The CEIC sees the need for academic upgrading as a failure on the part of the provincial educational systems. The Senate Report suggests that "the persistence of this need on the present scale indicates that the division of federal and provincial responsibility for adult literacy programs should be re-examined" and goes on to recommend that "this situation be re-assessed and remedial action taken if necessary".(1) Nothing further appears to have happened to this recommendation.

Most provinces do not have explicit policies which are concerned with adult basic education in any comprehensive manner. Several acknowledge the special needs of Indian and Eskimo adults; and those with high concentrations of immigrant adults tend to fund ESL or FSL programs to some degree. Even the OECD Report could only discuss adult basic education and literacy in relation to native peoples and manpower programs.

British Columbia is presently working to correct this lack of policy. The Report of the Committee on Continuing and Community Education of 1978 identified adult basic education as an area of highest educational priority (and this in the province with the lowest overall rate of functional illiteracy). A recent discussion paper from the Ministry of Education states that:

Adult basic education as it presently exists in British Columbia is characterized by an ad hoc approach which resulted in uncertainty, insecurity, and inefficiency in the deployment and use of resources ... The principal recommendation of (this committee), therefore, is:

1. That Adult Basic Education be regarded as an integrated system which can aid in the amelioration of provincial problems in such areas as unemployment and social welfare.

2. That the definition and scope of Adult Basic Education be kept under review by the Ministry of Education so that changes in society are reflected in changed directions and emphasis for Adult Basic Education.

3. That the role of the Ministry of Education and other ministries with respect to Adult Basic Education be defined and reviewed periodically.

4. That the role of the institutional providers of Adult Basic Education be defined in relation to the Ministry of Education, in relation to each other, and in relation to other program activities in the institution.

If the British Columbia government adopts these policies, and that appears quite likely, this will be a first in Canada.

(1). Senate Committee on National Finance, op. cit., pp. 81 and 82

(2).Ministry of Education, Science and Technology of British Columbia,
Committee on Adult Basic Education, Discussion Paper 01/79, "Report of the
Committee on Adult Basic Education". (Victoria, B.C.: Information Services, 1979).


Back Contents Next