One of the important achievements of the IALS (1995) was establishment of an understanding of literacy as a spectrum of skill rather than a dichotomous set of skills. The question is no longer whether individuals can or can not read but rather how well they can read. According to the survey, a large percentage of adults in the participating countries lacked adequate literacy skills for living in a modern society and the global economy. The survey showed that within industrialized countries where an increasing premium is placed on literacy skills, a large number of people are disadvantaged by their limited literacy skills.

A critical understanding of IALS. The National Center for Education Statistics in the United States recently raised doubts about the statistical parameters used in analyzing that country's National Adult Literacy Survey, the survey upon which the statistical analysis used in the IALS (1995) was modeled. The NCES stated that the Response Probability of 80% used to determine literacy levels in IALS was too high (Sticht, 1999). A Response Probability of 50% "produces the least errors in predicting whether adults can or cannot perform literacy tasks across the full range of tasks" and would give a more reliable result in terms of fewer lucky guesses and less underestimation of skill levels. This would reduce significantly the percentage of Canadians in the lowest two literacy levels (p. 22). Uncertainty about interpretation of the published results makes it all the more important to analyze and understand the significance of the results from a phenomenological perspective.

A demographic analysis of the results also can reveal significant information. In Ontario in 1999, less than 4% of the population deemed in need of literacy upgrading was attending literacy programs. This was an obvious problem for literacy programs as their funding was dependent on number of participants. A demographic analysis of IALS statistics found that the majority of Ontario residents at the lowest literacy skill level were either over 55 years of age or were English-as-Second-Language (ESL) learners (Sussman, 2001). Since ESL learners were ineligible for literacy programs in Ontario and individuals over age 55 were unlikely to be seeking employment, literacy programs with an employment focus would be unlikely to attract or meet the needs of a large number of the individuals who functioned at the Level 1. Sussman's findings provide another argument for a contextual understanding of literacy skills and needs from the viewpoint of prospective learners.