OECD 2000. Literacy in the Information age: Final Report of the International Adult Literacy Survey

BOOK REVIEWS – BUCHBESPRECHUNGEN – ANALYSES BIBLIOGRAPHIQUES

OECD. 2000.

Literacy in the Information Age: Final Report of the International AdultLiteracy Survey. Paris: OECD. xvi + 185 pp. ISBN 92-64-17654-3 (French edition:La littératie à l’ère de l’information. ISBN 92-64-27654-8)

This is the third and final report of the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS)which OECD and Statistics Canada have produced. “The IALS has, for the first time,collected reliable and internationally comparable data on the levels and distributionsof broadly defined literacy skills in the adult population” (p. 87). It is the end of thework of the OECD IALS Project. This Report includes some new countries in thesurveys, which are now based on 68,755 respondents in 20 countries. There are fourextended Appendices dealing with methodologies and data.

The criticisms of IALS are by now well-known. Apart from the statistical issues(which are answered in Appendix C and need not detain us), the criticisms group roundthe Survey’s understanding of literacy. It sees literacy as unproblematic, a uniformset of skills which a person either possesses or does not possess (this Report eschewsthe term ‘illiterate’). The authors do not ask ‘which literacy?’ or ‘whose literacy?’.They assume literacy in each of the countries surveyed will be the dominant literacy(not just literacy in the dominant language which is addressed on page 51, but thedominant form of literacy). Where for example is religious literacy? That would notappear in their tests, but is greatly important in many of the countries included here.But it is accepted implicitly that such a literacy is not ‘important’ (to whom?). Thereis no perception of the power relations in literacy. Again, the approach to languageis limited. IALS sees it mainly in terms of immigrant populations (they talk of ‘non-native language’, but what is ‘non-native language’ in Ireland?). And what of situa-tions where people need for functional purposes two languages at the same time (suchsituations exist in several of the countries which they survey in small numbers, butin countries like South Africa, dual language literacy is essential for most of the pop-ulation). And there is an implicit contradiction in what IALS says about the purposesof literacy which they define as “the ability to understand and employ printed infor-mation . . . to achieve one’s goals, and to develop one’s knowledge and potential”(page x), so that the measure of success should be individual satisfaction; but whenthe majority of those they construct as having low levels of literacy skills say thatthey do not see that they have any problem (pages 52–53), IALS regard this commentas a negative statement, not a positive statement. IALS is based on a normativeapproach to literacy and to society, not on any understanding of diversity in society.As I read this, I wondered how a woman who has deliberately chosen to stay at hometo develop the family will cope with tests based on “job applications, payroll forms,. . . tables and charts”, though she may have become proficient at different kinds of“transportation schedules and maps”! The “demands of everyday life” of the officecleaner are not the same as those of the shop assistant, and different shop assistants

International Review of Education – Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft– Revue Internationale de l’Education 46(5): 467–468, 2000.

may have very different demands. The literacy activities (and needs) of taxi driversand hospital porters in their own societies are very different, and will not be testedby the uniform IALS tests. And again, while there is recognition of cultural differ-ences, the tests do not seem to allow for the fact that research has demonstratedthat the ‘easiness’ or ‘difficulty’ of any text is dependent on the experience of thereader and on the relevance which the reader sees it having to their own lives, noton the text itself (As with the earlier reports, there is little on writing in this Report).And finally, there a tendency to simplistic correlations. Does literacy lead to jobsor do jobs lead to literacy? Can it really be true that the authors see a relationshipbetween literacy skills and the increased participation of women in public and civiclife?

All this is well known and has been recited before, although this Third Reportconfirms these criticisms. Which raises the question, why do it? Whose interests isthe IALS serving? The Reports are aimed at “policy-makers in lifelong educationand the social and labour markets”, so that (as befits its originators) its aim is tostrengthen the state and the formal economy which the state is pledged to uphold.Many studies have shown that adult literacy programmes are used by the state to legit-imise, extend and consolidate its authority. Is this how IALS will judge its success(page ix)?

But having said all of this, we need to recognise that the critics of IALS do notface some of the implications of their own approaches to literacy. This volume andthe others before it present a challenge to its critics, and there has been a poverty ofresponse. For example, the work of Doronila and Bernardo in the Philippines havedemonstrated the existence of communities with different levels of literacy practicesand events, and a World Bank paper drew attention to families with different literacyaccess, as this Report recognises (page 43). But how can we measure these activitieson a comparative basis? To say that some societies have different amounts of literacyactivities needs some justification. Some writers like Barton have revealed throughtheir research ‘local literacies’; but how can they render this into statistical forms?Just to dismiss the claims of policy-makers and others for statistics is to demeanthese individuals’ needs. How can these critics “assist those with low literacy skills”(even if they would use other language to express this phenomenon) in any literacy– and indeed, why should they? And the picture which these critics form throughtheir research tends to be static. It does not indicate ways in which society is changingand the implications of this for literacy practices and events, as this IALS Reporttries to do; for as this Report stresses, the world (and local societies with it) ischanging, and educationalists of children and adults need to try to develop plans forappropriate interventions to help society use these changes advantageously. Just to tellus what is happening now, as the critics do, will not help the policy-makers and edu-cationalists to plan for the future.

The question this volume then poses to the many critics of IALS is that, if this isinadequate, what should it be replaced with? Of course, it is difficult to devise tests;IALS recognise this. But until the critics can come up with some answers, this muststand for what it is, “for the first time, . . . [reasonably] reliable and internationallycomparable data on the levels and distributions of broadly defined [dominant] literacyskills in the adult population” in 20 countries, most of them in the industrialised world.But its problems will be greatly enhanced should the Survey be extended by othersinto developing societies.

Uppingham, UK ALAN ROGERS

468

WHITMORE, Kingsley, HART, Hilary, and WILLEMS, Guy (eds.). 1999. ANeurodevelopmental Approach to Specific Learning Difficulties. MacKeith Press.304 pp. ISBN 1 89868311S.

This book describes a range of developmental disorders believed to be of neurolog-ical origin. Of the 21 contributors 14 are medical doctors, and the overall emphasisof the book is medical rather than educational.

There is a masterly first chapter by Kingsley Whitmore and Martin Bax in whichthe authors not only provide a historical overview but confront head on the complexproblems of definition. They note that even the familiar acronym “SLD” is ambiguous.“S” always stands for “specific”, but “L” can stand for “learning” or “language” and“D” can stand for “disorder”, “disability”, “dysfunction”, “difficulty”, “defect” or “dis-turbance”. It is particularly important, in my view, to distinguish between a difficulty– where you find something difficult and are not very good at it – and a disability –where there is some kind of block to learning and where, even with good teaching,progress is slow. It seems that the less secure our knowledge, the more varied will beour diagnostic labels and theories. Enough, however, is known about developmentaldisorders to justify the giving of practical advice, and the experience and wisdom ofthe contributors is apparent throughout the book.

Another awkward customer is the word “syndrome”. This word is sometimes usedto refer to any manifestations which regularly go together. It does not necessarilyimply any simple chain of causation, but there needs to be a pattern in the manifes-tations which is somehow coherent and united; this is in contrast to conditions whichco-occur only as a result of the law of averages. The question then arises as to whethera particular verbal label stands for what we call a “genuine” syndrome – perhapsADHD or, more controversially, Gerstmann syndrome, in contrast with, say, the “can’t-get-down-to-work” syndrome, which does indeed constitute a cluster of manifesta-tions but where the use of the word “syndrome” is almost a witticism.

Another helpful distinction is that between nosographic labels, which simplydescribe and call attention to what is taking place, and nosolgic labels, which implycausal explanations. As knowledge increases more labels become nosolgic. However,as things are the position is somewhat untidy: further research will be needed beforewe can say which of the many diagnostic labels used in this book are nosographicand which are nosolgic. Whatever transpires, however, it remains important that theconditions in question should be named. In the wise words of Christopher Gillberg(p. 271): “Having a name for your problems early in life is almost always helpful,not frightening or threatening.”

Dyslexia – or, more strictly, specific developmental dyslexia – is in my opinion agenuine syndrome; and it is one of the shortcomings of the book that most of theauthors seem to equate it simply with “poor reading” – thus ignoring all the researchliterature in which the inadequacy of this view has been exposed. Jim Stevenson’scomments on p. 159 are particularly disappointing in that connection: not only doeshe make disparaging remarks about the dyslexia concept in general, but his accountof the view of Critchley and Critchley (1978) is a careless piece of misrepresentation(see in particular p. 149 of the Critchleys’ book).

I have a few further criticisms. From time to time some of the contributors reportconclusions which either have not been replicated or have been criticised as invalid.For example, in chapter 3 (p. 81) Neil Gordon makes no mention of the failures byother researchers to replicate George Pavlidis’ findings on eye movements; and thereference on the same page to the claim by John Stein and Sue Fowler that childrenwith unstable vergence control make “visual” errors ignores the criticisms of DorothyBishop that the errors in question are not necessarily “visual” at all (whatever exactly

469


470

this means). The authors of chapter 10 are a notable exception, since they say onp. 211: “We draw attention to the difficulties of interpreting research findings”.

I was surprised that no mention is made in the book of the possible beneficial effects(in suitable cases) of tinted lenses or overlays. Thanks particularly to the researchefforts of Dr Arnold Wilkins and others this is no longer a matter of unprovenspeculation.

I discovered one misprint, repeated twice: on pp. 232 and 245 “Jorn” should be“Jorm”.

To conclude: although, as I have indicated, this book is not entirely free ofblemishes, it must certainly rate as a success. It contains a wealth of information onlearning disabilities of all kinds, and its humanity and concern for the individual areapparent throughout.

Department of Psychology T. R. MILESUniversity of WalesBangor, UK

BRYCE, T. G. K., and HUMES, W. M. (eds.). 1999. Scottish Education. EdinburghUniversity Press. 1040 pp. ISBN: 0 7486 0980 6.

In this volume the editors set out inform the reader how the Scottish education systemworks. This they do in 112 chapters divided into thirteen major sections, each devotedto a discrete element of the Scottish education system. These range across Policy andProvision in Scottish Education; its Administration and Control; and its Historical,Cultural and Economic Context in parts one to four. Sections five to eight cover theOrganisation, Management and Curriculum of Pre-school, Primary and SecondarySchool Education. Further and Higher Education are highlighted in part nine,Assessment and Certification in part ten. Scottish pupils and their achievements arethe subject of part eleven. Section twelve focuses upon Challenges and Responses:Education for All, and in Section thirteen attention is given to Scottish Teachers,Teacher Education and Professionalism. The editors provide both an Introductionand Overview at the beginning and a concluding chapter considering the future.

One of the key questions about any education system has to be: what impactdoes it have on the lives of its children and its citizens? In anticipation questionsthat came to mind were: What kind of changes ought we to expect upon thisrecent transfer of authority given the problematic relationship experienced in thepast. Will it be critical in content? The book has answered most, but not all ofthese. Within the parameters set the editors have achieved their aim. We are given a“vast amount of information, analysis and argument” (p. 1005) say the editors frommembers of the academic community in Scotland. It is largely critical in content.The reader will not be disappointed. Taken as a case study this text provides richand fertile ground for exploration of problems familiar in many countries. The bookshould appeal to a wide readership for that reason. Since publication of this bookScotland has its new Parliament in Edinburgh, to which certain powers have beendevolved from Westminster marking the first tentative steps towards independentcontrol of Scotland in Edinburgh the capital and not from England. It is we mightsay a country “on probation” from authority which has to prove it can handle its ownbusiness.

The story which unfolds is a fascinating account of how one education system hastravelled since the 16th century and from its original religious vision of “a publiclyfinanced system of universal education” with a school attached to every church in


the land which would “create an ideal society intended to mirror the Kingdom ofHeaven on earth” (p. 87). Development of the intellect of its citizens to universitylevel if able was paramount. Notable early chapters give account of the way in whichPhilosophy subsequently informs the practice of teaching in Primary and Secondaryschools. We are reminded by the editors that “education is fundamentally concernedwith social values which, in a democracy should never be subject to closure.” . . .that “freedom, rights, equality, justice and citizenship”. The three principles of socialunity, democracy and equality so well established early in the development of thesystem (p. 37) can be traced through the chapters and appear to be consistentlyrelegated today in favour of investment in intellectual achievement.

Today Scotland is a multi-cultural and pluralist society. There are religious andclass divides. The economic climate is harsh. There are pockets of high unemploy-ment and real poverty. Education still is expected to play a role in improving society.It would appear from the accounts that social unity, and equality are seen to be underattack both from within the system and in society at large. Readers viewing Scotlandas a case to study will find this both useful the most interesting account. Initiativesdesigned to counter bullying, sectarianism, issues of gender, race and class in educa-tion are well documented and critically analysed. Like many education systems it hasbeen hi-jacked in the fight to establish market economies, globalisation, and citizensof enterprise are to be found to frame their own future.

The burden placed upon systems of further and higher education at this time is welldocumented. Education we are told is not only “for all” it is “for life” as a policy oflifelong learning keeps many of the population over 18 years old “on task” to improvetheir competencies so that they will be able to put something back into the economy,contribute continually until they are old. Thus we see the reemergence of one tenetof religious foundation of the Scottish education system, the “protestant ethic” onceso evident in the Scottish approach to a working life. Without the promise of workin local areas, becoming educated has become the “job” itself for many of thepopulation, and Colleges of Further Education in particular bear the brunt. “Emergingthemes from the analysis are the accessibility, diversity and flexibility of provisionwithin the sector, the wide range of partnerships within which colleges operate in orderto secure this provision, and the unrelenting pressure for efficiency which has beenapplied by government” (p. 582). In the current climate of lifelong learning rather thanlifelong work it will be measured by members of the society it serves by what it does.

This book tells us comprehensively how Scottish education works. It also sets aresearch agenda for the future. The answer to my central question as to what the systemdoes for its children and citizens, however, will have to wait. That will be a matterfor future researchers.

East Haven SHEENA ERSKINEScotlandUK

ARNOVE, Robert F., and TORRES, Carlos Alberto (eds.). 1999. ComparativeEducation: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local. Maryland, USA: Rowman &Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 434 pp. ISBN 0 8476 8460 1 (cloth) 0 8476 8461 X (pbk.).

This substantial collection of work by leading scholars in the field of comparativeand international education is structured around a central thesis that “the workings ofa global economy and the increasing interconnectedness of societies pose problemsfor educational systems around the world” (p. 1). Although there are commonproblems, regional, national and local responses vary. Attention to the dialectic of

471


the global and the local is considered by the editors to be central to the ongoing projectof “reframing” comparative and international education.

Arnove identifies three principal dimensions to the field, the “scientific” dimen-sion (knowledge building), the “pragmatic” dimension (policy-orientated) and the“international” dimension (global understanding for peace). In response to argumentsfor closer linkages between the scientific dimension and the improvement of educa-tional policy and practice, this volume calls for the strengthening of relationshipsbetween all three dimensions of comparative and international education. This, Arnovesuggests, would “contribute to improved theory, policy and practice, and the condi-tions for greater equity in schooling and society that contribute to global peace andjustice” (p. 10).

The selection of contributions and their well integrated presentation reflect thishigh ideal. The first section of the volume includes essays about appropriate theoret-ical and methodological frameworks, the assumptions of international financial andtechnical assistance agencies, the changing roles of the nation state and social move-ments, and the question of culture and personal identity formation.

In The Triumph of Technocracy or The Collapse of Certainty? Welch argues thatthe simplistic critique of modernity evident in postmodern literature is not adequateand maintains that there is “much that may be salvaged from the detritus of moder-nity” (p. 42). Thus, postmodernism is seen as an unsatisfactory response to theshortcomings of modernist theories and, for Welch, postcolonialism is a “more solidstarting point” for comparative methodology (p. 43). This is a pertinent argumentthat holds much potential for the future of comparative and international research.

In a chapter entitled, The State, Social Movements and Educational Reform, Morrowand Torres note that the relationship between globalisation and education remains anemergent form of enquiry (p. 108). Most attention has been given to the homogenisingeffect of liberalisation, however, there is also scope for research on the “creoliza-tion” of culture, an opposite effect. Other avenues for research suggested by Morrowand Torres include the implications of globalisation for socialisation, citizenship anddemocracy.

Essays that examine global challenges to education systems and the “emancipa-tory potential of different reform efforts” (p. 11) are presented in the middle sectionof the book. There are chapters about equality of educational opportunity, genderand social movements, conceptions of decentralisation, non-formal education andliteracy programmes. The writers generally adopt a critical view towards contempo-rary neoliberal and neoconservative reforms that are considered to threaten thetraditional public role of education and the social mission of universities.

In the final section of the volume, writers examine how global trends and the con-vergence of education reform proposals plays out in different geographical regions.There are chapters on educational change in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East,the former republics of the Soviet Union, and Eastern and Central Europe. Each chapterhelpfully locates education in the historical, political and cultural setting of the region,revealing the importance and complexity of context for understanding educationalchange.

Overall this text covers a great deal of ground that will be valuable to both pro-fessional and academic audiences. The editors have succeeded in compiling a volumethat both explores the challenges of globalisation for decision-makers, and introducesstudents to some of the key debates. They convincingly show that the field of com-parative and international education is well placed to “study the dynamic interactionsbetween global trends and local responses” (p. 3).

Readers should, however, be warned that there is no happy ending to this volume.Instead of concluding with an editorial piece to tie up the loose ends, including perhapssome reflection on the “dialectic” itself, the last chapter is given to Samoff and is

472

provocatively entitled No Teacher Guide, No Textbooks, No Chairs: Contending withthe Crisis in African Education. The parting image of the book is thus one of Africaneducation systems struggling to catch up with “those who are ahead” (p. 428).Moreover, to cite Samoff, “scrambling to catch up always leaves those presumed tobe in front to determine where they, and thus everyone else, are going” (p. 428). Thisis, therefore, a challenging volume that well demonstrates the renewed vitality andpertinence of comparative and international research in times of intensified globali-sation. It is a volume that recognises the dilemmas of the international transfer ofeducational policies and practice – and a body of work that simultaneouslydemonstrates the important role that culture and context continue to play in botheducational research and educational development. As such this book makes asignificant and timely contribution to the rejuvenation of the field of comparativeand international education.

Graduate School of Education KEITH HOLMES and MICHAEL CROSSLEYUniversity of BristolUK

CROSSLEY, Michael, and VULLIAMY, Graham (eds.). 1997. QualitativeEducational Research in Developing Countries: Current Perspectives. New York:Garland. ISBN 0 8153 1494 9 (hbk only). Pp. xv + 299 + index.

This book has already become well known both in Western educational circles andalso in many developing countries. It deserves to be even more widely known as amajor contribution to the development of educational research expertise in developingcountries, especially in view of the current concern with local capacity building. Itoperates on two levels: it opens up the whole field of qualitative research in educa-tion in developing societies; and it sets out clearly, with case studies, some of theissues surrounding the methods used in qualitative research. It can be used as ahandbook for new researchers.

Recent years have seen a great growth of qualitative research. The reason for thisis only partly discussed here. There is a recognition that modern insights in develop-ment theory, especially participatory approaches, have contributed to this; but equallythere is some hesitation about equating participatory development with qualitativeresearch: participation is often encouraged also in quantitative research. For example,as the book implies, participatory action research by teachers (15–16), while beingimportant, can lead as easily to quantitative assessment of teacher-set goal achieve-ment as to an open-ended exploration of the unexpected impact of education on thelearners. Indeed, Preston argues strongly that the dualism implied in setting qualita-tive against quantitative is unhelpful; she detects “a growing reaction to the puritanismof much of the separatist debate. Accepting overarching common goals . . . means thatthere is complementarity of purpose and not conflict, regardless of method” (53).The editors do not fully agree with this.

The only reason given in this collection of essays for the growth of qualitativeresearch is the inadequacy of quantitative research. Adopting constructivist approachesrather than positivist assumptions will inevitably reveal increasing diversity ratherthan imposing universal conclusions. Qualitative research shows the viewpoint of theresearched (65) rather than just that of the researcher; it creates links between the localand external research agendas. It breaks what is called “the strictly linear cause-effectrelationship” (5). There is a hesitant acknowledgement of the links with the growthof post-modernist thinking in educational circles (which is perhaps why donor agencies

473


have been relatively slow to adopt qualitative approaches to research and evaluation,for donors are not friends of post-modernism); but there is even more hesitation toadmit that even in qualitative research, the questions are ultimately framed by theresearcher. And the need for statistical data for purposes of comparison is not fullyexplored here. Indeed at times the editors themselves can fall into positivist thinking,as for example when they suggest that “the success rate of aid-assisted educationalreform has not been encouraging” (page 11: but who says so? by what criteria? encour-aging to whom? This is surely a meta-narrative).

Throughout the book, the emphasis is on methods (and methodology). It is admittedthat “the adoption of qualitative methods does not itself constitute qualitative research.Rather, it is the commitment to the interpretative paradigm that is crucial . . . a recog-nition of multiple realities” (p. xi). But despite this, it is the methods which predom-inate. In the following chapters, each written by a practitioner and based on field workin countries as far apart as India, Pakistan, China, PNG, various countries in Africaincluding Lesotho, St Lucia and Belize, different methods are analysed and evalu-ated. There is something of a bias towards case studies, but the distinction between‘telling’ case studies and ‘typical case studies’ is not fully discussed.

There is also a recognition that the contents of the research will also change withqualitative approaches. The “unanticipated consequences of change” and “the chalkface realities of schooling”, it is argued, can best be explored by quantitative research.Whereas sociology and psychology and similar disciplines created the demand forquantitative research, the more recent emphasis on anthropology and ethnography isleading to more qualitative approaches.

And it is here that the book opens up so many fascinating questions – but neverexplores them fully. The question of power and influence in qualitative research ishinted at time and again but not discussed openly (the chapter by Dyer and Choksiraises it most). Why has qualitative research become such a demanding issue at thistime? Whose interests does it serve? This is mentioned in passing several times (e.g.pp 38, 50, 67) but it still lies on the table. The change of research questions whichthis approach brings with it is equally inconclusive. It has been said that quantitativeresearch ‘makes the measurable important’, whereas qualitative research tries to make‘the important measurable’. For example, in literacy education, instead of formalstatistics of course completers and drop outs, qualitative evaluation will try to assessthe many different uses to which the participants put their new skills, with all thatthat implies for value judgments by the researcher (is a sports magazine less worthyof reading than a booklet on ways of increasing income, a film or fashion magazinethan improving literature on health or nutrition?).

Preston raises the issue of how to render the findings of qualitative research intostatistical format. This is certainly one part of the process and an important one: mosteducational research in developing countries is funded by donors, and they need sta-tistics for political purposes. But beyond that, donors need to learn that the questionsthey are asking may not be the most important ones. For the values implicit in qual-itative research are mentioned several times but are not discussed in any meaningfulway in this text (again, Dyer and Choksi come nearest to this). When researching theimportance of any educational activity, the question is raised, ‘important to whom?’This book recognises that there is currently in educational research in the context ofdeveloping countries a search for local partners and a recognition that both bring muchto the research programme (although the book admits that in most such relationships,the local remains subordinate to the international; Western imperialism reigns evenin qualitative research). But there is relatively little discussion in the case studies ofthe role of the researched. One view of qualitative research is to see it as an inter-cultural activity, the encounter of two (or even more) very different cultures, with allthat that implies about power relationships. Aikman suggests that inter-culturality

474

means to share different lifeworlds more or less on an equality, and this would meanlearning on both sides. None of the case studies (so far as I can see) even tried to sharetheir findings with the researched.

It is in the nature of a good book that it raises fundamental issues and leaves thereaders with a great deal to think about. This book certainly does this, and it is highlyrecommended. For its value is far greater than simply a handbook of qualitativeresearch methods. It is a collection of field-based case studies which will certainlycontinue to be used in any discussion of these more fundamental issues surroundingqualitative research. It will undoubtedly lead on to yet fuller explorations of the impli-cations of such research in education in developing societies. When it is next printed,it deserves a better index.

Uppingham, UK ALAN ROGERS

Shorter reviews

OECD. 2000. Motivating Students for Lifelong Learning. Paris: OECD. 198 pp. ISBN:92 64 17193 2.

This book makes a valuable contribution to answering an age-old education question:How to motivate and maintain teenagers’ interest in learning? Finding answers tothis query takes on new significance today, as education increasingly becomes a life-long process and a key to success in a rapidly changing world. Written under theresponsibility of the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI)and prepared by David Budge of The Times Educational Supplement, this bookexamines efforts being made in eight OECD countries to increase student motivationfor lifelong learning. It contains a case study for each of the eight countries, whichincludes information about the country context, motivation issues, policy approachesand a thorough evaluation of the innovation, effectiveness and replicability of thosepolicies. Not only does it contain detailed policy information about each country, italso provides a synthesis of the key issues related to motivating students for lifelonglearning complete with policy considerations. This book clearly explains both theimportance of motivation for lifelong learning and provides examples of possiblepolicy approaches. This timely book helps provide policy solutions to an increas-ingly important education issue.

CARNOY, Martin. 1999. Globalization and Educational Reform: What Planners Needto Know. Fundamentals of Educational Planning, Vol. 63. Paris: UNESCO/IIEP. 96pp. ISBN: 92 803 1192 1.

This timely book about the impact of globalization on education provides a clear expla-nation about how education will be even more important for future economic andsocial development than in the past. Globalization, however, places most governmentsunder financial pressure to reduce spending on education. In the face of finance-drivenreforms (i.e. reduction in public spending on education) advocated by internationalagencies, such as the IMF and the World Bank, the author offers a strong counter-argument maintaining that knowledge, and therefore better educated citizens, is themost valuable commodity in the global economy. According to the author, the needs

475


of the global economy will leave governments with little choice but to invest morein education. Invaluable for anyone concerned about education in an increasingly glob-alized world.

McGINN, Noel, and WELSH Thomas. 1999. Decentralization of Education: Why,When, What and How? Fundamentals of Education Planning, Vol. 64. Paris:UNESCO/IIEP. 98 pp. ISBN: 92 803 1193 X.

This monograph is a useful handbook for policy-makers, educational planners andanyone interested in the decentralization of education. The authors provide readerswith an understandable overview of the reasons for decentralization, which educationdecisions should be relocated and the conditions necessary for decentralization. Themonograph also explores different forms of decentralization and the objectives eachdecentralization strategy fulfills. The authors provide new clarity and insights into oneof the most intensely debated topics in education today.

SCHUBERT, Jürgen. 1999. Mundtot: Nachkriegsbiographie eines nicht gewolltenBesatzserkindes. Frankfurt: VAS. 149 pp. ISBN: 3-88864-288-4.

The author of this moving book was born in 1946, the son of a German woman anda Russian soldier of the occupying army. Abandoned by his mother on the insistenceof her German husband, he was placed in a Catholic children’s home in Westphalia,where he was subjected to a stifling and highly authoritarian regime, often reinforcedby the administration of drugs and physical violence. “We only mean well for you”was an oft-repeated phrase. Schubert suffered not only from his mother’s rejection butalso from the belief that he had been conceived as a result of a rape. Only much laterdid he find out that his mother had entered willingly into the relationship with theRussian. Labelled as a backward child with no hope of training for a career, hemanaged somehow to retain a spark of belief in himself. After 15 years in the estab-lishment and various failed attempts to escape, he was finally rescued by his guardian,a baker, who arranged an apprenticeship for him in the bakery business. This eloquentbook is both an indictment of the educational system to which the author was sub-jected and a testimony to his courage and will to affirm his own humanity in the faceof inhuman circumstances.

476

Documents

OECD 2000. Literacy in the Information age: Final Report of the International Adult Literacy Survey