Interesting to note that some of the literacy test examples use Times New Roman and in one example, a very fancy typeface. These are not recommended for people with visual impairment and typefaces like TNR adds a layer of difficulty for others with dyslexia or similar (white text on blue background is not very helpful either). Presumably this is all part of 'real life' aspect of the tests. But one might suggest that improving work-based literacy is a two way process in which employers might think about the ease (and speed) with which text may be read. In other words small (maginal perhaps) adjustments in 'literacy' levels can derive from employers' good practice without any additional training of workers.

Robert

Professor Robert Moore
School of Sociology and Social Policy
Eleanor Rathbone Building
The University of Liverpool
L69 7ZA

Telephone and fax: 44 (0) 1352 714456
________________________________________
From: email list for Radical Statistics [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Dr L Brownstein [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 31 January 2016 11:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OECD: Low literacy and numeracy in England

Re bad GUIs, I couldn't agree more. But you left out Microshaft. It's record in this area isn't sterling.

Larry




-------Original Message-------

From: Peter Timusk<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Date: 1/31/2016 5:25:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: OECD: Low literacy and numeracy in England

I believe these surveys are employer skilled based measures of literacy to make their arguments for education to support training low paid workers with high skills. Or justifying off-shoring production for cheaper labour costs.

This is one known criticism of these surveys. Radical statisticians would know this. Typical statisticians would not know this critique.


We have them in Canada too.

Journalists and politicians are expected to react.

Personally I think to empower folks with computational statistics and computers and the Internet in general we need to work on digital literacies and computer literacies. Also we need to pressure Apple, Samsung, Google, Asus etc not to create disabilities by bad user interfaces.

Bringing us back to this survey. I believe it is designed to not find any sort of true literacy in steady only a kind of work place literacy.





Peter Timusk
I do not speak for my employer or associations that I belong to, or volunteer with unless otherwise noted.

From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Norbert Bilbeny
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 12:34 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OECD: Low literacy and numeracy in England

Dear Ted,

I believe they used the Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC)<https://www.oecd.org/site/piaac/mainelementsofthesurveyofadultskills.htm>. There are a few samples there, though not an enormous amount.

Best,
Norbert

On 30 January 2016 at 17:16, Ted Harding <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
There have been many lurid-looking media reports recently
about an OECD report which found low levels of numeracy
and literacy in English people, especially the younger and
including university students and graduates. For example,
the Times (Friday January 29) has the headline "Students in
crisis over poor maths and English".

A google on:
   OECD university literacy
led me to track down the OECD report in question:

  OECD Skills Studies
  Building Skills for All: A Review of England
  POLICY INSIGHTS FROM THE SURVEY OF ADULT SKILLS

http://www.oecd.org/unitedkingdom/building-skills-for-all-review-of-england.pdf

I would be interested to see what other people think about
this report. I found it difficult to see clearly what it was
saying overall, and throughout I was often unimpressed by
its clarity and presentation.

One particular thought occurred to me: Given the reported
percentages of bottom-level numeracy and/or literacy amongst
university graduates, perhaps the institutions which had
awarded them their degrees should be considered to be valid
universities?

For example:
Page 49 of the report:
  "In England, one in ten university students has low basic skills,
  giving rise to a whole set of challenges. University teaching
  gives limited attention to low levels of literacy and numeracy."
Page 51:
  "About 7 percent of university graduates in England have low
  basic skills"
Page 52, Figure 3.1:
  About 3% (visual estimate) of graduates in England have
  "Level 1 or below", 20%-3%=17% at "Level 2" in literacy;
  About 7% (visual estimate) have "Level 1 or below" and
  about 20% have "Level 2" in numeracy.

The "Level" would seem to be what is discussed (but without
clear specification) in Annexe A (pp. 99-102), and there are
four levels: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Over to you, and best wishes to all!
Ted.

-------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: 30-Jan-2016  Time: 17:15:34
This message was sent by XFMail
-------------------------------------------------

******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>.
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk<http://www.radstats.org.uk>.
*******************************************************

****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk<http://www.radstats.org.uk>. *******************************************************


****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************

******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************