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

GOOD POLICY, GOOD PRACTICE / 239
Box 9.14
GCE/ActionAid ‘Benchmark statements’ to help define literacy policy
A: Understanding literacy
1. Literacy: the acquisition and use of reading, writing and
numeracy skills, and thereby the development of active
citizenship, improved livelihoods and gender equality. The goals
of literacy programmes should reflect this understanding.
2. Literacy: a continuous process that requires sustained
learning and practice. Policies and programmes should
encourage sustained participation and celebrate progressive
achievement.
B: Governing literacy
3. Governments have lead responsibility in fulfilling the right
to literacy and in providing leadership, policy frameworks and
resources. They should:
assure cooperation among relevant ministries and links to
all relevant development programmes;
work in systematic collaboration with experienced CSOs;
assure links between all these stakeholders, especially at the
local level;
assure relevance to the issues in learners’ lives by promoting
decentralization of budgets and of decision-making on
curriculum, methods and materials.
C: Evaluating literacy programmes
4. It is important to invest in ongoing feedback and evaluation
mechanisms, data systematization and strategic research. The
focus of evaluations should be on the practical application of
what has been learned and the impact on active citizenship,
improved health and livelihoods, and gender equality.
D: Facilitators, supervisors and trainers
5. Facilitators should be paid at least the equivalent of the
minimum wage of a primary-school teacher for all hours
worked (including time for training, preparation and follow-up).
6. Facilitators should be local people who receive substantial
initial training and regular refresher training, as well as
ongoing opportunities for exchanges with other facilitators.
Governments should put in place a framework for professional
development of the sector, including trainers/supervisors, with
full access to facilitators (e.g. through distance education).
7. There should be a ratio of at least one facilitator to thirty
learners and at least one trainer/supervisor to fifteen learner
groups (1:10 in remote areas), with a minimum of one support
visit per month. Programmes should have timetables that
flexibly respond to learners’ daily lives but provide for regular
and sustained contact (e.g. twice a week for at least two years).
E: Teaching, learning and the wider literate environment
8. In multilingual contexts it is important at all stages for
learners to be given an active choice about the language in
which they learn. Active efforts should be made to encourage
and sustain bilingual learning.
9. A wide range of participatory methods should be used in
the learning process to assure active engagement of learners
and relevance to their lives. These same participatory methods
and processes should be used at all levels of training of trainers
and facilitators.
10. Governments should take responsibility to stimulate the
market for production and distribution of a wide variety of
materials suitable for new readers, for example working with
publishers and newspaper producers. They should balance this
with funding for local production of materials, especially by
learners, facilitators and trainers.
F: Financing literacy
11. It should be assumed that a good-quality literacy programme
that respects all these benchmarks will cost between US$50
and US$100 per learner per year for at least three years (two
years of initial learning and ensuring that further learning
opportunities are available for all).
12. Governments should dedicate at least 3% of their national
education-sector budgets to adult literacy programmes as
conceived in these benchmarks. Where governments meet this
target, international donors should fill any remaining resource
gaps (e.g. by including adult literacy in the Fast Track Initiative).
Note: For the full ‘benchmark statements’ see the source document.
Source: GCE/ActionAid (2005).
while the framework is potentially an important
tool for countries with a major literacy deficit, it
is less useful where the objective is to meet the
needs of a relatively small but diverse target
population.
Despite these weaknesses, the framework can
help stimulate policy debate. It is not a solution in
itself but a contribution to a dialogue that should
be situated in broader policy frameworks.
Youth and adult literacy, and the promotion
of literate environments are key to poverty
reduction, education-sector development and
other strategies devoted to human development.
If this is not recognized and acted upon, those
efforts will not prosper.