Scoping the Development of a Measure of Adults’ Numeracy (and Literacy) Practices

  • Diana CobenEmail author
  • Anne Alkema
Part of the ICME-13 Monographs book series (ICME13Mo)


We describe our research scoping the development of a measure of adults’ numeracy and literacy practices, focusing in particular on numeracy. Our ultimate aim is to develop a way of tracking changes in how adults use numeracy and literacy in the workplace, community and at home, to inform educational efforts. This is particularly important for numeracy because there is often a gap between the numeracy adults use in their daily lives and their performance on proficiency tests designed to measure their progress and assess their suitability for work or further training. We treat numeracy and literacy as both social practices and technical skills, against prevailing polarized positions in the academic and policy literature, and present a conceptual framework encompassing numeracy, reading, writing, speaking and listening practices, in real and virtual (digital) environments.


Adult Numeracy Literacy Practices Measure 


  1. ACE PDSG Learner Outcomes Working Group. (2013). ACE learners outcomes trial final project report. Wellington. Retrieved from
  2. Balatti, J., Black, S., & Falk, I. (2006). Reframing adult literacy and numeracy course outcomes: A social capital perspective. Adelaide SA. Retrieved from
  3. Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local literacies: Reading and writing in one community. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Black, S., Yasukawa, K., & Brown, T. (2013). Investigating the ‘Crisis’: Production workers’ literacy and numeracy practices. National Vocational Education and Training Research Program Research Report. Adelaide. Retrieved from
  5. Bynner, J., & Parsons, S. (1998). Use it or lose it? The impact of time out of work on literacy and numeracy skills. London: Basic Skills Agency.Google Scholar
  6. Cameron, M., Whatman, J., Potter, H., Brooking, K., Hipkins, R., Lander, J., … Madell, D. (2011). The transfer of literacy, language, and numeracy skills from learning programmes into the workplace. Wellington, NZ. Retrieved from
  7. Coben, D. (2000). Mathematics or common sense? Researching invisible mathematics through adults’ mathematics life histories. In D. Coben, J. O’Donoghue, & G. E. FitzSimons (Eds.), Perspectives on adults learning mathematics: Research and practice (pp. 53–66). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Coben, D. (2006). Social-cultural approach to adult numeracy: Issues for policy and practice. In L. Tett, M. Hamilton, & Y. Hillier (Eds.), Adult literacy, numeracy and language: Policy, practice and research (pp. 96–107). London: Open University Press/McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  9. Coben, D., Colwell, D., Macrae, S., Boaler, J., Brown, M., & Rhodes, V. (2003). Adult numeracy: Review of research and related literature. London. Retrieved from
  10. Coben, D., Miller-Reilly, B., Satherley, P., & Earle, D. (2016). Making the most of PIAAC: Preliminary investigation of adults’ numeracy practices through secondary analysis of the PIAAC dataset. Adults Learning Mathematics—An International Journal, 11(2), 27–40.Google Scholar
  11. Coben, D., & Weeks, K. W. (2014). Meeting the mathematical demands of the safety-critical workplace: Medication dosage calculation problem-solving for nursing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2), 253–270. Scholar
  12. Department of Labour. (2010). Upskilling partnership programme evaluation report. Wellington. Retrieved from,%20Evaluation%20report.pdf.
  13. Dixon, S., & Tuya, C. (2010). Workers with low literacy or numeracy skills: Characteristics, jobs and education and training patterns. Wellington. Retrieved from
  14. Earle, D. (2011). Literacy and numeracy at work. Skills, education and job tasks. Wellington, NZ. Retrieved from
  15. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156. Scholar
  16. Eraut, M. (2004). Transfer of knowledge between education and workplace settings. In H. Rainbird, H. Fuller, & H. Munro (Eds.), Workplace learning in context (pp. 201–221). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Evans, J. (1999). Building bridges: Reflections on the problem of transfer of learning in mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39, 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Evans, J. (2000). Adults’ mathematical thinking and emotions: A study of numerate practices. London: Routledge/Falmer, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  19. Gyarmati, D., Leckie, N., Dowie, M., Palameta, B., Taylor, S.-W. H., Dunn, E., et al. (2014a). UPSKILL: A credible test of workplace literacy and essential skills training summary report. Ottawa, Ontario. Retrieved from
  20. Gyarmati, D., Leckie, N., Dowie, M., Palameta, B., Taylor, S.-W. H., Dunn, E., et al. (2014b). UPSKILL: A credible test of workplace literacy and essential skills training. Technical report. Ottawa, Ontario. Retrieved from
  21. Heath, S. B. (1982). What no bedtime story means: Narrative skills at home and school. Language in Society, 11(1), 49–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hull, G., & Schultz, K. (2001). Literacy and learning out of school: A review of theory and research. Review of Educational Research, 71(4), 575–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hutchings, J., Yates, B., Isaacs, P., Whatman, J., & Bright, N. (2012). Hei Ara Ako Ki te Oranga: A model for measuring wellbeing outcomes from literacy programmes. Wellington. Retrieved from–hei-ara-ako-ki-te-oranga.pdf.
  24. Keeley, B. (2007). Human capital. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keogh, J., Maguire, T., & O’Donoghue, J. (2012). Mathematics in the workplace—Invisible to whom? In T. Maguire, J. J. Keogh, & J. O’Donoghue (Eds.), Mathematical eyes: A bridge between adults, the world and mathematics. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of Adults Learning Mathematics—A Research Forum (ALM) (pp. 228–237). Hosted by: The Institute of Technology Tallaght, Dublin, Ireland. Tallaght, June, 2011. Dublin: Institute of Technology Tallaght & Adults Learning Mathematics—A Research Forum (ALM).Google Scholar
  26. Lane, C. (2013a). Assessing skills of adult learners in 2011. Profiling skills and learning using the literacy and numeracy for adults assessment tool. Wellington. Retrieved from
  27. Lane, C. (2013b). Literacy and numeracy for adults assessment tool 2010-2012: Preliminary ethnic and age group analyses. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  28. Lane, C. (2014). Literacy and numeracy assessments of adult English language learners. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  29. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness and personality (M. J. Hall, Trans.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Merrifield, J., & McSkeane, L. (2005). Mapping the learning journey: NALA assessment framework for literacy and numeracy. Cork, Ireland. Retrieved from
  32. MOE, & MBIE. (2016). Skills in New Zealand and around the world: Survey of adult skills. Wellington. Retrieved from
  33. Murray, T. S., Kirsch, I. S., & Jenkins, L. B. (Eds.). (1998). Adult literacy in OECD countries. Technical report on the first International Adult Literacy Survey. Washington DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  34. Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). The visibility of meanings: Modelling the mathematics of banking. International Journal of Computers in Mathematics Learning, 1(1), 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. OECD. (2013). OECD skills outlook 2013: First results from the survey of adult skills. Paris. Retrieved from
  36. OECD Directorate for Education. (2009). International adult literacy and basic skills surveys in the OECD region. OECD Working Paper No. 26. Paris. Retrieved from
  37. Parsons, S., & Bynner, J. (2005). Does numeracy matter more? London: NRDC.Google Scholar
  38. Perry, K. (2012). What is literacy?—A critical overview of sociocultural perspectives. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 8(1), 50–71 [Online].Google Scholar
  39. Purcell-Gates, V., Degener, S. C., Jacobson, E., & Soler, M. (2000). Affecting change in literacy practices of adult learners: Impact of two dimensions of instruction. Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from
  40. Purcell-Gates, V., Degener, S. C., Jacobson, E., & Soler, M. (2002). Impact of authentic adult literacy instruction on adult literacy practices. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(1), 70–92. Scholar
  41. Purcell-Gates, V., Perry, K. H., & Briseño, A. (2011). Analyzing literacy practice: Grounded theory to model. Research in the Teaching of English, 45(4), 439–458.Google Scholar
  42. Reder, S. (1994). Practice-engagement theory: A sociocultural approach to literacy across languages and cultures. In B. Ferdman, R.-M. Weber, & A. G. Ramirez (Eds.), Literacy across languages and cultures (pp. 33–73). New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  43. Reder, S. (2008). The development of literacy and numeracy in adult life. In S. Reder & J. Bynner (Eds.), Tracking adult literacy and numeracy: Findings from longitudinal research (pp. 59–84). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Reder, S. (2009a). The development of literacy and numeracy in adult life. In S. Reder & J. Bynner (Eds.), Tracking adult literacy and numeracy: Findings from longitudinal research (pp. 59–84). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Reder, S. (2009b). Scaling up and moving in: Connecting social practices views to policies and programs in adult education. Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 17(1), 35–50.Google Scholar
  46. Reder, S. (2011). Some thoughts on IALS measurement validity, program impact, and logic models for policy development. Think paper. Paper presented at the Fall Institute 2011 IALS (International Adult Literacy Survey) Its Meaning and Impact for Policy and Practice, Banff, AB.
  47. Reder, S. (2012). Research brief. The longitudinal study of adult learning: Challenging assumptions. Montreal, Quebec. Retrieved from
  48. Reder, S. (2013). Lifelong and life-wide adult literacy development. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 39(2), 18–21.Google Scholar
  49. Schuller, T. (2001). The complementary roles of human and social capital. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 1, 89–106.Google Scholar
  50. Scottish Government. (2011). Adult literacies in Scotland 2020. Strategic guidance. Edinburgh. Retrieved from
  51. Sheehan-Holt, J., & Smith, C. (2000). Does basic skills education affect adults’ literacy proficiencies and reading practices? Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 226–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stewart, J. (2011). Extending the assessment of literacy as social practice. Adult Learner: The Irish Journal of Adult and Community Education, 41, 55.Google Scholar
  53. Sticht, T. G. (2013, October 14). Key PIAAC finding: The “Triple Helix” of literacy development. AAACE-NLA List. Retrieved from
  54. Street, B. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Street, B. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography and education. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  56. Street, B. (2000). Literacy events and literacy practices: Theory and practice in the new literacy studies. In K. Jones & M. Martin-Jones (Eds.), Multilingual literacies. Reading and writing different worlds (pp. 17–29). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  57. Street, B. (2003). What’s “new” in new literacy studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 77–91.Google Scholar
  58. Swain, J., Baker, E., Holder, D., Newmarch, B., & Coben, D. (2005). ‘Beyond the Daily Application’: Making numeracy teaching meaningful to adult learners. London: NRDC.Google Scholar
  59. Vaughan, K. (2008). Workplace learning: A literature review. Report prepared for Competenz. Wellington. Retrieved from
  60. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Waite, E., Evans, K., & Kersh, N. (2014). The challenge of establishing sustainable workplace ‘Skills for Life’ provision in the UK: Organisational ‘strategies’ and individual ‘tactics’. Journal of Education and Work, 27(2), 199–219. Scholar
  63. Young, S., Weeks, K. W., & Hutton, B. M. (2013). Safety in numbers 1: Essential numerical and scientific principles underpinning medication dosage calculation. Nurse Education in Practice, 13(2), e11–e22. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Heathrose ResearchWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations