31 minute read
IV. Renfrew-Collingwood Literacy Plan From Vision to Action
C. Asset Inventory and Survey Findings
Three surveys were developed online on SurveyMonkey.com: one survey for residents and class participants, one for students and another for service providers. By October, 26 service provider surveys were filled out, 62 resident/participant surveys and 23 student surveys.
Advertisement
The groups who were visited and filled out printed resident/participant surveys were: • Families Branching Out for Aboriginal and multicultural families – 20 program participants • ELSA Beginner 1 Class at the Warehouse, a PIRS program – 15 class participants • Family Place Drop-In – 20 families • Two ELSA Intermediate classes at First Lutheran
Church – 30 participants
Online or printed student surveys were forwarded or given to: • Youth Celebrate Canada Day – 20 youth respondents • youth with the Prevention Education program • Windermere Leadership Students
Committee members emailed the web link for the service provider survey to their networks, including: • health care providers • adult education programs • ESL language programs • Collingwood Neighbourhood House programs
The results of the surveys combined with the mapping document contribute to a better understanding of the literacy assets in our community. According to survey findings, residents, class participants and students thought the components of literacy included the ability to read, write, understand, communicate and learn. Appendix IV, Part 2, describes the many ways survey respondents share their literacy skills.
9
These components suggest that literacy allows
people to participate successfully in mainstream social life.
Service providers listed a wide variety of literacy activities for new immigrants, school-age children, youth and families but fewer activities for seniors and young adults.
Though they were concerned about the uncertainty and low levels of funding, service providers reported they were successful in developing partnerships and that they met their program goals very well.
D. Strategic Planning Session
Muriel Kerr facilitated a strategic planning session on July 30, 2008. Here committee members identified literacy strengths, needs, opportunities and challenges (shown in Appendix V) and worked toward developing a vision.
Observations around the literacy vision were all strength-based and related to quality of life and personal development. Literacy meant learning in many forms, and learning is integrated into daily life.
Later, the committee would create a vision, a mission, values and strategies as well as an action plan that further developed our strengths and opportunities and addressed needs and challenges.
What does the future for literacy in RenfrewCollingwood look like?
Vision
A diverse learning community that encourages, challenges, supports and nurtures all residents to participate, master and share what interests them.
Mission
To enhance and create lifelong literacy
programs that are accessible, sufficient and sustainable for Renfrew-Collingwood residents by building on the strengths of local programs, service providers and residents, connecting service providers and residents, and expanding capacity.
Values
Renfrew-Collingwood literacy opportunities
allow residents to be the best they can be for individual and community needs and aspirations. This means residents of all ages, cultures and abilities: • Feel a sense of belonging • Know they have a neighbourhood where they feel safe to express themselves • Have lots of opportunities for learning and life experiences • Have knowledge, appreciation and respect of cultures and talents • Take care of each other and share and learn from each other • Take ownership of their own learning • Learn whatever takes them where they want to go • Enjoy a culture where everyone wants to learn more • Have the opportunity to participate fully in building a healthy and safe community for all
10
Strategies
Know Our Neighbourhood
• Expand and focus community mapping around school catchment areas • Link community mapping to transportation to and from programs and services • Map the gifts and skills of residents in a skills inventory
Connect Residents
• Connect residents to the right programs • Strengthen outreach using and expanding community assets such as Cultural Connectors • Identify and remove barriers to participation • Create a safe and welcoming environment that encourages residents to acknowledge and share their gifts and needs • Create a culture that recognizes all residents have gifts and skills that they can contribute to the community • Acknowledge resident leadership and find ways to empower them and build on their strengths
Connect Service Providers
• Ensure all service providers within Renfrew-
Collingwood know about and have access to community mapping information • Link service providers to resident gifts and skills
Expand Capacity
• Work together to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of existing resources; ensure there are no redundancies • Increase capacity based on identified needs • Develop an accessible, flexible and comprehensive set of program options • Support programs with community service providers who work together actively to create and maintain programs and who have the training, skills and cultural capacity to build programs with community users • Support resident leadership and ideas for sustainable lifelong learning
Develop Programs
• Address expressed needs for literacy, numeracy and social skills to meet demand and for literacy upgrading programs for Canadian-born adults and new immigrants • Initial focus is on seniors, adults and immigrants • Sustain programs through concrete resources and in-kind support from public, private and community organizations
Action Plan
• Hire a community literacy coordinator • Identify needed resources under strategies and what lead organizations take • Develop communication strategies and networks • Expand mapping of programs, services and resident skills • Develop one to two new programs • Develop strategies and networks for intercultural social development and inclusion
Evaluation
Will our actions result in programs that are: • Accessible • Sufficient • Sustainable
11
Appendix I: Participants
Renfrew-Collingwood Literacy Plan Committee
• Heather Brown, Constable, Collingwood Crime
Prevention Office • Inness Campbell, Branch Head, Collingwood
Library, *replaces Ann Martin • Paula Carr, Executive Director, Collingwood
Neighbourhood House (CNH) • Julie Cheng, Renfrew-Collingwood Literacy Plan
Coordinator • Helen Dempster, Regional Literacy Coordinator, *replaced by Sandy McKay • Charito Gailling, Community Developer,
Evergreen Health Centre, Vancouver Coastal
Health • Rania Hatzioannou, Resident and Board
Member, CNH • Kulwant Kaur, Director of Operations, CNH • Andrea Little, Coordinator District Literacy Plan,
Vancouver School Board • Christine Macer, Community Schools
Coordinator, Windermere Family of Schools • William McMichael, Resident, President, CNH • Rene Merkel, Basic Education, Adults, Vancouver
Community College • Diane Sugars, Executive Director, Learning
Disabilities Association
Partners and Visioning/Survey Participants
• Belle Abbott, Resident • Rob Allen, Resident and Chair, CityPlan Visions • Norma-Jean Baptiste, Carnegie Centre Aboriginal
Front Door • Bill Barrie, Principal, Norquay Elementary • Rosalinda Barrientos, Settlement Worker (Filipino/Tagalog), Carleton Elementary • Anamaria Basic, Program Coord., Big Sisters • Jackie Bridge, Chinese Settlement Worker, CNH • Ross Cassie Principal, Renfrew Elementary • Donna Chan, Resident, Windermere PAC • Elizabeth Chan, Resident, Norquay PAC • Zeena Chopra, Resident and CNH staff • Carmen Contreras, Family Support Worker, PIRS • Carmen Correal, Recreation Coordinator, CNH • Kathy Coyne, Cultural Connectors instructor,
Capilano College • Lani El Guebaly, Prevention Education
Coordinator, CNH • Naomi Fuchs, Resident, Cultural Connectors • Pat Furey and 8 students, Resident and ABE
Instructor and class • Juliana Graham, Bruce and Collingwood Annex
Elementary Schools • Ivory Ha, Resident, Cultural Connectors • David Hanuse, Resident and former board member, CNH • Amal Kago, Resident, Cultural Connector • Daniel Louie, Pastor, Urban Church Village • Sharon Lowe, Resource Teacher, Collingwood
School • Amy Lui, Multicultural Liaison Worker, VSB • Sheri MacIntyre, Resident • Evina Mak, Resident, Preschool Manager, CNH • Sheri Martin, Community Capacity Building, CNH • Jeff Mazo, Resident and Teacher, Windermere • Alison Merton, Child Care Coordinator, Open
Doors to Learning, CNH • Trish Miller, Branch Head, Renfrew Library • Anshumala Nand, Resident, Cultural Connector
i
• Veena Nand, Resident • David Nelson, Principal, Grenfell Elementary • Tammy Do Nguyen, Resident, Cultural Connector • Michelle Nguyen, Settlement Worker, VSB • Amaya O’Duir and son Shonyn, Residents • Regina Paniagua, Resident, Cultural Connectors • Judy Payne, Teacher, Windermere High School • Kristina Pikksalu, RN, Evergreen Health Centre • Paul Reid, Resident and Renfrew-Collingwood
Community News, CNH • Donna Reine, Leader, Urban Church Village • Nancy Reynolds, Community Recreation
Coordinator, Renfrew Park Community Centre • Suki Sandhu, PHN (0-5 Nurse), Evergreen
Health Centre • Rob Schindel, Principal, Windermere High School • Heidi Sinclair, Renfrew Collingwood Food
Security Coordinator, CNH • Pat Steiner, Resident, Pacific Immigrant
Resource Society • Georgina Sue, Library Resource Centre Teacher,
Nootka Elementary • Lori Walker, Project Manager, Literacy, 2010
Legacies Now • Keri Wallin, Principal, Nootka Elementary • Heather Weber, Resident, Windermere PAC • Zoe Welch, Roots of Empathy, c/o VSB • January Wolodarsky, Resident and Director of
Community Development, CNH • Peter Woo, Vice-Principal, Renfrew Elementary • Huang Xiaolan, Cultural Connector • CNH Family Place Participants, Satinder Singh • CNH Families Branching Out Participants, Nancy
Sweedler • ELSA Beginner 1 Class at the Warehouse, a PIRS program; Pat Steiner and teacher Susan Bonham • ELSA Intermediate classes at First Lutheran
Church, Carmen Mancilla-Fuller and teacher
Lesley Sayer • Grenfell Elementary Grade 7 class and teacher
Diane Mezzaroba • Nootka Elementary Grade 6 class and teacher
Eartha Ann Hanson • Windermere Grade 10 Leadership class and teacher Nicolle Mageau • Derek, Joleen, Paul and Scott, Residents; reporters and photographers, Youth Media • Youth and residents at Canada Day Celebrations
ii
Supporters
• Terresa Augustine, Mount Pleasant Literacy Plan • Karl Chan, Resident and IT Coordinator, CNH • Denise Dhalian, Resident, Girl Scouts of Canada • Susan Fisher, Resident, Cultural Connector • Sharon Gregson, Director of Child & Family
Development Services, CNH • Diana Guinn, Director of Neighbourhood and
Youth Services, Vancouver Public Library • Sanjeev Karwal, Resident, Youth Services
Coordinator, CNH • Jas Mahal, Director, Tiny Bubble Preschool • Jean Maloney, Executive Director, PIRS • Michael McLenaghen, Director of Community
Services, CNH • Valerie Overgaard, Associate Superintendent –
Learning Services, VSB • Hyewon Park, Korean Settlement Worker, CNH • Carmen Rosen, Resident, Still Moon Arts Society • Emanuela Sheena, Resident, Program Coord., CNH • Satinder Singh, Family Services Coord., CNH • Catherine Sinasac, Planner, City of Vancouver • Ryan Vernon, CILS, Information Services
Librarian, Langara College
Appendix II. Informal and Formal Links between Community Initiatives
iii
Source: RenfrewCollingwood Visioning Forum, November 27, 2007. Compiled by Evergreen Health Centre.
NOTE: This illustrates many of the existing committee linkages in Renfrew/ Collingwood but is not a complete representation.
Appendix III: Renfrew-Collingwood Statistics from 2001 and 2006 Census
Population
Age 0-4
5-14
15-19 2001 Census
RenfrewCollingwood
44,950 (8.2% of City)
City of Vancouver
545,671
2006 Census % Change
RenfrewCollingwood City of Vancouver
48,885 578,041
RenfrewCollingwood
8.8%
(8.5% of City) (+5.9% 2001)
2,480 12,020 2,385 24,725 -3.8% 5.5% 4.3% 4.9% 4.3% -0.6% 5,320 48,845 5,245 49,195 -1.4% 11.8% 8.9% 10.7% 8.5% -1.1% 2,830 29,005 3,060 29,490 8.1% 6.3% 5.3% 6.3% 5.1% 0.0%
19 and under 23.6% 18.6% 21.9% 17.9% -1.7% 20-39 33.6% 36.6% 31.2% 34.5% -2.4% 40-64 29.9% 31.9% 33.1% 34.5% 3.2% 65 and over 12.8% 12.9% 13.8% 13.1% 1.0%
Language – Mother Tongue English
27.3% 49.4% 25.5% 49.1% -1.8%
French
0.5% 1.7% 0.5% 1.7% 0.0% Chinese 43.6% 26.4% 42.7% 25.3% -0.9% Vietnamese 4.4% 2.2% 4.0% 2.8% -0.4% Tagalog 4.2% 2.4% 6.0% 1.8% 1.8% Punjabi 3.9% 2.7% 2.5% 2.7% -1.4% Hindi 2.4% 0.9% 2.0% 0.7% -0.4%
Mobility: Population who moved since previous census
44.7% 51.7% 43.2% 50.2% -1.5%
Number of families 12,285 (9.1% of City) 134,380 13,430 (9.2% of City) 145,605 9.3%
Average family income $49,625 (28.3% below City average) $69,190 $66,354 (25.4% below City average) $88,971 33.7%
Population in lowincome households
27.3% 27.0% 26.9% 26.6% -0.4%
Single-parent families 18.7% 17.0% 18.4% 16.2% -0.3%
Sources: City of Vancouver Community Web Pages and Renfrew Collingwood Facts and Stats – EDI data
iv
In This Appendix
1. Visioning Consultation Findings 1.1 Accessibility 1.2 Sufficiency 1.3 Sustainability 2. Asset Survey Findings 2.1 Definition of Literacy 2.2 Language Proficiency 2.3 Literacy Skills 2.4 Service Provision
1. Visioning Consultation Findings
In early May 2008, two community visioning consultations were held, one in the evening, with childminding, and another during the day. A total of 85 residents and service providers took part. In addition, three student visioning sessions were held in May and June 2008 and involved 90 students from local elementary and secondary schools.
Three major themes emerged from the consultations: accessibility, sufficiency and sustainability.
1.1 Accessibility
The lack of opportunity for many to benefit from literacy programs emerged as the major concern of participants in both community consultations. They noted that entitlement barriers denied access for many groups, a situation that could be resolved if there were more interagency collaboration to support a “fluidity of services and access” in a variety of institutions including prisons, group homes and homes for the mentally ill. One group noted that there should be “formal relationships between “There should be a libraries and community Starbucks in every groups. More libraries library or perhaps a should be more accessible.”
library in every Starbucks!” —Resident
Programs should be available for such groups as refugees, pregnant mothers, isolated seniors, young parents, the developmentally challenged, school dropouts and those on probation. Translation was of particular concern for seniors programs to ensure that all community members knew what opportunities are available. Affordability was a key issue in both consultations, especially for programs targeting the youngest (0-6) and oldest participants (seniors). Ideally, programs, materials and daycare would be free, cultural events would be subsidized, cheap transportation would be provided to the location of the program and income support would be provided to families in need.
25 Figure x. Accessibility Concerns Elements of Accessibility
21
48
28 Opportunity Affordability Safety Welcome
The need for safe environments was reported in both consultations: “kid-friendly spaces, safe, enjoyable, fun ways to connect.” Libraries could be more welcoming for youth by providing opportunities and resources for “oral, written and graphic” skill development and spaces for young users, including children with disabilities, to chat. Most importantly, the libraries needed to be accessible outside of school hours and on the weekends.
One group in the student visioning sessions offered, “We want solar-powered lighting in the parks so we can feel safe (to hang out) there at night.” Programs at community centres needed to be supervised by older youth so that all participants would be respected and heard.
Participants in both community consultations commented on the importance for cooperation, respect and support in order to address negative social attitudes to ESL learners and the growth of anti-intellectual attitudes in the community.
Opportunities for “mutual reciprocity, where everyone has a role as both teacher and learner” were seen as important to this effort as was the development of “family places” where families with special needs would feel welcome.
There was a call for expanded intercultural learning opportunities for members to learn about their community and the community to learn about its members.
“Stigma and fear keep some people hidden––people feel that they can’t meet expectations when they can’t do something. We need to focus on strengths.” —Service Provider
vi
Figure x. Sufficiency concerns Elements of Sufficiency
25
28 7 5 5
33 39
33 Social Literacy Outreach Language Skills Community Support Multiliteracy IT Literacy Assessment Environmentalism
1.2 Sufficiency
Sufficiency refers to the ability of a program or policy to adequately address the needs of those whom it intends to benefit.
Consultation participants said an ideal program would provide a wide range of community supports and focus on developing multiple literacies, particularly social and language literacies and, to a lesser degree, environmental and information technology literacies. By participating in programs, community members would be literate to the level they aspire, be sensitive to the relationships that exist between language and culture and be interculturally competent.
Social literacy, the ability for each of us to interact easily with our neighbours in a multicultural society, was the most important program outcome of participants. In order to achieve it, programs would require teaching materials “that help us learn from different cultures or nations.” Sometimes those different cultures include one’s own, as was noted by one group’s call for “topics that interest First Nations, that they can relate to.” Social literacy needs were viewed as “specific to needs of different groups (that
must) meet needs of individuals as well.” It was important that learning activities be fun and involve opportunities for newcomers to meet long-term residents, for celebration and the opportunity to share stories with one another.
Suggestions emerged on how to build social literacy into the school curriculum. One group suggested that students work together in a coffee bar or a school library, where there could be magazines available in other languages. Field trips promoting intercultural literacy were reported in most consultations, as were anti-bullying and assertiveness training. Two groups suggested that simply learning how to greet one another in different languages was an important first step at bridging cultural divides. Social literacy skills were viewed by many participants as opportunities for activating “respect, reaching and caring” in the schools. Suggestions for adults and seniors included culture and language classes in the top-10 languages of the neighbourhood and First Nations languages, perhaps culminating in field trips to such places as Chinatown and Little India.
“We need to link training with real job opportunities, get people using their qualifications and provide the necessary support to make this happen.” —Resident “Teachers (should) not forget about who you are, to check in where you’re at and encourage you to finish school.” —Service Provider
The need for language training in schools that was specific for labour market access was mentioned most often in both consultations, beginning with the completion of application forms (“they don’t understand the jargon”), continuing to orientations to different trades and tours to trade schools and then to writing for different purposes. For preschoolers the prime purpose for language training was so as to not fall behind their peers. For adults and seniors it was, first, to provide survival language skills necessary for emergency responses, shopping, public transportation and, second, for social integration and pursuing careers that were in line with their skills. Progress assessment was a concern for K–12 students, according to adult participants, who called for teachers to document progress so that learners could monitor their progress, and help teachers to remember “where the learner is at.” One group suggested that at the beginning of the year, the teacher send home his or her expectations for the child so parents could track his or her progress. Program outreach to marginalized groups was discussed, touching upon the need for mobile literacy programming that would move to where the need was apparent, promotion of family literacy opportunities and addressing specific needs related to mental health. The need for promotional materials to be provided in the languages of the target groups was identified by both service providers and residents. For preschoolers, the needs for family involvement, support for different learning styles and an early start for literacy training were identified. For elementary and secondary students concerns for sufficient remediation and support for those with learning difficulties emerged. Participants commented that such concerns might be addressed by viewing the learner as a whole person, building self-esteem and providing a welcoming learning environment for the child.
vii
For adults there were concerns for marginalized grandparents, overworked parents, job seekers and newcomers who were facing challenges related to social integration. There were needs expressed for “facilitating emotional transition to literacy,” linking training to “real job opportunities,” connecting people from different cultures, increasing supports for parents working multiple jobs, speech therapists, psychological support and general personal development. One group noted the importance of “working from an assets perspective,” rather than a deficit model of the needs of marginalized groups and to “tailor learning opportunities” by using the “untapped resources” that learners bring with them.
Consultations emphasized the importance of providing opportunities for developing creative literacy skills in preschool and school settings that would lead to multiple literacies upon which they could call in their adult lives. In preschool there was a call for the use of a “variety of mediums—art, books, technology and spoken word” in self-expression and the delivery of instruction. In elementary and secondary school settings, these broad categories were expanded to include theatre, improvisation, emotional, critical thinking, art, literary, dance and health literacies, offered across the school curriculum.
Environmental literacy was the most important for preschoolers in order to increase the children’s awareness of “the natural environment in the community.” Participants suggested the children have opportunities to interact with animals such as communal pets, to “touch dirt and bugs and enjoy the natural environment” in addition to learning about the benefits of bicycling and public transportation. One group suggested the children have a role in educating adults about environmentalism.
Students participating in the school visioning sessions expressed concern for environmental literacy on issues related to recycling, transportation, food security, stream restoration and waste management and reduction.
Information technology literacy was important for adults so that they may be able to “interface with technology and see it as a creative and communicative tool.” One group suggested using computer-based learning programs to provide technical training in such applications as word processing; another to use voice recognition software such as “DragonSpeak” to access the technology. A service provider summarized the benefits as “We can use technology (such as DVDs) to pass on skills and learning of people who may not be able or want to leave where they are comfortable.”
There is a need for community supports and the ways neighbours might support literacy development as reading buddies, program organizers and coordinators, tutors, personal literacy trainers for seniors, heritage language teachers and outreach assistants.
Intergenerational connections were seen as helpful for preschoolers, especially such involvement of grandparents and caregivers as evident in the Mother Goose program. Ideally adults would be organizing workplace literacy programs and seniors would be reading with children, both having been trained by other volunteers in their community.
“Literacy starts with connections between people—it must be a bottom-up approach.” —Resident
viii
The importance of school-based peer support in the form of homework support groups and mentorship learning was mentioned as was the need for “one-toone attention and time” for special needs children so “they will be ready for Kindergarten.”
The high school students in the student visioning sessions perceived a role for themselves mentoring elementary school students, for example, showing them how to grow a vegetable garden. Local youth teaching local adults, local adults teaching local youth, peer support groups both in and out of school—all would serve to help improve the quality of life in their communities.
1.3 Sustainability
Sustainability refers to the ability of the community to continue its literacy development initiatives by putting its local resources to best use.
Elements of Sustainability
20
22 6
34 41 Community Inclusion Program Development Family Support
Empowerment
Program Advocacy There was strong enthusiasm expressed in the consultations for stronger coordination between home, school and community-based literacy development. One consultation noted that this could be achieved by actively involving local volunteers in the schools, but that it was the responsibility of the school system to permit such involvement.
Program development that focused on building positive attitudes toward intercultural relations, making it “cool to be ethnic” and to respect other ways of knowing emerged in all consultations. It was important that services, for the sake of efficiency and sufficiency, not be duplicated and that this outcome
By taking “ownership” of the initiatives, residents help ensure their overall survivability by reducing the need for external supports. Participants said an ideal program provides opportunities for community members to participate in program advocacy development and delivery. Those families in need of support would receive it. All community members would then be empowered to take ownership of what one participant termed “a social movement.”
The importance of community inclusion was mentioned in all consultations. Ideally, it would take the form of actively involving residents in all aspects of program implementation and maintenance, while “maintaining their own cultural identity.” Activities included literacy fairs, block parties, multicultural celebrations and, most importantly, multilingual communication to ensure that all members of the community are aware of literacy events.
The community could be used much more by schools as a site for learning. Participants made many references to the need for involving seniors in literacy development as mentors, homework helpers, first language teachers, translators and cultural ambassadors for school-age children. The potential for high school students to offer similar supports for seniors was also frequently mentioned.
ix
could be realized by more effective volunteer involvement of local “Programs need to be experts in program
expanded beyond traditional
delivery of ESL, to focus on delivery.
opportunities to access
information/news on what’s A student noted that going on in the community—to this could happen if the become involved and to mix schools fostered the
with different groups and
development of
opportunities.” —Resident
different clubs for different subjects, where students could continue to develop their literacy skills in specific areas of study.
To encourage more residents to take part in literacy initiatives, they may need some family support. For example, workshops to teach parents how to access library resources and read with their children, “Welcome to Kindergarten” programs for seniors who are caring for grandchildren and discussions on ways to promote multiliteracy in families through the use of written texts, graphics, cartoons and movies. Other supports included more education videos accessible to families, more family nights at education centres, honour system book
“Every child should
have a library card exchanges at community mailed with his or her centres and coffee shops and birth certificate.” educational video games in —Resident libraries. The empowerment of individuals and families to connect and reconnect with their communities at different levels and in different contexts was considered to be especially important for adults and seniors. It depends on financial stability, which allows parents and grandparents to become more involved in family life. Ideally, all would have equal access to the labour market, be employed in a job that is relatively close to home and in which they can make use of the skills they possess. Unfortunately, for many newcomers this is not the case. As a result there need to be opportunities outside normal working hours (while they are trying to establish themselves) for them to participate in program planning and development activities, as well as the willingness of training providers to adjust their own working hours accordingly. Advanced language training was also seen as a crucial element of empowerment. Current training is provided to immigrants and refugees in BC up to the beginner level of proficiency in reading, writing, listening and speaking. This level was considered insufficient for workplace entry by participants, who suggested that the level be increased substantially. Finally, the important role of social advocacy emerged in two consultations. If literacy development is to become a social movement, participants said we need more people talking about it, promoting it and reminding others that illiteracy is alive and well in our community. There needs to be more communication within and among community members, in their many languages, and schools (because “schools are most aware of the needs of their students”), health service providers and community organizations. The need for continuing support from the three levels of government to provide for intercultural programming that brings people together and for raising literacy awareness was seen by participants in both consultations as being essential for improving literacy in the community.
“Literacy is a shared responsibility and a continuing government presence will be needed to be effective in the long term.” —Service Provider
2. Asset Survey Findings
Between May and August 2008, three surveys were given out at classes and gatherings and made available through SurveyMonkey.com: one survey for local residents and literacy class participants (62 responses), one for service providers (26) and one for students (23). Twelve respondents identified the ability to understand language in its written, verbal and nonverbal forms as an important component.
The ability to communicate competently in order to better access and use social resources and to express oneself clearly was reported by 10 participants.
2.1 Definition of Literacy
Local residents and students were asked to describe what the term “literacy” meant to them.
Five key components emerged from the responses. The ability to read comfortably at a level of ability matching one’s peers was indicated by 23 respondents, including 14 students.
A similar level of ability in writing was indicated by 14 respondents, equally divided between residents and students. Eight respondents viewed the ability to increase and apply one’s knowledge of language and communication as being important.
Findings suggest the majority of respondents would agree to a broad definition of literacy:
Literacy is an ability to read, write and understand language in its verbal and nonverbal forms at a level that allows residents to participate successfully in mainstream social life.
Components of Literacy
Reading Writing Understanding Communicating Learning 10 8
12
xi
23
14
2.2 Language Proficiency
Residents reported some degree of proficiency in 18 languages; high school students in 12 languages on a scale where “0” indicated no proficiency and “4” advanced proficiency.” Student proficiency in languages other than English was consistently lower than that of the residents. Their ability in English, however, was on average comparable to that of native speakers.
Language Proficiency
Students Residents
Vietnamese
Taiwanese
Tagalog
Spanish
Somalian
Sign Language
Punjabi
Portuguese
Mandarin
Korean
Japanese
Italian
Hindi
Hebrew
German
French
English
Cantonese
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50
2.3 Literacy Skills
Students reported their strongest literacy skills included reading and interpreting music, interpreting art, analyzing lyrics and short stories, communicating through visual media, oral storytelling, writing narratives and dialogues, and being able to use electronic media effectively for communicative purposes.
Residents described their strongest literacy skills as businesss communication, computer literacy, storytelling, dramatic performance, reading maps, preparing and editing reports, conducting meetings, public presentations, listening, interpeting visual texts, translating, interpreting and communicating in multiple languages and communicating through music.
Students shared their literacy skills by helping others with homework, working together with others in study groups, tutoring others, translating and writing for parents, proofreading others’ writing and asking them to do the same, writing for the school
xii
newspaper, story telling and generally engaging others in conversation. Residents shared their literacy skills by socializing with neighbours, explaining documents, organizing classes, community dialogues and projects, volunteering to tutor and teaching ESL, math and computer literacy classes, teaching children with learning disabilities, editing others’ writing,
“I use my skills to make people
feel comfortable within a group, preparing advocacy no matter the age or materials and differences, and allow them to arguments and doing create their own atmosphere of research.
friendship, understanding, and confidence to work together as 2.4 Service a team to get the job done.” Provision —High School Student
Service providers described a wide variety of literacy development activities, including helping new immigrants integrate into Canadian society, helping school-age children with reading and math, health promotion and disease prevention, and helping youth at risk and families. There were fewer activities listed for seniors and young adults than there were for children and adults under 65.
“The tutoring takes place before, during and after school, as well as throughout the summer. All of our tutoring is individualized to each student's needs and goals, which are determined during the diagnostic process.” —Service Provider
The uncertainty and low levels of current funding were their primary areas of concern. One provider commented that the time spent chasing funding dollars and reporting on funding grants was a major obstacle to the efficient operation of the service. Another reported that the chronic lack of funding resulted in poor quality of supplies and constant staff turnover due to low wages. Additional funding needs were identified in staffing, coordinating volunteers, increasing programming space and producing learning materials. Other concerns included long waiting lists for English language training courses, access for women with very young children and student access to information technologies. One provider saw a need for parent involvement in the learning process, noting that the times the organization encountered serious barriers to success in its tutoring had been when parents were uninterested or unable to become involved in any way. Another identified a need for facilitators to keep students motivated. The need for culturally sensitive programming was mentioned by two providers. Despite these challenges all the organizations indicated that their programs had enjoyed many successes. Over 66% of organizations reported they were quite successful or very successful developing partnerships with other organizations. Over 69% reported that their programs had met their goals “very well.” Most felt they had made a positive impact on the lives of individuals by helping them access information they needed and enjoy success in their school studies. They felt their services contributed to building capacity in the community, supporting children and families, and helping newcomers integrate successfully into the mainstream society.
“The main successes are when students and their parents start to see a difference. Once they or their parents start to see the progress being made they are so happy, and that makes us happy.” —Service Provider
xiii
Appendix V: Strengths, Opportunities, Needs and Challenges
Strengths
Diverse community
• very diverse community – multi/intergenerational and cultural • friendly welcoming atmosphere at CNH • post-racial community – no bars of race • this is a neighbourhood that finds ways of celebrating our diversity • not NIMBY”s – more MOBY’s • we have a lot of languages and skills
Strong networks and programs
• community is well-connected, lots of networks to tap into • we have lots of services and they are mapped • effective, proven reading, literacy programs • Mother Goose – intergenerational learning • service providers in the area are committed to finding out the needs of people in the area rather than imposing programs and services • CNH takes a different approach to community development – strength-based • buy-in from major stakeholders to raise literacy levels • lots of volunteer opportunities for people to become involved in community • strong youth leadership component/culture
Other
• relatively cheap housing – makes for a diverse community –families; not homogeneous • Renfrew-Collingwood has a low profile, is not trendy so less interference • transportation network is pretty good
xiv
Opportunities
Leadership
• we have our Literacy Now Committee • we have large multilingual volunteer populations • we have Cultural Connectors, Community Schools,
Buddy Programs, Food Security Institute,
Leadership Institute and community celebrations to use and add onto
Programs and facilities
• lots of early childhood development opportunities and facilities that we can use to add adult literacy programs for adults • sense of partnership that we can add to and make stronger to deal with family literacy programs and smooth out duplication • schools with empty rooms at times • lots of programs that people find useful • opportunities for mentoring – there is youth interest, ability, a culture of doing this already and an infrastructure • arts and culture provide opportunities • Strong Starts are being set up in the community and the Ministry of Ed plans for earlier K programs will have an impact • have a number of libraries open to people in the community – Collingwood, Renfrew, school libraries may open to the community and
Langara’s braille and audio library facilities
Funding
• Ministry of Education is funding literacy initiatives • The United Way’s plans for 211 • The Office of Literacy and Essential Skills (federal government) has plans with funding
Needs
Programs
• more programs to meet demand (literacy, numeracy, social skills) • upgrading for adults – more and accessible, e.g., programs in the summer • programs need to be free and have child care available in order to adults to participate • literacy upgrading programs need to be available for Canadian-born adults and seniors • more settlement services • make sure to keep people from falling through the cracks • provide literacy services in various ways (times, correspondence, technologies, mentoring, etc.) • programs to teach writing in English and advanced
English
Outreach
• multi-media facilities to create multi-media tools/spaces • outreach to isolated individuals • an online presence/capability • awareness/education about what is already available • a community literacy listserv • an umbrella organization to refer and hold the information
Resources
• a comprehensive and cohesive plan for literacy in the area (all working the same direction) • resources – $ and people • physical space for classes, socializing, meetings • buy-in from government stakeholders • service providers who are multilingual and appropriately trained
Challenges
Local
• languages • availability of staff versus the times that people want services/programs • convincing schools and dealing with their issues around opening schools to public • sharing vs. owning attitudes • ongoing recruitment/retention of volunteers, keeping them interested • resource issues – time in having to constantly write grants and the admin involved, burnout, etc. • “customers” – if people don’t come? • Not being able to find new leaders • Not delivering the message of the services/programs correctly • The word “literacy” – a lack of understanding of the concept can block participation • If partners are apathetic or don’t see relevance it is hard to get buy-in – work places, for example.
Regional, Provincial, National
• $ • if policies, politics, focus changes can be a block • can remove programs, support etc. • there can be “strings” attached that don’t fit with what the community wants/needs • if the various governments have separate agendas • if there is interdepartmental lack of communication • when accountability takes over • too many hoops, too much bureaucracy can stop learners from participating • funding and policies need to see this work as a beginning of a long continuum of service and transition
