ODI report identifies flaws in Government's data literacy approach
The UK Government needs to improve its approach to data literacy, focusing on consistency and distinctions between other skills, according to a new report by the Open Data Institute.
The report, titled 'Data literacy and the UK government' intends to map the Government's efforts on data literacy, as part of the Open Data Institute's (ODI) work in support of the UK National Data Strategy (NDS).
One of the top findings is that, while the Government recognises the need for widespread data literacy, it lacks a consistent definition of the term. When combined with the wide range of subjects that 'data literacy' encompasses, this can make it challenging to judge understanding.
Secondly, it highlights that there is no clear distinction between data literacy and related skills such as digital-, media-, AI-, statistical-, tech- and information literacy, all of which appear in government documents and discussions.
The report highlights the risk of fragmentation and duplication of responsibility for data across various agencies in and around government, as multiple organisations are accountable for 'data literacy' - and, again, there is a lack of a consistent definition.
The report welcomes improvement in data capabilities within the civil service, citing the Government Skills and Curriculum Unit (GSCU) and numerous data-related functions and professions that are producing and consolidating training resources.
Despite that, it has also observed a fall in activity and alignment, particularly with the Government's internal activities. In particular, the ODI laments that the fact that most efforts focus on the individual as employee, with an emphasis on workforce benefits, rather than the individual as citizen and the benefits to them within society.
While acknowledging some promising moves by the Government, the report notes that the there is still a lot of work to do to address key challenges.
The first is to develop precise definitions, which the ODI believes its Data Skills Framework and upcoming ODI Levels of Data Literacy could help to shape.
The Government must also address the risk of duplication, fragmentation, and a lack of understanding of different activities across departments.
Finally, work must be done to address the disconnect between the Government's internal activities and its public-facing data literacy efforts.
The study proposes that 'more transparency about the resources available, both inside government and to the general public, might be of significant advantage and help government's aspirations for data literacy for the general public and workforce.'