Skills for life:
The national strategy for improving adult literacy and numeracy skills

(DfEE, December, 2000)

1. NIACE welcomes the high priority given by the Government to the literacy and numeracy of adults and supports the development of a national strategy through the creation of the Adult Basic Skills Strategy Unit.

2. We welcome the creation of the Adult Basic Skills Strategy Unit and the Cabinet Committee on adult basic skills. We also welcome the increased funding to 2003-04 to support literacy and numeracy development. NIACE supports the intention to give direction to local LSCs to

3. Other key strengths of the proposals welcomed by NIACE include,

4.  NIACE has the following concerns:

Below, is a little more detail on these and other concerns NIACE would like to see addressed as part of the full strategy document.

5.1 Development work

Apart from the 10 Pathfinder Projects there needs to be opportunities to continue to develop methods of reaching learners through national pilot programmes. These national projects offer an opportunity to test models and methods and provide guidance to others. Examples include the work NIACE, BSA and FEFC are leading in relation to community-based basic skills work; more development on ESOL and with adults with disabilities; and family learning.

5.2 Targets

We are unconvinced by this target-setting but appreciate the desire for improvement which lies behind it. The strategy has to be long-term and continuous, it must seek to increase skills levels but aim to improve the focus on and quality of opportunities for adults.

The strategy does not suggest how the numbers will be arrived at and since many people learn on their own, in informal ways or as part of some other activity, this limits confidence in figures such as the desire to reduce by 750,000 the number of adults with basic skills needs. If we have an incomplete understanding of how many people have a poor level of skills now, we are unlikely to be confident when we have 750,000 less of them. It would be better to set targets for those engaged in learning successfully rather than the proportion in the population with basic skills needs.

5.3 Young adults

5.4 Disadvantaged communities

5.5 Parents

NIACE would prefer an inclusive definition of ‘family’ to include, for example, grandparents and lone parents. Current family literacy and numeracy programmes need to be focused on both adults and children, need proper evaluation and work best when offered within a broader family learning setting. ‘Basic Skills’ classes are a ‘turn off’ for some adults.

5.6 Unemployed people, benefits claimants, and those in low skilled jobs

NIACE regrets the media coverage suggesting compulsory basic skills tests and that provision is to be imposed on those receiving benefits. This is not intended in the strategy and efforts will need to be made to encourage voluntary activity in learning and to dissuade those who believe people will learn best when forced to do so. The possibility of tests ("universal screening"), compulsory ‘taster’ courses and suggestions of targeting lone parents will not reassure those with limited faith in the education system. The key is effective promotion, quality ‘brokerage’ and guidance arrangements and motivation. For workers in low skilled jobs there is a particular challenge to ensure that part-time and temporary workers on the margins of the labour force are not excluded. Lessons from Union Learning Fund projects may be of importance here. Again, the most successful programmes approach the task by embedding basic skills in the overall learning programme, which has to be meaningful to adults involved. All participation research points to making sure that key events in people’s lives and small successes in learning anything can bring confidence to try more learning at more complex levels.

5.7 Groups at high risk

There is insufficient attention given to those adults who do not speak English as their first language (ESOL). The strategy should distinguish between ESOL and native-speakers who have difficulty with literacy and/or numeracy.

NIACE remains concerned that both ESOL and learners with disabilities were excluded from A Fresh Start and would want to see both these groups of learners mentioned throughout the strategy document and not ‘bolted on’ in one small part. NIACE is concerned that these large groups of learners have been marginalised in this document. Additionally, the development programmes for ESOL and for disability and basic skills has only just begun; a more significant development programme must feature in the strategy.

5.8 Management of learning

The lack of recognition of self-help, independent and informal learning is no surprise, but should be recognised in the full strategy. There is also insufficient mention of the training of front line workers as mentors which is well proven as a successful method of engaging new learners. Finally, there is a misplaced belief that adults involved in improving their basic skills want to progress up the educational ladder. Many do not. The ‘seamless progression to key skills’ is only relevant to those wanting to progress from course to course.

5.9 Missing groups

Older learners are a significant omission. The financial literacy work undertaken by NIACE with older learners indicates a significant need among older people for basic skills support.

Asylum seekers and travellers are two groups not considered fully in the document.

Numeracy and literacy are different skills and there is little indication that the strategy will address the subjects differently. There are different levels of skills in the population and each will require different promotional strategies and provision. It is recognised that different stigma apply in each case.

5.10 The national tests

The national tests should be voluntary and opted into as a qualification when learners wish to do so, but not double as a screening, surveying and diagnostic tool. It appears as if Skills for Life has thoroughly confused the purpose of the tests being developed at the moment. The document suggests that the tests can be used for surveying, screening for diagnostic purposes and as a qualification. This is educationally and practically unsound. It would be better to focus on one purpose, a qualification perhaps. Diagnostic assessment usually needs to be more detailed and rigorous.

NIACE would welcome a statement which reinforced the point that the tests, or qualifications, are not a curriculum in themselves. There is always a risk of some providers ‘teaching to the test.’ NIACE does not agree that tests are always motivating and would want to see the Fresh Start recommendations followed: that adults should be able to opt in to take a National Test should they choose to do so. NIACE has agreed to help pilot the tests with adult learners but have not seen them.

5.11 National curriculum

Unlike the national standards devised by QCA, the national curriculum for literacy, for numeracy and for ESOL have each had limited exposure to the field for testing and review. It would be helpful to state that these three separate documents should be reviewed regularly. It would also be important to state that some adults need a curriculum which helps them have access to the literacy and numeracy entry levels, which is being developed in the NIACE/LSDA project.

5.12 Teaching materials

Much nonsense is talked about ‘good materials.’ NIACE would welcome encouragement to teachers to devise and deploy materials based on individually assessed need and interest. Materials ought to always integrate into adults’ interests and requirements; this is not optional. The ‘seal of approval’ from the Strategy Unit may confuse matters. The BSA ‘seal of approval’ means that materials have been tried and properly tested. The variable quality of the FEFC’s Basic Skills Quality Initiative materials is not encouraging and we need to learn from this experience.

5.13 Pathfinder Projects

There is necessarily a lack of detail on the Pathfinder programme. NIACE recommends that the Pathfinder project information is left out of the strategy and is treated separately. The Pathfinder projects need to involve national as well as regional agencies in their operation and be publicly tendered for. Care needs to be taken to ensure that the projects, laudable as they might appear are not seen as the strategy. In addition, the projects must begin from work already done and not ‘from scratch.’ Too much attention to "innovation" and too little on effectiveness has led to wasted opportunity when funding projects in the past.

LEAs with a recognised track record in delivering basic skills to adults should be included in Pathfinder projects, rather than limiting it to only those LEAs which are effective in their work with school pupils.

The Pathfinder projects also risk having to test everything. This will make them unwieldy. Each project will need to have several partners, several strands and a project management team. All will need to be evaluated by agencies competent in qualitative as well as quantitative research.

5.14 Quality and inspection

Review of the inspection arrangements would be welcome. It would be valuable to include a statement about what providers can expect from the two inspectorates in relation to level of expertise from inspectors. It will be important, too, to ensure that inspections look at the quality of basic skills where they underpin or are embedded in other kinds of learning.

Too little attention has been given to the LSC’s quality improvement role, which is potentially a powerful influence on quality, given that each LSC will have basic skills expertise.

6. Conclusion

NIACE is concerned that the Strategy Unit’s intention to publish the strategy at the end of January implies that too little attention will be paid to the many detailed responses being sent in. We hope this is not the case.

While welcoming Skills for Life, NIACE has concerns that a hurried approach to developing a strategy that has waited all these years might spoil the strategic approach. We are not keen to see a ‘crusade’, preferring a calm and well resourced strategy that is inclusive and developmental and aims to increase participation in learning for all.

Top of page