"Whenever I call the school unit for anything I get the feeling that they're putting me off and we're presumably all in the same business. I think my literacy program is looked at as some fledgling operation that just started up whereas they've been in business for years. They act like, 'Who are you to want any information or to makes suggestions to us?' They sure don't make it easy for me."

Attitudes such as this continue to "ghettoize" literacy work. On the other side of the coin, I learned that even with frustrations such as Carol described women are choosing to stay in their literacy jobs because they love the work they are doing and are generally satisfied with the rewards. BARBARA WALMAN from Camrose commented:

"I don't like the expression 'female ghetto' because I certainly don't see myself as a women who is stuck in this job because she can't find anything better. I could go back to work as a social worker or take a job that pays more than I make an hour now but I get the summers off to be.with my family, it's flexible and I'm my own boss and I like that. For me it's a choice; I am choosing to be in this position because I like it."

Now working in literacy as a woman becomes a question of, "How can we raise the profile of what we do and how well we do it?" NANCY STEEL feels that women working in literacy will not be taken seriously until they begin to see themselves as professionals:

"Our intellectual approach to the issue has to be ahead of our emotional approach if we are to be seen as professionals in this field. We must view ourselves as professionals with a passion instead of soft-hearted women with an humanitarian cause."

As literacy workers begin to approach themselves and their work with a stronger sense of professionalism, their personal and professional value will be more fully recognized (by others as well as themselves). Attitudes are beginning to change but the road ahead is long and much of it unpaved. The federal and provincial governments have provided funding for initiatives which have promoted the provincial literacy network but there are politicians who continue to make placating comments about grassroots literacy efforts and the "fine women who run those volunteer programs". Sometimes it is the greatest strength of literacy workers, their ethic of care and justice, which is incorrectly perceived as their greatest weakness.

Most of the literacy workers are women and ironically most of the decision makers and funders of literacy programs in the province are men. Respect for each other's approach to program management and problem solving needs to be more fully developed. The male model is patriarchal, competitive, hierarchical and organized. The female model is collaborative, flexible, cooperative and personal. One model is not better than the other; they are just different. It should be noted, however, that experience has proven the female model to be very effective in literacy programming.

Some of my female colleagues have asked, "Why don't the women complain? Why don't they get angry and demand the recognition and resources they deserve? Why don't they spend more time defending their realities?" I have thought and talked a great deal about this and have determined that there are three main reasons holding women back: 1) they lack confidence in the strength of their voices, 2) they are afraid of the consequences and 3) there is not enough time.