However, as the focus of the NLS starts to shift away from social development objectives, beginning in 2000, the ability to sustain the approach at the core of the partnership model is compromised. There is a disconnect between social development goals and an increased demand for measurable outcomes and results-based goals. The latter leaves little room for experimentation and risk taking—elements needed for continued development and innovation of literacy partnerships and practice. An example of the emerging concern with this trend is the increased focus on essential skills. A study sponsored by HRSDC, Essential Skills and the Labour Movement: A Research Report, shows that the main view from labour representatives is that the Essential Skills Framework is narrow and does not represent the broad view of literacy that labour uses in its approach. (Folinsbee, 2005)

Literacy instructors and workplace educators will need to hold on to the practices of an approach based on the broader, social development notion of literacy for life despite the policy and funding shifts away from this model. They are well placed to play a lead role in preserving and promoting this vision of literacy.

A credible field

Perhaps one of the lead contributions of the NLS as a system enabler has been the focus on literacy practitioner training and development. Unlike colleagues in other fields of education such as school teachers, college instructors and university professors, literacy practitioners did not generally enjoy recognition as professionals. Aside from lending credibility to workplace-based programs, practitioner training helps to position literacy learning as a legitimate education goal for adults. While there is still room for volunteers, such as peer tutors, they too take part in a training program.