'One size does not fit all’: how five tertiary education organisations embed literacy, language and numeracy: case study findings

The overarching research question guiding this project was: How do tertiary education organisations profile, develop and deliver effective literacy, language and numeracy within programmes? In this section we address this question by synthesising conclusions listed at the end of each case study into an integrated set of findings. We relate these integrated findings to the literature.

Although all case study conclusions are supported by data, not all conclusions listed at the end of the case studies are synthesised here. We decided to synthesise only case study conclusions identified in all five organisations. Case study conclusions not synthesised nevertheless offer valuable information about the provision of embedded literacy. We were able to synthesise eight findings.

1. In all case studies an ‘embedded literacy champion’ has emerged from within the organisation. The champion acts in various ways. Usually an individual who envisions and drives developments, energises and motivates people, the champion could be at the top of the organisational hierarchy, but could also be a literacy enthusiast. In two cases the champion works with an organisational unit that enables selected individuals to spread enthusiasm and structure across the organisation. This is the only finding not referred to in the literature we reviewed.
2. All case study sites have developed strong philosophies in favour of embedding literacy. The meaning given to the concept, however, differs among organisations. In two instances the core of this philosophy is to develop functional literacy or literacy to build human capital (Reio et al., 2005) – a literacy that prepares people to function successfully at work, at home and in the community (Skills for Life Development Centre, 2006). In another, the focus is on developing critical, human and social capital literacies at the same time (Crowther et al., 2003). Yet another organisation sees functional literacy as just one element in a holistic vision that also features critical and cultural literacy (May, 2009).
3. In all case studies there is a clear involvement in and commitment to embedded literacy across the whole organisation. But again there are differences in the way this is conceived, developed and implemented. In one case it is the main business of the organisation; in two others it operates alongside other programmes; in two others it is envisioned and managed by the strategic management of the organisation and operated locally in different geographical locations. This ‘same but different’ view of embedding literacy finds support in the literature. Millar and Falk (2002) argue that embedded literacy is ‘built in not bolted on’ and the Skills for Life Development Centre (2006) calls for a whole-of-organisation approach. This finding also supports the notion that ‘one size does not fit all’ (Rogers & Kramer, 2008) and that there is no single perfect model for embedding literacy (Casey et al., 2006).
4. A range of planning and policy documents have been developed in all organisations. Such documents support the whole-of-organisation approach (Skills for Life Development Centre, 2006). They include official documents such as applications for funding, investment plans for TEC and literacy embedding overviews. But other documents have been prepared to suit the needs of each organisation. These documents have different formats and content. For example, one organisation has a medium-term development plan, another an extensive document that focuses on embedding literacy not only within programmes but also within a very strong institutional philosophy, while others have produced a variety of policy documents, project guidelines and teaching resources. According to Casey et al. (2006), the availability of planning documents is necessary for the successful implementation of embedded literacy.
5. In all case studies we found a strong emphasis on learners and learning, with a number of participants noting a shift from teacher-directed transmission to constructivist and learner-centred approaches (Burt et al., 2003). While the learner, their needs and interests are considered central in all five organisations, they also recognise that learning should be personalised not individualised – tailored to suit individual needs but not forcing them to learn by themselves (Green & Howard, 2007). In all case studies there is evidence that they prefer their learners to work in groups, although individual tuition is possible in some. Learner focus also featured when tutors discussed the need for learners to be involved in planning for learning (Skills for Life Development Centre, 2006), for flexibility in teaching methods (Tusting & Barton, 2007) and for active learning (Balatti et al., 2006).
6. One of the recurring reasons given to support the view that ‘one size does not fit all’ is that literacy learning needs to fit the context for which learners are being prepared. In all case studies this is the very rationale for embedding literacy. This view is supported by Burt et al. (2003) and the Nunavut Literacy Council and Northwest Territories Literacy Council (2007), who add that literacy learning also needs to be authentic to the student. Within this consensus, however, there are differences in the way contextual authenticity is interpreted. In three case studies the context is primarily vocational and embedded literacy has a functional focus. In two organisations the functional focus is affected by other considerations: language learning in one and cultural literacy in the other.
7. In all case studies we found a very strong commitment to training and professional development of staff. Researchers in the field emphasise that such commitment to upskilling staff is vital when embedding literacy (Berghella et al., 2006; Casey et al., 2006; Dymock, 2007). The case study organisations offer a qualifications track for their staff. In most this is well advanced with a number of staff having already gained certificates; in some the expectation may be for new staff to hold a literacy qualification. In some organisations there is also a ‘bottom-up’ approach that emphasises mentoring and other personal support (Wickert & McGuirk, 2005).
8. The seven integrated findings report conclusions common to all case studies. We also found diversity within these commonalities. Under each integrated finding lurk at times subtle differences in the way the finding is conceived and implemented. This finding emphasises again that ‘one size does not fit all’ (Rogers & Kramer, 2008) and that there is no single perfect model for embedding literacy (Casey et al., 2006).

The eighth finding is possibly the most informative one. Despite the commonalities, there are considerable differences in the provision of embedded literacy. Our considered responses to the subsidiary research questions that underpin the main question highlight these variations and differences. Figure 2 demonstrates this point.

8.1 Concluding comments

The research questions underpinning this research asked for a description of how five different types of tertiary education organisations embed literacy into their programmes. Together, the case studies provided rich data to enable a number of findings.

Most were common to all case studies. Every organisation had a ‘literacy champion’ that envisioned and drove embedding, developed a coherent philosophy for embedding literacy across the whole organisation, developed comprehensive policy and planning documentation to implement provision, focused on learners and learning preparing them for the context in which they would work and showed a strong commitment to tutor training and professional development.

But within each commonality there were differences. Each case study organisation was in a different phase of implementation. A very important finding is that when it came to providing embedded literacy programmes, each case study organisation went about the task slightly differently. The answers to the subsidiary research questions highlight this finding: ‘one size does not fit all’. This is also strongly supported in the literature.