|
The following are our reflections on what all of the
foregoing implies in terms of future action around literacy and learning in BC:
1) Continue Benchmarking Awareness
There is value in continuing to track awareness and
understanding around literacy issues on a regular basis so as to provide at
least one indicator of the effectiveness of the communications strategies
undertaken in the future. Using the identical telephone survey instruments used
in the Leaders in BC and the Supplemental Business/Labour surveys, and using
the findings of this first set of surveys as a benchmark, we recommend
surveying randomly chosen representatives of these same groups every three
years.
2) Be Diligent in Our Approach to Collecting,
Promoting, and Using IALS Data
Educators and those in the literacy community should be
cautious and diligent in their approach to using and promoting IALS and other
data in three ways:
Firstly, there should be over-sampling in BC for the 2004
IALS data so as to have more accurate regional and community information.
Secondly, educators and those in the literacy community
should not assume that just because people did not directly attribute their
greater understanding of literacy issues to the IALS data, the promotion of
those findings did not have an effect. We recommend continuing to communicate
IALS findings as an integral part of our communications strategy about the
issue.
Thirdly, having said that, we recommend being cautious in
the over-use and over-statement of the IALS data. To avoid getting bogged down
in discussions about the validity of the IALS data, greater emphasis should be
placed on the implications of those findings rather than on the precise
percentages of Canadians at Levels 1, 2, and 3. |
