What's the problem?

Although Terry Hyland (THES, May 2) complains that transferable skills cannot be defined, I think I can offer a few suggestions.

I would define communication skills as the ability to talk/write to an audience of a certain size (from one to several million) in such a way that his/her message is understood. Of course, this is context- dependent: being able to explain benefits to a client in a Citizen's Advice Bureau is different from making a television or radio programme but someone who can help an elderly man with a limited grasp of English understand what housing benefits he is entitled to should also be able to tell a young woman with a degree in English about family credit. Equally, a person who can make a television programme about benefit traps can, and would also be required to, make a programme about Britain's education system.

Problem-solving, I would suggest, starts with the identification of a perceived problem, analysis of possible causes (which may reveal an underlying different problem or even problems) and then hypothesising and testing potential solutions. Of course, this too will be context-dependent: preventing bottlenecks on a production line will involve a different underlying knowledge of systems and people from the knowledge needed to cure the common cold. However, someone who can suggest solutions to bottlenecks on a production line producing biscuits should be able to apply his/her problem-solving skills to one producing electric toasters.

I cannot see what Terry Hyland's problem is, but then I am not an academic. I am a freelance trainer using her transferable skills to teach a range of subjects from those needed to work in the media, such as research and writing, to job-hunting skills for unemployed graduates.

Doing this involves problem-solving - what to teach and how to teach it - plus communication skills: who is the audience and what is the best way to put it across? I thought this was what academics did for a living.

Kathy Chater

Meath Road, London E15