After 15 years in politics, Marie-Thérèse Geffroy created the National Agency for the Fight against Illiteracy (ANCLI) at the start of the 2000s.  A board-member of the Carla Bruni-Sarkozy Foundation,  she here sets out her views on the problem of illiteracy.

You have a higher teacher’s diploma in classical literature,  you were involved in politics, today you run the ANCLI… What does your work there consist of?

I always dreamed of running a bakery in San Diego!  I often wondered why … Perhaps – above and beyond my love of travel – it’s because I have always admired people who go out and make the things we need for our everyday lives,  and yet whose talents are so often overlooked.  Today when we are guiding youngsters through the school system, the choice of baker as a final career is far from most people’s thoughts  But actually  that shows a kind of discrimination against people who do not happen to have the top academic qualifications. For me, it is a real discrimination, and all forms of discrimination are to be opposed. People these days are put in boxes. But my view has always been that we have to look at everyone in exactly the same way, whatever their cultural level.  I was brought up by parents who were active in the Action Catholique movement.  I myself was in a Catholic youth movement (Jeunesse étudiante chrétienne).  I was always taught that everyone I meet is an equal.  Whoever it is.  Today I try to put that into practice. That is perhaps the reason why the problem of illiteracy has had such a profound effect on me.   I have always believed that one’s sense of ambition should be not just on one’s own behalf, but also on behalf of others: for others and with others.  So I got involved with various voluntary associations and then with the Gaullist movement, whose ideas I found chimed with my own.  This involvement led me to certain positions of authority. I was elected mayor of a district of Lyon, then a councillor in the Rhône-Alpes region.   These official responsibilities I carried out as far as I could in accordance with my inner convictions. That is why, when it became a question of forming alliances that for me were incompatible with my convictions (I mean with the far-right National Front),  I prefered to leave politics and turn to other activities and interests.

The ANLCI was founded at the end of the year 2000.  Before that, what existed as far as the fight against illiteracy was concerned?

There were a lot of things going on all over the place.   But there were no statistics; there was no organisation, no material. Father Joseph Wresinski (of the ATD Fourt World movement) was the first person to sound the alarm.  He was the first to say openly that here in France there were men and women living with illiteracy.   He made the point that these were people who had actually been through schooling, but still could not read, write or count.  However today  illiteracy has come to mean different things to different people. There is a confusion between the case on the one hand of ordinary people unable to cope with everyday challenges because they cannot read or write, and on the other hand of immigrants unable to speak French.  A lot of people working in the field treated illiteracy as a problem of learning French as a foreign language.  But you know in order to solve a problem, you’ve first got to define it properly. What being illiterate means is for example not being able to read your homework after school, or not being able to read health and safety instructions at work, or not being able to do a simple sum, or not being able to take out money from a cash-dispenser.

So where does one start?

To work out the range of a plan of action should be, you first need clear information: how many people are we talking about? Who are they? Where do they live? What do they do? You also need to define the mechanisms and the practices which will help overcome the problem and prevent it recurring.  This was what we were aiming at when we commissioned a nationwide survey from INSEE (the French national statistics office).  It was actually the first ever carried out in the field.  We wanted to find out more about the 3,100,000 people who are affected – yes, it is a pretty impressive number!  We then proposed dividing up the work among all the different actors who could make a contribution at the national level. We also called for regional action plans.  In addition – really so as not to waste time reinventing solutions which already existed – we engaged the help of large numbers of people already involved in tackling the problem on the ground.  This was in what we called the Permanent Forum on Best-Practice. Some 3,000 people are currently contributing.

So on the one hand there is the problem of skills loss, and on the other there is the problem of learning.

That’s right.  The problem is the belief some have that just because you have been through the school system you have therefore got all the skills at your command.  But we know that these skills can be eroded. They can even be forgotten.  Take the case of a person working in a production-line at an abattoir, or packing chicken.  It is a repetitive job in which reading and writing play absolutely no part. All the instructions come by word of mouth.  Let us imagine that this person has such a busy daily life that he or she never has occasion to open a book at home.  For any papers that have  to be filled out for the government, he or she relies on friends and relatives.  But then the day comes when new safety instructions at work are delivered in written form,  procedures change, and suddenly this person is in a position of extreme fragility and vulnerability as a result of their problem.  That said,  it is always possible to re-learn.  And the best way to re-learn is by using situations from work or everyday life.  That’s why in many sectors of the economy, as part of their on-going training programmes, companies have got schemes in which workers can re-learn or consolidate these vital skills without being made to feel like children the way they would if it was like going back to the classroom.

What are the different bodies  involved in the fight against illiteracy?

People used to think that what was needed to resolve the problem was a single administrative system.  However we soon realised that in order to overcome a phenomenon that is so diffuse across the whole of society, what is needed is in fact a multiplicity of different agencies acting in a coordinated fashion.  The fact that the people concerned by illiteracy are so diverse  – in age, life situation, geographical location – means you cannot just have one single agency.  How could a single organisation cope all at once with the question of prevention in early childhood, with family-based initiatives, with school initiatives, with the fight against illiteracy in the work-place, with the problems of youngsters when they finish compulsory schooling, with the work going on in prisons?  If you had a single vast organisation like that, all the energy and all the resources would be used up just in running the thing!  On the other hand,  a structure dedicated to the fight against illiteracy, which is flexible, reactive, and which which can work in synergy with all the relevant players – ministries, socal partners, local government, associations – that is far more realistic. And that is what the ANLCI is trying to do: organising the work,  coordinating the contributions of the various partners, and suggesting new ideas and tools.  All the knowledge we have, we make swiftly and easily available so that everyone makes a real difference when they carry out their different functions.

There is often confusion between illiteracy and analphabetism (illettrisme and analphabétisme) , is there not?

L’analphabétisme – or in English illiteracy in the strict sense — refers to people who have never been to school.  There are 800 million men and above all women in that situation around the world.  The international community has developed learning campaigns for these people.  L’illettrisime in French  – or more properly in English ‘functional illiteracy’ — applies to people who have been to school  but never mastered the basic skills of reading, writing and numeracy.  It’s a problem today not just in developing countries but in the industrialised world too.

Looking at the illiteracy figures for France, more than half of those affected are actually in work.

Of the 3.1 million functionally illiterate people in France, 57 percent – in other words 1.8 million people – have a job.  They work in many different sectors of the economy, but above all cleaning, food processing, transport, waste-disposal.  They survive in their jobs by having all sorts of clever mechanisms to get round their problem.  However difficulties arise when they are offered the chance to go up a grade, or to undergo training.   Today in many branches of the economy there are agreements with the ANLCI under which these people are offered programmes for re-acquiring the basic skills – all done in the work-place so there is no sense of stigmatisation.

Often society seems to make its weakest members even weaker. Why do you think that is?

Wouldn’t it be good to have schools where boys or girls who were so minded were actually encouraged to become gardeners or jewellers or electricians .. or bakers, of course.  Where they were congratulated on such a decision, even though they had an excellent academic record.  The trouble with our society is that it is very academic and judges everyone by virtue of their diplomas.  There’s enormous prejudice against competences that lie outside the field of academic knowledge.  Though they act in good faith,  many of our intellectuals still don’t fully acknowledge or give the right importance to the knowledge of those who have not gone on to higher studies. Intellectual knowledge reigns supreme.  So obviously someone who is illiterate does all he or she can to hide it.  The illiterate suffer from a double penalty.  Because they are so uncomfortable with their problem, they are shy about expressing themselves, even though in fact they know how to do all sorts of thngs.  They do not dare to reveal their problem.  And yet it is perfectly possible for them to re-learn. The vital thing is to give them back their self-confidence. That way they use their energy and the resourcefulness that they regularly deploy to get round their difficulty in order to re-acquire the basic knowledge.

How is your work organised?

The ANLCI has its headquarters in Lyon. In each region, we rely on a local team, with a project leader at the préfecture (office representing central government).  There are also a dozen project leaders at national level.  We try to be as pragmatic as possible in a job that basically comes down to three words:  evaluate, organise, equip.

And who are the other players?

On our administrative board (we are a GIP – an association of public interest) we have representatives of all the relevant ministries: labour, employment, social affairs, education, defence, justice, urban affairs, local government, the social partners.  And then outside this decision-making body, we have  a vast advisory structure consisting of about 100 institutions and associations working in illiteracy prevention, as well as a scientific advisory group manned by researchers and experts in the field.  Our motto is basically this: work together to work better.  It may sound a little boy-scoutish, but it’s well-adapted to the circumstances.  The ministries, the local government departments and the social partners who sit on our committee share out the tasks between them.  We exist so that the problem of illiteracy forms a key part of their programmes and their policies.  A prefect (government representative) or a business leader cannot dedicate entire days of their working lives to the problem of illiteracy. They need key information.  What we would like is for every person in authority to devote two hours of his or her working life each year to find out about illiteracy.  If we could just achieve that, it would sweep away a lot of misunderstandings and save us a lot of time.

Does French society still create illiteracy?

Of course it does.  People are still sliding into illiteracy because their life situation, their health, their work keep them away from the written word.  However for several years now these people have had ever greater opportunities for finding a way out.  We know for example that 15 percent of unemployed people face functional illiteracy.  So the employment ministry has decided to give this statistic due attention.  The ministry of defence meanwhile does tests on 17 year-olds as part of the Defence Preparation Day (which has replaced national service). From its figures we know that 4.9 percent of young people are illliterate.  That’s why a policy of prevention is so vital to stop illiteracy putting down roots during childhood.  There have to be programmes in school of course, but also programmes inside the family from early childhood so the problem is nipped in the bud.

But school plays a central role, no?

Of course. School is fundamental. But when they leave school, not all youngsters are in the same situation.  There are big inequalities between different backgrounds.  School plays no part in the evening at home.  That is why associations like Lire c’est bon pour les bébés (Reading is good for babies), the AFEV, Lire et faire lire (Reading and getting to read) and many others help children who are in families with no access to the written word to get into reading via very simple actions: listening to stories,  reading a book out-loud,  going into a library.  Helping families is vital so that parents – and in particular those who are themselves living with illiteracy – can follow their children’s school work. Often the parents are scared rigid by the prospect of going to see a teacher.   Parents like that – the ones who are incapable of replying to the written messages they get from teachers – they have not thrown in the towel. But  they are afraid of feeling uncomfortable in an environment – school – of which they probably have bad memories.  So when other parents and associations help them to get their confidence back, they can start to take part in their children’s school life. Along with the High Commissioner for Active Solidarities against Poverty and for Youth, Martin Hirsch,  we have set up an experimental programme Activités éducatives familiales (Educational activities in the family).  There is also an array of low-cost initiatives being carried out in partnership with libraries, kindergardens and nursery schools.  What they have in common is the aim of bringing children into contact with books and the written word as early and as often as possible.

Do you have any enemies in your work, like for example television?

As far as television is concerned,  we are against the use of highbrow language on programmes which ought to be educational.  I was watching a researcher talking the other day on television. Incomprehensible.  She was using words that could only be understood by other experts.  She existed in her own little world of words.  She wanted to sound knowledgable.  But the way I see it, what counts if you have knowledge of a particular kind is being able to share it,  trying to make it interesting to other people by speaking in a manner that is clear and simple and accessible.   Another thing about television is that we do not have in France the right mix of oral and written language.  In Hong Kong there are morning programmes that help people work on their oral and written expression.  In Holland, as in many countries, films are shown in their original language with sub-titles.  That is a great way of getting the written word into people’s homes – and of learning a foreign language too.

Are you aware of globish – global English?  From Hanoi to Jakarta it’s used as a way of communicating by tens of millions of people in tourism, business and so on.

Yes, of course,  not least because one of my other roles is at an international association called Worldskills which promotes professional training and skills around the world.  There are 52 member countries.  There are five if us in the bureau, and we can’t each have an interpreter.  So with my Korean, Australian, Finnish and Canadian colleagues we talk together in English, or rather  in globish. We don’t have the same accent, but we understand each other.  If I can’t think of a word, I have my dictionary, or I invent one!  Paradoxically when I am attending a meeting here in France, I am often much less at ease because I am afraid people are judging my accent , or my mistakes in the language, just as if I was still at lycée.  In France we are so hung up about French. My generation was petrified.  For every little mistake, there had to be a comment.  My studies were in literature: French, Latin, Greek. I love the French language.  But we cannot forget that languages have to change.  Preserving our linguistic heritage and promoting the use of French must not impede the process of  making contact with people around the world who do not speak our tongue.

But isn’t the basic problem that there is not enough room for everyone?  The utopia of universal equality has no substance.  Young people can see that.  Inequality is inherent in our societies.

I agree.  We are not all equal. I obviously am not the equal of the president of the Republic. But what matters is the way in which people treat each other.  A look is all it takes to know if you exist or not in the eyes of another person.

What would you like a foundation like the Carla Bruni-Sarkozy Foundation to achieve?

We have fought hard to change long-held patterns of thought about illiteracy, to  stop the ghettoisation of people coping with illiteracy,  to put an end to the stigma, and to put in motion an organised, collective, calibrated programme of action.  But the reality of illiteracy is still not properly appreciated in France. There has been enormous progress in recent years, but we’ve got to keep going back on the attack to keep the problem to the fore.  If influential voices speak of the problem, if the right initiatives are publicised, then things can move much more quickly.  It’s in that way that the involvement of the Carla Bruni-Sarkozy Foundation could make a vital difference.

Interview with JC and LP