Advertisement

ZDM

pp 1–12 | Cite as

Value and understanding of numeracy practices in German debt counselling from the perspective of professionals

  • Katharina AngermeierEmail author
  • Harald Ansen
Original Article
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

In dealing with over-indebtedness and poverty, numeracy appears necessary for affected persons, in order to use the scarce money available with foresight and to avoid financially negative decisions. However, numeracy as an essential part of (financial) basic education for adults has not yet been systematically taken into account in German debt counselling. Nor are the difficult conditions concerning over-indebted life situations considered sufficiently in theoretical models of numeracy or financial literacy. There is a lack of knowledge in adult mathematics education about the mathematical requirements in the context of over-indebtedness and the numeracy practices of persons affected. In this paper we therefore intend to clarify the understanding and significance of numeracy practices in over-indebted life situations from the perspective of German debt-counselling professionals. The empirical basis comprises qualitative data of two group interviews with debt-counselling professionals (n = 11). Amongst other things, our findings show the complexity of contextual factors in mathematical demands and numeracy practices in precarious living situations, which can help to develop current thinking on numeracy and financial literacy.

Keywords

Numeracy Practices Vulnerability Over-indebtedness Debt counselling 

Notes

References

  1. AG SBV (2018). Soziale Schuldnerberatung. Konzept. [Social Debt-Counselling. Concept]. Retrieved September 17, 2019 from https://www.agsbv.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/2018_04_03_Konzept-Soziale-Schuldnerberatung_AGSBV.pdf.
  2. Atkinson, A., & Messy, F. (2012). Measuring financial literacy: Results of the OECD/International Network on Financial Education (INFE) pilot study. Paris: OECD Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1787/5k9csfs90fr4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, K., Ecclestone, K., & Emmel, N. (2017). The many faces of vulnerability. Social Policy & Society,16(03), 497–510.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746416000610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chambers, R. (1989). Editorial introduction: Vulnerability, coping and policy. IDS Bulletin,20(2), 1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-5436.1989.mp20002001.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. European Commission (2008). Towards a common operational European definition of over-indebtedness. Retrieved May 14, 2019 from http://www.oee.fr/files/study_overindebtedness_en.pdf.
  6. Evans, J., Yasukawa, K., Mallows, D., & Creese, B. (2017). Numeracy skills and the numerate environment: Affordance, opportunities, supports and demands. Adults Learning Mathematics International Journal,12(1), 17–26.Google Scholar
  7. Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Gal, I., Grotlüschen, A., Tout, D., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Numeracy, adult education, and ‘vulnerable’ learners: A critical review of a neglected field. ZDMThe International Journal on Mathematics Education, 52(2), this issue.Google Scholar
  9. Geiger, V., Forgasz, H., & Goos, M. (2015a). A critical orientation to numeracy across the curriculum. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education,47(4), 611–624.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0648-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Forgasz, H. (2015b). A rich interpretation of numeracy for the 21st century. A survey of the state of the field. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education,47(4), 531–548.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0708-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gellert, U., & Jablonka, E. (2007). Mathematisation and demathematisation. Social, philosophical and educational ramifications. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gitterman, A., & Germain, C. B. (2008). The life model of social work practice. Advances in theory and practice. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Huber, G. (2018). Lernen. [Learning.] In H.-U. Otto, H. Thiersch, R. Treptow & H. Ziegler (Eds.), Handbuch Soziale Arbeit [Compendium of Social Work] (pp. 943–955). München: Ernst Reinhardt Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Hurrelmann, K., & Bauer, U. (2015). Einführung in die Sozialisationstheorie. Das Modell der produktiven Realitätsverarbeitung. Weinheim: Beltz. English Edition: Hurrelmann, K. & Bauer, U. (2018). Socialisation during the life course. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Jayaraman, J. D., Jambunathan, S., & Counselman, K. (2018). The connection between financial literacy and numeracy: A case study from India. Numeracy,11(2), 5.  https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.11.2.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kuckartz, U. (2018). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. [Qualitative content analysis. Methods, practice, computer support]. Weinheim, Basel.Google Scholar
  17. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Loibl, C. (2016). Ansätze der Überschuldungsprävention aus verhaltensökonomischer Sicht. [Over-indebtedness prevention approaches from a behavioural economics perspective]. In Boniversum Consumer Information & Creditforum Wirtschaftsforschung (Ed.), SchuldnerAtlas Deutschland 2016. Überschuldung von Verbrauchern. [Debtor Atlas Germany 2016. Over-indebtedness of consumers] (pp. 43–53). Neuss.Google Scholar
  19. Lusardi, A. (2012). Numeracy, financial literacy, and financial decision-making. Numeracy 5 (1)  https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.5.1.
  20. Lusardi, A., & Tufano, P. (2015). Debt literacy, financial experiences, and overindebtedness. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance,14(04), 332–368.  https://doi.org/10.3386/w14808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. OECD (2016). G20/OECD INFE Core competencies framework on financial literacy for adults. Retrieved May 14, 2018 from http://www.oecd.org/daf/fin/financial-education/Core-Competencies-Framework-Adults.pdf.
  22. OECD (2017). G20/OECD INFE report on adult financial literacy in G20 countries. Retrieved May 14, 2019 from http://www.oecd.org/finance/g20-oecd-infe-report-adult-financial-literacy-in-g20-countries.htm.
  23. Payne, M. (2014). Modern social work theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. PIAAC Numeracy Expert Group (2009). PIAAC numeracy. A conceptual framework. OECD Education Working Paper, 35. Paris: OECD Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1787/220337421165.
  25. Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder in the Federal Republic of Germany (2017). The Education System in the Federal Republic of Germany 2015/2016. Retrieved September 16, 2019 from https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/pdf/Eurydice/Bildungswesen-engl-pdfs/dossier_en_ebook.pdf.
  26. Shah, A. K., Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2012). Some consequences of having too little. Science,338(6107), 682–685.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1222426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ulbricht, D., & Peters, S. (2018). iff-Überschuldungsreport 2018. Überschuldung in Deutschland. [iff Overindebtedness Report 2018: Overindebtedness in Germany]. iff - institut für finanzdienstleistungen. Hamburg. Retrieved May 14, 2018 from https://www.iff-ueberschuldungsreport.de/media.php?id=5331l.
  28. Yasukawa, K., Rogers, A., Jackson, K., & Street, B. (2018). Numeracy as social practice. Global and local perspectives. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hamburg University of Applied ScienceHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations