This final section of the report provides a discussion of the study’s major findings and relates them where possible to the related research literature (Benseman et al., 2005).
The 15 teachers we observed in this study probably represent a reasonable cross-section of those currently teaching literacy, numeracy and language in New Zealand, both in terms of their characteristics and the contexts in which they teach. They are predominantly female, Pakeha and over 40 years of age. This type of socio-demographic profile is also consistent with the broader adult education sector, where people typically come in through the ‘back door’ after working first in other vocational areas. With the exception of those teachers working in tertiary institutions, many have minimal job security, operating on short-term contracts or on a casual basis, paid by the hour provided learners turn up. Similar to Smith and Hofer’s (2003) study in the US, the lack of a distinct career structure and poor employment security means that literacy, numeracy and language teaching is predominantly marginal in character, sustained in large part by teachers’ commitment to their learners and philosophical ideals. The average of only 2.25 years literacy, numeracy and language experience of the teachers in this study is indicative of the turnover of staff in the sector.
All but one of the participating teachers in this study had some form of tertiary qualification. However, few of these qualifications were related specifically to LNL, or adult education generally. Apart from the four who had done the Literacy Aotearoa literacy training,32 three had ESOL qualifications and one other was currently completing an adult literacy certificate. As a point of comparison, a much higher proportion of the Australian counterparts in McGuirk’s (2001) study had specialist qualifications (a pre-condition for receiving funding). Most of the teachers in this study had undertaken some form of professional development over the past year, but again there was considerable variation in the amount done, with those in tertiary institutions or literacy, numeracy and language agencies able to do the most.
There is considerable variation in the number of hours the teachers teach per week, ranging from 7-35 hours per week. About half of the group teach in excess of 20 hours per week. There is also variation in the amount of time that they spend in preparation for teaching. Most spend about five hours per week, with four spending in excess of ten hours. Most did preparation in excess of what they were paid for, and did not have explicit agreements as to the amount of time for preparation.
Three of the participating teachers taught as part of a dual teaching approach. One of these situations was notable for the way that the literacy, numeracy and language specialist taught alongside a vocational teacher. In addition to direct teaching of literacy skills, this teacher also ensured that literacy, numeracy and language issues were identified and then minimised or resolved, thus ensuring effective delivery of the vocational content. In this way, the LNL teacher effectively operated as an advocate-cum-interpreter for the students in relation to their literacy, numeracy and language difficulties.
32 Of approximately 100 hours duration.