Literacy for competitiveness, literacy as a right

Over the last quarter century, ideas articulated from various sectors of society have put adult literacy on the public agenda and produced a new era of literacy activity. Community, cultural and linguistic, and literacy advocacy organizations have promoted literacy as an aspect of community development and as a human right; media have portrayed illiteracy as an individual burden and a social cost; researchers and policy makers have clarified the meanings and scope of functional literacy; labour unions have sought educational opportunities for their members; and employers and government labour force managers have pressed for a literate and "flexible" or trainable labour force. There has of course been a public discussion of all these ideas, a discussion that extends from government and advocacy reports to café conversations among political party activists and ordinary voters.

The economic and functional arguments for literacy (supplemented at times by cultural and equity arguments) have generally driven government interest. There has been a steadily increasing interest in workplace literacy. Ideas on the economics of literacy have most recently been urged in the federal government's "Prosperity Initiative," which has begun with an effort to create a "dialogue" about competitiveness, and about the relationship of competitiveness and learning. A consultation paper observes that "Our prosperity depends on major improvements in the general level of skills held by all Canadians," but that "recent Canadian numeracy and literacy statistics paint a grim picture of a future work force without the basic skills to adjust quickly to a rapidly changing environment." The paper's possible targets for the end of the decade include cutting rates of adult illiteracy in half, and having 90% of people attain by age 25 the equivalent of a high school diploma.⁴⁸

But the economic and functional arguments have not supplanted claims for literacy as a right and as a resource that should be available to communities. Indeed it is also remarkable that proponents of the broader claims have very often provided the terms of discussion about teaching and programming arrangements, with such ideas as community or learner involvement, program diversity, and learner-centredness. The relationship between the dominant interest in literacy and the nature of literacy work itself is sometimes paradoxical.