Defining LLN

Over the years, several broad definitions have been applied to LLN, such as those contained within the Australian Language and Literacy Policy (1991), a statement from the Australian Council for Adult Literacy (2006) and the National Foundation Skills Strategy for Adults (2012). These broad definitions belong at the macro-layer. Participants’ narratives showed more personalised understandings of the meanings of literacy and numeracy. When asked to define LLN, participants did not reference common definitions from governmental or adult education based sources. Rather, they responded at a personal level, drawing on their years of experience working with adult learners. When asked to define LLN, Cassie responded by stating that ‘adult literacy and numeracy is difficult to define because nobody seems to have a decent definition’.

Viewed from a phenomenological perspective, LLN is difficult to define. As has already been discussed, LLN teachers consider LLN learners to be a diverse cohort with diverse needs. Indeed, according to LLN teachers, the needs of individual LLN learners are all different. This could explain the reluctance of participants to reference any common definition of LLN. Highlighting the individuality of LLN, Karen commented:

Due to the diversity of needs you can’t define adult literacy and numeracy at the level of a framework descriptor. It really has to be based on the adult’s understanding of their needs and their background obstacles that have been placed in front of them.

Mindful of the perception that LLN varies according to the needs of individual learners, and drawing primarily from participants’ experience working in the LLN field, three

broad repertoires have been identified that help to define adult literacy and numeracy: functional skill development, skills deficit and the development of learner attributes.

4.3.1.1 Functional skill development

It was noted by various participants that LLN could be defined as the development of functional skills. Drawing on her 22 years of experience, Carmel’s defined LLN in terms of macro skills. She stated:

I never quite know because I like bits of other people’s definitions. I think, in terms of adult literacy, we’re talking about the five macro skills—reading, writing, speaking, listening and numeracy, but learning as well. But I also understand and I appreciate that it’s greater than that. It’s so that people can do what they want to do in society, take part in society as they want to.

Sounding a similar note, Carol defined LLN as something that gave learners the ‘competence and skills to function’ in society. Drew, an LLN coordinator in a rural TAFE with four years’ experience, articulated a narrower perception, describing LLN as the ‘skills that enable students to adapt to a workplace environment’. Dianne suggested that LLN was not just about the acquisition of functional skills, but also how to use those skills as a tool kit to gain new knowledge. ‘Obviously the ability to read and write’ was important; however, beyond helping people to be literate, Diane maintained that it was important to teach them to ‘use that literacy, to interpret the words and their meanings, to help gain the knowledge’. For her, it was ‘not just the ability to read and write’ that was important. Joanne stressed the importance of representing LLN positively. Drawing on her experience of trying to describe LLN within her workplace, she recounted: ‘I try not to define it by a deficit so I always try to define it with what is there. I might say functional literacy and numeracy that enables people to function in their everyday world’.

4.3.1.2 Deficit

Joanne’s concern with not defining LLN in deficit terms was not shared by all participants. For example, Fran, who worked in an ACE institute, believed that the majority of students in her LLN classes were lacking in basic skills and ‘that their skills are weak and they want to get them better’. Edwina also felt that LLN programs were about deficits, but she had a slightly broader view on literacy:

I’m thinking of [literacy] in terms of programs with low or limited skills for engaging with the full range of texts that are needed in modern life. So that’s

looking at it from a program point of view. I guess literacy in terms of skills set, for me it’s about engaging fully in the whole range of the world of written texts. Fran too spoke of LLN in deficit terms, but she extended her definition by adding that learners tended to underestimate their own skills in LLN. Like other participants, she believed that the notion of deficit often came from the students themselves. Describing LLN skills, Fran explained that ‘I sort of look at it like a muscle that’s not being used. What I’d like to say is that they probably have got a lot of these skills, they’ve just avoided using them for a long time.’

4.3.1.3 Developing individual learner attributes

The third theme that emerged from the data was that LLN helped learners to develop new attributes. This was in spite of government policies that directed funding for LLN towards low-skilled learners with the aim of transitioning them into employment. While participants expressed concerns about the constraints of funding, and lamented the loss of ‘learning for learning’s sake’, they still considered that learning should be connected to the support that individual students needed. Reflecting the sentiments of other participants, Eve explained that, notwithstanding the diversity in backgrounds and ages of her students, her role as an LLN teacher was to:

Make sure it’s real, it’s relevant; that the students are engaged with what they are doing and that they are going to gain new skills out of their further education. Adult literacy and numeracy should promote student’s confidence and engagement in society and not just in work. It should be contextualised to those sorts of things to their interests.

Karen linked LLN to individual goal setting, commenting that ‘LLN doesn’t exist in a vacuum … it has to be connected to a purpose so adult literacy and numeracy for employment, for further study, for personal development’. Referring to the achievement of personal goals, Bronwyn’s view was that development included ‘learning to navigate the Australian culture and to connect in some capacity and they [learners] need LLN to do that and they need other things as well’.

Elise believed that learners needed help to develop a range of ‘learning to learn’ attributes, such as confidence, that would assist them to see learning as transformative, thus enabling them to progress to other types of learning. Preferring to define literacy and numeracy separately, she explained:

Literacy is the requirement for supporting people to become independent in reading and writing in a variety of genres, improving their competence. Numeracy I would define as teaching people who don’t have confidence or don’t have skills to work with numbers in the world.

I see the roles [of LLN teachers] in the best of all possible worlds as something that might hopefully be transformative for the learner so that they might see themselves as learning other things as well.

Giving learners the confidence to participate in transformative learning altered their negative perceptions of education and promoted a sense of self-belief in their own abilities to transfer their functional LLN skills between contexts. Helen saw this as a matter of helping learners to develop ‘confidence with [their] written and spoken and critical literacy skills’ so that they could ‘function in a very complex society’; it was also about helping them ‘to grow … and to continue to learn’.