ALM-12



ALM-12

Theoretical framework for adults learning mathematics

David Kaye

LLU+, London South Bank University

This is a report on the work of Topic Group A, who met twice during the conference to continue

discussion of a Theoretical Framework. It includes a summary of past discussions.

I identified three aims for the two Topic Group workshops on “Developing a Theoretical Framework for Adults

Learning Mathematics” ) at ALM 12:

������ To initiate newcomers into the debate about a specific theoretical framework with reference to adults learning

mathematics

������ To continue the debate with others to confirm, broaden and deepen the concepts we are defining.

������ To identify any research directions or research questions that ALM collectively and its members individually

can take forward.

The story so far

This topic is at the heart of the teaching and research practice of ALM members and conference participants. How

do we define ourselves? At ALM 12 I felt I felt that my task was in some ways that of an ‘elder’ passing on the

traditional culture of ALM. At every conference there are new members joining this debate. It is through the annual

repetition of this group that the core cultural identity of ALM as a distinct activity is perpetuated and passed on.

To welcome those meeting this topic for the first time, and to remind others of what has gone before, I present here

some key quotations from previous papers on this topic.

ALM4 (Wedege, 1998)

I regard ‘adults education and mathematics’ as a complex subject for didactics of mathematics, whether the focus

is on teaching, learning or knowledge. Thus delimiting the field of study (subject area and problem filed) is a

central part of the research. In my view the complexity is based on at least three vital, inter-connected conditions

which have to do with knowing, learning and teaching of adults:

Mathematics teaching . . .

Learning mathematics . . .

Mathematical knowledge and attitudes to mathematics

ALM 5 (Wedege, 1999)

If we look at three classical subject fields in the didactics of mathematics (mathematics teaching, learning

mathematics and mathematical knowledge) we have to note that, in ALM, ‘teaching’ includes ‘math-containing

teaching’, ‘learning’ includes ‘learning in everyday life’ and ‘knowing’ includes ‘adults mathematical capacities and

competencies developed in everyday life and their attitudes to mathematics’.

ALM 5 (Benn, 1999)

If we are looking at Adults Learning Mathematics as a community of practice and research, we might ask what

are the aims of research and practice in adults learning mathematics. Research might be the creation of ‘adults

learning mathematics’ knowledge: practice of the induction of curriculum knowledge in others. But the distinction

is not clear cut. One of the aims of research might also be to improve teachers’ practice and students’

understanding and learning. Is there a clear distinction between theoretical research knowledge and pragmatic

empirical ‘really useful’ knowledge? It seems to me that in the moorland of questions concerning adults learning

mathematics, research and practice are fundamentally linked.

238

ALM 5 (Maasz, 1999)

Both practice and research is very interesting for me. I like to hear what other people do in their courses. I like to

exchange experiences and to construct and discuss theories about learning and teaching. Lots of prejudice

sometimes blocks the formation of a community of practice and research: theory is too abstract and not useful,

practice is boring and experiences from practice are singular and not important for all members. ALM is on the

way to remove such prejudices by offering lots of positive examples. . . . ALM should be a community of

practice and research, and not only research.

ALM 6 (Benn, Maasz, & Wedege, 2000)

But is it dangerous to live with heterogeneity? Sometimes people become lost in moorland and do not find the

way back to their home. Other (older) pedagogical disciplines are in a similar situation. Psychology, sociology

and philosophy, for example, have different schools or ‘invisible colleges’ – groups of researchers with one theory

or methodology The most important question is not how to change this situation (to find one theory for all

researchers) but how to ensure co-operation between ‘schools’.

At present it seems that ALM has a negating philosophy where the emphasis is on what we do not want, rather

than on what we do. Among ALM members, there is a fundamental criticism of the conventional wisdom of what

it means to learn mathematics, about what mathematics is, and about what it means to teach mathematics. This

critique is political as well as educational.

The question for each of us is not whether we each have a theory. It is more, which is your theory, and can you

name it? Learners also each have their own theories concerning the nature of mathematics and learning

mathematics. What are their theories and how do we as researchers and teachers respect and acknowledge

these?

ALM 7 (Benn & Wedege, 2001)

It was stated that different theories offer a larger perspective in practice and research and that interdisciplinarity

is a must. Thus we began to make explicit some of the possible theoretical and methodological choices (e.g.

What do we mean by mathematics education?) and how these choices do affect our practice.

ALM 8 (Benn & Wedege, 2002)

Several studies examine numeracy in society. They represent, however, different approaches to the subject area,

for example: an an objective perspective (society’s requirements of numeracy) versus a subjective perspective

(adults’ individual need for numeracy; or a numerical skills approach (numeracy as basic skills) versus a

numerate competence approach (numeracy as an everyday competence).

ALM 8 (Schwartz, 2002)

I don’t believe I am alone in asserting that there are direct linkages between numeracy, empowerment and

democracy. In essence, the hypothesis seems to be: if students demonstrate an increase in numeracy skills then

there will be an associated increase in empowerment and democracy.

ALM 9 (Wedege, 2003)

By ‘problematique’ I mean a systematically linked problem field in which questions and answers about the subject

field are formulated on the basis of a certain theoretical and /or methodological approach. It was a metadiscussion

about the nature of the new research domain and the debate at the conference showed that this is a

very complex issue.

ALM 9 (Maasz, 2003)

One aspect of many statements concerned the relation of theory and practice. I had a feeling that it was not

always clear what the meaning of “theory” and “practice” was. There were different meanings and some

misunderstandings. This is the reason for me to invite you to concentrate on some possible meanings of “theory”

and “practice” in the area of ALM.

One of his [Sir Karl Popper’s] theses is that practice and theory are always connected – it is impossible to do

something like teaching without thinking about it. If this is correct – and I think so – it is not useful to talk about

“theory” and “practice” as if there are contradictions or as if it would be possible to do one of them without the

other part. They belong together.

239

ALM 10 (Maasz, 2003)

What are the realistic aims for research in our area of adults learning mathematics? Let us look at the research

situation. We have some established academic disciplines from where we import theories and research methods:

pedagogics, psychology, sociology, mathematics education, didactics of mathematics, philosophy, information

sciences, medicine, biology. A discipline like pedagogics is differentiated in a lot of subdisciplines concentrated

on research subjects, such as very young children, teacher training, or adults learning. If the subdiscipline that is

working with adults learning wants to start a research project to find out something about the learning process or

the chances to improve the quality of teaching some basic decisions have to be made. What background or basic

theory should be used? What method(s) of research could be used? Basic theories for pedagogics are in many

cases imported from psychology or sociology. At this conference we talk about attitudes and emotions and their

role in the process of learning. These are psychological categories. If we listen to presentations about

mathematics at the workplace or in everyday life we will hear something about the sociological background, for

example a definition “What is a workplace?”

ALM 10 (Safford-Ramus, 2003)

At ALM-7 in Boston, I shared an analysis of doctoral research about mathematics education from the years 1980

to 2000 . . . In the intervening years since ALM-7, I have examined more than sixty of the dissertations cataloged

in the database, reading several in their entirety. It has been an intriguing, time-consuming, and rewarding

experience . . .. For this paper, I report on five of the dissertations that I read in their entirety. The first, by a longstanding

member of ALM, is a study in critical education conducted in Friere’s native country, Brazil. This is

followed by summaries of two dissertations about mathematics anxiety, an ongoing concern for adult tutors, and

two about computer usage in adult mathematics instruction, a much-touted tool that is sometimes difficult to

implement.

ALM 10 (Coben, 2003)

The research domain of adult numeracy is fast-developing but still under-researched and under-theorised. It may

be understood in relation to mathematics education, as well as to adult literacy and language, and lifelong

learning generally. Most research on adult numeracy is interpretative and uses qualitative methods, although

quantitative studies do exist, most notably in the form of large-scale surveys. Research designs vary widely,

including mixed methods, experimental studies, ethnographic studies and practitioner research. Heterogeneity in

research design in studies of adult numeracy is healthy and should be encouraged, giving the diversity and

under-researched nature of the field –or moorland – of adult numeracy and the myriad issues worthy of

investigation, provided that the methods used are ethical and fit for purpose. Practitioners and researchers need

opportunities to learn from each other - practitioner/researcher fora and networks such as ALM, ANN [Adult

Numeracy Network – USA] and ALNARC [Adult Literacy and Numeracy Australian Research Consortium] have a

key role to play; international perspectives are important here.

ALM 11 (Coben, Maasz, Nolte, & Safford-Ramus, 2005)

This session was opened with a presentation by Kathy Safford that summarized the work of two theorists in the

United States who are actively examining adult learning although not specifically the learning of mathematics.

Dr Howard Gardener has developed his theory of multiple intelligecies (MI) over more than two decades. … The

eight intelligencies that have been recognized in Gardener’s theory are linguistic, logical/mathematical, spatial,

bodily/kinaesthetic, musical, naturalist, interpersonal and intrapersonal.

Dr Robert Kegan has crafted a theory of adult development that describes three perspectives from which

teachers and learners view their educational experiences. Kegan and his associates at NCSALL [National Centre

for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy – USA] distinguish three “ways of knowing” that may appear within

the adult life span: instrumental, socializing, and self-authoring.

Participants in Topic Group A suggested other theorists who are influencing current research.

Professor Brian Butterworth … In his book The Mathematical Brain … describes several findings concerning the

learning of and dealing with mathematics. The book evokes the question of the mathematical capabilities of

babies, the differences between street mathematics and school mathematics, and other topics pertinent to adults

learning mathematics. … His resultant theory proposes that the capability to do mathematical operations is

localized within the brain.

Dr Stanislas Dehaene is a mathematician … who studies cognitive neuropsychology of language and number

processing in the human brain. . . .His 1997 book The Number Sense: How The Mind Creates Mathematics … is

a study of numeration … He argues that many of the difficulties that people face when learning mathematics

240

stem from our primate brain … He also argues that the human brain does not work like a computer and that the

physical world is not based on mathematics, rather mathematics evolved to explain the physical world.

The second session of topic group A concentrated on the future of ALM research. Leading the brainstorming

session, Juergen Maasz asked participants to collect their ideas and wishes in response to questions like:

What should be research areas that are helpful for ALM?

What do I want to know about adults learning mathematics?

What could be areas for joint ALM research projects?

[Note – the list of projects was published in the proceedings of ALM-10 and in the ALM newsletter No. 22 March

2005 available on the ALM website]

The ALM 12 event

The ALM 12 session began with a kinaesthetic activity, both to break the ice and to find out how many people had

had previous experiences of ALM conferences. The participants in the Topic Group discussion were asked to form

themselves into a human bar chart according to the number of times they had attended ALM – 1, 2, 3, or more than

3. This immediately produced a picture of the pattern of attendance at ALM conferences with approximately twelve

attending for the first time, five attending two, one attending three and eight attending more than 3.

As anticipated there was a need to provide a background to this on-going discussion. The introduction summarised

the main points given above in ‘The Story So Far’. The emphasis was put on the fact that this topic group was still

defining the boundaries of this field or moorland of study, and was continually encouraging more people to become

interested and participate.

I brought in my own interpretation by looking at the name of our organisation as a means of defining our activities. I

like to think of this as a focus on our locus.

Adults Learning Mathematics can be looked at in three ways: Adults Learning, Adults Mathematics and

Learning Mathematics. The significance of this is summarised in Table 1.

This summary and introduction provided a background against which the participants in the Topic Group were asked:

������ Can we build up a field of study of our own?

������ If we can promote more research – where should it go?

The participants were divided into four groups, and as far as possible these groups were mixed in terms of

experience of attending ALM conferences.

Table 1. Three ways of looking at Adults Learning Mathematics.

Title Field of Study Significant Topics

Adults Learning Adult education

The practice and study of teaching and

learning in the post-16 sector, including

vocational, technical and work-based

learning

Theories of adult education, “androgogy”,

‘Bildning’

Social justice

Empowerment

Entitlement

Adults Mathematics Mathematics curricula

Attitudes to mathematics

Philosophy of mathematics

Numeracy

Ethnomathematics

Maths phobia/anxiety

Learning Mathematics Theories of teaching and learning

Models of mathematics education

Mathematics in context

‘Everyday maths’

Algorithms

Learning preferences

Dyscalculia

‘Maths anxiety’

The summaries of the discussions, as noted at the time, are shown here.

241

Group 1

������ Is there a need for a framework and what should it be?

������ Acknowledge 'complexity' - need not to exclude ideas as areas of study

������ What are the differences between children and adult learning? To what extent are they important?

Group 2

������ Can we keep focus inclusive (of) adults mathematics

������ Trickle up what we know from ABE/ASE (adult basic/special education)

������ Special needs students (eg blind and deaf) - language / cultural

Group 3

������ Extremes eg Sudanese immigrants - no school education - no formal education

������ Cultural difference - no experience of western structure

������ How do you stop formal education destroying knowledge?

������ Not recognising actual knowledge - mathematical cultures

������ Will official culture kill valid mathematical cultures?

������ Language - adaptive expertise

������ Providing magic formulae "algorithms" eg nurses/electricians formulae not understanding

������ Adult numeracy ������ moving to prepare for further study ������ moving to traditional

������ How (to) bridge divide of maths/numeracy?

Group 4

������ How do adults learn math on line?

- can technology increase access and equality

- what costs and benefits?

- does it affect the nature of the math?

������ How do we look at development - research it

- How is adult math development different/same from kids?

������ experience?

������ ageing?

- What do adults bring that facilitates learning?

������ How learning math changes a self-identity

- look at identity shifts

������ Do we need a curriculum?

- if we have a starting point on everyday experience/concrete experience and go from there

- how do teachers trust this process?

������ What skills do teachers need?

The second workshop was held on the following day. The aim of the second day was to identify the next steps with

the opportunity for participants to add the experiences gained at ALM 12 to the debate. The ideas emerging from

this workshop would inform future discussions of the ALM Trustees and next year’s conference, particularly the Topic

Group A discussion.

The summary of the comments and discussions of the first session is presented under the following headings.

A. Community of Practice ~ Professional Development

242

B. Curriculum ~ Knowledge – Formal & Informal

C. Language ~ Speakers of ‘other’ languages – Sign – Mathematics

D. Learning Theory ~ Children – Adults

E. Personal Development ~ Identity ~ Understanding

These categories were used as a basis for further discussions, but there was some concern expressed that useful as

categorisation may be, it should not form a limit to what can be discussed.

We found the time of the second session very limiting – given the scope of the issue under consideration. I noted the

following as the main new themes or proposals to emerge from this discussion.

������ Adult numeracy and social justice

������ This was the main theme of the 2005 conference itself. It was given as an example of the meta themes to be

considered in the future.

������ Framework of previous ALM Proceedings

������ A suggestion to look at the past proceedings of ALM conferences and seek to categorise the contents. This

could be linked to an analysis aiming to summarise “who we are”.

������ Data base of research activity

������ This would be an active record of what is being investigated, which would aim to make links between people

working in various specialist areas, who could support each other. An example was given of working in the

Maori language, working in sign language and working on ESOL courses; though apparently diverse, these

adult numeracy contexts are all linked through the issue of the use of language in mathematics.

Conclusion

I re-call going to ALM conferences to find some theoretical answers to questions about teaching numeracy. At Topic

Group A sessions the discussion on theoretical frameworks has become the place to raise new questions, and within

the annual meetings to bring more people into this fundamental discussion. The answers are continually given by the

strength, variety and depth of the contributions that are made to each ALM conference as it criss-crosses around the

world.

I presented three aims at the beginning of this paper that the workshop was to meet: the initiation of newcomers; the

continuation of the tradition; and the possibilities for future developments. I feel these were achieved, and that

defining the theoretical frameworks for adults learning mathematics had been enriched that little bit more.

References

ALM4 Coben, D., & O'Donoghue, J. (Eds.) (1998). Adults Learning Mathematics – 3. Proceedings of ALM4 the Fourth International

Conference of Adults Learning Maths - A Research Forum, July 1997. London: Goldsmiths College, University of London in

association with ALM.

ALM5 Coben, D., & van Groenestijn, M. (Eds.) (1999). Mathematics as part of Lifelong Learnin. Proceedings of ALM5 the Fifth

International Conference of Adults Learning Maths - A Research Forum, July 1998. London: Goldsmiths College, University

of London in association with ALM.

ALM6 Coben, D., & Johnson, S. (Eds.) (2000). ALM – 6. Proceedings of ALM6, the Sixth International Conference of Adults Learning

Mathematics - A Research Forum, July 1999. Nottingham: CEP, University of Nottingham in association with ALM.

ALM7 Schmitt M. J., & Safford- Ramus, K. (Eds.) (2001). A Conversation Between Researchers and Practitioners. Proceedings of ALM7,

the Seventh International Conference of Adults Learning Mathematics - A Research Forum, July 2000. Cambridge MA:

NCSALL, Harvard University in association with ALM.

ALM8 Johansen, L Ø., & Wedege, T. (Eds.) (2002). Numeracy for Empowerment and Democracy. Proceedings of ALM8, the Eighth

International Conference of Adults Learning Mathematics - A Research Forum, July 2001. Roskilde: Centre for Research in

Learning Mathematics, Roskilde University in association with ALM.

ALM9 Evans, J., Healy, P., Kaye, D., Seabright, V., & Tomlin, A. (Eds.) (2003). Policies and Practices for Adults Learning mathematics:

opportunities and risks. Proceedings of ALM9, the Ninth International Conference of Adults Learning Mathematics - A

Research Forum, July 2002.. London ALM jointly with King’s College London.

ALM10 Maasz, J., & Schloeglmann, W. (Eds.) (2003). Learning Mathematics to Live and Work in our World. Proceedings of ALM10, the

Tenth International Conference of Adults Learning Mathematics - A Research Forum, July 2003. Linz: ALM and Johannes

Kepler Universitat.

ALM11 Lindberg, L. (Ed.) (2005). “Bildning” and/or Training. Proceedings of ALM11, the Eleventh International Conference of Adults

Learning Mathematics - A Research Forum, July 2004. Göteborg: ALM and Göteborg University

National Constraints on and Direction of Numeracy Education

Topic Group A, Belfast Conference

David Kaye, London South Bank University, United Kingdom

Juergen Maasz, University of Linz, Austria

Kathy Safford – Ramus, Saint Peter’s College, United States of America

Abstract

Our meeting in Belfast in June 2006 had two parts. In the first part the group decided where to put the focus of the meetings and in the second part the participants shared their experience and descriptions about the situation in their countries. What was the main focus? It was the conditions of the institutional, social and economical frame of our work as practitioners and researchers in the area of Adults Learning Mathematics.

Starting Points

At ALM conferences it is an ongoing theme of unofficial talks at breaks or while walking through the conference buildings: What is happening at home? What has been changed by the government or by those institutions from whom we get money? What are hidden or open rule for example to get funded by EU for a joint research project? Is there any evaluation of the effects of adult education by the government? Do we have fixed jobs or only financing by short time projects? Who is deciding about the direction of work? How the effect or success is measured? Are there any stories about crazy activities by the administration of our institutions at home? There are! A lot of stories!

All this communication is not part of our official conference communication. Maybe something is told as a joke at the beginning of a presentation. “I did not want to present this here but I have to do it to get money for the travelling costs!” “The research I am going to present now was part of a big nonsense project but I do not want to talk about this frame here.”

We all had the feeling that it is more and more important for our work to talk about the frame of our working situation in a more official way. The first step to do this was very easy. Very soon we had the impression that the situation in different countries is really very different. So we decided to collect information about the different countries. The inputs given by the participants of topic group A were reported and collected by David. This paper is an informal analysis and summary of the points of convergence and divergence between the national discussions. The appendix contains the actual points made by contributors to the discussion.

Funding

The strongest support for a national numeracy effort appears in the United Kingdom. Since 2000, a series of research projects and reports have advanced the development of a national adult numeracy core curriculum accompanied by teaching and diagnostic test materials. Individuals from Sweden and Denmark spoke of historically strong support for adult numeracy but expressed concerns that there has recently been a shift in funding from adult programs to research centered on children. In the United States, the source of educational research monies has migrated from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to the Department of Education (ED). The funding for the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy (NCSALL) ends in early 2007 and the ED-funded Adult Numeracy Initiative (ANI) is only a one-year project. There is negligible support in Germany and Austria.

Economic Influence

Virtually all participants reported an increasing emphasis on numeracy as an economic concern with research, and funding thereof, focusing on mathematics education for upgrading workplace skills. An Australian colleague spoke of the “vocationalisation” of basic mathematics education accompanied by an overall decrease in the mathematics components of the vocational courses, even those in engineering. A Swedish researcher characterized this as a shift from a personal growth model to one of economic development. In the United States, projects like Equipped for the Future that emphasized the importance of numeracy for citizenship and parenting as well as work are no longer funded by the government. Competition in the global market now has prominence. In Germany, the recent growth of unemployment would likely spark a major economic reconstruction but there are currently no government decrees promoting numeracy programs.

Teacher Training

Teacher training is prominent in the UK projects funded by the National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy (NRDC) as well as the development of numeracy specialist qualifications for post-16 teaching. No other country seems to be making similar efforts although a survey of professional development practices and qualifications was a task within the American ANI. In fact, Austrian, Danish and Swedish colleagues reported a deterioration in teacher quality resulting from funding cuts that drove experienced teachers away or privatization of numeracy instruction to firms with looser teacher criteria and lower salaries. In the Netherlands there are no specific qualifications for teachers of adult education, including numeracy.

Learner Characteristics

Immigration and school-leaving were two issues that participants saw as escalating influences on adult education. A participant from the Netherlands stated that numeracy is now subordinate to the provision of language skills for second language learners (SLL). A US colleague asserted that the highest demand in adult education was language instruction for SLL students. Increased school-leaving qualifications are causing more adolescents in the 16-19 age brackets to dropout of traditional school instruction and into programs designed for adult students. This is challenging programs designed for older, motivated students from both curriculum and financial perspectives.

Assessment

Assessment appears to still be traditional and competence-based. No one spoke about innovations in assessment that would reflect the changes in content and delivery that are occurring on the elementary and secondary levels in the schools. A colleague from the United States alluded to federal attempts to test tertiary students via a standardized assessment tool but expressed doubt that it would occur given the level of funding available and the resistance within the higher education community.

Conclusions

The intuitive sense that there is a broad range of differences between nations would appear to be true. One path that Topic Group A might pursue is a discussion of recent research reports from the UK and US as applicable, or not, to each member’s national situation. As an alternative, perhaps members can identify research project(s) that could be conducted in each country and the results compared. Whatever course we follow, Topic Group A must strive to advance research in adult mathematics education by moving forward, even if the annual effect seems infinitesimal.

Appendix

Reports on National Strategies with Particular Emphasis on Government Interventions

Australia

▪ Vocationalisation of basic mathematics

▪ Vocational courses (including engineering) had maths component reduced

▪ More generic support teaching in vocational courses – less emphasis on numeracy separately

▪ Research projects being encouraged on vocational topics

Austria

▪ “There is no need”! (official view)

▪ People are put on courses so they disappear from unemployment statistics

▪ Increase in private providers being used – brings in competition: now paying 50 – 60 Euro per day for teaching

Sweden

▪ Comparatively high level of government supported intervention in adult education

▪ Good investment in adult numeracy historically but recently complaints about reduction in funding – there has been a shift of funding from adults to children

▪ Shift from a personal growth model to one of economic development

▪ There is still good support for informal education

▪ Affected by trends from EU under “Lifelong Learning”

▪ More marketing in education

▪ Teachers in private sector are less well educated

Denmark

▪ Similar situation to Sweden

▪ Reduction in funding over last 6 years but for electoral reasons some increases now put in place, but damage already done, e.g. teachers resigned

▪ In survey of practice in various teaching situations could not find evidence of ‘numeracy’ by name but some increase in a focus on numeracy in content

▪ A growing need for more 16- 19 further education

Germany

▪ No government “decrees”

▪ No public discussion on government programmes

▪ Some private ‘schools’ and some folk ‘schools’

▪ Recent growth of unemployment – now over 10%

▪ Government money going into private training – very traditional style

▪ Currently a problem of major economic reconstruction

▪ Evidence of 5-10% low achievers

Netherlands

▪ Adult numeracy embedded in system of lifelong learning

▪ Competence based system of assessment

▪ Numeracy now hidden – not on list of priorities compared to provision for second language speakers

▪ Some research results awaited to show level of need for adult numeracy

▪ No specific qualifications for teachers of adult education – including numeracy

▪ From EMMA project some research on numeracy needs

UK (England & Wales)

▪ Recent developments start around 2000 with Moser report and the launch of the government led Skills for Life Quality Initiative (SFLQI)

▪ This includes the development and publication of a national adult numeracy core curriculum (Literacy and ESOL produced at the same time) and training provided for current parctitioners.

▪ Funding for production of teaching and diagnostic test materials

▪ Research funded through the NRDC (National Research and Development Centre for adult literacy and numeracy) and the more recent Maths 4 Life research project

▪ Development of numeracy specialist qualification to be taken in addition to post-16 teaching qualification

▪ Lack of funding to release teachers for part-time courses

▪ Government funding for some adult courses being reduced

▪ Growing emphasis (government policy) on courses for 16-19 sector linked to employment skills and vocational qualifications

▪ Current debate is about

- the re-writing of the post-16 teaching qualifications and within that the content of a specific numeracy pedagogy

- the term ‘numeracy’ and the development of ‘functional mathematics’ within ‘functional skills’

United States of America

▪ Changing curriculum and changes in teacher training in all subjects including mathematics

▪ There are fewer topics with greater depth

▪ Adult numeracy is on the fringe of literacy in USA

▪ NCSALL funding is coming to an end

▪ Government is ending direct national financial support and moving it to State funding

▪ Oversight of research has been moved to Department of Education which favours large scale surveys and this has taken money from math education projects

▪ The provision of adult numeracy is State funded, and all are different

▪ State budgets for adult education cut by 60%

▪ Evidence of adult numeracy needs ignored

▪ Assessment of adult numeracy/math very traditional

▪ The highest demand in adult education is for ESL (English for speakers of other languages)

▪ New proposal on college graduation – this can affect millions of people

▪ Possible assessments to be provided nation-wide but with so little funding is not very likely to happen

General Comments

▪ Lack of awareness by government politicians

▪ Rising influence of economic thinking and aims: (further) educations becomes part of the competition to allocate new companies or to convince them to invest more money in an existing site “here you find high qualified employees!”

▪ Do educational institutions have the power to resist against these tendencies?

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download