literacy for life; EFA global monitoring report, 2006 - Institut de ...
literacy for life; EFA global monitoring report, 2006 - Institut de ...
literacy for life; EFA global monitoring report, 2006 - Institut de ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
2<br />
0<br />
0<br />
6<br />
150 / CHAPTER 6<br />
Education <strong>for</strong> All Global Monitoring Report<br />
Scholars have<br />
suggested<br />
that a useful<br />
concept would<br />
be that of<br />
multiple<br />
literacies<br />
Challengers to this view note that the<br />
competence-based agenda <strong>for</strong> adult<br />
mathematics/numeracy education is dangerously<br />
limited (FitzSimons, 2002, cited in Coben et al.,<br />
2003). They distinguish between concepts of<br />
numeracy with narrowly <strong>de</strong>fined learning<br />
outcomes, which they characterize as<br />
approaching numeracy from a human resources<br />
perspective, and approaches that would allow <strong>for</strong><br />
the <strong>de</strong>velopment of critical citizenship (Johnston<br />
et al., 2002, cited in Coben et al., 2003).<br />
More recently, ‘numeracy’ has been used<br />
to refer to the ability to process, interpret and<br />
communicate numerical, quantitative, spatial,<br />
statistical and even mathematical in<strong>for</strong>mation in<br />
ways that are appropriate <strong>for</strong> a variety of contexts<br />
(Box 6.3). The term increasingly refers to a<br />
competence allowing more effective participation<br />
in relevant social activities (Evans, 2000).<br />
Skills enabling access to knowledge<br />
and in<strong>for</strong>mation<br />
The word ‘<strong>literacy</strong>’ has begun to be used in a<br />
much broa<strong>de</strong>r, metaphorical sense, to refer to<br />
other skills and competencies, <strong>for</strong> example<br />
‘in<strong>for</strong>mation <strong>literacy</strong>’, ‘visual <strong>literacy</strong>’, ‘media<br />
<strong>literacy</strong>’ and ‘scientific <strong>literacy</strong>’. International<br />
organizations – notably the OECD through<br />
publications such as Literacy in the In<strong>for</strong>mation<br />
Age (2000) and Literacy Skills <strong>for</strong> the Knowledge<br />
Society (1997) – have given impetus to the use of<br />
such terms, eventually giving rise to a new French<br />
term, littératie (Fernan<strong>de</strong>z, 2005). The meaning of<br />
these concepts tends to be diverse and shifting,<br />
ranging from the view of <strong>literacy</strong> as a set of<br />
largely technical skills (the OECD perspective)<br />
to the i<strong>de</strong>a that these skills should be applied<br />
in critical ways to examine one’s surroundings<br />
(e.g. the workplace and the media) and push<br />
<strong>for</strong> social change (Hull, 2003). For instance,<br />
‘in<strong>for</strong>mation <strong>literacy</strong>’ broadly refers to the ability<br />
to access and use a variety of in<strong>for</strong>mation sources<br />
to solve an in<strong>for</strong>mation need. Yet, it can also be<br />
<strong>de</strong>fined as the <strong>de</strong>velopment of a complex set<br />
of critical skills that allow people to express,<br />
explore, question, communicate and un<strong>de</strong>rstand<br />
the flow of i<strong>de</strong>as among individuals and groups in<br />
quickly changing technological environments.<br />
Some scholars have suggested that a more<br />
useful concept would be that of multiple literacies<br />
– that is, ways of ‘reading the world’ in specific<br />
contexts: technological, health, in<strong>for</strong>mation,<br />
media, visual, scientific, and so on (see Street,<br />
2003; Lankshear and Knobel, 2003; Cope and<br />
Kalantzis, 2000). This concept has recently<br />
been adopted in the francophone world (most<br />
prominently, in Quebec) through the term<br />
littératies and has been used to un<strong>de</strong>rstand<br />
the multiple <strong>for</strong>ms of <strong>literacy</strong> among minority<br />
communities with shifting cultural i<strong>de</strong>ntities<br />
(see the work cited in Fernan<strong>de</strong>z, 2005).<br />
Yet the notion of multiple literacies is not<br />
without controversy. By attracting a long list of<br />
modifiers, ‘<strong>literacy</strong>’ has become a <strong>de</strong>based term,<br />
its core reference to reading skills un<strong>de</strong>rmined<br />
(Jones, 1997; Hull, 2003). Some respond to this<br />
critique by emphasizing that reading, in the<br />
broa<strong>de</strong>st sense of the word, remains integral<br />
to the notion of <strong>literacy</strong>. Thus, reading may mean<br />
not only the <strong>de</strong>coding and un<strong>de</strong>rstanding of<br />
Box 6.3<br />
Numeracy situations<br />
A recent approach to the issue of numeracy<br />
<strong>de</strong>scribes three different types of ‘numeracy<br />
situations’ (Gal, 2000):<br />
Generative situations require people to count,<br />
quantify, compute and otherwise manipulate<br />
numbers, quantities, items or visual elements —<br />
all of which involve language skills to varying<br />
<strong>de</strong>grees.<br />
Interpretive situations require people to make<br />
sense of verbal or text-based messages that,<br />
while based on quantitative data, require no<br />
manipulation of numbers.<br />
Decision situations ‘<strong>de</strong>mand that people find and<br />
consi<strong>de</strong>r multiple pieces of in<strong>for</strong>mation in or<strong>de</strong>r<br />
to <strong>de</strong>termine a course of action, typically in the<br />
presence of conflicting goals, constraints or<br />
uncertainty’.<br />
Teaching adults numeracy means enabling them<br />
‘to manage effectively multiple types of numeracy<br />
situations’. As such, numeracy should be seen as a<br />
semi-autonomous area at the intersection between<br />
<strong>literacy</strong> and mathematics and address not only purely<br />
cognitive issues, but also stu<strong>de</strong>nts’ dispositions and<br />
cognitive styles.<br />
Sources: Gal (2000), Coben et al. (2003).