Back to Home Page of CD3WD Project or Back to list of CD3WD Publications

PREVIOUS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS NEXT PAGE


Chapter 1: The growth of interest in 'post-literacy'


Concepts and definitions
Assumptions and issues
Conclusion

There is growing interest in 'post-literacy' at both academic level and in the field. Almost all plans for and reports on literacy programmes (India 1988, Kenya 1992, Egypt 1993) now include some statement about the need for post-literacy provision. Many programmes are producing large quantities of material labelled 'post-literacy'. This reflects a substantial change from the situation of a few years ago.

The study of 'post-literacy' is also growing. UIE has been engaged on a large scale project in post-literacy and continuing education since 1981 which has resulted in a number of reports (Dave et al 1985-1987). In Tanzania, major studies into post-literacy have been undertaken (Sjostrom 1992; see Bibliography under Tanzania). Collections of materials have been and are being built up in UIE (Hamburg), CESO (the Netherlands), and the University of Reading and SIL in Buckinghamshire (UK), and these are being used for research and teaching.

Experiments in the practice of 'post-literacy' have also expanded. The Asian Regional Office of UNESCO in Bangkok has joined with ACCU in Japan to mount probably the largest programme of regional and national workshops on the preparation of materials for post-literacy. In Latin America, there are large programmes. The German agency DSE has developed writing workshops throughout Africa, and CODE-Europe has taken post-literacy publishing as part of its programme.

Provision for post-literacy within national and local programmes is thus growing, although there are hesitations about the cost of the production of materials on a large scale.

The results of all of this may be seen in the growing conceptualisation of the field of post-literacy (see note in Bibliography). Busy development administrators may need help to access and digest these new understandings. We have not attempted to deal here with all the issues these studies and field experience have raised but to concentrate on those issues (especially relating to post-literacy materials) which we consider helpful to donors. In general terms, we have noticed a need to cut through the rhetoric which surrounds this field as in other areas of literacy and development.

Concepts and definitions

All the most important terms used in discussions of post-literacy are context-dependent. For example, 'local' (as in 'locally-generated materials') may refer to a particular group of learners, a village or collection of villages, a local region, a linguistic group, a region or even a national programme. 'Basic education' in different contexts may mean either literacy (with numeracy), the whole or a large part of the primary school curriculum, training in vocational skills, or even a broader concept of 'those skills which are necessary for adult participation in modern society'. Thus 'basic education' may mean initial literacy in some contexts or 'post- literacy' in other contexts.

The same is true when we look at concepts and issues. 'Quality' assessments of materials are almost always made in the social context within which such materials have been produced rather than by any absolute standards of good writing, illustrations, design etc. 'Low-cost' assessments depend on local conditions and markets - there can be no absolute guidelines. Language issues are determined within a specific context: although general guidelines are available (Guidelines 1994), these need to be interpreted within a particular situation. Post-literacy programmes are always based on prior (conscious or unconscious) decisions relating to language and associated matters. Gender-related issues also vary. In some countries (e.g. Egypt), no special provision for gender-related materials is made. In others (e.g. Bangladesh), gender related materials are usually confined to subject matter thought to be appropriate to women in general rather than to the differing needs of specific groups of women, and most of these concentrate on what Moser (1993) calls the 'basic' rather than the 'strategic' needs of women. All of these assumptions relating to language, gender and context need to be tested.

Given all of this, it is not surprising that the term 'post-literacy' itself means different things, even to different agencies within the same country. Like 'literacy', it usually carries two meanings - the teaching of skills, in this case further literacy and other print-based skills, and secondly, the use of these skills after the period of initial literacy instruction. The content of the further stages of literacy instruction varies greatly. For some, it is 'post-primer', for others, it is 'post-basic' education. Initial literacy primers now usually come in three or more stages (as in Kenya, India and Egypt: Tanzania has four stages), so that they now include much that was formerly included in 'post-literacy'. As these initial literacy primers have grown in the range of the matter they cover, so post-literacy materials and programmes now often include subjects well beyond the traditional limits of literacy, such as health, vocational training and political/social affairs.

The variations in meaning given to post-literacy may be seen in some of the terms applied to these materials -'follow-up' or 'supplementary' materials, 'easy reading', 'materials for adults with limited reading skills' etc (PROAP: see below). Insofar as there is any common understanding behind all these terms, it would seem to be the provision of activities and materials which are thought to be appropriate for persons with limited reading and writing abilities/experience.

Assumptions and issues

A number of assumptions can be seen behind these terms and practices: these have been often debated but there is no common agreement on them. Two in particular stand out.

1. Staging

The word 'post-' in 'post-literacy' strengthens the idea of successive stages in literacy learning. Some are hesitant about the word 'stages', preferring instead to talk about a continuum of adult/continuing education. But almost all our respondents and case studies see literacy in terms of several (sometimes distinct, sometimes overlapping) phases leading from a state of being illiterate to being literate. Bhola (1980) speaks of illiterate; pre-literate; literacy instruction in stages; post-literacy in stages; independent learner; and finally participant. UIE (Dave et al 1985; Ouane 1988) has elaborated this, and their view has spread widely. PROAP speaks of adults as progressing through overlapping stages of literacy and continuing education (with post-literacy as the first of several successive stages of adult education) and on into the formal system of education (see Fig. I p5 below). Other stages have been posited.

For most practitioners, there is a more or less distinct post-literacy phase. It would seem to have a relatively clear starting point - the end of the initial or primer-based literacy instruction, which of course varies from country to country. The end point of post-literacy is more indeterminate. We have noticed a tendency for programmes to 'grab a bit more of the shoreline' as time goes on. The notion of 'being literate' in this context is wider than simply being able to read, write and calculate. It includes the idea of 'being educated', being independent. Often post-literacy programmes include a wide curriculum. Tanzania for example includes health and political education; Bahrein includes Arabic, Maths, English, religious studies, social studies, science, and health education in a two-year programme. In these cases, post-literacy comes to mean the whole of the primary school curriculum and even more.

Many agencies do not distinguish between 'post-literacy' and 'continuing education'. Where such a distinction is drawn, 'continuing education' would seem to refer to those learning programmes designed to obtain for the learner access into the formal system of education and/or to cover the same curriculum as the schools, while 'post-literacy' refers to those subjects which are specifically adult in their orientation including social and economic development issues.

2. Goals of post-literacy

This raises the other basic issue, the goals of post-literacy. Once again the stated purposes of post-literacy provision vary:

a) For some, the main purpose is to consolidate and if possible extend the literacy skills in order to "prevent relapse into illiteracy". Many people have argued that a post-literacy programme is an essential ingredient of a permanent literacy campaign.. "Successful countries like China and Russia embarked on post-literacy programmes, while countries lacking such programmes as Ecuador. had a gradual decline of literacy" (Bwatwa 1977 p15): "the relatively successful campaigns are in fact normally distinguishable from the failures by the emphasis they place on post-literacy" (Cairns 1989, cited in McCaffrey and Williams 1990 p 15).

b) Others see post-literacy programmes as an opportunity to purvey developmental messages: "literacy creates and post-literacy reinforces the possibility for new literates to have access to information, to decisions and responsibilities concerning their own development" (Kessi 1979 p5).

c) Others see post-literacy as helping the learners to participate in political or social life as critical citizen, alert customer or aware voter. In South Africa, for example, massive inputs of materials on voter education have been provided.

Such variations of goals will of course influence the contents of the programmes and the materials.

Two concepts have been of particular significance for helping to determine the goals of post-literacy, independent learning and access.

Independent learners: Most writers on and practitioners of post-literacy see the over-riding goal as the promotion of independent learning. But this phrase is once again variably defined in different contexts - as the ability to learn on one's own, or the process of learning to be independent, or the creation of a permanent reading habit etc. There are divergent views between those who hold that post-literacy activities are essentially individual and those who hold that they can best be undertaken in a group. It is significant that the stress is laid on independent learning rather than on the independent use of literacy skills. We would point out that real rather than rhetorical independent learning - that is, individualised learning without the help of a learning group or teacher - will carry implications for the role of the providing agency and for the dissemination of materials (on learning, see p40 below).

Virtually all agencies engaged in post-literacy report that the gap between what is achieved by the end of the primer-based literacy programme (even in three or more stages) and the ability to 'learn independently' is too big for adult learners to proceed from the one to the other without further assistance. What is equally clear is that primer-based literacy instruction tends to encourage dependency of the learner on the teacher and the text. Some different process is needed to discourage such dependency and to promote 'independence in learning'. This programme of further assistance and declining dependence is what many people mean by post-literacy. We note from our field studies however that many post-literacy programmes are becoming more prescriptive and more like formal education and are thus discouraging rather than encouraging real independence.

Access: Several agencies see post-literacy as providing access into formal education (some form of primary or secondary schooling), as bridging the gap between the levels achieved by the end of the literacy programme and the standards needed to enter school. Others however point out that only a very small minority of adult learners in literacy classes have any intention of proceeding into formal education; the bulk of those who learn literacy skills as adults intend it to be of immediate use in their existing way of life rather than of future use in some changed way of life.

This last point suggests that although many of those who plan and provide post-literacy programmes claim to know what the goals of the learners are, there may well be less appreciation of the real literacy needs, understandings, perceptions and practices of the participant learners. Existing literacy practices and perceptions are rarely considered in depth when planning literacy programmes except at a very generalised level ("all villagers.." or "all women.." need this or that). This is particularly true when expressing the purposes of post-literacy. Thus Bhola (1980) summarises the goals of post-literacy as the retention of literacy, second-chance formal education, the systematic integration of literacy and developmental goals, and socialisation for the ideal society. It would seem clear that these are the goals of the providers, not necessarily those of the learners which would normally be more immediately instrumental. Local surveys of literacy perceptions are still rare, and local surveys of existing literacy practices are even rarer, although some are beginning to emerge (and where they exist are usually confined to reading rather than writing practices). Both kinds of surveys need to be encouraged.

Conclusion

We would draw the following conclusions from this survey:

· that a search for commonly agreed terms and concepts is probably impractical. Those who deal with literacy and post-literacy need to be aware of the use of variable definitions and to seek carefully for what is implied by the use of any particular term

· that there can be no single appropriate form of post-literacy provision; it will always be context dependent.

· that we cannot assume that the goals of the providing agencies and donors will always coincide with those of the participants which will themselves vary by region, gender, status etc. An analysis of the relationship between the aims and activities of these agencies and the aims and practices of the participants should be one of the primary focuses in the design and funding of any post-literacy programme.

Fig. 1: PROAP scheme of post-literacy and continuing education (PROAP Report 1993)

LITERATURE SURVEY

Published and unpublished materials were found in the libraries of IDS (University of Sussex), Reading University, CESO in the Netherlands, the UNESCO Institute of Education, Hamburg, and DSE in Bonn. The material comes under many different headings such as Non-formal Education, Functional Literacy, Follow-Up Material, Reading Materials etc, as well as 'Literacy', since many libraries have no key term 'post-literacy'.

The largest amount of research material comes from Tanzania; this is often used as a model for others (e.g. Kenya) but evaluations of this programme (CESO/SIDA 1992; IIEP 1992) have been critical and contain many warnings. The same difficulties facing the mounting of literacy programmes also face research, so the findings are often based on very thin evidence.

A study of this material shows:

1. Post-literacy is now regarded as an essential element in most literacy campaigns or programmes. It is thought to be needed to prevent relapse into illiteracy, to convey new ideas and messages, to change attitudes, to increase literacy skills (mainly reading), and to promote participation in community development.

2. The material is full of normative assumptions and judgments which make it difficult to distinguish what is from what the author feels should be.

3. Most programmes view 'post-literacy' as part of a continuum. Nevertheless, there is much discussion of different levels of post-literacy materials.

4. There is much rhetoric about involving 'participation' but the reality does not always bear this out. Many projects are top-down unidirectional attempts to impart information, particularly of an extension kind, to supposedly 'backward' villagers. The difficulty of reconciling on the one hand the rhetoric of materials being locally focused and adaptable with on the other hand the promotion of central often scientific agency messages is a further subject for debate.

5. Nevertheless, several reports and handbooks describe ways of getting local involvement in the design and planning of materials such as newspapers (mainly monthly because of lack of resources), especially as an antidote to top-down and demeaning views of local culture. Locally generated materials (LGM) activities emerge in relation to literacy or development aims rather than as a journalistic venture. LGM have limited circulation because of distribution problems, are usually sponsored by a development agency or government department and depend on subsidies. LGM writing projects rarely seem to last long and are very vulnerable.

6. Other media than print is used to support post-literacy work - e.g. radio, film, audiovisual, posters, games, puppet plays etc. For some, this material will reinforce and stimulate flagging literacy campaigns; for others, this is a way of getting messages over more directly. There is some discussion about the cultural appropriateness of 'visual literacy'.

7. There is increasing discussion of cultural issues, especially whether any medium can be used for post-literacy or whether media proposed by international and national agencies will lead to local rejection. The UIE research programme is aimed at finding innovatory ways of using local cultural resources, avoiding the welfare model of literacy.

8. There is considerable concern about language and gender issues. Most post-literacy materials appear to be in standardised rather than local languages. Kenya, for example, uses local languages in initial literacy campaign primers, whereas the post-literacy materials will be in KiSwahili. Evaluations indicate that these materials are not always gender sensitive.

9. Most post-literacy materials production is dependent on outside funding and infrastructure and is vulnerable to economic or political change.

10. The writer workshop has emerged as the main focus for materials production for post-literacy work; they combine central expertise and infrastructure with local knowledge and skills. The two main models are

a) UNESCO PROAP/ACCU Regional and National Workshops
b) DSE 'Action Training Model' (ATM) especially in Kenya.

Both try to test the materials they produce in the field but there are limitations to the effectiveness of this testing.

11. The dissemination phase is nearly always seen as the main bottle-neck.

12. There is very little in the material on writing. Almost all the emphasis is on reading materials, except for the Zimbabwe Community Writing Project where the materials were produced by community leaders and grass roots development workers rather than by the learners, and LGM projects where learners themselves are encouraged to write. Surveys of background reading habits are becoming more frequent.


PREVIOUS PAGE TOP OF PAGE NEXT PAGE