Quality Control — The government should take the lead in ensuring the quality of skills training provision by supporting the ongoing professional development of teachers and trainers, curriculum and resource development, evaluation approaches and strategies for analyzing the training needs of particular employers and/or sectors. (Gray 2006: 3, 11; Cedefop 2009: 101; Murray et al 2008: 73; Rosen 2008: 28-30; Goldenberg 2006: 26-7). Recent recommendations in Canada and the US include the development of national accreditation standards and “certification” for training providers (Saunders 2007: 5; Parker 2007: 7-78).
Access — The government can help by ensuring that learning opportunities are accessible to all, including individuals in remote areas, the disadvantaged and at-risk populations (Gray 2006: 3, 11; Murray et al 2008: 73; Goldenberg 2006: 26-7). This issue also touches SMEs, which might not be able to take advantage of available training information, options and supports because constraints of limited time, money and personnel are more acute for these employers (Gray 2006: 18).
There is universal agreement in the literature that partnerships — between and among government departments and agencies, employers, sectors, unions, providers and community groups — are “crucial” to workplace literacy and essential skills programs (Gray 2006: 4, 84; Saunders 2009: 7; Murray et al 2008: 72-3; Bélanger and Robitaille 2008: 67; CCL 2007; WfDB 2007: 21; CAEL 2006: 89-102; Goldenberg 2006: v; Saunders 2007: 6-7). The role of employers is particularly important. Their awareness, attitudes, commitment and support are key ingredients to any workplace skills training drive.
From this perspective, the “low” commitment of employers to workplace literacy training, for instance in Canada (Folinsbee 2007: 22; Bailey 2007: 6; Lowe 2007: viii; Plett 2007: 69-70; Saunders 2007: 1; CCL 2007a: 14), New Zealand (Gray and Sutton 2007: iii-iv; Benseman and Sutton 2007: 8) and parts of Europe (Cedefop 2009: 49), is a serious challenge that needs to be addressed. Complicating the task is that employers who do invest in training still tend to focus on their high-skilled workforce and not the less educated in need of literacy and essential skills support (Myers and de Broucker 2006: v). The less skilled, many employers seem to believe, should be the state’s responsibility (Gray 2006: 13; Goldenberg 2006: iii, vi). This does not seem to have changed appreciably over the years.
The literature highlights several important and widely encountered barriers to greater employer investment in workplace literacy, including: a lack of awareness about the connection between low literacy in the workplace, job performance, productivity; limited time, resources and personnel to seek out relevant information about options (funding, programs, providers); management attitudes — lack of a learning or training culture within the enterprise; absence of champions within enterprises, sectors and professional business organizations; complexity of the training landscape — too many agencies and bodies, regulations, paperwork etc… (Gray 2006: 3-4; Cededfop 2009: 49; Plett 2007: 69-70; CCL 2007a: 14; Merrifield 2007: 28; Gray and Sutton 2007: iii; Benseman and Sutton 2007: 4-5).