Session Information
09 SES 12 B, Language and Literacy Assessments (Part 2)
Paper Session
Contribution
The target of the leo. – Level-One Survey was to establish a benchmark for the dimension of illiteracy in the German population. The instruments developed on behalf of this study estimate the grade of literacy and focus on the ‘lower rungs’ of competencies. We would like to discuss the challenges the study had to meet.
The underlying definition in the study is the UNESCO definition of illiteracy and functional illiteracy as followed:
UNESCO 1978: A person is illiterate who cannot with understanding both read and write a short simple statement on his everyday life.
UNESCO 1978: A person is functionally illiterate who cannot engage in all those activities in which literacy is required for effective functioning of his group and community and also for enabling him to continue to use reading, writing and calculation for his own and the community’s development. (www.unesco.de/154.html, accentuation: AG)”
Functional illiteracy is defined very broadly by the UNESCO, it means as much as not fully participating in the community. Reviewing the literature about Level-One studies in other countries (England and France in particular) causes confusion about the European standard of the definition of illiteracy and functional illiteracy. The IALS (International Adult Literacy Survey cf. OECD/Statistics Canada 2000) and the Skills for Life study (England, cf. DFES 2003) follow the Anglo-Saxon Tradition and work with the term functional illiteracy in quite a broad way. As a result 23% of the population in the UK where identified as functionally illiterate, that means to have competencies within the IALS Level One. In comparison with this the German institute “Bundesverband Alphabetisierung” also works with the term of functionally illiterates but only identifies 6.7% functional illiterates among the German population (cf. Chenot/Hubertus o.j.). This gap shows that different terms of functional illiteracy are used.
The leo.-survey had to define which tradition Germany would like to follow and summarizes the discussion in a way that illiteracy shall be deemed as falling below the level of sentences while functional illiteracy shall be deemed as falling below the level of texts. In order to specify the definitions so-called ‘Alpha-Levels’ were defined. The Alpha-Levels were developed in the project “lea.” (Literalitätsentwicklung von Arbeitskräften – workforce literacy development). These levels distinguish reading and writing skills of individuals, whose skills are significantly below the expected average reading and writing skills. Based on the Alpha-Levels, items had to be developed that correspond with them and at the same time measure the different skills of the individual. With help of the Alpha-Levels a precise analysis of competencies could be presented and it was decided to report two results: the number of illiterate and functional illiterate persons in Germany.
Below is summarized how we got there.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
ANLCI - Agence Nationale de la Lutte contre l'Illetrisme (o.J.): Illiteracy: The Statistics. Analysis by the National Agency to Fight Illiteracy of the IVQ Survey conducted in 2004-2005 by INSEE. Unter Mitarbeit von Jean-Pierre Jeantheau und Claire Badel. Lyon, France. ANLCI - Agence Nationale de la Lutte contre l'Illetrisme (o.J. (2005)): Illiteracy: The Statistics. Analysis by the National Agency to Fight Illiteracy of the IVQ Survey conducted in 2004-2005 by INSEE. Unter Mitarbeit von Jean-Pierre Jeantheau und Claire Badel. Lyon, France. Chenot, Regine; Hubertus, Peter (o.J. (2009)): Größenordnung des funktionalen Analphabetismus in Deutschland.: Vorstudie. Projektbericht des Bundesverbands Alphabetisierung und Grundbildung e.V. DfES (2003): The Skills for Life survey. A national needs and impact survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT skills. DfES Research Brief RB490. Unter Mitarbeit von Gail Peachey, Richard White und Peter u. a. Burke. Herausgegeben von DfES. Norwich. Grotlüschen, Anke; Riekmann, Wibke (2010): leo. - Level-One Studie. Literalität von Erwachsenen auf den unteren Kompetenzniveaus. In: Magazin erwachsenenbildung.at, H. 10, S. 07/1-07/7. Online verfügbar unter www.erwachsenenbildung.at/magazin. Grotlüschen Anke; Bonna, Franziska; Riekmann, Wibke (2010): Was an Teilhabe übrig bleibt. Methodische/methodologische Problemlagen der Erfassung von Lese- und Schreibkompetenzen für eine Level-One Studie. Erscheint in: Hessische Blätter für Volksbildung, Jg. 60, H. 3, S. 240-247. OECD (2009): PISA Data Analysis Manual. SPSS® Second Edition. http://www.oecd.org/document/38/0,3746,en_32252351_32236191_42609254_1_1_1_1,00.html OECD; Statistics Canada (2000): Literacy in the Information Age. Final Report of the International Adult Literacy Survey. Paris
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.