We are using a social practices account of adult literacy and numeracy (Barton, 2002). Rather than seeing literacy and numeracy as the decontextualised, mechanical manipulation of letters, words and figures this view shows that literacy and numeracy are located within social, emotional and linguistic contexts.' (Scottish Executive, 2005)
Further, the Adult Literacies in Scotland 2020 Strategic Guidance (Scottish Government, 2011) includes a definition that illustrates the intention to link literacies with everyday context:
By 2020 Scotland's society and economy will be stronger because more of its adults are able to read, write and use numbers effectively in order to handle information, communicate with others, express ideas and opinions, make decisions and solve problems, as family members, workers, citizens and lifelong learners.'
Interestingly, a footnote, (Ibid:7) specifically defines the word literacies:
The term “literacies” used throughout this document refers to the skills, knowledge and understanding required for literacy and numeracy practices, for example to read and understand a bus timetable; to complete a betting slip or to create a CV.
Adding to this Scottish Government policy context, the Curriculum for Excellence (Scottish Government, 2009) provides an educational framework for children and young people aged 3-18 years and it states that literacy and numeracy are the responsibility of all, whilst English and maths are seen as specific curriculum subjects.
Inclusive but thought-provoking debate
There were voices in our discussion which expressed the fact that the continual changes of terminology were confusing:
· Terminology can circle around · There is a lack of clarity. Could we all just be consistent in the terminology we use and its meaning?
There is probably a great deal of truth in this as it is widely acknowledged that policy simply evolves; many contemporary commentators on literacy provision and on literacies have pointed out this in the English experience. St. Clair (2010:18), for example, describes how the term functional literacy 'inspired by good intentions' in the end 'does not help a great deal with understanding what literacy is.' The reason for this he suggests is that 'any functional definition of literacy will tend to collapse into circularity – literacy is that which you have to do to be literate.'
Policy makers who introduce layer upon layer of new policy as governments shift their focus or are replaced by other governments are also in the process of continually reworking the language of policy, 'the way it is thought about and talked about…over time.' (Ball, S.J, 2008:201).
As a rule then, policies that shape the type of provision that can be afforded, are not creative with language. The main preoccupation for government bodies is to act, in this case, for literacy, 'enabling through funding, legislation, policy infrastructure and training provision, a particular version of reading and writing to circulate through particular populations and not others.' (Hamilton, M; 2012:92)
36
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62