A very good morning to you all and to those that are joining us virtually especially the EQAP Board members of the Pacific Board for Education Quality (PBEQ).
Ni sa bula vinaka
Literacy- what is it and its importance
International Literacy Day. One day out of three hundred and sixty-five when theoretically the World population has an opportunity to focus their minds on the concept of Literacy.
Literacy is a vast domain with which we interact during our life span from the cradle to the grave. For every individual, birth is a starting point for the interaction, but the only possible finishing point is when we take our last breath.
Literacy is the skill we build to communicate. The range of tools we use to communicate are an indication of our literacy proficiency. And the greater the mastery of using those tools the more literate we become. It is a continuum of learning and proficiency in Reading, Writing and using numbers throughout life.
Now it is part of a larger set of skills, which include digital skills, computer literacy, financial literacy, digital literacy, media literacy, as well as job-specific skills. Literacy skills themselves are expanding and evolving as people engage more and more with information and learning through digital technology.
Acquiring Literacy is not a one-off act. According to UNESCO, “Beyond its conventional concept as a set of reading, writing and counting skills, literacy is now understood as a means of identification, understanding, interpretation, creation, and communication in an increasingly digital, text-mediated, information-rich and fast-changing world”.
Lacking basic Reading and Writing skills is a huge disadvantage. Literacy is vital in ensuring that every child has the best chance to succeed in their schooling and everyday life. It empowers and enriches an individual’s life, provides opportunities for people to develop skills that will help them provide for themselves and their family now and in future. It improves lives by expanding capabilities which in turn reduces poverty, increases participation in the labour market and has positive effects on health and sustainable development. Those empowered by literacy, women in particular, have greater life choices for themselves and an immediate impact on the health and education of their families. Those with appropriate literacy skills access higher education opportunities, and in return high income, and contribute to economic development of country. Literacy (and numeracy) are seen as the building blocks for one’s education and economic wellbeing of families as well as the country.
Because of its importance, many countries view literacy as a basic human right.
It is important to recognise that Literacy is not a skill area developed solely while in school. But one which continues development deep into adulthood.
The link between literacy competency and communication is powerful.
The practical application of Literacy requires a medium, and that medium is language. Here in the Pacific, twenty-seven countries, all members of SPC, each has its National Language. In most cases these languages differ from each other. But in all cases, the function of the language is the same – communication between people.
Those same countries all have education systems. But the National languages existed and were used exclusively by the people before any school system (in the current sense) was developed. And of course, some of today’s Pacific nations have multiple languages operating within the country.
But years ago, principally in the nineteenth century, churches from countries far away, sent missionaries world-wide; including to the Pacific to spread their word on religious matters. But the languages they spoke were not the same as those being used on the Pacific islands.
To overcome the problem of communicating, school systems were developed. And in that way a language was introduced and taught to facilitate communication.
And so foreign languages, including English and French, appeared in the Pacific.
To this day, the language medium of instruction in most, but not all, Pacific secondary schools is either French or English.
But fifty or sixty years ago, Pacific national languages started to be included in the curriculum operating in both primary and secondary schools. This was an important development.
Language is closely linked to the environment within which it is being used.
For example, parts of Vanuatu would have language expressions that describe volcanic activity, Tuvalu would not. Kiribati has vocabulary associated with the cultivation of babai; Fijians use language that relates to the practices of growing cassava. Fishing methods vary between Pacific countries, and those variations result in linguistic expressions unique to the method being used. The statement” I am going fishing”, would inform about a general intention, but would lack the detail and precision necessary to describe exactly how to proceed.
It is important that National languages are not allowed to suffer at the expense of the time and effort made in developing and entrenching the two main languages currently used for tuition in many if not most Pacific schools.
So here a dilemma is met. On the one hand, National language should be supported to promote development and vibrancy. On the other hand, French and English are the languages currently needed if Pacific nations are to participate in global development.
Multilingualism
The theme chosen for this International Literacy Day is “Enhancing Literacy through multilingualism: promoting peace across the blue Pacific continent.
The term “multilingual” suggests the use of more than one language. National censuses carried out in recent years show that in the Pacific Island countries, the percentage of national populations who are at least bilingual is very high. For example, at least 77% of Tongan, and 95% of Fiji, nationals are bilingual. These are very high percentage values, when compared with New Zealand 20% and Australia 25%. In UK, the source of English, bilingualism is claimed by 35% of the population. These values, coupled with familiarity with Pacific Island countries, suggest that the Pacific Region is well along the road in establishing its multilingual reputation. This multilingualism isn’t just a matter of speaking multiple languages, it’s about thriving within multiple cultural contexts, each with its own values, norms and worldviews.
The Pacific is one of the most linguistically diverse regions in the world. For instance, Papua New Guinea alone is home to over 800 languages, representing about 12% of the world’s total languages. In countries like Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, the number of languages spoken per capita is among the highest globally. This diversity results from centuries of migration, trade, and cultural exchange among the islands and the outside world.
On a visit to Vanuatu some years ago, I took a walk to the market in Port Vila. I got into conversation with an unassuming lady selling handicrafts. I remarked on her good command of the English which she was using. She replied “Oh, it’s one of my five languages”. “Pardon! Five languages?” I said. She continued, “Yes, I speak English, French, Bislama, my husband’s language Neverver from Malekula, and my families’ language Nokuku in Santo.”
Now that’s multilinguistic for you.
In multilingual settings, literacy extends to include multiple languages and the ability to switch between them fluidly. This skill is vital for accessing education, employment, and participating fully in community life.
Studies have shown that learning to read and write in one’s mother tongue before acquiring these skills in a second language can be beneficial for literacy development. When children start their education in a language they speak at home, they are more likely to grasp the fundamental concepts of reading and writing. This foundation in their native language can make it easier to learn additional languages, and potentially can lead to higher overall literacy rates.
For example, research from the Vanuatu Ministry of Education has highlighted the positive impact of bilingual education programmes that start with instruction in indigenous languages before introducing English or French. These programmes have been associated with improved literacy outcomes, suggesting that multilingualism, when supported in educational settings can enhance literacy.
However, the relationship between multilingualism and literacy is not without its challenges. One significant challenge is the lack of educational resources in many indigenous languages spoken across the Pacific. For multilingualism to positively impact literacy, there must be books, teaching materials, and trained educators fluent in these languages. Unfortunately, many PICs face resource constraints that limit the availability of such materials, particularly in remote or rural areas. Moreover, there is often a tension between promoting local languages and emphasizing international languages like English or French, which are seen as essential for economic mobility and global participation. Balancing the need to maintain cultural heritage through local languages while ensuring proficiency in global languages is a delicate task for educators and policymakers.
With increasing globalization, mass migration, and growing mobility in modern society, multilingualism has become a widespread topic across many continents. Although multilingual teaching and learning practices are often implemented in classroom settings, issues involving assessment for multilingualism are rarely addressed. Assessment policies and practices have a history of lagging behind the advances in teaching (Mathew, 2008). As Shohamy (2011) points out “Although multilingual teaching and learning are currently promoted, encouraged, and practiced, especially in a European context, there are no voices that argue in favor of multilingual tests” (p. 421).
Despite these challenges, there are tremendous opportunities. Embracing multilingualism in education could foster a more inclusive learning environment that respects and values all cultural identities. For example, bilingual or trilingual education models could be designed to build literacy skills across multiple languages simultaneously, giving students the tools they need to succeed in diverse contexts.
It includes the capacity to communicate across cultural boundaries, to understand different perspectives, and to engage in dialogue with others who may not share the same linguistic background. This ability is invaluable in multicultural societies, where understanding and cooperation are essential for social cohesion. This reflects the second part of our theme; promoting peace across the Blue Pacific continent. The Blue Pacific as an ócean of peace’has evolved as one of the core ideas of Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and the Fijian Government. An outline of the Blue Pacific as an Ocean of peace was presented to Pacific Leaders at their meeting in Rarotonga last year and Fiji’s Prime Minister was to present a fuller version of this concept to the Pacific leaders meeting in Tonga this year for their consideration.
It is about ten days since the Pacific Leaders held their Forum meeting in Tonga. Their meeting will have precipitated much talk, the reading of papers, discussion, explanation, and so on. Prime Ministers and Presidents from the Forum Island Countries, each with their own national tongue. Yet for the meeting a common second language would have been used.
All the Leaders are multilinguists. This attribute lends support and facilitation to the development of communication and relationships.
Ultimately promoting multilingualism in the Pacific is not just about increasing literacy rates- it’s about fostering a richer, more inclusive society where all voices are heard, and all cultures are valued.
A timelapse of the literacy interventions that have been achieved since the SPBEA days and now:
SPBEAs original function when it was established in 1980 was to assist countries in the region develop assessment procedures towards national education certificates.
In 1990, SPBEA was contracted to conduct an additional piece of UNDP/UNESCO work on a literacy/numeracy study, The Pacific Islands Literacy Level (PILL). This was done to mark International Literacy Year. A report, which involves all SPBEA member countries and includes vernacular and numeracy elements was distributed in 1991. The PILL was administered under the Basic Education Life Skills (BELS) programme which ran for 5 years. The countries did not take ownership of the results and blamed the instrument, claiming that it was not based on the local curriculum and that they were not involved in the development of the instrument. At the end of PILL, the countries wanted something similar but based on their own curriculum, thus the start of the development of the national literacy and numeracy tests- STAT, SISTA, STAKi, VANSTA, TUSTA.
Each country then wanted to find out how they were performing compared to other countries, so that was the start of the development of the regional benchmarks that led to the development of a regional monitoring tool, the PILNA as a Large-Scale Assessment (LSA) at 2 levels in 2012, (for Primary Grade 4 and 6). Also, there was support to member states with the national LSA complementing PILNA, but even up to now there has been no regional intervention. PILNA has been administered 4 or 5 times since 2012....are we seeing any improvement?
For high stakes assessment (HSA), PSSC and SPFSC as regional high stakes examinations, there was no consideration for diversity of language policies and literacy on student achievements other than as part of moderation. A one-system fits all despite differences in the language of instruction/assessment (1st language for some, 2nd/3rd/etc for others).
There was a regional intervention on school-based assessment (SBA) in the 1980s but failed due to the stronghold of high stakes examinations in the assessment of member states. The SPBEA experience revealed that the formative function for assessment was not embraced with any enthusiasm, and there was little evidence of it appearing in classroom practice. Examination-like tests were still the method by which teachers provided feedback to students. It was assumed that the “mark” for the test provided the necessary level of feedback to facilitate intervention.
There was little evidence to show that young, newly qualified teachers were equipped to a higher level than their older colleagues in the adoption of SBA within classrooms. The replication of examination-like tests was seen to be continuing. This suggested that Teacher Training Colleges were not embracing the formative SBA concept within their training curriculum.
The biggest disappointment was the lack of commitment towards initiatives for the most valid and relevant assessment for improving student achievements (SBA) even up to now.
Other interventions included the Assessment Resource Tool for Teaching and Learning (ARTTLe), which was used for improving literacy and numeracy. The teacher competency modules titled Are our children Learning? How do we know? about 12 altogether based on improving teacher competency in the teaching and learning of teachers. At the same time work on the regional standards for Teachers and Principals was completed and workshops conducted in the countries. With all the money being poured into all these initiatives, can we confidently say that learning has improved?
There is still no intervention on assessment to IMPROVE student learning (AfL/AaL). The focus is still on assessment to PROVE student learning (AoL)
The evolution of SPFSC over time
SPFSC was administered for the first time in 2004 after the Board approval at the 2003 AGM. This followed a series of discussions at the Issues meetings of 2001, 2002 and 2003. A regional exit qualification to replace the NZ Bursary examination. Acceptance and Recognition was crucial hence SPBEA had to work with NZQA (NCEA now) through accreditation and benchmarking against NZQA scholarships qualification at F7 and obtain secured recognition. It also included contracting former Bursary examiners, and the training of markers as well as teachers. The endorsement of the NZ University Vice Chancellors Committee (NZUVCC) had to be secured first so that the qualification could be recognised by the universities in the region. Reporting was on a 6-point grading system (A+, A, B, C, D and E) with fixed grade boundaries to be monitored and revised yearly.
The end users of SPFSC reporting are employers and tertiary education providers. SPBEA thought that the outcome statements being developed would be recognised as having greater value than the traditional letter grade. I do not think that is what was found during the early development process. The end users knew how to use the letter grade. They were familiar to them. The attitude was “we need to know who is better than who. The grade tells us this”.
The funding for the development of SPFSC was provided by NZAiD (now MFAT) which included the secondment of a NZQA personnel (Steve Lusby) to assist with its development.
The USP Foundation programme became an alternative (and a shortcut for some countries). Some took up F7 as first year of tertiary (e.g. Samoa where F7 was part of their NUS programme, while others took it up at the end of secondary (Tonga). There was some confusion between IA and classroom assessment (SBA). IA is part of external qualification and is externally controlled although administered by teachers. CA (SBA) is internally controlled and administered by teachers as part of the overall school assessment of student learning and progress.
Today, some countries have nationalised SPFSC (Tonga, Samoa, and others took up the USP foundation program (Solomon), some had a mixture of qualifications (Kiribati), and only a few took up SPFSC. Fiji developed its own (FSFC) and was never part of the SPFSC.
The importance of language in achieving success in the Pacific’s literacy arena
In such a diverse region as the Pacific in terms of language which is strongly entrenched in each country's culture, language policy (language of instruction/assessment) is crucial in efforts to improve literacy achievement.
Regional efforts to improve literacy have so far focused on the status quo where High Stakes Assessment still dominates. Worst still, little effort to factor in differences between each country's language policy, into the language of assessment, especially at the senior level, which raises issues of validity and reliability of the assessment.
I know EQAP has made effort through PILNA (translating instruments into the vernacular of some countries (only with homogeneous language situations).
There has been no effort so far to investigate the influence of the language of assessment on the performance of students. Perhaps this is something that the EQAP Research section can work on.
Literacy construct is not part of the curriculum and therefore has always created issues with integrating it as part of teaching and learning. A key issue is therefore on how to improve literacy through the curriculum which emphasises content domains of English and vernacular.
How to teach Reading and Writing is still very much an issue and continues to be taken for granted by most countries.
It needs to be understood that it is not only the teachers’ role but also the support from parents at home to assist their children.
Questions can be raised about the current Literacy (and Numeracy) situation regionally and globally. For example:
- What the regional and global data says (PILNA vs PISA, TIMMS, etc)
- What the country data says (National literacy situation in countries)
- Gaps
- South-South Comparison (e.g. Pacific vs Caribbean, African countries, Asian countries)
- South-North Comparison (e.g., Pacific vs OECD, Australia, NZ, etc,)
To improve the literacy situation in PICs, we need to identify most literate countries globally (using PISA, TIMMS, etc) and use these as examples of best practice, e.g. Finland.
Identify literacy countries in the Pacific (using PILNA) and identify best practices. What are the lessons learnt and adapting good practices into country situation.
Highlighting the current challenges of the Pacific and how strengthening literacy now can help secure the region’s future.'
Education in the Pacific Region continues to be choked by the stronghold that High Stakes Examination still has, and its focus on proving how much students have learnt rather than on Improving learning first.
The biggest challenge for the Pacific is how to get out of such a stronghold.
Unfortunately, it can only happen if every country has the commitment and political will to consider more viable alternatives.
An alternative that has proven to work but continues to be ignored by most countries in the Pacific is SBA integrated as part of teaching and learning and focussing primarily on improving student learning.
Unless each country is willing to make the change, there is little hope of any changes soon.
Perhaps EQAP (as part of the PacREF) can revisit the initiative introduced in the 1980s (SBA) but with a more direct approach, learning from the lessons that led to the failure of the initiative of the 1980s (a regional SBA initiative to complement PILNA), to gradually replace the unnecessary HSE's that still forms a significant part of the assessment system of each country.
Perhaps its time for the education leaders of each country to consider getting out of their comfort zone and start taking the BEST INTEREST of their most valuable clients (the students) into consideration.
Thank you.
I understand that I am now to formally launch the Literacy Day Photo competition that SPC is sponsoring.
The competition invites budding photographers and probably young but experienced hands to submit photos that are linked to one or more of the themes described in the four categories available. All four are intended to link to Literacy, but the subject matter portrayed in the photographs are described as:
1. Food systems 2. Climate change 3. Oceans 4. Gender
EQAP, SPC has produced a flyer which describes the conditions which relate to the competition, which I am sure will be available to all those interested.
This is the flyer that I am referring to (a copy is held up).
So best wishes to all competitors. I formally announce the launch of the Literacy Day Photo competition.
Vinaka.
