[AAACE-NLA] Toward Theory Driven R & D

[David Rosen]

AAACE-NLA Colleagues,

On Jun 19, 2006, at 2:52 PM, tsticht at znet.com asked:

> Question #1: Since 1990 through 1995, a decade and a half of federally
> funded R & D in adult literacy education, has the quality of adult  
> literacy
> programs and services been improved on a nationwide basis (or at  
> any state
> or local basis for that matter)? If you think the answer is yes,  
> then what
> is the evidence for this conclusion?

To measure program quality, Tom, wouldn't we need an agreed-upon  
definition and measures of program quality?
Wouldn't we need a baseline measure for 1990 as well as periodic  
measures since then?
And wouldn't we need a federal government which provided funding for  
this?
Lacking these, I think the answer is that we don't know, nationally,  
if the quality of adult literacy programs has improved.

> Question #2: It has been suggested that it may take 20-30 years for  
> research
> findings to find their way into practice. Does anyone have the  
> historical
> view to point out how research from 20-30 years ago has finally  
> found its
> way into practice and has improved practice in some way?

It doesn't take 20-30 years.  In our field it takes somewhere between  
several months -- and never.  For example, in some parts of the  
country the findings from the Adult Reading Components study (ARCS) ,  
through workshops, training, study circles, and in other ways have  
now found their  way into practice.  Evidence of this can be seen in  
the recent discussion about the ARCS on the Special Topics discussion  
list.  In some cases this took only months to happen; in others, just  
a few years.  But, I doubt that these findings have found their way  
into widespread practice.  In our field, what finds its way into  
widespread practice is what commercial publishers sell to teachers,  
not research.

> Question #3: In your opinion, why has the federal government  
> decided to not
> fund a national center for research on adult education and literacy  
> beyond
> 2007?

It was a Congressional mistake, and I think the funding pretty much  
ends in 2006.  Our national research center "got rolled over with the  
oats" when all the research centers were reorganized.  But that this  
mistake hasn't yet been corrected is an indication that we haven't  
made adult literacy education matter enough to Congress. Either the  
loss has not yet sunk in for practitioners, or they don't value  
research enough, or they don't mind all that much that adult literacy  
doesn't matter to Congress.  I, for one, am very concerned about  
this, and am glad that the National Coalition for Literacy has made a  
national adult literacy research center a priority.   I would like to  
see every practitioner and adult learner who meets with a federal  
legislator have this as a top concern on their ask list -- right  
after increased funding for student services.

> I recall many years ago (1976) that when the new National Center  
> for the
> Study of Reading was founded in Illinois, the decision was based on  
> the
> fact that the proposal had  a strong theoretical point of view about
> reading (notably schema theory) that helped suggest hypotheses for  
> research
> and an integrating conceptual framework for synthesizing research  
> findings
> into a meaningful, coherent "story’ about reading development that  
> helped
> cohere a wide range of findings. Teachers and other educators were  
> better
> able to then integrate the research findings into their existing  
> knowledge
> bases.
>
> Such theory-driven research is more like a mystery story that has a  
> plot,
> development, and conclusion whereas general problem-driven approaches
> ("improve the system")like those of the exisitng and former federal  
> R & D
> centers is more like a talent show in which a succession of  
> unrelated acts
> occur, people are entertained for a while, but it doesn't add-up to  
> any
> coherent "story" that practitioners can comprehend and use to organize
> their practices.
>
>
> Question #4: Is there an integrating theoretical framework for adult
> literacy development that could lead to testable hypotheses and  
> help in the
> dissemination of findings through comprehensible narratives that  
> teachers
> and others could readily integrate into their existing knowledge  
> bases?
>
> Question#5; Would such a theory-driven proposal for a national R &  
> D center
> for adult literacy stand any chance of being funded by the federal
> government?

It might.  And it might help practitioners make the argument for why  
a national R&D Center is needed.

> Thomas G. Sticht
> International Consultant in Adult Education
> 2062 Valley View Blvd.
> El Cajon, CA 92019-2059
> Tel/fax: (619) 444-9133
> Email: Tsticht at aznet.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AAACE-NLA mailing list: AAACE-NLA at lists.literacytent.org
> http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/aaace-nla
> LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
> http://literacytent.org

David Rosen
DJRosen at theworld.com