Upload
dvndamme
View
522
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
LITERACIES: KEY TO INCLUSIVE SOCIETIESDirk Van DammeHead of the Innovation and Measuring Progress division, Directorate for Education and Skills, OECD
2
• Inform you on what the most evidence tells us– EFA Monitoring Report
– OECD’s PISA 2012
– OECD’s Adult Skills Survey / PIAAC
• Draw lessons for policies and practices from the available evidence
• Make a case for evidence-based advocacy and action
Purposes
3
• Progress is made, but not enough
• Low literacy is not a destiny: policies and practices matter!
• Literacy impacts on various economic and social outcomes
• Looking beyond literacy– Not just about the very basic skills
– Multi-literacies: multi-dimensionality of literacy
– Not only skills development, but also skills use
• Conclusions: literacy policies for inclusive societies
Outline
4
PROGRESS, BUTNOT ENOUGH
5
• The adult illiteracy rate fell from 24% in 1990 to 18% in 2000 and 16% in 2011.
• However, the number of illiterate adults remains stubbornly high at 774 million, a fall of 12% since 1990 but just 1% since 2000.
• The number of illiterate adults is projected only to fall to 743 million by 2015. In 32 out of 89 countries, the adult literacy rate will still be below 80%.
• In sub-Saharan Africa, the number of illiterate adults has increased by 37% since 1990, mainly as a result of population growth.
• Women make up nearly two-thirds of the total, and since 1990 there has been no progress in reducing this share.
Progress made, but slowing down
EFA Global Monitoring Report 2013/14
6
Many countries have decreased their numbers of low-performing 15-year olds
J
apan
8.6
H
ong
Kong
-Chi
na...
K
orea
8.4
N
ew Z
eala
nd
...
4.4
F
inla
nd
...
3.7
F
ranc
e
4.4
C
anad
a
-3.
9
Bel
gium
A
ustr
alia
-5.9
I
rela
nd
-9
.8
Lie
chte
nste
in...
N
orw
ay
-1
2.7
P
olan
d
...
-9.6
I
srae
l
5.5
-6.7
S
witz
erla
nd .
..-8
.1
Ger
man
y
-1
.6
OEC
D a
vera
...
Uni
ted
Stat
es
...
10.1
S
wed
en
...
I
taly
C
zech
Rep
ublic
...
6.5
Ic
elan
d
...
-7.4
P
ortu
gal
H
unga
ry
Spa
in
Aus
tria
D
enm
ark
-
2.7
G
reec
e
Rus
sian
Fed
erati
...
Bul
gari
a
2.1
-13.
1
Lat
via
R
oman
ia
-1
8.0
A
lban
ia
...
T
haila
nd
-1
5.2
C
hile
A
rgen
tina
-
1.2
B
razi
l
-1
9.7
P
eru
M
exic
o
-1
3.4
In
done
sia
...0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2012 2000
Perc
enta
ge o
f stu
dent
s be
low
pro
ficie
ncy
Leve
l 2 in
rea
ding
Countries are ranked in descending amount of progress
But many countries still have 30, 40, … to even 60% of low-literate 15 year-olds
PISA 2012
7
• Progress is not only uneven across countries, but also unevenly distributed within countries
• Many are excluded from the benefits of educational expansion and skills improvement, but exclusion is often concentrated in particular groups– Gender, location, ethnicity, socio-economic
background, age, immigrant status, language, …
Progress not only too slow, but also unevenly distributed
8
Huge social disparities in youth literacy
EFA 2013
9
LOW LITERACY ISNO DESTINY – POLICIES
AND PRACTICES MATTER
10
Low literacy risk among youth related but not completely explained by mean literacy levels
Peru
Kazak
hsta
n
Argen
tina
Mala
ysia
Colom
biaBra
zil
Mon
tene
gro
Bulgar
ia
Costa
Rica
Chile
Serbia
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Turke
y
Lithu
ania
Icela
nd
Croat
ia
Portu
gal
Spain
Latv
iaIta
ly
Denm
ark
United
King
dom
Franc
e
Viet N
am
Mac
ao-C
hina
Nethe
rland
s
New Z
ealan
d
Eston
ia
Canad
a
Irelan
d
Korea
Singap
ore
Shang
hai-C
hina
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Mean score on the reading scale Exponential (Mean score on the reading scale)% of students below Level 2 Exponential (% of students below Level 2)
PISA 2012
Vietnam
Croatia
Estonia
Denmark
Costa Rica
Macao-China
Turkey
Albania
Indonesia
Sweden
Italy
Luxembourg
Israel
France
New Zealand
Rank mean reading score
Rank
per
cent
age
stud
ents
bel
ow le
vel 2
Less inclusive countries: with higher percentage students below
level 2 than predicted by their mean score
More inclusive countries: with lower percentage students below level 2 than predicted by their mean score
PISA 2012
12
National income plays a role, but with a lot of variation – poverty is no excuse
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GDP per capita (in thousand USD converted using PPPs)
% o
f stu
dent
s bel
ow L
evel
2
PISA 2012
13
National income plays a role, but with a lot of variation – poverty is no excuse
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Indonesia
Vietnam
GDP per capita (in thousand USD converted using PPPs)
% o
f stu
dent
s bel
ow L
evel
2
PISA 2012
14
National income plays a role, but with a lot of variation – poverty is no excuse
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
GDP per capita (in thousand USD converted using PPPs)
% o
f stu
dent
s bel
ow L
evel
2
PISA 2012
15
National income plays a role, but with a lot of variation – poverty is no excuse
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Argentina
Latvia
Shanghai, PRC
GDP per capita (in thousand USD converted using PPPs)
% o
f stu
dent
s bel
ow L
evel
2
PISA 2012
16
Inequality in income distribution matters for inequality in literacy, but not in a deterministic way
1.41.451.51.551.61.651.7
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.33593915
0.26078351
0.323504170000001
0.256125120.2478
0.3150587
0.25947413
0.29544 0.29327448
0.3366040.32925796
0.3150.29374042
0.2501
0.3144635
0.25663323
0.31701137
0.259326
0.37823832
0.2591987
England/N. Ireland (UK)
Literacy skills inequality (9th/1st decile)
Income inequality (Gini coefficient)
Low income inequalityLow skills inequality
High income inequalityLow skills inequality
High income inequalityHigh skills inequality
Low income inequalityHigh skills inequality
Ave
rag
e
Average
PIAAC 2012
17
PIAAC 2012
18
Schooling matters a lot, but is not the only reason why adults lack basic literacy skills
Japa
n
Nethe
rland
s
Finlan
d
Sweden
Austra
lia
Czech
Rep
ublic
Flande
rs (B
elgium
)
Norway
United
Sta
tes
OECD ave
rage
Poland
Austri
a
Englan
d (U
K)
Englan
d/N. I
relan
d (U
K)
North
ern
Irelan
d (U
K)
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Franc
e
Germ
any
Denm
ark
Irelan
d
Korea
Canad
a
Eston
iaSpa
inIta
ly
Russia
n Fed
erat
ion210
230
250
270
290
310
330
Tertiary Education Below upper secondary education Upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education
PIAAC mean literacy proficiency scores for 25-64 year-olds by educational attainment (2012)
PIAAC 2012
19
Level 2
15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
Age matters a lot for literacy, even after correcting for education and other factors
Age
Score
Literacy unadjusted
Numeracy unadjusted
Numeracy adjusted
Literacy adjusted
20
LITERACY IMPACTS ON VARIOUS ECONOMIC AND
SOCIAL OUTCOMES
21
1
2
3
4
5Average Germany England (UK) Flanders (Belgium)
Likelihood of positive social and economic outcomes among highly literate adults
(scoring at Level 4/5 compared with those scoring at Level 1 or below)
Odds ratio
PIAAC 2012
22
The effect of education and literacy on labour market participation
PIAAC 2012
23
Literacy skills impact on employment, but qualifications determine earnings
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Earnings
Employment rate (%) Average monthly earn-ings ($USD)
ISCED 0/1/2 ISCED 3/4 ISCED 5/6
Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4/5
Flemish Community, Belgium
PIAAC 2012
24
Low literacy skills increase likelihood to negative social outcomes
Czech
Rep
ublic
Irelan
d
Avera
ge
Nethe
rland
s
Finlan
d
Japa
n
Sweden
Englan
d/N. I
relan
d (U
K)
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Norway
Poland
Denm
ark
Austra
liaIta
ly
Flande
rs (B
elgium
)
Canad
a
Korea
Estonia
Spain
Austri
a
Germ
any
United
Sta
tes
1
2
3
4
5
Trust Political efficacy volunteer Health
Odd
s ra
tio –
ref
eren
ce is
Lev
el 4
/5
Odds ratios adjusted for age, gender, education and immigrant and language background
PIAAC 2012
25
Low literacy skills increase likelihood to negative social outcomes
Czech
Rep
ublic
Irelan
d
Avera
ge
Nethe
rland
s
Finlan
d
Japa
n
Sweden
Englan
d/N. I
relan
d (U
K)
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Norway
Poland
Denm
ark
Austra
liaIta
ly
Flande
rs (B
elgium
)
Canad
a
Korea
Estonia
Spain
Austri
a
Germ
any
United
Sta
tes
1
2
3
4
5
Political efficacy Trust volunteer Health
Odd
s ra
tio –
ref
eren
ce is
Lev
el 4
/5
Odds ratios adjusted for age, gender, education and immigrant and language background
PIAAC 2012
26
Low literacy skills increase likelihood to negative social outcomes
Czech
Rep
ublic
Irelan
d
Avera
ge
Nethe
rland
s
Finlan
d
Japa
n
Sweden
Englan
d/N. I
relan
d (U
K)
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Norway
Poland
Denm
ark
Austra
liaIta
ly
Flande
rs (B
elgium
)
Canad
a
Korea
Estonia
Spain
Austri
a
Germ
any
United
Sta
tes
1
2
3
4
5
volunteer Trust Political efficacy Health
Odd
s ra
tio –
ref
eren
ce is
Lev
el 4
/5
Odds ratios adjusted for age, gender, education and immigrant and language background
PIAAC 2012
27
Low literacy skills increase likelihood to negative social outcomes
Czech
Rep
ublic
Irelan
d
Avera
ge
Nethe
rland
s
Finlan
d
Japa
n
Sweden
Englan
d/N. I
relan
d (U
K)
Slovak
Rep
ublic
Norway
Poland
Denm
ark
Austra
liaIta
ly
Flande
rs (B
elgium
)
Canad
a
Korea
Estonia
Spain
Austri
a
Germ
any
United
Sta
tes
1
2
3
4
5
Health Trust Political efficacy volunteer
Odd
s ra
tio –
ref
eren
ce is
Lev
el 4
/5
Odds ratios adjusted for age, gender, education and immigrant and language background
PIAAC 2012
28
• The impact of low literacy on various measures of social well-being and inclusiveness is high to very high
• But the impact also varies a lot between countries, depending on institutional contexts
• Literacy is interacting with a lot of other determinants, often reinforcing their impact
• Sometimes, literacy is also competing with other factors (e.g. educational attainment)
Literacy matters for various social outcomes
PIAAC 2012
30
• More education generally means more literacy, but the relationship is not always straightforward– High-educated people losing skills
– Low-educated people learning skills
• Whether it is educational attainment or literacy which matter most for social outcomes, differs for each measure and for each country
• More educational opportunities are of course crucial, but lack of education in early years should not condemn people for the rest of their life-course
Relationship between education and literacy
31
BEYOND LITERACY: MORE THAN JUST BASIC SKILLS
32
Evolution of employment in occupational groups defined by level of skills proficiency
33
• Labour markets and social realities are changing quickly, asking for ever higher skills needs
• Also mid-level literacy skills will soon not suffice to protect people from vulnerable jobs and living conditions, and seem to be even more endangered than low-skilled jobs
• Literacy is not a dichotomous ‘one-off’ reality, but a continuous effort to improve and enhance skills
More than just basic skills
34
BEYOND LITERACY:MULTI-LITERACIES
35
LiteracyNumerac
y
Digital literacy
Financial literacy
Media literacy
Visual literacy
Problem solving
Multi-lingualis
m
Cultural literacy
Science literacy
Emotional literacy
Multi-literacies
36
• Digital literacy (“problem-solving in ICT-environments”) is becoming a critically important skill
• From less than 7% of 16-65 year-olds in the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden to around 23% or higher in Italy, Korea, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Spain lack the basic skills to use ICT for daily tasks (PIAAC, 2012)
For example: digital literacy
37
• Multi-dimensionality of literacy, but at the same time risk of inflation of the concept itself
• Various dimensions and modes of low-literacy reinforce each other, but sometimes people also compensate skills shortages
• How are modes of communication in the lives of people changing in reality?
• How are different dimensions – cognitive, problem-solving, communication, social, emotional – interacting, reinforcing or contradicting each other?
• On what dimensions should policies and practices focus to empower people?
Multi-literacies
38
BEYOND LITERACY:USES OF LITERACY SKILLS
39
• What adults do, both at work and outside work, is closely related to proficiency.
• Adults who engage more often in literacy- and numeracy-related activities and use ICTs more (both at work and outside of work) have higher proficiency in each domain
• Engagement in relevant activities outside of work has an even stronger relationship with the skills assessed than engagement in the corresponding activities at work.
Literacy skills use and proficiency strongly related
40
Reading at work is associated with literacy skills – especially in open economies
41
Reading at work is associated with literacy skills – but less so in more closed economies
42
But reading outside work matters even more
43
Also ICT-skills are closely associated with usage of such skills at work
44
• There is a clear relationship between the extent of participation in organised adult learning and the average level of key information-processing skills in a given country.
• The large variation among countries at similar levels of economic development suggests major differences in learning cultures, learning opportunities at work, and adult-education structures.
Adult education and proficiency are also strongly related
45
Likelihood of participating in adult education and training, by level of literacy proficiency
Norway
Nethe
rland
s
Fland
ers (
Belgi
um)
Italy
Czech
Rep
ublic
Finla
nd
Irela
nd
Sweden
Japa
n
Engla
nd/N
. Irel
and
(UK)
Avera
ge
Unite
d Sta
tes
Denm
ark
Estoni
a
Austri
a
Polan
d
Spain
Slova
k Rep
ublic
Austra
lia
Canad
a
Korea
Germ
any
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4/5
Reference group: Below Level 1
Odds Ratio
46
CONCLUSIONS: LITERACY POLICIES FOR INCLUSIVE
SOCIETIES
47
• Illiteracy and low literacy remains a terrible reality for far too many people in all countries
• Literacy is unequally distributed within countries, dependent on gender, age, social background, ethnicity, migration status, language, etc.
• The impact of literacy on various measures of economic and social well-being is huge – low literacy in many cases means being excluded from jobs, full citizenship, health, community life and public communication
What the evidence tells us
48
• Low literacy levels are no destiny, but can be changed– On country level: against the odds of national
income or overall literacy levels, some countries succeed in keeping low-literacy levels under control, and others don’t
– On individual level: against the odds of their background, education and status many individuals succeed in acquiring good literacy levels, but they can’t do that alone, they need help
What the evidence tells us also
49
• Countries utterly underestimate the cost of low literacy and the potential benefits from raising literacy levels– Increasing productivity, employment, earning, tax
– Fostering social inclusion and social cohesion
– Reducing poverty, ill health, crime
– Improving the functioning of political democracy
• Neglecting or underestimating the literacy crisis comes at a cost, now and in the future!
Literacy is a matter of human rights and social justice, but also of economic and social progress
50
• Ensure a good initial education for all, including taking specific measures to guarantee that disadvantaged groups take full benefit from education
• Prevent poor initial education resulting in a vicious circle of missed opportunities for jobs, continuing learning and use of literacy skills
• Identify those who can benefit from learning most
• Make adult education more flexible, so that learners can adapt learning to their lives more easily
• Improve skills metrics and assessments, because assessment also drives change
Policies that work
51
• Create literacy-rich environments at work and in the community which help people to develop and use literacy skills
• Take specific measures to ensure that low-literate people get equal access to continuing education, health, social services, etc.
• Value literacy skills, but value also other skills people have
• Make literacy learning everybody’s business – help employers to make best use of everybody’s skills
Policies that work
52
• Valuing literacy skills more means:– Rewarding people who acquire and improve literacy
skills, for example by opening up labour markets for skills instead of diploma’s
– Potentially also penalizing low-literate adults with educational qualifications and taking away the social protection function of educational qualifications
• Creating literacy-rich environments means:– Helping people to develop, use and maintain skills
– Potentially also excluding and stigmatising low-literate people more
Literacy policies and practices face dilemma’s
53
• It is vitally important for literacy policies and actions to positively emphasize the opportunities of literacy and to empower people to learn, rather than to stigmatise low-literate adults for their lack of skills.
• Literacy actions can easily result in unwanted effects when over-problematising skills shortages from a deficit-perspective.
An empowerment approach, not a deficit one
54
• All this will not happen by itself, but needs concerted and determined action– Governments and international organisations
– Business, employers, social partners
– Education and social services
– Grass-roots movements, NGO’s
– Social entrepreneurs and innovators
URGENT ACTION IS NEEDED!