12 education and
ways in which people can meet their basic needs will ensure a steady supply
of adult literacy learners to take the place of those who have managed to
move ahead in life economically.

I think the IALS is a strong argument for the literacy field to be concerned
with a myriad social justice concerns (such as campaign finance reform,
ending corporate welfare, health care reform,
affordable housing) to increase social equality in the U.S. while also
advocating for improved adult literacy funding and policies. Only then, I
believe, we will begin to see some discernible improvement in adult literacy
rates.

Of course, the prospects for more social equality in this country do not
look bright after the recent elections. . .

Happy and healthy new year to all my fellow NLAdvocates.

Silja Kallenbach
Coordinator
New England Literacy Resource Center/ World Education


>>> Thomas Sticht <tsticht@aznet.net> 12/13 3:03 PM >>>

Tom Sticht

Research Note 12/13/00

>From International Competitiveness to International Inequality: New
Perspectives on Social Justice From the International Adult Literacy Survey
(IALS)

On September 8 of this year, International Literacy Day,  I attended
ceremonies at the Library of Congress in which a new report on adult
literacy was released and discussed. I think it is  of interest to note that
since then there has been little discussion of the report. This is
unfortunate because the report takes a somewhat different stance with regard
to the results of the International Adult Literacy Survey than has been
reported in the past.

Funded by the U. S. Department of Education, the report entitled
Benchmarking Adult Literacy in America: An International Comparative Study,
was authored by Albert Tuijnman of the Institute of
International Education, Stockholm University. It is available for
downloading at:
http://www.ed.gov/offices/ovae/publicat.html and it has a publication date
of September 2000 (it is also available at www.nald.ca under Full Text
Documents).

One of the major findings of interest to me in the Benchmarking report are
the data for the literacy proficiency of the adult population aged 26-65.
These data indicate that, for 21 nations, the United States average literacy
score was significantly better than 11 nations (including the United Kingdom
and Switzerland), no different from 6 others (including Australia, Denmark,
Germany, New Zealand, Canada and the Netherlands) and statistically lower
than only three nations- Finland, Norway and Sweden.  For the population
aged 16-25, the U. S. was no different from the United Kingdom, Italy, New
Zealand, Ireland, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, Belgium
(Flanders), though it scored lower on the average than Denmark, Australia,
Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Finland, but not by much.

It seems to me that the foregoing is especially important given the concerns
for global competitiveness that some policy-oriented reports have used to
focus adult literacy education on workforce development.  For instance, the
influential Jump Start report of 1989 stated,
"There is no way in which the United States can remain competitive in a
global economy, maintain its standard of living, and shoulder the burden of
the retirement of the baby boom generation unless we mount a forceful
national effort to help adults upgrade their basic skills in the very near
future (p.iii)." Yet now we find the U.S. pre-eminent in the global economy,
with very low unemployment rates internally, and on a par with the worldAEs
leading economic western nations in terms of average adult literacy skills.
Overall then, there is not much of a basis in the report for arguing that
the U. S. is not economically competitive internationally because of low
adult literacy. Hence such
economically-based arguments are likely to be less influential in the
foreseeable future for advocating for adult literacy education.

Concerns for Inequality and Social Justice On the Rise

When one looks in the Benchmarking report at the range of scores in each
nation, there are clearly differences across nations in terms of the range
of  literacy scores between the lower scoring and higher scoring adults.
There are large international differences in the variation among the adult
populations within nations with regard to their literacy scores. The report
makes a great deal about these inequalities among nations.

The report creates an index of inequality in literacy for each of 22 nations
by dividing the literacy scores of those at the 90th percentile by the
scores of those at the 10th percentile. For the United
States, the score of 183 (10th percentile) was divided into 355 (90th
percentile) producing an inequality index of 1.9. For the adult population
aged 26-65 years, the U. S. has a larger index of
inequality than 14 of the 21 nations, and has less inequality in literacy
only than Portugal, Poland, Slovena, Italy, and Chile. Only Canada and the
U.S. are equal in their distributions of literacy and both of these nations
have inequality indices that are not statistically different from the
average inequality index computed using all 22 nations (1.8).  Similar
findings hold for the adult population aged 16-25, though in this case the
U. S. has more inequality than in 13 other nations, including Canada.

The report goes on to note that "inequality in the range of literacy scores
in North America is also among the highest of the nations surveyed.
Especially in he United States, inequality in the
distribution of literacy scores on the English test [that is, the NALS] used
for the survey is strongly related to economic inequality measured by income
differentials between households."

It seems to me, then, that  the emphasis of this recent  report using IALS
data is largely on the inequality of literacy among adults within nations,
and the economic consequences of these differences in literacy for adults
within a given nation.  In many respects, this seems  to
be somewhat of a change in perspective from the concern for adult literacy
as a factor in international competitiveness that has in large part driven
the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, to  a return to the concern for issues
of poverty and the need for individuals to be economically
competitive within our nation that led to the enactment of the adult basic
education program as part of the War on Poverty's Economic Opportunity Act
of 1964. In a sense, with this new report using IALS data, we seem to have
gone back from the concerns with international competitiveness of A Nation
at Risk of the 1980s and 1990s  to the concerns for People at Risk of the
1960s.  This might be a more fruitful stance for advocating for the full
recognition of the Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) as the third
major, mainstream component of our nation's publicly supported  educational
structure (K-12, AELS, Higher Education,) for promoting the general health,
welfare and
prosperity of the nation. It might also augur well for placing workforce
development in a more appropriate, tertiary position with regard to its
importance as an outcome for adult education and for getting the WIA changed
to the Adult Education, Literacy and Workforce Investment Act
(AELWIA) when it next comes up for reconsideration.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:33:01 EST