literacy for life; EFA global monitoring report, 2006 - Institut de ...

2
0
0
6
238 / CHAPTER 9
Education for All Global Monitoring Report
Few governments
have set
out coherent,
long-term
national literacy
policies
37. The literacy
programme contributors
to the GCE/ActionAid
study (most of them from
NGOs) made clear that
the relationships between
government and CSOs
should not be one-way,
with governments telling
CSOs how to deliver
programmes. With their
local knowledge and
experience, CSOs have
much to contribute in the
definition and design of
literacy strategies. The
programme
representatives also made
clear that government-led
coordination could be
counterproductive where
relationships between
government and civil
society were weak or
strained.
38. For example, in
relation to same-sex
facilitators in single-sex
learner groups and
gender-equitable teaching
and learning materials.
This section has highlighted the paucity of
data and research on the financing of literacy.
A strong evidence base on cost-effective,
sustainable approaches to delivering good-quality
literacy programmes and promoting literate
environments is badly needed. Examples of such
work exist in Bangladesh, Brazil, Mexico and
South Africa. A major initiative to build capacity
for monitoring and evaluation in literacy
programmes should be undertaken systematically
at all relevant levels of national systems (Bhola,
2005). Support for such work would be a valuable
contribution of and to the United Nations Literacy
Decade.
Bringing greater coherence
to national literacy policies
Governments have made commitments to
improve levels of adult literacy but relatively few
have set out coherent, long-term national literacy
policies, either because this is not deemed a
priority for political or economic reasons or
because coordinating programme delivery and/or
creating more enabling and proactive literate
environments is found to be difficult, complex and
potentially costly. Accordingly, in most countries
policy on literacy is less than the sum of its parts.
A cohesive, comprehensive approach is required
to promote literacy for literate societies, firmly
embedded in national education and poverty
reduction strategies. How might such a policy
process be stimulated?
The Indicative Framework developed by the
World Bank to promote focused policy and
planning dialogue for achieving UPE through the
Fast track Initiative has given rise to substantive
debate worldwide (Chapter 4). Despite
disagreements regarding the choice of indicators
and their benchmark values, the concept of the
framework is a useful policy tool. A similar
approach to stimulate dialogue on literacy – and
adult literacy in particular – could be worthwhile.
GCE and ActionAid developed twelve baseline
statements of good practice (‘benchmark
statements’) designed to serve this purpose,
summarized in Box 9.14.
This benchmarking work is very useful but
necessarily incomplete. The understandings
represented in statements 1 and 2 are very much
in line with the thrust of this Report. So is
statement 3, though its considerable implications
for developing human resource capacity within
government would have to be factored into
national policy, including the need to work
productively with civil society. 37 There is a strong
case for decentralization, given the superior local
knowledge of literacy needs, though caution is
required as the success of decentralization in
many fields has been mixed.
The emphasis on evaluation of adult literacy
programmes (statement 4) is wise and highlights
an area that is weak in many literacy
programmes where resources and knowledge
are limited (Bhola, 2005).
A major plank in the framework is a unified
approach to investment in human resources
(statements 5, 6 and 7). The underlying premise
is that, although good practice may exist in
individual programmes, a national approach is
needed to scale up and sustain improvements
in literacy. Since meeting that need necessitates
new resources and a significant increase in
training capacity, this is the issue most likely
to test the willingness of many governments to
engage seriously in major new literacy initiatives,
especially when volunteerism and the payment
of honorariums keep many literacy programmes
alive. In essence, it means recognition of a new
cadre of education professionals.
The statements on teaching and learning
(8, 9 and 10) rehearse many of the arguments
in this Report and have implications for other
aspects of government policy, including policy
on language, rights to information and books,
all areas that are politically charged as well as
technically challenging.
More detailed work is needed to assess the
cost benchmark (11). The proposed dedication of
at least 3% of national education budgets to adult
literacy programmes (statement 12) is arbitrary,
the study acknowledges. The arguments in favour
of allowing national need, rather than a set figure,
to drive strategy and policy are much stronger.
Four major weaknesses characterize the
proposed framework. First, it underplays the
place of gender in literacy and the importance of
gendered strategies in literacy policies. 38 Second,
by assuming a relatively steady state of national
circumstances, it underestimates the incidence
of conflict and other emergencies, and, to a lesser
extent, the urgent demands stemming from the
HIV/AIDS pandemic. Third, it does not prioritize
the benchmarks. Promoting a three-year literacy
programme cycle, with its attendant costs, may
be unrealistic, and setting budget targets in a
vacuum may serve limited purposes. Fourth,