Whose Economic Wellbeing? A Challenge to Dominant Discourses on the Relationship between Literacy and Numeracy Skills and (Un)employment.

The impact of poor literacy and numeracy skills on employment and unemployment in Australia and elsewhere was examined through two case studies and a literature review. The first case study examined the role of literacy provision in helping 27 unemployed jobseekers find employment. The second focused on literacy and teamwork in the activities of local council workers with responsibilities for cleaning and repairing small drains and performing small construction jobs. Although statistics on literacy and numeracy indicate a relationship with employment status, that relationship is not necessarily "causal. " Despite the fact that many individuals referred to literacy and English-as-a-second-language (ESL) programs welcomed the opportunity to' develop their skills and believed that such programs would lead to jobs, literacy had played a minor role in their past work histories and appeared unlikely to have a big impact on their current chances of gaining employment. Although many of the local council workers were being targeted for their lack of literacy skills, it was difficult to demonstrate that their lack of literacy/numeracy skills had a significant impact on their job performance. The case studies provided evidence that, rather than causing unemployment or limited economic opportunities, limited literacy and numeracy skills are themselves caused by economic conditions and limited employment opportunities. (Contains 100 references.) (MN) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Whose economic wellbeing? : A challenge to dominant discourses on the relationship between literacy and numeracy skills and (un)employment Dr Stephen Black, University of Technology, Sydney This paper forms part of a project which examines the relationship between literacy and numeracy skills and a range of indicators of wellbeing, with the key focus in this paper being employment, and its corollary, unemployment. Most people assume this relationship to be relatively unproblematic because the discourse on the role of literacy, (and to a lesser extent numeracy) and (un)employment is well known. When, for example, the former federal Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Dr Kemp in the midst of a recent 'literacy crisis' stated: There are direct links between poor literacy, school drop out rates and youth unemployment (DEETYA 1996a: 1), few people would have questioned this statement. Most people believe, and would rarely challenge the view that literacy and numeracy skills are essential requirements for employment in the current globalised world, and that lacking literacy and numeracy skills may contribute to, in fact may cause, unemployment. To promote dialogue and debate on these issues, my aim in this paper is to challenge these common sense understandings with an alternative critical discourse. The dominant discourse on literacy, numeracy and employment An appropriate starting point is a brief outline of the dominant discourse on literacy, numeracy and (un)employment. At the outset, however, I need to point to the research and policy bias to date in favour of the role of literacy. Numeracy has not featured so prominently and is sometimes subsumed within a broader definition of literacy (for example, see DEET 1991a: 9, and the notion of quantitative literacy in Kirsch et al 1993) or included within a term such as 'basic skills'. Often, and particularly in recent government reports, researchers refer to literacy and numeracy as one, failing to make a strong distinction between the skills (e.g. Lee and Miller 2000, Miller and Chiswick 1997, Rahmani 2000). The bias in favour of literacy is reflected in this paper as I refer predominantly to literacy studies, though, as with many other studies, to some extent numeracy is inferred in discussions on literacy. I do nevertheless make reference to some recent significant numeracy studies. Literacy skills assume enormous significance in contemporary Western society. Citing the former Minister Dr Kemp, again, he stated in a media release that: The single most important mission of schools is to provide every student with adequate literacy skills (DEETYA 1996a: 1). Literacy is generally equated with success in life, with notions of a person being 'educated', obtaining a job and having access to the `goods' and trappings of wellbeing that are valued highly in society. The corollary to this perspective is that lack of literacy has dire consequences. For example, on the first page of the Australian Language and Literacy Policy (ALLP) we find the following unequivocal statement: BEST COPY AVAIIA 1' I. LE e) Frr PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) M.lhis document has been reproduced as V received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. There is a strong and well demonstrated relationship between low levels of literacy or English language competence and high levels of unemployment and other forms of social disadvantage (DEET 1991a: 1). The relationship between literacy skills and (un)employment has received particularly high prominence since the late 1980s with increasing recognition that if the skills of the nation's workforce do not improve then the nation will become uncompetitive in a globalised economy (see Dawkins and Holding 1987; DEET 1991a/b). Dawkins, former federal Minister for the Department of Employment, Education and Training, for example, claimed that for Australians: . literacy is the difference between competing in international markets with a well trained workforce and stagnation (International Literacy Year 1991). Further, there have been claims that lack of literacy or low literacy skills in workplaces costs the nation billions of dollars in lost productivity each year (Miltenyi 1989, Singh 1989). Commonly, lack of literacy is represented as a scourge, with negative implications for the economic security and productivity of individuals, enterprises and the nation generally (DEET 1991b: 20-23). It is seen to restrict the ability of workers to adapt to new technology and new workplace practices, and leads to safety concerns, costly mistakes and a host of other negative features (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training 1991: 18-26). Not surprisingly, in view of this dominant discourse, federal governments since the early 1990s have channeled considerable funds into both literacy programs in workplaces (the Workplace English Language and Literacy program, WELL) and for the unemployed (see DEET 1991a/b, 1996, DEETYA 1996b, Rahmani 2000). Australia, of course, is not alone in focusing on literacy skills and (un)employment. The recent Moser Report in the United Kingdom (Moser Report 1999) for example, makes explicit the economic implications of low literacy (and numeracy) skills, and in the United States improving the literacy skills of workers has long been regarded as integral to economic development (e.g. Chisman and Campbell 1990; Darkenwald and Valentine 1984, Newman and Beverstock 1990). Literacy programs are also claimed to be an essential aspect of recent 'welfare-to-work' initiatives in the United States (Martin and Fisher 1999). Perhaps the best international examples of the stated relationship between literacy skills and economic wellbeing are the many OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) reports over the last decade (e.g. OECD 1992, 1995, 1997, OECD/Statistics Canada 2000). These reports draw on international comparisons of literacy rates using standardised measures and they all strongly recommend a focus on improving literacy skills as the 'key' to unlocking the benefits of globalisation (e.g. OECD 1995: 23). Organisations such as the OECD are respected authorities on economic development. Their reports, together with many government reports and academic opinions, some of which are cited in this paper, represent a powerful and dominant voice on the relationship between literacy skills and aspects of employment. They are part of a broader human capital discourse which sees education as an investment which will lead to greater economic productivity. Literacy skills are, as one government publication put it: Just like farmland and goldmines, we can use them to help our country to grow and prosper in the 21st century (DEET 1992a: 1, Wickert and Baynham 1994). They are skills that are seen to add to the economic value of people, to increase their exchange value in the labour market (see Marginson 1993, 1997). Within this discourse literacy skills are elevated; they are viewed as a set of technical skills which, once acquired, usually lead to positive employment outcomes. This `model' of literacy has been termed 'autonomous' by Street (1984, 1993) because literacy is considered a cognitive skill relatively autonomous of social context. In many studies based on this model the literacy levels of particular groups of people are measured using a range of indicators, and usually higher literacy levels are found to correlate with higher income/status jobs, and the reverse is the case for lower literacy levels (for recent Australian studies, see Lee and Miller 2000; Miller and Chiswick 1997). The measures or the indicators of literacy vary considerably across different studies, ranging from the estimations and beliefs of employers and their organisations (see House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training 1991: 9-12), to sophisticated statistical surveys conducted across a range of standardised literacy related tasks (e.g. OECD 1995, 19