Integrating literacies: Using partnerships to build literacy capabilities in communities

This report seeks to identify examples of successful integration of literacy learning in community and workplace settings.

• More can be done in Australia to build the literacy capabilities of adults by integrating literacy learning into activities beyond formal education and training programs.
• Literacy workers can act as mentors, brokers and facilitators supporting social and community workers to embed literacy development into their policy and strategies.
• As in successful workplace literacy programs, educators must be open to the knowledge and experiences of other sectors regarding effective or appropriate action or intervention. Collaboration is a two-way learning experience. Vocational education and training providers could improve collaboration across sectors to achieve effective and sustainable responses to literacy challenges.
• A 'simpler' message about literacies is required to build understanding and allow workers in other sectors to act with confidence in relation to clients with literacy needs.
• A better understanding of effective localised approaches appropriate for different populations is also required to assist policy and funding decisions.
• Short-term ad hoc funding provides no real incentive and limits change possibilities. Innovation is easier to encourage when there are funding incentives and people understand and can relate to the overall strategic objectives and desired outcomes, as exemplified by the Workplace English Language and Literacy (WELL) Program.

It has long been accepted that adult literacy is best taught and learned in authentic contexts using materials which relate to real-life needs. An important implication of this 'situated learning' is that opportunities for learning are everywhere, not just in colleges or designated learning centres. This understanding was crucial to the development of early workplace learning programs, and underpins Australia's significant success in integrating literacy and numeracy with wider vocational skills development.

The integration of literacy skills acquisition with vocational education and training, however, is only one of the possible approaches to the development of these skills in varying social contexts. Just as literacy educators have learned to avoid treating literacy needs in isolation, governments and other social agencies have acknowledged the inadequacy of uncoordinated responses to a range of social policies, and the need for cross-sectoral and joined-up (whole-of-government) approaches to a wide range of social issues.

Governments have increasingly come to favour partnership models for policy development and service provision over a broad spectrum of social programs. At the same time, there has been a growing recognition of learning as a central driver in the building of social capital, or the skills, networks and capacity for communities to function well. The challenge for governments is to link policies in various sectors to the goal of a learning society, and for educators to move outside the educational domain to an expanded arena of social environments.

Literacy is fundamental to the growth of social capital ¹, not least for communities where there is a sense of being left behind and socially excluded. But how does literacy development contribute to the construction of social capital? To what extent are opportunities available for literacy learning beyond the educational domain? Can the lessons learned from the integration of literacy learning with vocational education be extended to other forms of integration, that is, to literacy partnering in other social domains?

The research

The study was intended to act as a preliminary investigation of these issues by exploring:

• how literacy approaches are being, or might be achieved in cross-portfolio relationships with agencies for whom education and training is not core business
• how approaches to building literacy skills might be further developed through partnerships and joined-up or whole-of-government approaches.

The report seeks to identify examples of successful integration of literacy learning in community and workplace settings. It draws a number of findings from a comprehensive analysis and critique of recent relevant literature, backed up by an analysis of data from a range of programs and practices outside and beyond traditional literacy programs offered in institutional settings.

The study deliberately includes recent research and policy literature to help better understand the role literacies and learning can play in building social capital and community capacity.

The methodology combined research of the literature and the internet with interviews of coordinators in cross-sectoral community projects and successful integrated workplace literacy projects. This was complemented by a think tank assisted by the Australian Council for Adult Literacy, and overseas information on the subject.

Sites were selected from various sources, including suggestions from a range of community organisations and government agencies. Because of the necessarily limited size of the project, programs targeting specific groups were excluded, such as those dealing with Indigenous people, those from non-English speaking backgrounds, the disabled, and job seekers in programs funded through the federal Language, Literacy and Numeracy Program.

The findings

The review of workplace literacy programs confirmed the success of initiatives in Australia in integrating literacy, numeracy and vocational skills acquisition through 'built-in' rather than 'bolted-on' methodologies. It also confirmed the importance of valuing and embedding a range of literacies into workplace and community practice, rather than teaching literacy in 'programs' in isolation from other learning. The review also showed that various approaches to integration are adopted in these programs.

There are also other, perhaps less expected, outcomes from workplace literacy programs that have a wider impact and can be said to build social capital and community capacity. It is reasonable to conclude that some of the lessons learned in these workplace programs can be transferred to other social environments. However integration, even in workplace education, proved a complex task, and there remain varying views on how and where it should be approached.

While the workplace approach could be transferred to non-workplace sites (such as health or other community settings), significant resources would be required to train non-specialists in literacy and numeracy identification, and to train specialists in the culture and context of the community setting. It is not easy to integrate literacy and numeracy in wider activities, while also finding ways to make visible and reportable literacy outcomes explicit for those not engaged in a vocational education or general education pathway.

The investigation of the five welfare and community sites revealed the importance of working in partnerships, but also the challenges inherent in this goal, particularly in the absence of a long-term program commitment. Agencies working in the most challenging situations, and for whom education is not their top priority, will withdraw when they feel the other parties are not in for the long haul. All the community sites experienced difficulties working with mainstream education providers. Overall, the study highlighted the difficulties in developing and sustaining partnerships, and the importance of finding a balance between accountability and local flexibility.

All the sites have a complex and multi-faceted array of impact measures reflecting their particular priorities and client groups. How best to weave the acquisition of literacy skills into these indicators is one of the ongoing issues raised by this study.

Further detail about the findings, including responses from professional bodies; information about workplace programs; presentations to the think tank; and news on international developments can be found in the support document. This document can be accessed from NCVER's website at <http://www.ncver.edu.au>.

Implications for policy and practice

• There is a need to seek greater collaboration on building literacy improvement possibilities in social policy areas such as health, youth, housing, welfare, crime prevention and community development. Literacy development must be embedded in the policy and strategies of these sectors.
• A targeted approach aimed at policy domains outside the formal education and training sector should be based on sound needs analysis of populations known to have literacy development needs. One way forward might be to focus on one policy domain (such as health) so as to better understand the needs and possible responses.
• Understanding these collaboration possibilities is a significant factor in developing a nationally agreed approach linked to a comprehensive literacy learning framework that can accommodate local diversity of approach and outcome.
• Funding incentives for the participating agencies can then be used to stimulate collaborative approaches with high potential, to encourage innovation and to build upon successful initiatives.
• Professional development in other sectors and domains should build the capacity of frontline workers to assist clients with literacy needs. Awareness of literacy challenges and issues should also be built across all policy domains.
• Successful workplace literacy programs show that educators must be willing to take up new roles when working outside of institutional settings. These new roles require a re-assessment of teacher preparation and professional development opportunities.
• The shortage of information available to this study shows the need for more systematic measurement of successful outcomes at the micro-level, and program evaluations at the macro-level. Pilots and trials of adult literacy interventions and collaborative programs need to be systematically followed up. This will assist in the evaluation of innovations and effective targeting for longer term project funding. Such studies may also assist in better understanding how to achieve greater coordination of separately funded projects.

Finally, for real progress to be made, it is essential that there is infrastructure support for collaboration and alliance building among the players.

1 Social capital is the accumulative benefit accruing to individuals and communities as a result of their engagement in community and civic activities and the consequent networks established.