Adult basic skills issues

What is the best way to reach out to students? Should quality of teaching be the first issue to be addressed? This page contains debate from the press.

Why many people don't use the term 'basic skills'

Jessica Waters, skills for life tutor in Leeds, explains:

"Basic: adj 1: Forming an essential foundation: fundamental. 2: Consisting of the minimum needed or offered."

"A lot of people have heard the term basic skills, and have an image of the type of person who would attend a basic skills class. As a tutor I rarely use the expression myself. As a term basic skills has been subsumed by Skills for Life (SfL), which is a far more positive phrase with wider connotations for lifelong learning. In reality I teach at varying levels, including improving spelling and general writing skills, punctuation and report writing. This can include such delights as the passive voice and its many uses and also the joy of the possessive apostrophe.

This got me thinking about the language we use when speaking to employers and potential learners and how important it is to use positive terms. The learners who access the support offered at work are motivated by different things, and they all want to improve their existing skills. However, there are perceived barriers to adults accessing maths and English courses at work. One of these is the fear of being seen as 'not up to the job'. It's also important to note that many employers seek support when they are facing restructuring, redundancies or possible closure, so this can add to the anxiety of staff.

Bearing this in mind, it's not just important for tutors to think about what they're saying, it's also important for employers to use terms that will attract learners. No one wants to be told that their skills are basic. Despite the intended meaning of the word basic being the first definition given above, people often assume that it relates to the second - the minimum.

A large part of my job is awareness-raising. One of the biggest challenges can be explaining to employers and non-SfL providers that they need to think about the language they use when discussing this type of provision with their staff. For instance, given the choice between signing up for a literacy class or a class to help brush up your writing skills, which would you choose? Don't ask people what areas they have a problem with, focus on their strengths; don't use the term weaknesses and do explain that this course will help them to fill skills gaps. Small considerations like this can make all the difference."

(Guardian, 18 October 2005)

Alan Wells' attack on the quality of the teaching of adult learners

What he said:

It's not been a good few weeks for adult learning. First we had the Ofsted report suggesting most adults joining courses to improve their literacy or numeracy were destined to be taught by poorly-qualified and relatively unskilled teachers. This was followed by a similar Ofsted report about the poor quality of training of adult and further education teachers. Finally, the Adult Learning Inspectorate (Ali) revealed that the provision of quite a lot of the organisations they had inspected was of poor quality. It made for depressing reading.

The only positive news was the Department for Education and Skills press release revealing the number of adults with poor literacy had fallen from 7 million in 1997 to 5.2 million in 2003. The DfES said this was evidence that the Government's strategy was already working very effectively.

If true, this is a remarkable achievement in view of the serious problems with the quality of basic skills provision for adults, and the lack of specialist knowledge and skills of adult basic skills teachers revealed by Ofsted. If the number of adults with poor literacy can be reduced by 1.8 million with poor-quality teaching and underskilled teachers it should be possible to solve our adult literacy problem in the next few years without too much effort.

Of course, there may be sceptics who think that two different surveys, undertaken by two different organisations, using two different methodologies and tests, with two different groups of adults and coming up with two different results doesn't prove much at all.

I only see all this from the perspective of adults who have problems with basic skills; those who have been failed by the education system, and for whom adult and further education is the last chance saloon. What's clear is that despite constant repetition of the lifelong learning mantra, lots of adults have no more intention of signing up than committed smokers have of quitting. And, seemingly, even many who do sign up get taught by poorly-qualified and underskilled teachers and find the way out is a lot more attractive than finding the way in.

According to Ofsted, even though teachers of basic skills to adults are sympathetic and understanding, all too many don't have much in-depth subject knowledge. Yet these are teaching those people who have failed to master the basic skills most of us take for granted.

It seems perverse, but the best-qualified teachers of literacy and numeracy are teaching bright-eyed and bushy-tailed young children, and the least-qualified the easily disillusioned 35-year-olds.

Part of the problem with poor teaching in post-16 education is a philosophy that suggests being well-meaning and understanding is all that's needed to teach adults. All too many people who should know better in adult learning spout the politically correct slogan that knowledge of a specialism and specialist skills are less important than having the right attitude. What nonsense.

My most recent experience of this still grates. In a workshop group at a recent conference, someone responsible for adult basic skills said she selected teachers on whether they had a positive attitude, rather than whether they were qualified. As I watched the nods of agreement, I wondered privately whether she selected her doctor on the same basis.

At a similar event, I had to sit through the usual adult basic skills claptrap that "we could teach those in primary schools a thing or two". Dream on. The very best and most skilled teachers of literacy and numeracy are working in your local primary school. They're sympathetic and understanding, but the can also teach. And they don't find teaching a dirty word. Yet if they were in adult learning they would soon be told that what they need to be is a learning facilitator not a teacher.

I have some sympathy for those adults who drop out of education, perhaps because I've dropped out of more adult education than I've ever completed. It's often embarrassing to admit that you were a drop out from adult and further education - my local college wanted to put me on their roll of honour until I mentioned I hadn't actually completed the course - but at least it gives some insight into the feelings of reluctant learners.

Why does this matter? As someone who gained almost all of their qualifications after leaving school, I have a very real belief in the benefits of post-16 education. Not just because well-educated adults will benefit the economy - another mantra often marked by lack of evidence - but because education provides choices.

For me, education is about basic human rights, not just economic performance. About human potential and ending the waste of it. Of course some - me included - don't choose lifelong learning if it means endlessly joining courses to be taught by sympathetic, but poorly-trained teachers who have little knowledge of their specialism. All too often lifelong learning sounds like a life sentence, a punishment inflicted on the rest of us by professional educators who can't give up the habit and look down on those of us who prefer to do the garden, play with our children, watch football or Eastenders or do almost anything else instead.

Alan Wells is director of the Basic Skills Agency.

(The Guardian, 2.12.03)

How the same paper reported it:

Adults unable to read or write are being taught by poorly qualified teachers because of beliefs that sympathy and a "positive attitude" are more important than good teaching, a government advisor says. Writing in the Guardian, Alan Wells, director of the Basic Skills Agency, attacks "the philosophy that suggests being well-meaning and understanding is all that's needed to teach adults". Too many adult learners studying basic skills were suffering "death by worksheet" under the supervision of underskilled teachers, he said. Basic skills teachers involved in adult learning are even told they must not call themselves teachers - regarded as "a dirty word" - but "learning facilitators", according to Mr Wells. In an assault that angered the further education union Natfhe, he said those teaching basic skills to Britain's millions of struggling adult learners are outclassed by primary school teachers who are "teaching bright-eyed and bushy tailed young children", and who "don't find teaching a dirty word".

More than five million adults in Britain have literacy problems and nearly seven million struggle with maths.

Two reports this autumn by the education watchdog Ofsted and the Adult Learning Inspectorate raised serious concerns over further education teaching. The studies found that adults seeking help with literacy and numeracy were often let down by poorly qualified teachers who, though often "inspiring", were in many cases themselves struggling with the basics of reading and writing. The reports called for improved teacher training, prompting a Government consultation exercise into standards.

r Wells dismisses as "claptrap" the belief by many involved in adult basic skills teaching that they are superior to their primary school counterparts. "Dream on. The very best and most skilled teachers of literacy and numeracy are working in your local primary school. They are sympathetic and understanding, but they can also teach. All too many people who should know better in adult learning spout the politically correct slogan that knowledge of a specialism and specialist skills are less important than having the right attitude. What nonsense." Too often, adult learners endured "death by worksheet" as they ploughed through written exercises rather than being taught, he said.

Natfhe called the criticisms "unfair and unfounded". Dan Taubman, the union's national education official, said: "Until very recently, basic skills provision for adults has been neglected, underfunded and overlooked. It was the bit of teaching that went on in a Portakabin in the back of colleges, often without training or support." The Government's skills strategy had begun to make changes, but improving Britain's poor basic skills performance was like "turning round a tanker".

The Government began a drive to tackle Britain's adult numeracy and literacy problems 3 years ago. Ministers want 750, 000 adults with poor basic skills to be able to read and write as well as the average 11-year-old by the end of next year.

In an effort to improve training, new adult basic skills teachers are now required to hold, or work towards, a level four qualification in basic skills training, but until recently they were not obliged to hold any qualification at all.

(The Guardian, 2.12.03)

Are adults too embarrassed to sign up to basic skills courses?

Reaching people who need help with basic literacy and numeracy is a delicate matter. The wrong approach can send target groups heading for the hills.

How to go about it has become a hot topic within colleges and the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education. What is becoming clear is that some now believe it is better to operate by stealth.

The problem is that not every adult responds to an upfront offer of a basic skills course, even though it can change lives and may be on their doorstep. So some favour the embedded approach where the course on the surface is about, say, making Christmas decorations but all the time basic skills are being observed. Then people are offered help as appropriate.

But there is a danger this approach can backfire: people may feel indignant if they feel literacy and numeracy has been thrust upon them. Some favour explaining course content upfront, possibly through a union representative at work-based courses.

So, is it better to be upfront or work more subtly? NIACE has studied the issue. It has been commissioned by the Learning and Skills Council and the Adult Basic Skills Strategy Unit to look at the effectiveness of "embedding" literacy and numeracy in other courses.

NIACE has examined 37 case studies. Project officer Heather Clary suggests it is possible to be upfront about basic skills, if you sell them in a way that makes them relevant to the central course content. "There are ways of telling people. With aromatherapy someone might say 'we will help develop you writing skills because you'll need to put together a folder of evidence'. However, she admits opinion is divided on how subtle to be.

(TES, 11 April 2003)

Link:
For more informartion on the NIACE Developing Embedded Basic Skills (DEBS) project visit www.niace.org.uk/Research/BasicSkills/Projects/DEBS.htm