EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Key findings
- Literacy skills in Scotland are comparable with many of the world's leading economies
- Three-quarters (73.3%) of the Scottish population have a level of skills that has been recognised internationally as appropriate for a contemporary society
- Around one quarter of the Scottish population (26.7%) may face occasional challenges and constrained opportunities due to their skills but will generally cope with their day-to-day lives
- Within this quarter of the population, we find that 3.6% (one person in 28) faces serious challenges in their literacies practices
- The proportion of people found to have limited or very limited literacies skills is lower than previous surveys, partly due to better survey methodologies
- Women below 55 have stronger skills than men, above 55 this picture reverses
- Stronger skills are associated with many other forms of advantage, such as better paying jobs and living in a less deprived area
- 26-35 year olds have stronger skills and higher education than other age groups
- There are strong links between measured literacies scores and educational qualifications, being employed, and the skill level of that employment
- People generally state they are satisfied with their literacies skills, though people with less developed skills are less satisfied
- The key issue in Scotland is distribution of literacies skills across the population, which mirrors poverty in our communities.
1. This report explores adult literacies 1 in Scotland using data from the 2009 Scottish Survey of Adult Literacies ( SSAL2009). SSAL2009 is based on the International Adult Literacy Survey ( IALS) carried out in the mid-1990s as part of an international programme of surveys.
2. SSAL2009 involved a random sample of 1927 16-65 year olds in Scottish households. The sampling strategy ensured a high degree of representativeness as well as allowing in-depth discussion of issues such as gender, social class, and level of urbanisation.
3. SSAL2009 used individuals' scores on a range of tasks to generate information about capabilities across the population. Literacies were measured on three scales: Prose, Document and Quantitative 2. Scores have been grouped into five levels; Level 1 represents the lowest ability range and Level 4/5 the highest. 3
4. The paper and pen based SSAL2009 survey instruments collect data on the tasks seen as among the most valuable for economic and social life in contemporary society. The instruments approach literacy skills as a single continuum, with people being at one point or another along a line running from low skills to high skills.
5. Contemporary theory takes a more complex approach to literacies. Rather than a set of stand-alone skills, literacies are seen as a range of practices that people are able to apply to their lives when needed. People have spiky profiles, with areas of strength and weakness, and a greater ability to use texts more effectively in some circumstances than others.
6. SSAL2009 was not intended to tell us everything about the literacies skills of the Scottish population. It serves to provide clear indications regarding certain types of practices associated with valued forms of literacy. It does not follow that everybody who scores at the lower levels will have problems or difficulties with reading or writing in everyday life. However, SSAL2009 demonstrates that the valued forms of literacy are not evenly distributed across the population, and that limited or very limited skills are strongly related to several dimensions of disadvantage.
The distribution of literacy skills across the population
7. On all three scales the majority of people in Scotland score at Level 2 or 3. Scoring at Level 3 and above is generally recognised as indicating that individuals have the literacy skills appropriate for a contemporary economy. The proportion of adults in Scotland scoring above these Levels are 55% for prose literacy, 61% for document literacy and 66% for quantitative literacy. These figures are similar to those of other advanced economies in the 1996 International Adult Literacy Survey.
8. Looking at all three scales together, the majority of the population (73.3%) scored at the OECD defined level of acceptable literacies skills for a modern economy (Level 3 or above) on at least one of the three scales.
9. Skills are not strongly related to gender, though there is a relationship with age. This is shown in figure 2, which focuses on prose literacy scores in particular. 4 Generally, the distribution of scores is not strongly related to age except in two aspects. First, it is interesting to see a very strong set of scores for 26-35 year olds. Over 20% scored in the top category for prose literacy and this increased to 34% in the top category for quantitative literacy.
Figure 1: Distribution of scores across the Scottish population
10. The proportion of 16-25 year olds scoring at Levels 1 and 2 in prose literacy is higher than any other age group. A similar pattern, though far less marked, holds for the other two literacy scales. However, this finding has to be contextualised within the wider picture. When all groups are examined, it is the 26-35 year old group which stands out, and this is because its levels are higher than all other groups except the 36-45 year olds.
11. The second notable aspect of age is the interaction with gender. Looking at prose literacy scores as an example, in the 16-35 and 36-55 age groups women have higher proportions than men at Level 3 and above (60% vs. 56% and 58% vs. 51% respectively). In the age group 56-65 this is reversed, with women less likely to score at Level 3 or above (51% vs. 53%).
Figure 2: Prose literacy scores by age group
12. Literacy scores are also strongly related to education level, as shown in figure 3. This emerges from analysis of highest qualification.
Figure 3: Prose literacy score by highest qualification
Literacy in working life
13. Literacy scores are related to occupations and employment status. The higher the occupation is on the Standard Occupational Classification, the more likely that a person will have strong literacy skills. It follows that stronger skills also have a relationship with higher income.
14. People with stronger literacy skills are also less likely to be unemployed. The jobs they have typically involve a greater range and frequency of literacy practices, including computer use, than those reported by people with lower literacy scores.
15. Generally people report themselves as having excellent or good skills for the workplace, even among those people who attain Level 1 scores. When examined in terms of the jobs people do, however, people in more routine jobs tend to be less satisfied with their literacy skills whatever the level of their skills.
16. People with lower literacy scores were less likely to have participated in education or training over the last year, but more likely to have wanted to and been unable to do so.
17. The survey instruments did gather data on disabilities and ethnicity, including first language, but the diversity of the sample in terms of these factors was limited, and no meaningful discussion of these issues is possible.
Literacy in everyday life
18. People who live in the 15% most deprived areas in Scotland tend to have lower literacy scores than those who live in the rest of Scotland as measured by SIMD. 5 People with lower literacy scores also tend to face health problems.
19. People with lower scores tend to interact with texts much less than those with higher scores, and tend to have fewer resources such as books and dictionaries available in their homes. They also tend to watch more television.
20. People with higher scores tend to rate their own skills more strongly, indicating a degree of realism about capabilities. Satisfaction with skills is also related to frequency and type of literacy practices, such as reading books or newspapers.
21. People with lower scores are more likely to identify that they need help with everyday literacy tasks, particularly business and government information and forms.
Characteristics associated with level 1 scores
22. Analysis was conducted to see which social factors were associated with Level 1 scores. The most notable associations include age, with the youngest and oldest more likely to score at Level 1, and being a resident in one of the 15% most deprived areas in Scotland.
23. Health problems were associated with Level 1 scores, as is receipt of government benefits (not including child benefit or pensions).
24. Limited years of education and lower qualifications are also associated with Level 1 literacy scores.
25. People with Level 1 scores were less likely to be employed, and if employed, were often in occupations requiring less frequent use of literacy practices.
26. Literacy resources, such as libraries and books in the home, are typically used less by those scoring at Level 1, and they watch more television. Newspapers and magazines in the home remain very common, however. People with scores at Level 1 are more likely to identify that they need help with literacy practices.
27. When the social characteristics associated with people scoring at Level 1 on all three literacy scores were analysed there are clear and strong messages about the characteristics associated with these scores. Compared to the average, people with these scores have lower qualifications, less income, less education, are older, are working in lower-skilled jobs and more likely to be living in the 15% most deprived areas of Scotland.
28. A similar set of findings holds for those who score below Level 3 on all three scales, but the differences between these adults and those scoring at or above Level 3 is much less marked.
Summary of findings
29. The findings indicate that a number of diverse social factors are associated with literacy scores and that overall they are consistent in their effects. People scoring at Level 1 or 2 are less engaged with literacy, and this is especially true for those scoring at Level 1. However, there is no clear demarcation between people at a particular point on the scales; instead there is a continuum of engagement with literacy practices.
30. This should not obscure the point that people scoring in Levels 1 and 2 tend to earn less, work in more routine occupations, be unemployed or economically inactive, live in more deprived areas, face health challenges and have lower educational levels than those scoring in Levels 3, 4/5. There are consistent relationships between key social factors and literacy scores.