Education — Issue No. 3 — Wednesday, March 22, 2006 (HTML)

2006 Legislative Session: Second Session, 38th Parliament
SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
MINUTES AND HANSARD

3. The Committee discussed its proposed meeting schedule and agreed to schedule three expert witness meetings in April 2006.

4. The Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair at 11:56 p.m.

John Nuraney, MLA
Chair

Kate Ryan-Lloyd
Clerk Assistant and
Committee Clerk

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION



CONTENTS

		Page

Expert Witness Briefings		11
	R. Faris
	A. Thomas
	P. Goyan

Committee Meeting Schedule		30

Chair:	* John Nuraney (Burnaby-Willingdon L)
Deputy Chair:	* Gregor Robertson (Vancouver-Fairview NDP)
Members:	* Daniel Jarvis (North Vancouver–Seymour L) * Richard T. Lee (Burnaby North L) * Lorne Mayencourt (Vancouver-Burrard L) * Mary Polak (Langley L) * John Rustad (Prince George–Omineca L) * John Horgan (Malahat–Juan de Fuca NDP) * Doug Routley (Cowichan-Ladysmith NDP) Diane Thorne (Coquitlam-Maillardville NDP) * denotes member present


Witnesses:	Dr. Ron Faris (President, Golden Horizon Ventures) Paul Goyan (Ministry of Advanced Education) Audrey M. Thomas (Director, Canadian Project for Adult Basic and Literacy Education)

J. Nuraney (Chair): Members, if I may call the meeting to order. Before we begin, just for the benefit of our presenter, I'll read the mandate that this committee has.

It says that the Select Standing Committee on Education is empowered to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to finding effective strategies to address the specific challenge of adult literacy and, in particular, to conduct consultations to consider successful strategies from other jurisdictions on the promotion of adult literacy and specific strategies to improve literacy rates among aboriginal people, English-as-a-second-language adults, and seniors. This is basically the mandate of this committee.

Also for the benefit of the presenter, I would like to mention that today's meeting is a public meeting which will be recorded and transcribed by Hansard Services. A copy of this transcript along with the minutes of this meeting will be printed and will be made available on the committee's website at www.leg.bc.ca/cmt.

In addition to the meeting's transcript, a live audio webcast of this meeting is also produced and available on the committee's website to any interested listeners to hear the proceedings as they occur. An archived copy of the audio broadcast will also be retained on the committee's website.

Having said that, ladies and gentlemen, we have before us today Dr. Ron Faris, who has extensive experience in what our mandate dictates. I will request Dr. Faris to give us a brief introduction of his background and commence his statement.

R. Faris: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the standing committee. I've been involved in the field of adult literacy for almost 40 years. Perhaps some of the most pertinent background is when I was in the Ministry of Education and Advanced Education in the period from 1976 to 1987.

My division, the then division of community and continuing education, was responsible for the development of adult education policies, including adult basic education and literacy. At that time we produced a policy framework, adult-oriented curriculum and adult-oriented materials. We, in fact, provided materials that were used across Canada.

I then left British Columbia and was the associate executive director of the National Literacy Secretariat in 1987, when it was first created. For some years I was in that position and joined the Privy Council team in 1991, which wrote a paper called Learning Well, Living Well, which urged that there be a lifelong learning strategy for all of Canada.

Upon the death of my wife I returned to British Columbia and have been here ever since as a freelance consultant. I have been working with a number of learning communities, which I will address today, for about the past seven years. In every one of them, we have attempted to embed literacy in all of its forms, and specifically adult literacy, within the context of the villages, towns and cities in which we work. For your information, some of the first of the learning communities that I worked with are in rural British Columbia — communities I'll refer to, such as the Upper Skeena, Lillooet, the Fraser Canyon, etc.

Presently I'm working with folks in the city of Vancouver. There is a working group to declare Vancouver as a learning city this year. Last year the city of Victoria proclaimed itself as a learning city. In both cases, the literacy movement — aided, for instance, by Project Literacy Victoria, in our case here, and in the case of Vancouver by Literacy B.C. — has been a main actor in promoting the notion and the vision of a learning city.

If you don't mind, I'll move quickly, because what I want to do today is, hopefully, bridge good theory and good practice but also bridge international and British Columbia practice, so you'll see me moving between the two, I hope, in a meaningful and understandable way.

There are key global trends, all of which are driven, if I may say, by learning or new knowledge and skills. Globalization, technological change — particularly in the sciences and technologies — and the explosion of new knowledge and learning — once again in the sciences and technologies — have been developing a new type of economy, one which we call a knowledge-based economy and society. Particularly in British Columbia, we're moving from a resource-based to a knowledge-based economy.

Specifically, there are new features that I think this committee would do well to attend to. There is a whole new political economy emerging which recognizes not only the importance of human capital — that is, educational attainment — but also social capital: trust, networking and shared values. The sorts of assets, the intangible assets, of building healthy families and healthy communities…. Modern economists in the OECD and in the World Bank recognize once again the importance not only of human but also social capital and the interplay of the two. I'll be relating to this later.

The other thing is…. I refer to the new literacies. We'll expand on that in a few minutes.

To ground ourselves just very, very briefly — and this is impressionistic…. If you look at the socioeconomic index, those parts of our province that are red or pink are worst off in terms of socioeconomic conditions. This is just a snapshot taken in 1999. The pattern would be relatively the same now. Those that are relatively best off are in the blue, and they tend to be, once again, the southern tip of Vancouver Island, the lower mainland and parts of the Kootenays.

If one looks at the education index, one finds a somewhat similar pattern once again: south Island, lower mainland and parts of the Kootenays. Those

worst off tend to be in the central, northern, interior and coastal areas of British Columbia.

Finally, if you look at the health index, those worst off tend to be in the centre, or in the interior, the north and the coastal areas. Those best off, relatively, are in the Greater Vancouver area, parts of the Kootenays and the south Island.

Now let me rush to say that because of the general nature of this, it of course ignores specific neighbourhoods in urban centres that are clearly disadvantaged. But generally, if I had transparencies and laid one on top of the other, you would see essentially the same pattern of disadvantage in terms of rural, urban, etc., opportunities. If I may say, in 1985 my division did a study which looked at the pattern of school dropouts at that time, and then by school district looked at adult under-education, and believe it or not, it was essentially the same, a similar pattern. In other words, what we're talking about is intergenerational by nature.

Let me go back to the world scene for a minute. In 1992 there was an international conference in Göteborg, Sweden, sponsored by the OECD, which focused on learning cities and learning communities. Soon thereafter, the OECD commenced a number of learning region experiments in about six areas of Europe — the Andalusian region of Spain, southern France, the Danish-Swedish border, and the Kent County area of the United Kingdom — looking at the human and social capital developed when they looked at learning from a regional perspective.

The United Kingdom, in terms of English-speaking Canada, has led the way in terms of learning communities and the placing and the imbedding of literacy therein. There's, in fact, a learning communities network of almost 50 learning cities in the United Kingdom, and there's another 28 what we call learning community test beds in smaller communities in that nation.

Other countries, like Finland, Portugal and Italy, have been working in smaller scale learning villages. In the case of Finland, for example, they've been working with the Sami people, the aboriginal people of northern Finland, in terms of learning villages.

The nation, in my view, that's providing leadership right now in this whole field is Australia. They're doing remarkable work there. They, once again, have a learning communities network. Every state in Australia and the Northern Territory has some form of learning community, particularly learning towns. In the state of Victoria, which is the leader, there is a Victoria state policy, an initiative called the learning town strategy in that jurisdiction.

In terms of Canada, funding for the initiative of learning communities has come chiefly from HRSDC, or Human Resources Development Canada, through its community learning network. The projects to which I refer in British Columbia were all funded by them.

An operational definition of a learning community is a community of place — that is, neighbourhoods, villages, towns, cities or regions that use lifelong learning as an organizing principle and social goal. The notion of lifelong learning as an organizing principle and social goal is taken directly from UNESCO and about 40 years of research on how lifelong learning can be used as a planning and analytical tool. The purpose is in order to promote collaboration of the five sectors of the community: the civic elected sector; the economic, all the way from private through to social enterprise; the public sector of libraries, museums, social and health agencies; the voluntary sector; and the education sector, K-to-20. In other words, all five sectors are harnessed, mobilized, because all five sectors have people who have knowledge and skills worth sharing.

What we're doing as we prepare for a knowledge-based economy in our community is mobilizing the full learning resources, rather than the old model. I don't want to be rude, but the old model is this: education and training is the sole source of education and training. It never was, it isn't now, and it will not be in the future. We're going to use the full learning resources of our communities as we prepare for a knowledge-based economy in society. The purposes, of course, are to enhance the triple bottom line — that is, the social, the economic and the environmental conditions on a sustainable, socially inclusive basis so that all people can participate and all people can contribute.

I want to briefly tell you that the way I look at literacy is that there are at least four key settings for it, and they all fall within the rubric of a community. They are firstly, initially, in terms of our life experience, the family, then the community and then, of course, the workplace and educational institutions. All of them, of course, are found within the community, within our towns, our villages, our cities, etc.

The term "literacy" I use…. I believe there are core literacies — the reading, writing, numeracy, etc. — of which we speak, but there is also, in a knowledge-based economy in society, the applied literacies — information technology, health literacy, civic literacy. I may also add environmental literacy, etc. All of these literacies are crucial if we are going to be prepared for the emerging knowledge-based economy in society.

I want to give you a case example, a case study, put flesh on the bones — the Upper Skeena and its challenges. About seven years ago I began to work with the Gitxsan people in that area — thanks, once again, to funding from HRSDC. There are very real challenges up there. There is a deep concern about the future of the land and its resources. About 75 percent of the people up there are Gitxsan First Nation. What does first nation mean? What does citizenship mean? What about civic literacy, for instance, as these first nations people struggle to develop their first nation?

When I first was there, there was about 50-percent unemployment. It's now closer to 80 percent to 85 percent, as you may know — thanks to the softwood deal and the closure of the provincial research centre and the local law court, etc. They have had at least a one-two economic social punch, which has really created substantial disadvantage there.

They, like many first nations areas, have a substantial number of youth. About 70 percent of the people are under the age of 30 — many at risk. Among other things, substantial numbers of youngsters there, as in a number of other communities, have degrees of fetal alcohol syndrome. There's an intergenerational divide of deep concern to the people — the young people and the elders, etc. The wisdom that, hopefully, would be transmitted in their tradition is not necessarily occurring. Finally, as people move out, as the stock of human social capital diminishes, they're even less able to respond to or, better still, manage their future in a knowledge-based economy.

What are they doing? What's the good side of the story, as it were, as they built a learning village and a learning community? Well, among other things, they built some small-scale agricultural projects — the Gitsegukla Valley Farms, with about 12 employees. They're looking at organic farming — the raising of organic potatoes and blackberries — and industrial hemp oil production. The University of Finland and the University of Northern British Columbia have aided them in terms of industrial hemp projects.

One of the first family literacy projects was bookbags for babies, where two Gitxsan high school girls worked with the Gitxsan Health Authority to produce bookbags for babies. When they brought these bookbags to the young parents, they found that in some cases the young parents dearly wanted to be able to read to the youngsters but couldn't, so it was a teachable moment, as it were. That's when the local voluntary literacy association had home-based literacy programs for their people.

There were also other youth service-learning projects — forms of civic literacy, in other words. The first was that youngsters built a hiking and cross-country skiing trail behind their high school. When they had completed that, they were thanked in the best Gitxsan tradition by community celebration. Two of the high school boys on the verge of dropping out, in fact, are now at Northwest Community College. Among other things, they learned that they could learn, that their learning was relevant to their community and that the community appreciated it.

Secondly, another group — these were drug-addicted, chiefly alcohol-addicted youth — began a rock-climbing project and realized, when they were bound to each other in the rockface, etc., something about cooperation and trust but also the transitory nature of life. When they came down from that sort of life-enlarging experience, they decided as a project, as a legacy of their service-learning, they would develop a tech café for the youngsters in their community. Once again, a 23-year-old woman from that group is now completing her work at Simon Fraser in the criminology department.

In other words, these service-learning projects within learning communities can be life-changing. They also produced a learning shop there, where there were jam sessions. Local musicians, for instance, taught people how to play the guitar. As you can imagine, dozens of youngsters came to those events.

A young woman from a Gitanmaax village wanted to learn how to play and sing the songs of her people. She was taught how to do so by the Royal Bank manager. The next time she walked into the Royal Bank, it was Mary meeting John. You know — not the old stereotype of the Indian person going into a bank. That's person by person, as it were, case by case — building social capital.

The Gitxsan treaty office has also produced — thanks to work there — some five knowledge-based jobs. Their intention is, of course, to manage the land and forest in their areas, and they're training people in GIS and other technological approaches that are relevant to that sort of strategy.

They've created a regionwide newsletter. Let me say here that what's happening in virtually every one of the learning communities we've begun in — and this was the first of them — is that there are regional learning communities developing, no thanks to government. There is no government aid, but from Houston to Smithers, Hazelton, Terrace and all the way to Haida Gwaii there are over 40 community animators who, thanks to the Internet and this newsletter, etc., are collaborating and working together for the betterment not just of their local communities but of their region. This is paralleled, and I'll be talking about it later, by work we're doing here on south Vancouver Island. Finally, over all, small-scale, little projects are developing there that have produced 41 full- to part-time jobs in that area.

Other learning communities. Upper Skeena I've mentioned. Whistler, Mount Currie — as you may know, they are working together as we prepare for the 2010 Olympics. There are 1,300 people in Mount Currie and 10,000 in the elite destination resort of Whistler. I asked how many Mount Currie people had full-time employment in Whistler. The answer was six. One of the first aims of the mayor of Whistler, the chamber of commerce and others was to commit to create more full-time opportunities for the Mount Currie people. When we're talking about learning communities, we're talking about real people in real communities learning and working together.

Lillooet Learning Centre. One of its first projects was a literacy council. In the Learning Canyon — that is, from Boston Bar, Lytton up to Spences Bridge — local economic development was a priority, but also literacy. We've got the full cooperation of both the high school and elementary school in Lytton and in Boston Bar. In simple terms, we have been building bridges between first nations and non–first nations communities in every one of the rural communities we've been working in. In the case of the Learning Canyon, Chief Fred Sampson, the Chief of the Siska Indian band, is in fact the director of the Learning Canyon project.

In the city of Vancouver, of course, we have a working group actively working — we meet next week, as a matter of fact — and a growing coalition. Our hope is, by June, to proclaim the city of Vancouver as a learning city.

In the case of Victoria, Victoria council has already proclaimed itself as a learning city. That development

was initiated about three years ago when the Downtown Victoria Business Association initiated a Vision 2020 project. One of its subcommittees, which I worked on with other colleagues, was the Downtown as a Place of Learning project.

Victoria city council has also declared…. I want to give these examples of civic literacy. They've created a youth advisory council made up of street youth and school youth — a citizen apprenticeship approach. In other words, we're investing the notion of service-learning — that is, students applying the learning of their classroom for academic credit as they work with elected and unelected civil officials.

Restorative justice in all schools. Our plan, our hope is to have restorative justice, the core of which is learning, as you may know, in every elementary and high school in the greater Victoria area.

We're in early days. It hasn't begun yet, but these are the notions of infusing learning, then, into what we do as we provide learning opportunities for youth.

There's also a South Island Learning Communities Project, which has both civic and information technology literacies. The partners — led by the Project Literacy Victoria, the Songhees band and Camosun College — are working to aid development of 11 first nations bands on the south Island working on joint literacy and IT projects, as well as urban first nations working with non–first nations people in the city of Victoria, all around coalitions of the libraries, the CAP sites of Industry Canada, etc. Finally, Literacy Now is hosting a developmental project led by Victoria Public Library. What you can see, then, is a host of partners.

The elements of a policy framework are these: lifelong learning, ecological analysis or models, human development, a new form of political economy which recognizes the importance of human and social capital and, finally, community development examples. I'll talk about some of them briefly.

Human development is particularly important, because we know, thanks to the work of Clyde Hertzman from UBC and others, just how important it is to invest in the prenatal, postnatal and preschool periods. I could go on at great length about the clear evidence, the mounting body of evidence, about how there's a real return on investment there.

J. Nuraney (Chair): I don't mean to interrupt, Dr. Faris, but you've got ten more minutes, and then we can ask some questions.

The point is, and you can read from the text here, that there is a mounting body of evidence that it is wise to invest in human development.

In terms of political economy, once again there's a synergy between social and human capital, and what we know now is this: if you build strong and healthy families and communities, you're building a strong and healthy potential for human capital development. That's not me saying it; that's the OECD; that's the World Bank, etc. Finally, some experts are saying that social capital theory will have the same impact on political economic thought as Keynesian theory did in the '30s and '40s.

Some of you may be aware of the recent C.D. Howe Institute report which indicated that a 1-percent rise in adult literacy scores in Canada would create a 1-percent rise in GDP per head — in other words, an additional $18 billion — because of increased productivity. In other words, a three times greater effect than investment in physical capital. Also, it's more important to focus funding, etc., for purposes of economic growth on those people who need literacy provision rather than those of us who have probably got more than our fair share of educational resources already.

Community economic development values are important. Let me just talk about one example. This is the work of Amitai Etzioni and others at George Washington University. It's called the communitarian movement. What they've pointed out is that we have to balance citizenship rights and responsibilities. They've said, in terms of the American context, what they've got to do in the United States is to build a statue of responsibility in San Francisco harbour as a countervailing force to the statue of rights in New York harbour. I think we all know — and particularly at the community level — that, unless you have a balance of responsibility with rights, democracy will not continue. It cannot be sustained.

This model may or may not be of use to you. It's the infusion of learning strategies within the policy and practice of every one of the sectors so that there can be joined-up approaches to adult literacy provision and outcomes that are more sustainable.

The success determinants are clear. From the British research and our experience in British Columbia, learning how to build partnerships of all five sectors, learning how to foster participation of all people — not just those who are well-educated — and learning how to assess progress are key success determinants.

In terms of sustainability, I would argue in terms of the triple bottom line. That is, of environmental, economic and socio-cultural sustainability, learning is central. In fact, I have a model here pointing out that the learning — because social and human capital are all about learning in terms of the economic component….

Environmental learning — that is, accepting the gifts of the first nations people who have told us that respect for the land and an understanding of the interdependence of all living systems is crucial if we're going to have sustainable ecology — is a changed attitude, a changed value. That's learning by any stretch, by any definition.

Finally, social-cultural learning — learning how to create partnerships, learning how to foster participation, learning how to build networks. The triple bottom line of learning is the triple bottom line of sustainability, surely.

I don't know if this is helpful, but the web of learning is the web of life and of communities. It's that com-

plex yet simple interaction of all of the sectors that we live in — and harnessing them, mobilizing them for the common good.

There's a conceptual model. I won't bore you with this. My students find it useful, but I don't know if you will. In fact, your researchers might find it useful as a model for policy development.

Some policy assumptions. Let me just conclude now. The old socioeconomic model doesn't work. Separation between social and economic policy makes no sense at all. OECD has time and time again said that in the knowledge-based economy, you must recognize the interface, the interaction, of the social and the community.

Secondly, glocalization is an alternative to globalization. Glocalization is the interpenetration of the global and the local, the recognition of the importance of local values, traditional knowledge, local knowledge, etc.

Thirdly, Tony Giddens, the director of the London School of Economics, speaks of the risk society, which he says is characterized by complexity and constant change and which he argues demands continuous learning.

Joined-up problems. If there ever were joined-up problems, it's the problems that undereducated adults have. They often have not just educational problems but health or housing or other sorts of associated problems that require joined-up solutions.

A society which tolerates a permanent underclass is competitively disadvantaged. In other words, it's in our enlightened self-interest to make sure that we no longer have a permanent underclass in this province.

We must end the disease of short-termism, the short-term thinking and the drive-by funding which makes no sense at all. Learning and literacy are about the only assurance of a community's sustainable future.

I've got six recommendations for you — more than you want to know or have, maybe. One is that the provincial government, in my view, should create an infrastructure which includes a literacy secretariat, because I believe you've got to take a whole-of-government strategy towards this. There are many ministries besides Education and Advanced Education that have an impact at the community level, as you all well know, in terms of literacy provision.

Secondly, I would argue that you should create a learning communities and literacies trust — a $300 million or $500 million trust or whatever — which would ensure sustainable funding, because drive-by funding is not going to happen. The problems, particularly of first nations, which have been created over generations, are not going to be solved in three-year funding projects.

Further, I believe there should be — in terms of the interministry committee, which I now believe exists — a requisite citizens' advisory committee to advise that committee, to be a test bed in terms of ideas and whatever and to have that very positive synergy. It worked well when I had responsibility for continuing and community education. We had a field-based citizens' advisory committee for 15 years which worked very well.

Finally, in terms of policy commitments, I think there should be a literacy adult guarantee. That is, regardless of provider — whether it be the school board or a college or an NGO, a non-governmental organization — there should be an assurance that the instructors or the volunteers have some adult education training, that the curriculum be an adult curriculum and that the materials be adult-oriented. That is not the case in British Columbia now.

It's remarkable that in this century we still do not ensure this. If this were a committee on early childhood education, you would take it for granted that the instructors would know something about early childhood education. That is not the case in terms of adults, and I plead to you to strongly find out what is in fact going on there. What we must emphasize is the need of the learner, not the need of the provider — all right?

There should be a literacy workforce strategy. When you explore the working conditions of literacy workers, whether they be school board or college or NGO, you are going to find an underclass that is unbelievable: short-term, three-to-six-month contracts; many without any training or further assurance of any continuing professional development; burned out within three to five years.

We knew that in our ministry when I was working there, that these fine, fine people, chiefly women, are not going to be there long because of the high social and emotional costs they invest in. Would you advise your son or daughter to become a literacy worker? Is there anyone in this province who would?

Finally, we've got to expand, I believe, the very positive Literacy Now initiative, which is working along with Literacy B.C. in some 45 communities. But as you probably know from the documents that were handed out earlier, what we are looking at there is a model of embedding literacy within learning villages, learning towns and learning communities. I argue that it is a powerful model in which we are harnessing or mobilizing the full resources of our community for the first time.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Thank you, Dr. Faris. I think this was one of the finest presentations I have seen in a long time — really thought-provoking, indeed.

L. Mayencourt: I would echo the Chair's comments. This has been a very informative session with you.

At the beginning of the presentation you had some mapping that was done to show literacy levels. There were some areas there that were excluded, and I wonder why they were excluded — they weren't part of the graph.

The second is: you talked about how you would overlay transparencies and find that there were similarities and what have you. Have you combined your surveyed information to the Hertzman information, which has done that same kind of layering?

R. Faris: Yes. Firstly, those areas of white that are not shown there were not statistically significant. In other words, we didn't have enough cases to place them in any other area. But without exception, they were in central and northern parts of British Columbia, and I think common sense tells us they were disadvantaged, as were all the conjoining areas around them.

Secondly, the Hertzman data is particularly valuable, and the pattern he has identified is similar to the one that we found also. So there's a growing body of evidence that can help you in terms of your decision-making.

L. Mayencourt: Second question: so in other words, this is fairly well substantiated by early childhood, K through 12, adult literacy? The pattern continues throughout the province?

R. Faris: Unhappily, yes. Educational disadvantage manifests itself in many ways. The studies indicate generally that parents' education level and parents' educational aspirations are two of the most important factors as to whether youngsters do well in school or not.

L. Mayencourt: That's a great way to get into the second area of questioning that I have. When you were talking about the Gitxsan people, you talked about a generational gap where the elders were disconnected, not just by age but by ability to interact with youth in those communities. I have noticed that in other communities — not just first nations communities but also in my neighbourhood, which is downtown Vancouver — there is something going on. There's this gap. People are not connecting together.

I wonder if you have any theories on why that exists, on why that gap is there. The second thing I have a question about on that is: if we believe that elders are able to teach our young, and there is that gap right now — which would be the middle generation — what does that hold for the future for us? I mean, if we already have a gap that's fairly wide, what does it mean as we go forward?

R. Faris: Yes. I think you're right. I think there can be — whether it's in first nations or non–first nations communities — an ever-widening gap. It seems to me that some of the forces at work within our society, such as the media, for example, exaggerate that sort of gap. Media and advertising forces purposely target the most vulnerable — you know, youngsters and, if I may say, young women — particularly in terms of trends of fashion, etc., and transmit, to me, trashy, materialistic sorts of values.

What the first nations people are saying, and many others in our wider community, is that we have to return to some fundamental ethical or spiritual values that were the very foundations of our civilization and our culture, as it were. Communities are all about relationships. I would argue that learning communities are all about ethical or spiritual relationships — the interrelationship, the bonding, etc., that are so valuable. I would argue that this is missing for many young people. I mean, why are we having increasing numbers of people who are addictive? You know, it can be a variety of drugs or sex or whatever. We're becoming more and more, I would argue, an addictive society.

The analysis of some at Simon Fraser University is interesting. They've argued that our lack of belongingness, our lack of connectedness, is really a crucial factor there. Once again, if we build healthy families and healthy communities, we're counteracting, in a sense, some of those forces.

In terms of the ever-widening gap, what we're finding is, as we have young students working in service-learning projects, working in their communities, albeit for academic credit…. In some cases, for instance, they'll build an Internet café. Another of the communities I worked in was Lumby, in the North Okanagan. One of the first things they did was, near a seniors retirement centre, they built a café. That's where the seniors came, and the teenagers taught them how to surf the Web, etc. Then, as they were doing that, there became this dialogue between the generations. Some of the seniors, some of the men for instance, were talking about their war experiences or the history of building Lumby. We got wonderful examples of this much-needed human interaction.

So we purposely, in learning communities, challenge young people to community service. It's a very powerful, experiential form of learning that fits perfectly into our learning communities.

I think that the service-learning projects are very, very important, and I get the connection to that. There's a theory around community assets as well. I would venture to guess that in terms of community assets, you could lay that transparency over the province, as well, and you'd find it's kind of confirming that in terms of assets that might be part of the community — that lead to the health of the community, that lead to kids being engaged — which are missing, are also vitally there.

I guess that might be the beauty of taking the service-learning projects as a way of filling that asset gap, if you will, and at the same time…. So do you have any thoughts on that?

R. Faris: Yes. Well, the most important assets are often the intangible assets, as economists call them. They are the human and social capital. Social capital,

once again, is trust, networking and shared values. The more we can build positive social capital via service-learning and other approaches in our learning communities, the better off we are.

We know how to measure social capital and civic engagement, for example. Time and time again we challenge young people in positive ways, and they respond in positive ways. We are simply not challenging them, in some cases, in terms of the real-life issues of their communities. I'm not talking about "build your classroom in the community" or that sort of thing. I'm saying: "Get out into the real community."

There are people in the business, health and other fields who would gladly act as mentors for these youngsters.

J. Nuraney (Chair): I've got several members who are wanting to ask questions. I advise members to ask questions quickly; and, doctor, would you make your comments a little briefer.

M. Polak: I will try to be brief, and in doing so, what I'll do is give you two questions and then allow you to answer.

My quick comment is that I am extremely pleased to hear someone talking about the interrelated nature of literacy and going beyond what we tend to think of in the vernacular as literacy, which is being able to pick up a book and read. We know it's far more than that. I'm pleased to hear that you're attaching to it the significance of some kind of moral purpose and that the lack thereof has moved us, maybe, in the incorrect direction.

My two questions relate to that. The first is maybe a quicker one. On your list of applied literacies I was curious to find that you didn't have social literacy, although you did allude to that in a number of your comments. I was curious as to why you hadn't included it.

The second — and this is a little more involved, perhaps — is that you hit on a pet topic of mine, which is the training and support provided to those who work in the area of literacy. I've heard for many years, having been involved in education, that our universities are not providing adequate preparation to those who are going to be out in the field. They're not changing quickly enough with the research around literacy and around learning. I wonder if you have any thoughts and perhaps recommendations on that.

Lastly — this isn't exactly a question; it's more a recommendation that I'm asking for — we have lots to consider as a committee — I'm wondering if you could name a book that would be useful for members of the committee to read. What would our further reading list include, according to you?

R. Faris: First, one could rightly add social literacy, obviously. I hope that all of the applied literacies, for instance — and I just mentioned a few, quite frankly — would have, as it were, a social component, because learning is essentially a social process rather than a privatistic act, and it's in the communities that that's manifested.

Second, in terms of training and support for literacy, let me say that I am deeply troubled by what I see as a trend in the last 20 or so years in terms of how, increasingly, our education system generally is driven by universities and by examinations, neither of which have much to do with real-life literacy. There must be a dialogue and a challenge of our universities.

We have, having said that, some excellent people in some of the universities. But generally speaking, I do not think that we can continue along a trend which has resulted in a great shortage of tradespeople, for instance, because we have so devalued one form of learning as opposed to another. It makes no sense at all.

In terms of books, I'll get back to you on that. I'd like to think more about that.

I'll try to make this brief and make it into specific questions, but the effective strategy of this committee is for adult literacy. I have 45-odd years of experience in the Pemberton Valley and the Lillooet headwaters through family and land and all the rest of it up there — not so much in the last ten years because of this job, but nevertheless….

I was surprised that you mentioned the number of employment, say, in the Mount Currie band, for example, that there are only six in Whistler. Do you have any idea what the total employment of that area would be as far as the aboriginal load? There's always been work through the logging and power projects, farming and highways department, etc., etc. What are the impediments that are keeping the adults from there from getting employment? What is the bridging…?

I don't know how to really put this. We're supposed to be talking adult literacy, but when it comes to aboriginals we seem to roll over into…. It's the young kids that we've got to get to first — or help them. How would we go about that? I don't know if that's a proper question or not, but I'm throwing it at you.

R. Faris: It seems to me it's not either-or. We must do both. Quite clearly, the parents, for example, are constantly influencing their youngsters in terms of aspirations and attitudes, etc.

In terms of employment, what we found in that valley, for instance, and what is quite similar in other areas, is that there were a number of first nations people who were on short-term or part-time work, partly because that was best — required by some employers — but also partly because that was the view of some first nations people. They couldn't or wouldn't engage in full-time employment there.

There have been some successful projects over the last few years where, through mentoring of first nations adults…. I believe a dozen adults have already

The irony, when I was there, was that there was a worker shortage, yet here is this great number of unemployed, etc. None of us could put that together. We were saying: "This does not make sense."

As I said, the mayor, the head of the chamber of commerce — whatever — people of goodwill in Whistler were prepared to undertake the learning and the training processes, the mentoring, etc., that is going to be necessary.

D. Jarvis: Is there adult training in there already — say, from Capilano College or something like that, putting people in there to…?

R. Faris: Yes. As a matter of fact, there is a campus of Capilano College right on Mount Currie band reserve.

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): Thank you very much, Dr. Faris. It's an exceptional presentation. It spans so many realms, ties a lot of things together. I think the word "interdependence" describes it well. You really illustrated to me the importance and the power of developing a culture around good communication and understanding, and literacy is at the core of that. Certainly, developing that culture is what's going to be necessary for a sustainable future. I think that's well recognized around the world.

I have a couple of quick questions for you related to your recommendations on policy and funding. I just would love to have some more specific recommendations. When you referred to the trust and setting up a learning communities and literacy trust and the role or ongoing involvement of the province versus municipalities, what would you recommend there?

You describe interministry committee and citizen advisory committees. Have you any recommendations specifically on their makeup and their mandates? I would love to have your sense of what sort of scale of support is required for literacy now, for it to do the kind of work to support what you've brought forward here today.

R. Faris: In terms of trusts, as you probably know better than I, there was an announcement — I think it was yesterday — about a trust for education and training opportunities for aboriginal people. Once again, it might well be worth looking at the thought and the design of that sort of model, but increasingly in, for instance, the United Kingdom, they've even drilled down to the community level. They've created what they call community trusts. There might be some exciting new approaches here which could combine a provincial overall trust, but one that is combined in an imaginative way.

Let me just give the example of the Columbia Basin Trust. When you look at the provincial data I showed on the screen, why were the Kootenays so relatively better off? It's only small bucks, I know, but something like $135,000 a year is given by Columbia Basin Trust to the literacy movements in those 17 communities. It makes all the difference. I'm not talking necessarily about big bucks, but I'm talking about assured bucks so that you can do some longer-term planning and some people can have some permanent jobs and other things like that in the field of literacy.

Sometimes small-scale, imaginative things, but I really think that we've got to look at ways in which we can drill down to the neighbourhood level, in terms of urban centres and local communities.

In terms of this Literacy Now scale, one of the most important things it's doing, in my view, is creating an infrastructure at the community level. One of the worst things that could happen is if all of a sudden this province had millions of dollars and somehow poured it out — say, in some kind of pre-election whatever — with no infrastructure to make sensible use of it. Literacy Now is, to me, doing valuable work because they are doing developmental community work in 45-plus communities, etc. So that's among the contributions that it makes.

The other thing, once again, is that conceptually — as you know from the guidebook and materials that you were given — they are looking at how we can embed literacy within learning communities.

J. Rustad: I will be very brief, as I know we are over…. Just a couple of interesting things that I've noticed in the presentation, particularly on the three maps that you had for the education, health and social economic indexes. It'd be very interesting to get a breakdown on the population base and some demographic statistics around that, because when you look at the various regions that that represents, there are also a number of other factors that obviously contribute to that.

As we are dealing with adult education, the information you brought forward was, I think, quite fascinating. A lot of it had to do, of course, with youth and with issues that will ultimately become adult education issues. Unfortunately, our mandate going forward — and I'd love to engage in that side — is on the adult side as opposed to what will happen going into that ten or 20 years out from the kids that are in there.

I guess the question that I have is around the recommendations, particularly for the literacy secretariat. The various recommendations you have are, of course, more focused on a provincial nature. Yet from the examples that you give and the examples that I've seen in my experience, the most successful are always on the ground, in the local communities and the local projects that are going on. Somehow there always seems to be that disconnect between what goes on provincially and

what we'd like to forecast for people versus what they're actually doing on the ground and what could connect and make a real difference on the ground.

I'm wondering, given the examples and stuff you said, how your recommendations are going to link to real results on the ground and encourage those kinds of projects where the involvement of people and the life-changing experiences that people can have are able to further their goals? How have you made those links?

R. Faris: If I could give a demonstration of the literacy secretariat. I'm arguing for some such body because it would be a whole-of-government strategy. When I'm working in local communities, what they don't get is the silos of government — you know? — one department not knowing what the other one is doing, whether it be provincial, federal or whatever. What I'm arguing, please, is for some strategy where there is a whole-of-government approach.

One term we apply, technically, is place-management strategies. As you probably know, in Australia they've done leading-edge work where they've had, say, six or seven departments or ministries responsible for aspects of literacy working together and focusing on collaborative approaches to one place, as it were. I'm talking about communities of place and, hopefully, a literacy secretariat would manifest, once again, a whole-of-government strategy that would devolve or drill down to the community level in a comprehensive way.

In terms of the trust, once again, there's much thinking to go on there, but what I'm arguing in terms of the trust is sustainable funding. This drive-by funding doesn't do it. I mean, how much evidence do we have to have that it is almost useless? Once again, you could structure this…. As I said, it could be a new model of trust that has regional or community trusts associated with it, and I would be delighted to speak further about that.

In terms of the interministry committee and citizens advisory committee, what we found…. The interministry committee, of course, is approaching a whole-government approach. And adding a citizens advisory group of some local community people and some world-class experts to that — because we've got some in British Columbia's colleges and universities, etc. — I found particularly valuable as a bureaucrat. It's constantly refreshing the ideas of what's really needed on the ground.

D. Routley: I come from a community with the largest single population on a reserve, in Cowichan, where they have a similar demography to what is indicated here from the Gitxsan, and 75 percent of our Cowichan band members are youth, defined as 26 and under. I think a lot of that number would come under our discussion here as adults in learning and in the judgment of their literacy levels.

I like the broader description, including citizenship and rights, particularly when it comes to first nations, because obviously, literacy is the keystone to understanding. Social literacy, political literacy and citizenship literacy are particularly important in engaging aboriginal youth.

I think that when we ask people to confront their issues of literacy, learning, training and capacity as citizens, we ask them some open-ended questions. It's important to have a goal. It's important to have a perception that there is a purpose to what we're doing. If we can connect that citizenship — their literacy of rights — to the idea of adult literacy, we'll have particular success amongst first nations in establishing that there's an interest and there's a goal that is productive and practical for their communities and them.

I'm really encouraged by that connection, and then also by the underlining of that in the later slide on adult literacy as an investment — that a 1 percent rise in literacy equates to such a huge increase in GDP. I assume that there could be similar, congruent figures that would measure investment in training and investment in training of literacy instruction that could also show huge gains. Have you done any of that work in trying to connect those numbers?

R. Faris: Unfortunately, not much work has been done in terms of return on investment at the literacy level. Predictably, most of the return-on-investment studies have been done at the university level. There's almost a self-serving dynamic at work there, and I won't go into that right now. But why is it that we attend so much to the training of those who already have more than their fair share of learning? This elitist sort of strategy makes no sense at all.

I hope that's one of the major arguments I'm giving here. The OECD, the World Bank are all saying that those nations that have more equal opportunities for learning, for decent housing, for good health, etc., are those that are best prepared for the emerging knowledge-based economy in society. That's not me. That's the OECD. That's the World Bank.

It seems to me that we're very foolish indeed to have great disparities in our province or nation, so the fact that we do not have many return-on-investment studies of literacy is, in fact, an indication of how low the prestige is. The prestige of this field — and, if I may say, of my government division when I was head of it — was because the people I dealt with were low-prestige — all right?

It's a vicious cycle, and it seems to me that this committee has got to grasp the nettle and say: "We cannot carry on. You know, more of the same won't do it. We have to have a new paradigm, new policies, new strategies from provincial right through — grounded — to the community level." I'm arguing that the learning community model is one of those emerging new approaches.

D. Routley: Very quick. The maps. Can we access the maps in a more readable size on the website or anywhere?

R. Faris: Let me say that those maps were produced by Stats B.C. some years ago. My hunch is that they already have equivalent, more up-to-date maps, so I would urge your research people to find that out, and I'll find whatever I can. That's 1999. That's out of date, and there's more up-to-date information all the time.

Stats B.C. has done some superb work in terms of mapping disadvantage. If you go on their website, as a matter of fact, you can also get regional comparative data.

For the benefit of the members, if they do need to have the full presentation that was presented to us, it can be made available through the Clerk's office.

Dr. Faris, thank you very much. It has been really enlightening for the committee, and I thank you very much for taking the time. Once again, as I said before, stay tuned because we may need to consult with you as we move along in our work.

First of all, let me apologize for the little time delay. As you know, we are running late, and that is not very unusual for committees of our nature. Let me begin by reading out the mandate that this committee has.

The Select Standing Committee on Education is to be empowered to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to finding effective strategies to address the specific challenge of adult literacy and, in particular, to conduct consultations to consider successful strategies from other jurisdictions on the promotion of adult literacy and specific strategies to improve literacy rates among aboriginal people, English-as-a-second-language adults, and seniors.

These are the parameters of our mandate. I may also mention to you that the proceedings of this committee and the public meeting that we are having are being recorded and are available for information to the public at large.

With those remarks, Ms. Thomas, may I ask you to please give a brief introduction of yourself, and then please commence your presentation.

A. Thomas: I'm very pleased to be here, a little nervous because I've been out of the workforce for two and a half years. I took mandatory retirement in June 2003, but I've been involved in the adult literacy issue for 30 years.

I started in 1975-1976 with a one-year research project in Canada, which took me from coast to coast, but not the north coast. Incorporated into that project was the holding of a national conference. At that time we had no idea whether there was any interest in adult literacy across the country to have a national conference, and as I travelled across the country, people indicated that they were. We had a national conference, and as a result of that, people said that this is an issue which needs more public attention and that we need to do more about it.

A second national conference was organized a year later, and that became the founding conference of the Movement for Canadian Literacy. So what was a one-year project for me has become sort of a lifetime mission. I've worked in three provinces, had two years in Saskatchewan before coming to B.C. and have lived in Victoria since 1980.

I did a lot of research work for the government through projects when Ron was working with the ministry. When the National Literacy Secretariat came on line, I did some work for them. Then, I guess, the crowning achievement of my career was nine years working for the provincial government as the literacy coordinator in the Ministry of Advanced Education. I also became the adult basic education coordinator, and for the last 18 months I also had the ESL portfolio. That's a bit of my background. Would you like me to just go into the presentation now?

J. Nuraney (Chair): If you would, please. Yes. You have about 20 minutes and then five or ten minutes for questioning afterwards.

First of all, I'd like to say that we have made considerable progress over the 30 years. I was just thinking back to when I did my travels across Canada. Adult literacy then was an issue that people did not talk about. They did not believe it. The programs that I found usually were just in the major cities. They were tucked away, very often in abandoned buildings — buildings that were more or less derelict. So along with that location was the whole idea of shame.

These people who were second-class citizens…. When I watched the teaching that was going on, it was obvious that most people were being taught by elementary school teachers. They had no idea, really, that adults learned differently from children. The methods and the whole atmosphere were very child-oriented. I remember going to some of the bigger community college classes at the basic literacy level, where people were learning the alphabet by rote, and there were 30 to 40 people in the class. We now know through experience that those are not the ways you deal with adults.

What I want to do a little bit in my presentation is try to stress some of the differences in looking at adult literacy from K-to-12 literacy. I should say that in all the work we have done, we realize that there must be problems or failures for some people in the K-to-12 system. Otherwise, we wouldn't have adults who had literacy problems.

We have never really castigated the school system. We really wanted to work with them and bring them along as a partner. In the early days that was really crucial, because there were a lot of sensitivities about the K-to-12 system. Our tack always was: "Well, we have a problem here. There are adults who cannot read and write. What are we going to do about it?" That was always the emphasis.

You've got some historical material, which you can read over breakfast or before you go to bed at night, but the crucial document…. I just put some ideas on these three pages, called "Elements of an Adult Literacy Strategy."

When I think about literacy, I really think of it in the context of being part of a culture of lifelong learning. There is a quote by Alfred Fitzpatrick, who was the founder of Frontier College, which is our oldest national literacy organization, founded in 1899. He realized there were many immigrants coming to the country at the time, who did not have the opportunities to learn English or become literate. He recruited university students to go in the summers to the bush camps — the mining and forest camps — to work with these people during the day and to teach them at night.

One of his sayings, which has always struck a chord with me, is: "Wherever and whenever people are gathered, there is the place and means of their education." My vision for literacy in B.C. is that anyone who needs basic literacy skills or wishes to improve any of the cluster of literacy skills — which are now defined as numeracy, reading, writing, computer skills, oral communication, problem-solving, teamwork, etc. — will have a place to go where they will be welcome to continue their learning and that, if possible, they can access that learning through electronic means, which we were beginning to do when I left the ministry. I think that for that to happen, every community in B.C. should strive to be a literacy-friendly community so that we take away the stigma which makes it difficult for adults to come forward and we make it as easy as possible to diminish the barriers which many adults find.

I think there are some general principles of adult literacy work which we need to look at. A lot of good work has been done over the last ten to 15 years by practitioners in B.C. and across Canada in deriving statements of good practice and beliefs in programming. I pulled some off my computer yesterday, and I've got a copy of some of the statements here, which I can leave with Josie. The practitioners themselves have worked out various standards, and there is a considerable body of work being built around what constitutes good practices.

Another thing about literacy is that we must not look at it in isolation. It has to be seen as part of a lifelong continuum: literacy through the lifespan. Some people say "from sperm to worm" or "womb to tomb." "Cradle to grave" is perhaps the most polite form.

Literacy takes place in a context — a social context and a local context — or it might take place in what I call a situated context — say, in a workplace or something of that nature. When we talk about literacy, the literacy perspective of the people doing the talking must be understood. Whose agenda is being pursued? Is it government's agenda? Is it the institution? Is it the group? Or is it the most important person, the learner? The learner is often the one that's neglected in this.

I'd like to throw out a challenge. We all know that the Premier is onside with this issue and that he's put out the challenge to be the most literate jurisdiction in North America by 2010 or beyond. But what does that really mean? You know, you have some work to do in unpacking that meaning. What does "the most literate jurisdiction" mean?

We've just had the results from the 2003 IALS report — the international adult literacy report — which shows that apart from the Yukon, British Columbia has the highest percentage of adults at the highest levels, compared with Alberta and Saskatchewan. The three western provinces have adults at the highest levels.

But when you look at the lowest levels, British Columbia has a higher percentage than Alberta or Saskatchewan. You know, we can say: "Good. We're the most literate jurisdiction." We're doing very well at the top levels, but what about the bottom levels? I'll come back to that.

I think the work you're doing and the Premier's announcement are all situated extremely well at present. I don't know whether Ron or others have mentioned that the United Nations has declared 2003-2012 a literacy decade. This is about the third literacy decade we've had in my career, but each one has a different flavour, and different things are accomplished. I like the motto that goes along with this one: "Literacy for all. Voice for all. Learning for all." What that says to me is that we're looking at literacy within a culture of learning.

I've got a note here about the Scandinavian countries. They always do very well when we look at the literacy statistics. One reason they do well is that they have put a high value on education and training, study circles, folk high schools and so on. People there can access these opportunities quite easily.

I think it's very important, obviously, for literacy programs to be sensitive to learners' needs and to be as learner-centred as possible. In the field we've come a long way in recognizing that. I don't think that anywhere now in Canada you'd find classrooms of 30 to 40 adults reciting the alphabet. If anything, the classes at these levels are smaller. Often they're very intensive, with individual one-to-one help — either volunteer tutors or learning assistants.

We usually begin with the adult — where they're at — and find out what their interests are. Unlike chil-

dren, they're not a blank slate. Adults come with a lot of life experience. Some of that has been very damaging and maybe hard. Some of it maybe has been quite rich. But they come with their experience, and it's that experience that very often is the key to unlocking their ability to learn.

It's very important, though, that we have the supports that need to be in place for adults. I think that's where the idea of partnerships and effective collaboration and cooperation at all levels comes in, both at the overall provincial level and at the community level, so that we have a microcosm in the local community of what's going on — say, at an interministerial level.

I tried to sort of map that a little bit with the diagram on page 3, where I've put the Ministry of Advanced Education at the centre, because I was an avid employee at the time when I started thinking about this, with links, then, to all the other ministries. Now, although this is at a provincial level…. As above, so below. There would probably be representatives of each of these ministries in local communities that can work together — as they have done, as you've already mentioned, in the Columbia Basin area, where people have come together around the literacy issue and have done wonderful work. So it's very important.

I don't know if you as a committee are familiar…. There is a report that came out by Shauna Butterwick of UBC. I don't know if that's been mentioned.

Looking at a program that we had here a few years ago, the institutional-based training program. It was a program that gave extra support to income assistance recipients. Many adults need that support. They need access. They need the barriers to participation to be removed. They need help, very often, to stay in the program. That's retention. Then they need help to make transitions to other educational programs or to employment. That program, when it was in existence, was proven to be quite successful in moving people from welfare to further education or to work. Very often people who are on welfare have multibarriers to education, and they need that support.

Another group that needs support also — and we were beginning to do some work on this just when I left the ministry — is offenders, people in the correctional system. Obviously, people want to reduce the level of recidivism. We were trying to figure out what educational opportunities could be offered within the provincial system, but we found it wasn't so much an educational problem as a social assistance problem.

When people get out of the correctional system, often there is nowhere for them to go. It takes a few weeks for their financial supports to kick in. So what do they do in the meantime? Very often they're back with their old buddies, and before you know it, they've recommitted a crime, and they're back inside.

I know that the ministry, the Solicitor General's department, was working with some representatives from Human Resources to see if there was a way that they could make the social assistance kick in more or less as they were coming out of the door, to give them a better chance to not recommit crime.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Ms. Thomas, sorry to interrupt. Five more minutes and then questions, please. Thanks.

Literacy is everyone's business. I think that's a slogan that we've used and that you may hear from other people during your tenure as this committee. I think it's important that literacy work is not isolated, that it is integrated. There is no one surefire method for working with adults. Usually, what we say is: if it works, it works; what works, works. We've not usually come down on the side of any one particular methodology, such as phonics or whole language or whatever.

The people that you're dealing with in the adult population are those that I've kind of listed under environment. Generally speaking, they tend to be people that are marginalized from the mainstream. They're the incarcerated, the poor, people with disabilities — could be physical or mental — street people, the homeless, displaced workers. People with learning difficulties are an interesting group, because they can come from all social strata. But in terms of their relationships, they can suffer similar trauma, lack of self-esteem and so on.

Maybe what I should do is just indicate that there's lots of good work being done across Canada in other jurisdictions. If you wanted to look at, say, Alberta…. Alberta has had a great program for many, many years on income support for supporting community literacy.

Aboriginal groups are one of your target areas. The Northwest Territories, of course, has experience with eight official aboriginal languages, so you might want to look at a jurisdiction like that, their policies. I don't know what's emerging with Nunavut.

We've always looked to Ontario, because they have lots of money for their community literacy program — about $63 million, compared with $1.4 million in B.C. Quebec has always taken a very comprehensive approach to things that it does. Saskatchewan has some interesting initiatives as well.

Just briefly, a few comments on your target groups. I think when I came in, there was some talk with Ron about aboriginal people. The main issues with the aboriginal group, I think, revolve around their own language and the culture. Literacy has to be dealt with in a holistic way. Literacy is put into the culture, not culture into the literacy. With the literacy grants that we managed, there was some interesting work being done around that kind of issue.

Seniors. I'm not quite sure why this is an issue now, except that as we get older, our short-term memory maybe is not as good. There is the saying: "Use it or lose it." Seniors were an issue 30 years ago, because we were dealing with a population at that time that maybe had not had the benefit of compulsory schooling and maybe had not gone to school. I doubt that now, as…. I'm a senior myself, and I think of my generation. There can't be too many seniors that are in that category.

Somebody suggested that it could be that now that the definition of literacy has expanded to include com-

puter skills, it could be that it's this group of people who are not computer-literate. So just a warning about seniors and what is it that you're really looking at there.

Then, with ESL, I think that…. A study was done on the previous IALS, the '93 IALS study that came out in '95 by Susan Sussman of Ontario. What she pointed out — and I think the current IALS is probably going to confirm this — was that that lowest group of people in the IALS study — it's about 17 percent, I think…. Most of them in B.C. are what we call allophones, neither francophone nor anglophone.

These are the immigrants that have come to B.C. and have not got the skills in English and French. We are an in-migration province, so I think that there are real issues around ESL training and literacy training for immigrants. That's one area where we're going to have to try to move the markers.

I would just like to say that there has been a lot of good work done in the province, and there's no need to reinvent the wheel, but there may be ways of helping the wheel get a little bigger and move a little more easily. Again, I'm delighted to be here, and I hope that you do well.

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation. Just a couple of quick questions. If you would comment specifically on the kind of barriers that now exist related to adult basic education and ESL. I think those two specifically. What's holding us back there? Where can improvements happen? Is it a funding question? Is it infrastructure in the communities that doesn't exist? If you could elaborate on that, that would be great.

A. Thomas: Where to begin? I think things have become a little more difficult. From 1991 what we call literacy in the colleges, fundamental ABE, was tuition-free. When the colleges moved from the grant system of funding to block funding, there was pressure, particularly from the university colleges, to want to institute fees for adult basic education. In the school district system, fees were being charged for people who had graduated but needed to go back to get, say, a particular subject to round out their grade 12 or whatever.

So there was pressure in the college system saying: "We would like to charge tuition as well." Gradually, the policy was changed so that colleges could charge tuition, but to my best recollection, it was supposed to be for those that had graduated. What we were finding in the college system was that many people were coming in who'd got their grade 12 and did not have the skills to do the courses that they had enrolled in, in community college, so they were being put back into adult basic education in the college in order to do that sort of upgrading. Those are the people that would have to pay at that point, whereas in the past they didn't have to.

ESL, I think, is a little more problematic because, as you may know, the funding is shared with the federal government. There's an agreement with the federal government to provide English-language training. A lot of that goes into community groups. Some of it went to the colleges, and then AVED supports ESL training at the higher level. What I understand is that in other provinces there's more money for ESL beyond the 152 hours or whatever the time limit is that the federal government will pay for.

There was pressure, within this province particularly, from the community groups to have more money to do that kind of transition into the higher levels of English-language training. It was interesting. There was a study I did in the prisons in B.C. before I went into the ministry, and every prisoner I interviewed that was an immigrant seemed to be operating at about a grade three or four level.

What that said to me was that their English-language training probably took them to a basic level where they could string together a few sentences, but after that, they were on their own. They were in the workplace or committing crime or whatever. It stressed, for me, that there is that gap between the basic training that everybody gets to make themselves understood, but then there's a barrier. There's a ceiling there, which we have to get through.

If people go to the colleges' ESL, they have to pay for ESL programs, so there's a financial barrier there. Finances, generally, are a big thing. Day care, maybe, is a problem for single moms, and transportation or passes, that kind of thing. There are many barriers, and you add all of that to the whole problem of low self-esteem. It's not easy for people to come forward.

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): One quick comment. It struck me, when you mentioned the comparative budgets of Ontario and B.C. on expenses that are targeted to literacy, how valuable it would be for us to see that whole spectrum across the country — what the stats are right now on funding that's targeted to literacy specifically. I think it would be really valuable for us to know that comparison.

A. Thomas: And further to that, the ESL as well. I think Ontario and Alberta provide more money for ESL for that middle section, which seems to be neglected.

Thank you very much for your presentation. I'm very pleased you raised financial barriers at the end of your comments to Gregor's question. That leads back into the two issues I would like to raise with you.

One, separate from math, is that at the outset, you made reference to shortcomings in K-to-12 as part of the problem. The logic, of course, is that if you have

adults that have gone through the system and are illiterate, then obviously, there was a problem at the front end. Although that's not specifically part of our mandate, it's a concern to me on the continuum that you and the previous speaker touched on.

The other issue is that you made reference to the highest percentage of adults above and highest percentage of adults below, in terms of B.C.'s standing and how we reconcile those numbers with the goal to be the most literate jurisdiction in North America. Could you explain that a little bit more clearly for me, on how we're highest and lowest? I'm assuming it's the financial barriers, the poverty and the other issues you touched upon.

A. Thomas: Let me deal with the last one first. It's a polarization. What it means is that we've got people in the middle. Are you familiar with IALS? No? This is an international adult literacy study that was started by Statistics Canada and taken up by the OECD countries. There were several iterations of it, with more countries coming on board, so that in the mid-'90s, I think there were, finally, about 22 countries that were compared. Their literacy levels were compared.

They have just, in '93, done another study with fewer countries. Canada, the United States, I think, and Switzerland and Norway were some of the countries that were involved. In the previous study we did not have a very big sample in B.C., so I felt that the B.C. statistics were a bit suspect. This time around, nearly every jurisdiction or most jurisdictions in Canada put in extra money to buy a bigger sample for each of the provinces. We felt that we would have a more solid sample for analysis. There will be a detailed B.C. report coming out sometime this spring, I understand.

There is a Canadian report on line by StatsCan, and it came out in November. This is the international report that came out. I just briefly looked at the statistics on line, the Canadian version, and that's what I noticed. The IALS is divided into five levels. Level one is the lowest, where we've got about 17 percent. Then there are level two and level three.

The definitions are such that people have to be at level three or higher to function. Levels four and five they put together in one category because they found there really wasn't much difference in the skills. So levels four and five are where we're doing better, or slightly better, than Alberta and Saskatchewan. Yukon is even better than us. But at the lowest level, that's where our percentage is higher, if I recall, than Alberta and Saskatchewan. This means that in the middle levels — level two and level three — our numbers are a bit thin compared with Alberta and Saskatchewan. So we've got the best, and we've got the worst.

The other thing that happened…. The B.C. Human Resources office were very interested in youth, and they put more money into the B.C. sample so that we could get more data on youth, which I think was defined from either 16 to 24, or 16 to 29. When the report comes out, we should have some really good data both on that age group…. Because we're an in-migration province, I think there was some extra sampling around new immigrants, which they defined as people being here for ten years or less.

This, in some way, has become the landmark study. Why are we the best? I think a lot of people have in-migrated to B.C. with good skills and education. We do have a good post-secondary education system in the province.

Why are we the lowest? As I mentioned earlier, I think it's because of the immigrants that have been coming in, maybe because of the family reunification policy or whatever. Again, there was a bipolarization — immigrants with high skills and the immigrants with the lower skills. That was kind of a national pattern for Canada.

R. Lee: This is a very interesting discussion on the correlation between immigrants and the literacy level. I look at the essential skills defining literacy — numeracy, reading, writing, document literacy, computer skills, etc. There are quite a few criteria skills — for example, critical thinking, problem-solving. Those are not language-dependent.

What I'm thinking right now is what kind of number you get, say, when you evaluate an individual for different kinds of skills. How do you get a number as to literacy level? What's the measure? The measure of teamwork, the measure of computer skills, the measure of numeracy — all those factors are lumped together in one number. I want to have some understanding on how you do it.

A. Thomas: Well, you should go to the reports, where they're explained. People, I think, were interviewed for a two-hour period. There were various tests and so on.

Literacy is divided into prose literacy and document literacy. Numeracy — this time they added some mathematical concepts. For the first time, IALS included sort of the problem-solving, critical-thinking skills, and they developed some tests around that. Then there was also a questionnaire around information processing and familiarity with computers. So there were some actual test items which some people often criticize, saying they're culturally based. Then there was softer data from interview processes.

The field really has moved away from looking at literacy as just being reading and writing to looking at the instrumental uses of literacy and critical thinking, problem-solving, teamwork — part of a cluster of skills that the Conference Board of Canada and various other

people have said is important for a worker in the 21st century to have. That's how that's gradually come into the analysis in the study.

M. Polak: I'll try to make this as brief as possible. I'm asking this because of your combined experience as a researcher and then also as someone who's worked inside government. We're attempting to develop strategies. I'm looking for your thoughts on two specific challenges that I know are faced across government, in particular when it comes to the more organic parts of it, such as literacy and getting at those things.

The two areas are these. Firstly, virtually everyone recognizes the need for integration as we work in government to provide supports for literacy and improvements in adult literacy. Yet we are also confronted with the increasing demand for straight-line accountability, financially, in governments, where everyone wants to know: where does this line item attach to which ministry? The two movements compete very often. I'm looking for your thoughts on addressing the need for integration in a context where we are increasingly divided with respect to our budget items.

The second piece is somewhat similar, only in an educational context. For many years we had a rather homogenous population in British Columbia. Our education system developed largely along those lines, with teachers and educational institutions constructed along a specialist model. If a student needs ESL, well, we'll have an ESL teacher, and if a student needs this, we'll have this kind of teacher — rather than every teacher being a literacy teacher and recognizing that now we need more across-the-boundaries instructional models.

I wonder if you could give some thoughts to us around confronting both of those realities, which seem to mitigate against our success.

A. Thomas: I noticed that Ron…. One of the first things he had on that last slide was a literacy secretariat. I think it's great to have interministerial committee work. I know that kind of work has been ongoing since I left the ministry. How successful it's been, I don't know.

Previous experience that I had with interministerial committees was that because of the different levels within the ministries, people at the table could vary, say, from an ADM to a coordinator. Then, you know, what's the ADM doing there with a coordinator? Then they've got their own responsibilities in connection with their day-to-day work, so they don't come to meetings, and before you know it, everything collapses.

What has happened in many other jurisdictions across Canada is that when they have embraced literacy as a strategy, they have usually reconfigured the ministry so that there is a literacy unit. I can tell you that B.C. was the worst-staffed unit in the country. I was the only literacy coordinator relating to the colleges, managing the community grants and then ABE and ESL. In other jurisdictions they have literacy teams or a literacy unit, or in the case of Ontario, they have a whole literacy division with field offices and so on. There is sort of a hierarchy within that. I was worn out by the time I retired, with three portfolios. Nowhere else in the country is there that kind of responsibility.

It's a little better now, because the Ministry of Education has an adult literacy coordinator looking after the K-to-12 system. I think the jobs that I was doing are split between two people within the Ministry of Advanced Education. But I would submit that if we're serious about this problem, it's really not enough. I've been trying to get my head around…. I heard that the Ministry of Education was the lead for literacy, but the Ministry of Advanced Education is the lead for adult literacy. So there you have a split.

I think there has to be some way of bringing the bodies together into a literacy unit. Then you would have your line responsibility and accountability.

J. Rustad: Thank you for your presentation. Something that stuck out in my mind is the amount of resources spent in Ontario and Quebec versus in B.C. The question I have is around the outcomes in Ontario and Quebec versus the outcomes currently in B.C., whether or not they are significantly different for the additional resources being spent.

Along with that, the question I have is: do you think the process and what we are doing in this province is the right process and needs more resources, or do you think we should be looking at different methods? Do you think there are some things or approaches that we currently are not taking that could potentially improve adult literacy, as opposed to the kind of box that we are currently in?

A. Thomas: To answer your last one first, the things that have always been close to my heart are the community, the community grants and the work that is done in the community. Often that's the first step where somebody can go. Their self-esteem is built up, and then if they have the support, they can go to either a school district program or a college program.

We're not giving enough support to the community groups. We have the regional literacy coordinators. There are ten, and another three are being funded through the Literacy Now initiative. But we know that Literacy Now money is time-limited. The regional coordinators have done sterling work with very, very little money. I would like to see every region have a regional literacy coordinator with sufficient income to do a good job, which might be…. I mean, $50,000 or $60,000 is not very much by today's standards for each one, as opposed to the $15,000 they get now, $3,000 of which is for learner events.

I think we're funding something like 46 community groups out of $1.2 million. Again, most of that work is being done by women on a part-time basis. Maybe learners are getting just one or two hours a week. I think that whole community area could be strengthened.

J. Rustad: Sorry. It was just the first part of the question that really I wanted to get to.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Can you make it really brief, because we are running a bit behind time.

You made mention that the two largest provinces in Canada are spending so much more. Are their outcomes significantly different from B.C.'s outcomes? The point I'm trying to get is, if it's a matter of resources and they're getting much better outcomes, well, okay, that's quite something. But if we're both doing the same thing, and they're spending more money and we're not spending as much money, then perhaps we should be looking at a different approach as opposed to what we're currently doing.

A. Thomas: I don't have anything at the tip of my tongue. I know that in Ontario they've developed a lot of accountability measures, so there's probably somebody there who can tell you what their outcomes are for what they're putting in.

Basically, B.C. is a public system province. We've got the school districts, and we've got the colleges. We used to do outcome study with the colleges. I don't know whether that's still done or not.

I think the whole area of accountability and outcomes, obviously, is very important. Going back to the challenge, again: what is the most literate jurisdiction? There has to be some work done on benchmarks. I understand that one of the research-in-practice groups — operating mainly out of Vancouver, I guess — got some funds from the NLS. They're doing some work on this and may be instituting some pilots and looking at measures and so on.

Because of the language dependence of the test of literacy, one person can be really literate in one language when they are tested in some countries. When they move here and are taking the test in this local environment — a different language environment — they may score way lower — right? How do you have a true measure of the literacy skill of that person? I think that's something to think about. Also, it's dependent on the….

You mentioned that literacy must be taken in contexts like social, local or situated. In that kind of situation, maybe we want to improve their language skills. Then they can pull up all their other skills at the same time. Is that a fair comment? Do you know what I'm getting at?

J. Nuraney (Chair): I don't want to get into a discussion. If there is a question, please.

L. Mayencourt: There's part of that that's very important, which is: how do you test problem-solving skills in English with someone that scores very high in China at problem-solving? How do you match that up when that same person is going to be taking it and be asked in English to solve a problem?

A. Thomas: Yeah. Well, the IALS study is done in the two official languages, English or French. The only thing I can offer is that I noticed somewhere that it said…. Francophones can opt to do the tests in English or French. I think what I read was that the francophones outside Quebec…. Most of them offered to do the test in English, and they did better than the francophones who did the test in French. So there's been some kind of acculturation there, which may happen with other language groups. I don't know.

The IALS is done in the two official languages. People have said that it is culturally biased, so you have to take that into the mix in interpreting the results.

We're supposed to get a hundred copies of the B.C. report when it comes. I keep saying we; AVED should. I certainly hope there'll be a few copies for this committee and that the B.C. data…. There'll be explanations there, hopefully, and maybe it will answer some of your questions.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Thank you, Ms. Thomas. On behalf of the members, I want to thank you for taking the time.

For the benefit of the members, this publication by the OECD, called Learning a Living, is on a website. We'll be circulating that information to you so that you can access it.

Once again, thank you, Ms. Thomas, for taking the time. Sorry we ran out of time.

Members, if I may call our session back to order. We have our next presenter, Mr. Paul Goyan.

First of all, let me offer you my apologies that, as you know, we are running late. I'm sure with the kind of work you do, it's not something unusual. It happens. Please introduce yourself. We look forward to your presentation.

P. Goyan: Good morning. I'm Paul Goyan. I'm acting assistant deputy minister of post-secondary education in Advanced Education, and I'm director of the private institutions and developmental programs branch within the ministry, which has been responsible for the literacy file for about the past year and a half.

I'm not an expert in the way that Ron Faris and Audrey Thomas are experts, but I can't resist commenting on a phrase that came up in the last presentation: "From sperm to worm." As you may not know, it's a lyric that's in the 1957 musical West Side Story. It's a Stephen Sondheim lyric, and 1957 marked the transi-

tion in the American musical from sort of the more traditional musicals. The Music Man was the traditional one that year, and West Side Story, which was about urban gang problems in New York City, was the new approach.

If we look back now, the problems that come with integration and multicultural societies where things aren't done well…. That's about a 50-year-old issue. As Ron Faris no doubt pointed out, the Premier's advisory committee on literacy found in researching the reports on literacy — there are many, many of these reports in the last 20 to 30 years — was that something like 96 percent of the recommendations were consistent across the reports, and virtually none of them had been acted upon. There was this huge knowing-doing gap.

It's not as if it's rocket science, but there are certain reasons that I think we must all seek as to why it's been so difficult to address some of the issues in the literacy file. Partly, no doubt, it's that government has been under tremendous pressure over the last 20 years to get the deficit under control and to deal with debt. It was becoming more obvious that the promise of the just society — that government could do everything — was problematic.

So here we are in British Columbia on the literacy file. I'll give you a brief overview, if you wish, on what we do but will leave most of it to your questions. As you're aware, the Minister of Education now is the Minister Responsible for Literacy, but Advanced Education retains the primary role in the adult literacy file. We do that historically through two primary program mixes. One is the developmental program stream, which funds adult basic education, adult special education and English-as-a-second-language training programs at public colleges, university colleges and institutes.

The second is through a relatively small program on community-based literacy projects. We've had a joint adult literacy cost-share program with the federal government and the National Literacy Secretariat. This government doubled the allocation to that program about two or three years ago to $1.4 million.

When people comment on the relative size of British Columbia's versus other jurisdictions' programs, by and large they're commenting on the community-based piece. We have a very small community-based piece. The spend that we have in British Columbia is roughly the same spend that Prince Edward Island has. That gives you a sense. Having said that, we have a fairly strong developmental program spend at community colleges and other public institutions.

Audrey Thomas pointed out that we have a very small number of staff assigned to the literacy file within the ministry, compared to other jurisdictions. It's absolutely true. However, in part, over a long period of time in British Columbia a number of the functions that are normally performed by ministries have been performed on a funded basis through Literacy B.C.

I know, Mr. Mayencourt, that I saw you at the annual general meeting there a couple of years ago. Literacy B.C. has played a very large role in providing common information across the province, training to literacy practitioners and the sort of thing that is more traditionally provided within a government ministry.

There was a fair amount of interest in English as a second language. I guess, technically, the only piece of that that is a literacy piece is where individuals are not literate in their first language. However, obviously, ESL is a huge issue for us in British Columbia.

A number of the reports that came out in the last couple of years — for example, the Ros Kunin work on going for the gold — indicated that there will be probably in the range of a million new jobs in the province in the next ten to 15 years. Based on labour market forecasts, it's expected that up to two-thirds of those jobs will have to be filled by new immigrants. If we have a huge new immigrant population and people are not able to speak and write English, the language of work, that's an issue.

B.C. has relied quite heavily, historically, on the migration of workers from other jurisdictions in Canada and internationally, and that market is tightening up a great deal. So the literacy issue becomes a much more intense matter for consideration. I think the fact that the standing committee is looking at it is very important.

The community adult literacy program. As I said, the government doubled the funding recently and also provided funding to Literacy Now, which has been funding community-based planning. Obviously, it raises the question: where to from here? We're going to have a lot of communities that have plans, but we don't have the capacity within the ministry to fund the operational activities for those plans at present.

You have a list of the 50 community-based projects that are currently being funded in British Columbia. These are small projects which historically receive no more that $25,000 a year. Last year we increased that spend to up to $40,000 a project. Really, we're talking about a part-time administrator and some training of volunteer tutors. It's a very, very small operation, in general.

Having said that, these involve communities responding to their own challenges with their own solutions and people who are highly committed to the issues. I think that although there are limitations in terms of what's been able to be done, there are also some really strong things about the approach that's been taken, especially on the community-based approach.

I think you were interested in the work that the Council of Ministers of Education Canada is doing on literacy, on the Canada literacy action plan. Premier Campbell, through the Council of the Federation, raised the issue of literacy again. Every ten to 15 years literacy comes up as a major theme. He raised it again a couple of years back and got it on the agenda of the Council of the Federation, which then got it on the agenda of the Council of Ministers of Education Canada, or CMEC. CMEC has had a general discussion of…. They have devoted a specific meeting to the literacy file. It's a difficult one.

We have this great goal of being the most literate and best-educated jurisdiction in North America. For example, if you look at the most recent IALS survey results, we're not doing too badly. First of all, though, there are only six countries involved in the most recent IALS survey, so unless you want to benchmark yourself against the United States, Mexico, Italy and Bermuda, you probably would do fairly well. Those are four of the six countries. Canada is another one, and I think Norway is the final one.

Having said that, even though we're close to being the best in Canada here in British Columbia, we're still talking about 40 percent of the adult population that doesn't have the literacy skills it needs to fully participate and fully contribute to their individual, their family, their community, the province. These are huge numbers.

CMEC has devoted a thematic meeting on literacy, and it has agreed to hold two pan-Canadian forums on literacy — one in Ontario on youth literacy, which was held this past November, and one that will be held on adult literacy this May or June in Prince George. So there's going to be a big national forum on that.

Through the Council of the Federation, working through CMEC, there was a best-practices piece that was developed about a year ago on adult literacy. In general, it's very difficult, though, to separate out information that's best practices that has not been reviewed by academic experts. You end up with a piece that's in part spin and in part factual, but no one really knows. For example, the jurisdiction with the poorest performance in Canada will certainly have best practices. What do you do with that? How do you deal with it? No one really knows.

Ron Faris, whom you met this morning, is going to host the Prince George gathering. There are three international experts that are going to speak to us. One is Barry Brooks, who was the head within the British government of the Skills for Life program.

Britain introduced a multi-billion-dollar strategy about five years ago to increase literacy in what we call workplace essential skills, in part because the social fabric was on the verge of coming unwound. It's an issue of social cohesion, and social cohesion doesn't appear to be primarily an issue for recent immigrants. It appears to be primarily an issue for second-generation immigrants, so that's something which I would keep in our minds.

Vanessa Little, who is the general manager of learning communities in Hume in Australia, is going to speak with us, and an expert from Stats Canada and OECD will come and talk about the current work that's been happening.

The third issue for Advanced Education is this whole proposed aboriginal post-secondary education strategy, which we're working on and currently consulting with aboriginal communities on.

Literacy in the aboriginal population is of particular concern. We know, for example, that in developmental programs within ministries — so programs at community colleges…. The percentage of aboriginals participating in those programs as compared to other programs is three to four times. So for many aboriginals, most of whom have not completed high school or who are functioning at, on average, two grade levels below the general population…. You know, we've got this 44-percent graduation rate at present. Even those who graduate often are functioning below level. Their only way to access post-secondary education and training or lifelong learning opportunities is to get back to the core, get back to literacy skills and developmental program skills and to enter through those programs.

Quite often, many of the groups that have special needs in this area are people who have challenges. I think Audrey mentioned some of them, such as homelessness, drug abuse, mental health issues, learning disability issues. These challenges require resources. It's not simply a matter of putting an instructor in front of a classroom and thinking that the second time is going to work better than the first time. It requires resource-intensive, but possible intervention that can make a real difference to these individuals.

So there's a crossover between the aboriginal file and the literacy file, but we're basically trying to work with institutions to develop strategies with aboriginal communities that will bring up the participation rate of aboriginals in post-secondary and in literacy programs — not only participation but the success story and the success rate. We have a real challenge even when we get the numbers up on those coming in. We aren't getting the numbers up on those going out, those succeeding, so that's a particular issue.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Mr. Goyan, you have five more minutes and then questions.

P. Goyan: You have the time. I'm finished. It'd probably be better to wait for you folks.

L. Mayencourt: You mentioned the forum that would be happening in British Columbia. I would hope that we would be able to send some representation to that. Maybe you can….

The second thing I wanted to talk about was…. Dr. Faris, when he was here earlier this morning, talked about the fact that literacy is so much more than numeracy and being able to read and those sorts of things, and that it's more than just the literacy you need for your workplace. It's actually about literacy about your community and how you fit into all of that.

I've seen some of the programs that you guys have started through Literacy B.C., for example. To what extent are you sort of getting out of that paradigm that says this is about ABCDEFG and we're now moving instead towards providing opportunities for people to

know lots of stuff about their community, to be engaged in their community? I think one of the terms that he used that he found was very effective was…. What's the word that he has?

L. Mayencourt: Yeah, service-learning. I wonder: is that the direction that Advanced Ed is taking when it looks at literacy projects here in B.C. right now?

P. Goyan: Well, we're just starting, as you are, the development of this adult literacy strategy, so there's no improved strategy at the present time. Virtually anything can be considered from the literacy perspective these days. I mean, there's computer literacy, there's health literacy, and there's…. In some ways that's a positive thing. In other ways, it makes it very, very difficult to get a real grip on the issue and to know how to look at it. It can almost become a black hole, because everything can be literacy.

I can say that the ministries, starting about a year and a half ago, established an interministry working group that brought a number of ministries that have literacy-related issues — seven or eight ministries — across government to the table. There is some information available on the funding that these various ministries are providing to literacy-related things.

There's also a danger in going too broad — that is, that anything, any expenditure for example of government, can suddenly become a literacy expenditure even though it's not primarily or it's a stretch. But I think the biggest change that's happening now is the recognition that government has. Although government has a role and bureaucracy may have a role in supporting that, probably…. There's the issue of increased investment and accountability concerns, but a real desire to increase communities' involvement in structuring their own solutions and in addressing their needs — with some assistance from government.

That's a very big change in terms of how we tend to work within a ministry — where we think that we have to do it all, and somehow we have some special wisdom, or whatever, to do things. I think the fact that the community involvement is becoming a major shift in how we look at things on the literacy file…. I think it's very important.

J. Horgan: Thank you, Paul, for your candour on the role of bureaucracy in this issue, because it's certainly my contention that community is the place where this has to start. As much as it's vital to have expertise at the disposal of ministers and legislators, these decisions and the deployment of programs are best done at the community level, so that's encouraging.

On the interministry committee. Audrey, before you, spoke of the trouble with…. Again, those who have not been involved in government in the past would assume that people talk to each other all of the time. The silo issues that have been raised by Ron and others are difficult for the public to understand.

Again, you're being candid. Can you perhaps advise the committee on what you believe to be the value of these interministry committees? It starts as an ADM committee, and then it's the director that shows up, and then a policy analyst after the fourth meeting…. Could you maybe comment on that?

P. Goyan: Well, if that were to happen, the good news is at least the coffee will be fresh.

Well, I think we've got a lot of growing to do in terms of working outside our silos and understanding the issue from different perspectives. I think we're being somewhat successful. I think the fact that deputy ministers, like the social deputies, are meeting as a group on a regular basis and discussing policy issues is helping to break down the silos. Is it perfect? Absolutely not.

With the silos…. I'll give you an example of things that can be quite problematic. On the literacy file we'll be doing work at Advanced Education looking at persons with disabilities, and the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance is doing work on persons with disabilities, but we're not talking to each other. So there's a major strategy that they're developing, and we're trying to refine what we currently do, and the two don't fit together. So I think by at least having us at the table on a regular basis across ministries, there's some modest improvement and potentially quite a substantial improvement that's possible.

M. Polak: I wanted to ask a bit about social cohesion. You spoke about the difficulties that we witness — more so in second-generation immigrant communities as opposed to that initial group that enters a country. We've certainly seen that in Europe.

I know that in British Columbia the ESL consortium on the lower mainland did some work in reporting out with respect to the impact of underemployment and lack of skills development on second-generation youth — who perhaps had a doctor as a father who is now a taxi driver — and what that did to the social context. Is that something that Advanced Ed is working on — i.e., the settlement aspects that flow out of literacy? If not, who is? If you are working on it, what kinds of strategies are beginning to emerge? I recognize you're sort of at the beginning of a lot of these things.

P. Goyan: It's an interesting area. I think for Canadians it will become a very large, problematic and challenging area in the next 20 years. There was a series in the Globe and Mail just prior to the election on the issue of second generation and social cohesion. It looked, in part, at what's been happening in Toronto and Montreal. You know, if you turn on the TV and listen to the latest gang-related shooting in Vancouver on a regular basis…. I mean, we have some issues that are developing.

To be quite frank, we have very, very limited resources on the literacy file within the ministry, so I don't think we've done any real work on this. But just getting it onto the table as a matter of discussion and

government raising the issue and groups such as this committee starting that discussion…. I think it's an issue that has tremendous potential benefit.

On the ESL file, which I discussed a little earlier. Despite the spending on language training for recent immigrants, we know that we are largely selecting immigrants based on their skills. Then we provide a level of language training that does not get them labour market–ready, so that seems to be a bit of a problem. Until we can interest the very core….

M. Polak: Is that a conflict between federal policy and provincial aspirations? Are we bumping heads there?

P. Goyan: …and in part, it relates to a period of time where in the last 15 years government has been trying to keep budgets under control. As a result, I don't think we're spending the amount of money that would get the job done.

If we're not getting people labour market–ready…. We let them come to the country to take advantage of their skills. We aren't getting them labour market–ready. We're probably not having a very good internal discussion on social cohesion.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Seeing no further questions, can I ask you a final question, Paul? We have been hearing the effects of silo workings of different ministries, with, obviously, the dispersed funding that flows from that. There has been a suggestion this morning of establishing a literacy secretariat, which I presume would become the vehicle of looking at literacy problems that face us as a province, rather than ministries. Would you like to give us your comments as to the merits of such an organization?

P. Goyan: Well, I've worked in jurisdictions that have had literacy secretariats for the last 15 years, anyway. They can be fairly successful, but although a literacy secretariat would probably be a modest part of a broader solution, I think we have to recognize that it would be a limited part of the solution.

The real issue is getting the priorities straight, getting a strategy and getting adequate sustainable funding for the things that will make a difference. There's no silver bullet in a literacy secretariat. I think it would be positive but not adequate.

P. Goyan: That government develop a strategy with adequate sustainable funding that has a large community role and a facilitative role by government, and that we report on the results of that on a regular basis so that British Columbians know what's happening.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Seeing no further questions, Paul, please accept our thanks and gratitude for being here.

Members, we will now look at the second item on our agenda today, and I'll ask Kate to please lead us through the second item.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk): I have just distributed a document wherein we are proposing a schedule to complete the broad consultations with expert witnesses during what we're calling phase one consultation. As you can see, we have suggested the names of witnesses in both the Vancouver and Victoria areas who we feel would help wrap up that phase of your consultation strategies.

It has been proposed by the Chair that we set up at least one six-hour meeting in Vancouver, or possibly two three-hour meetings, during the week of April 10 or April 17, which are constituency weeks. In addition, we would like to suggest that the committee find another date, possibly a Wednesday morning sometime in April, to meet here in Victoria with the Victoria witnesses.

As always, we would welcome your suggestions about the names of the witnesses, and certainly, any scheduling would be pursuant to your availability.

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): My first thinking on that six-hour or two three-hour meetings is that a six-hour meeting sounds daunting. I would think it would be nice — and I'm echoing Doug's comments as well — to put that as early as possible in the first week of the constituency weeks. Monday or Tuesday just to get it….

J. Nuraney (Chair): Why don't we just say Monday so that then we can have comments from the other members?

J. Schofield: I wonder if I could just make a comment. I think it's very important for the members to hear from Linda Mitchell. If you note the stars…. There are three dates that she's available, and the tenth isn't one of them. Would the 12th be an option?

J. Nuraney (Chair): If you're going to have three-hour meetings rather than a six-hour, then would a Monday and a Wednesday be convenient?

J. Rustad: Not to be a pain, but being the only person here from outside the lower mainland — well, not quite the only person here from outside the lower mainland — a Monday and a Wednesday means either two travel days for me, or having to stay down for three days away from my constituents. My preference would certainly be a six-hour meeting — perhaps three hours in the morning, a healthy lunch break so people can recharge and do whatever, and then a three-hour meeting in the afternoon. In essence, it would be two three-hour meetings.

That would certainly be my preference, but if it has to be two separate meetings, if we could have them on back-to-back days — an afternoon of one day and a morning of the next day — so it doesn't kill a big chunk of my break time.

M. Polak: I was going to make a similar suggestion. Just to echo what Josie said, I think it is very important that we ensure that we accommodate Linda Mitchell, because that's going to be a rather unique part of what we're going to hear, as opposed to many of the other experts who will reiterate the same information.

M. Polak: I would favour two three-hour meetings, only because I think we do better work that way.

J. Rustad: Could we do it on the same day? Like the morning and the afternoon, with a two- or three-hour break?

M. Polak: If we can have a very large break in between, that may work. We may want to start early in the morning, have a large break in the middle, and then have the afternoon. But honestly, I would prefer the two three-hours. I understand it's a difficulty, but perhaps by making them two consecutive days and….

M. Polak: Exactly — so that the travel time inconvenience was minimized. That might be better. But I would favour two three-hour meetings rather than the all-day six hours.

L. Mayencourt: I'm of the same opinion, but I also thought that it might be fun or useful to have the committee go and see a literacy project in action. There are a number that have been…. We have a number of ones in your riding. I think that there are some good projects here. It would allow us to see something in action. I don't think I want to spend six hours just talking, but I'd love to see what people are doing and how that's affecting the community.

J. Nuraney (Chair): If I may, that is the second phase of our process that we are planning — first, to listen to the presenters, and then to do some site visits. There is also the suggestion of Prince George — attending that council conference that is taking place on June 19 to 20. There is a series and a variety of things that I will suggest that our committee undertake, but the next phase, which would be listening to more presenters, will take place in Vancouver in the week of April 10. The suggestions and the commentaries I'm hearing are starting from Greg's Monday to the preference on the Wednesday of a six-hour slot — three in the morning, three in the afternoon, with a large lunch in between — if that is convenient and recommended…. No?

L. Mayencourt: It may be convenient, but I think it's unwise. I think that we…. Today I will be integrating all of the conversations that we've had today with the presenters. I want to think about them. I want to think about questions, and I think that's valuable time. I don't think it's just…. Yes, it may be convenient, but I don't think it will give us the benefit of really hearing and understanding everything that the presenters have brought to us.

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): It sounds like there's a suggestion, too, that we do maybe a Tuesday, later in the afternoon, and then a Wednesday morning when we can accommodate Linda Mitchell. Then the out-of-towner schedules are at least packed in….

J. Rustad: The 12th, 13th or actually…. And recognizing that they prefer to do it the first week as opposed to the second week…. Unfortunately, I'm in the opposite situation, but that's just a family situation. So whatever work I will do…. But the two days back to back would be good — afternoon, morning.

J. Horgan: Yeah, I agree with John. As someone who would have to travel to the meetings, an afternoon and a morning would be my preference. Could Ms. Mitchell not travel to Victoria? I really prefer the Monday-Tuesday, because then that gives me the rest of the week to deal with activities in my constituency. Breaking it up is not a huge challenge, but I don't know

if we should try and coordinate nine schedules because a primary witness that we want to hear from isn't available on that day. We could certainly get her to Victoria, I'm sure, for an hour sometime after the break.

J. Nuraney (Chair): I think the point here is that we are doing a Vancouver seating.

J. Horgan: Every minute of every day? I mean, why wouldn't we see if we can get her here?

J. Nuraney (Chair): Sorry; it's not Linda Mitchell that I'm worried about. It is the Vancouver location now, because there are several presenters from Vancouver who would like to speak to us. So if the suggestion that Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday morning — three hours each — is acceptable, then we are also accommodating the out-of-towners who do not have to come back and forth. They can come on the Tuesday, stay the night, do the Wednesday morning, and then they are free to go. Is that convenient?

J. Rustad: I think that's good. If it's going to be the first week…. I may end up having to participate by phone if it's the week of the tenth. If you want to do it on two separate days, I may have to do that anyway, just because of family situations. If it's the second week, I have a better chance of…. For example, if it was the 18th, 19th or 19th, 20th, I would have a much better chance of actually attending in person.

J. Nuraney (Chair): I'm open to suggestions on that. Do you want that we do it on the week of the tenth? Or do you want that we do it on the week of the 17th?

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): No. Doug and I were both the week of the tenth — easier.

J. Nuraney (Chair): I don't think anybody wants to do it again outside the two weeks.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Well, let's see if the week…. It's going to be very difficult, you know. Do you have a problem with the 17th, 18th?

J. Rustad: The 17th is a holiday. We don't want to go 17th, so that's why I was saying 18th, 19th or 19th, 20th.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Okay. How about the 18th, 19th? Is 18th, 19th convenient for all?

J. Nuraney (Chair): You won't be travelling, so it doesn't matter which week they are going to do it — right?

D. Jarvis: Not good for me. The Wednesday…. The week before the tenth…. That's only one out of the group.

J. Rustad: My preference is sometime the week of the 17th. I've got to reschedule all kinds of things to do it, but whatever. The 17th — that week is my preference. The 17th is the holiday, but sometime that week.

G. Robertson (Deputy Chair): Doug said he was not good for the week of the 17th, and I'm not good until the 20th.

J. Nuraney (Chair): If it is convenient for all, I would recommend the week of the tenth and do the 11th, afternoon, and 12th, morning. That way we have got three. Looking at what we did today, I don't think we can accommodate more than three speakers on a three-hour session.

So we will have three on the afternoon of the 11th and three on the morning of the 12th. Okay? What we are now doing is the afternoon of the 11th and morning of the 12th in Vancouver. Confirmed?

L. Mayencourt: We were trying to do this together so that we could accommodate John, so that he didn't have to spend too many days away from his riding.

J. Rustad: No, actually, there's a very, very good chance that I won't have a problem being down. There's a slim chance if things go bad that I may have to stay home. In all likelihood I will be able to be down.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Most likely you will be there, but on the slim chance that you won't, the conference call would be available. All right. That's Vancouver. We are done.

Looking at the second aspect. Wednesday the 26th for Victoria, three hours in the morning.

L. Mayencourt: I'm sorry. On the 11th we have a provincial summit that is happening on arts and culture. It's an all-day event in Vancouver.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Some are. So you have the opportunity to attend that in the morning and then join us in the afternoon, I guess. All right. So you can make it.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Wednesday the 26th in Victoria, from nine to one. Is it a good four hours for Victoria presenters? How does it work? Does it work okay? Yes, yes, yes. So that's done too.

The third is Prince George on June 19 to 20. I think we should be there. It's an important session. Does that work for all? Prince George, June 19 to 20.

J. Rustad: Of course, it would be no problem for me being there, but because we're going to be out there and we're talking about adult literacy, it would be great if we could get…. We're hearing from a lot of experts from the high end of education. It would be great to hear from people on the ground and to have some general input sessions from some of the people who have received services and some who have had some challenges receiving services so that we can get a broader perspective on this issue.

J. Rustad: That's what I was thinking. If we could do something around that, it might be an opportunity.

J. Nuraney (Chair): Okay, so the 19th, 20th are confirmed, and we will look at the 21st with the local inputs and even site visits, as Lorne is suggesting.

I would ask Kate and the group to see if we can have something going on the 21st in Prince George. All right?

Thank you very much, gentlemen. We have achieved quite a bit today, and I want to thank you.

D. Jarvis: I just wanted to make a comment. On the last witness's statement on the sperm to womb. I think he's got it a little bit wrong. That originally came out of "the womb to the tomb" and, through one of the fathers of English literature, Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet — just for your information.

Thank you, members. I'll ask for adjournment — a motion to adjourn the meeting. Lorne, seconded by Greg. The meeting is adjourned.

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

Committee Staff:	Josie Schofield (Committee Research Analyst)

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS (Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION