[AAACE-NLA] Meeting of the Minds Symposium II

[Andrea Wilder]

Hi Tom--

Thanks for your posting,

In research, we might start  with a controlled experiment re teaching 
methods.  Actually a randomized triaI,  with one group getting the 
treatment, and the other not.  Have  we done this?  Is it ethical?  
There may be other ideas for comparison groups.  I know there are 
hazards--how would you, for example, set this up?  Does the large 
sample  Purcell-Gates study satisfy research criteria? If so, are there 
other studies which do, also?

This seems such a morass, research-wise.

All the best for the holiday season,

Andrea


On Dec 23, 2006, at 7:34 PM, tsticht at znet.com wrote:

> Aaace-nla Colleagues:  Several of you have commented on my message 
> about how
> I am having difficulty finding  any research indicating that a decade 
> and a
> half of research by national centers and half a decade of increased
> accountability  by the National Reporting System has in fact brought 
> about
> improvements in learner persistence, learner gains, or any other 
> outcomes.
> I went on to ask, "Does anyone know of any such research?" So far, no 
> one
> has offered any references to such research.
>
> A number of actions have underscored the need for research that can
> demonstrate that it has brought about the improvements in practice 
> that it
> has stated is its purpose and for which funds have been allocated:
>
> (1) Attempts to drop funding for Even Start because some in the 
> government
> claimed that existing research said Even Start did not work. Indeed, I
> wrote and posted on the aaace-nla list a research note critical of the
> research on Even Start. I do not recall any other such postings on this
> list with similar critiques of the Even Start research methodology and 
> its
> unsound conclusions.
>
> (2) Dropping the search for What Works in adult literacy education 
> from the
> projected projects of the What Works Clearinghouse, presumably because 
> it
> could not find any research that met its criteria for demonstrating 
> What
> Works in a scientifically satisfying manner.
>
> (3) The decision to not fund another national research center in adult
> literacy education on the part of the Institute for Educational 
> Science.
> Perhaps the failure to find past research in this field sufficiently
> satisfactory may have entered into this decision. I don't know.
>
> (4) The decision by the federal adult education office to implement the
> National Reporting System which resulted in the loss of some 1 million 
> or
> more enrollments per year and the mandatory use of standardized tests 
> which
> the NRS itself admitted were not comparable, but are nonetheless 
> approved
> for measuring progress through the same levels of learning.
>
> (5) The decision by the Bush administration to ask for a 63 percent 
> cut in
> funding for the Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) because it
> thought it was not working well. Though this was fought by those in the
> leadership of the adult education and literacy field, and overturned on
> both methodological and political grounds, it underscores the need for
> convincing research providing support for the AELS.
>
> (6) Statements in magazines and newspapers by prominent columnists
> repeatedly state that adults with low literacy are of low intelligence 
> or
> low aptitude or have bad genes and nothing much can be done about it; 
> in
> 2000 a major philanthropist decided to give $100 million to children's
> literacy education because, according to the news article, both the
> philanthropist and "experts" say nothing much can be done about adult
> literacy problems.
>
> I have repeatedly called for greater support for research in adult 
> literacy
> education. I have noted that the Department of Defense annually spends 
> some
> $100 million dollars in adult education, training, and related 
> personnel
> activities and that is way beyond what has been provided for adult
> education and literacy development research for the entire nation.
>
> So having advocated for over 30 years for research for adult literacy
> education, it is disappointing to me when I am unable to find that 15 
> years
> of such research has seemingly not resulted in research demonstrating 
> that
> it has improved adult literacy education in some way(s).  I guess 
> members
> of this list also do not know about research that has resulted in
> demonstrable improvements in adult education and literacy practice, or 
> if
> they do perhaps they just do not want to reference it here on the list
> because I have not seen any such postings in response to my repeated
> requests for such information.
>
> All this leaves me deeply disappointed (but not cynical as George 
> stated). I
> still have a lot of faith in well trained and talented research 
> scientists.
> I hope that the federal government, or perhaps some private foundation 
> will
> provide the funding for such researchers to demonstrate the great 
> value of
> the Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) in bringing about
> improvements in adult's learning, improvements in multiple outcomes 
> such as
> health, community participation,  and the intergenerational transfer of
> literacy from parents to their children. I still believe that one of 
> the
> best investments we can make for the education of children is an 
> investment
> in the education of adults. We need a Multiple Life Cycles education 
> policy.
> I will argue for this at greater length at the National Family Literacy
> Conference March 4th in Orlando. Perhaps I'll see you there!
>
> Tom Sticht
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>