Language, literacy and numeracy are necessary for greater workforce participation, productivity and social inclusion. Being able to measure the level of proficiency in these skills, and any changes in the level of skills, is important for getting a sense of how well language, literacy and numeracy programs are working. Two measurement tools used in Australia are the Adult Literacy and Life Skills (ALLS) survey and the Australian Core Skills Framework (ACSF). This paper outlines an NCVER study which will investigate whether it is possible to map the performance levels of the ALLS to the performance levels of the ACSF in order to gain more frequent information than is currently available about the literacy and numeracy progression of adult learners against national goals.
Ensuring all Australians have equal access to education has been a key driver of state and federal governments since the late 1980s. 'Lifting' skills of individuals through education, training and employment is an integral focus of public policies to redress disadvantage and improve social inclusion. Using Australian and international research, this At a glance explores how vocational education and training system responds to and fosters the social inclusion policy agenda.
Experiencing financial hardship is detrimental to both individuals and the community. For some, trying to break out of this situation can be extremely difficult as they may not have access to, or be lacking, the skills or resources that could help. However, education can help with research showing increasing the level of education and training is an effective means of reducing the likelihood of experiencing financial disadvantage. Using data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey this study looks at how having post-school qualifications may protect someone from falling into, and help get out of, financial disadvantage. Using four measures of financial disadvantage, the study finds that post-school qualifications to reduce the risk of experiencing financial disadvantage but to varying degrees.
When measuring the socioeconomic status of young people, the authors find that the SocioEconomic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) works well when reporting participation in higher education at aggregate levels, but performs very poorly when classifying individuals. This has policy implications because it means that programs directing resources to increase educational participation for those with low socioeconomic status may be doing so based on incorrect information. The data used come from the 2003 cohort of the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY), looking at young people aged 15 to 25 years.