Análisis de Datos

It is difficult to discuss succinctly the demographic profile of adults learning mathematics without compromising on either accuracy or meaning. This is partly because the sector is broad, encompassing casual attendees of a basic numeracy course, distance-learning students who might be excelling at degree level study and many others between. Even within one level of study there is much variation; Coben (2003) notes that “experience tells anyone who has ever worked with adults that there is no such thing as a generic adult learner of numeracy” (p.73). Further, “the whole concept of participation in such a large, diverse and complex sector is highly problematic” (Benn 1997, p.16). Adult learners are frequently part-time, often attending courses in a flexible way due to other demands on their

82

lives (Hamilton and Hillier 2006, p.51); many are known to drop in and out of formal provision, responding to pressures in such a way that belies an equation of persistence in learning with course completion (Crowther, MacLachlan and Tett 2010, pp.651-2; Carpentieri 2008a, p.20).

The historical and political nature of some of the issues surrounding adult learners might also contribute to a distorted picture of participation. ‘Basic skills’ courses, including numeracy courses, became much more numerous, available and recognised in the 1990s, leading Benn (1997) to claim that “returning to study is seen by more adults as natural, almost inevitable” (p.47). However, this rapid growth in provision and the new initiatives that took place under the ‘New Labour’ government (Hamilton and Hillier 2006) may have skewed some statistics of participation and certainly some measurements of success. There is also no uniform definition about what constitutes numeracy, as discussed above in section 1.1.1. Coben, in her review of numeracy-related research (2003), described the field of numeracy as “fast-developing, but under-researched, under- theorised and under-developed. It is a deeply contested concept which may be best considered as mathematical activity situated in its cultural and historical context.” (p.7) Similar levels of uncertainty are expressed by Hamilton and Hillier (2006) who claim that “there is more speculation and opinion about (adult learners)… than there are hard facts and figures” (pp.43-44). Whilst more recent research such as Coben et al. (2007) and an increasing number of longitudinal studies (Reder and Bynner 2009) have begun to address gaps in the research, our understanding of adult learners is still incomplete and reported results are subject to political interpretation as well as academic criticism. Recognition of these tensions does however support the conceptualisation of adult learners of

83

mathematics as existing at the intersection of multiple goals and roles of mathematics education.

The available data on adult learners of mathematics is thus partial and problematic: “we have too little (data) and… what we have is distributed in a fairly arbitrary fashion across issues and topics” (Coben 2003, p.110). Yet whilst it is difficult to draw out definitive demographic summaries, some data does exist concerning subgroups of adult learners within specific pieces of research, and this allows for some preliminary comparisons. For instance, Benn and Burton (1994) reported the demographic breakdown of a sample of learners (n=1471) on Access to Higher Education or ‘Access’ courses, and this is given below in tables 3.1a and 3.1b. ‘Access’ courses, which contain a mathematics requirement, are designed for adult returners who want to move on to higher education but lack the necessary qualifications.

Gender Percentage

Male 30.2 Female 68.1

Age Group Percentage

18-21 7.9 22-30 41.1 31-40 36.6 41-50 10.7

50+ 2.4

Tables 3.1a and 3.1b: Gender and Age of Learners on ‘Access’ courses in Research Sample (n=1471), Benn and Burton (1994)

84

These figures are markedly similar to the reported proportions for current ‘Access’ courses (QAA 2011) and thus appear to be loosely indicative of this subgroup. In a related paper (Benn and Burton 1993) the authors examine the previous educational history of their sample: 35% had no mathematics qualification upon joining the course, and a further 49% had a mathematics qualification that was no higher than a GCSE Grade D or equivalent (p.184).

More recent data on numeracy course participants is offered by Coben et al. (2007, p.16) and is reproduced below in tables 3.2a and 3.2b.

Gender Percentage

Male 46.1 Female 53.9

Age Group Percentage

16-19 40.5 20-29 19.9 30-39 18.7 40-49 12.1 50-59 4.9 Over 59 2.2

Tables 3.2a and 3.2b: Gender and Age of Learners on Adult Numeracy Courses, Research Sample (n=412), Coben et al. (2007)

The gender bias present in the ‘Access’ learners is still present but less pronounced; nonetheless, it is still a common finding in numeracy research, with Carpentieri (2008b) summarising that “women were better represented in numeracy courses than men” (p.3). It is also noteworthy that the numeracy

85

learners also exhibit a stronger positive skew with respect to age than the ‘Access’ learners.

Notwithstanding these findings, it is entirely possible that age and gender are not the most relevant features which might be utilised in constructing a better awareness of adult numeracy learners. The International Seminar on Adult Numeracy (CUFCO 1993, cited in Benn 1997, p.18) found that despite wide demographic differences between cohorts of numeracy learners in different countries, there was significant commonality in their social backgrounds. Most belonged to the ‘fringe of society’ and possessed a limited cultural fund. Whilst the authors at the time recognised that “this may in part be due to methodological differences in data collection… (it) may also reflect the particular position of mathematics as a gateway subject” (ibid., p.18). In this way, in order to understand more fully who the prodigals are and frame them against the global aims of this research, it is necessary to consider how the goals and roles of mathematics education might be understood by adult learners of mathematics.

3.1.2 Mathematics as a Gatekeeper: Evidence of the Goals and Roles of Adult