[NLA] No need for evidence, just get personal

[Thomas Sticht]

Some thoughts upon reading comments about the OERI and reduced
enrollments to improve quality of AELS services.
Tom Sticht

Regarding David Rosen's, John Coming's, and George Demetrion's comments
regarding changes at OERI. Perhaps NCAL and NCSALL could put together a
report that presents evidence showing that their research has improved
services for adult learners somewhere in some way. The evidence should
be of a nature that the R & D centers think the policy makers
considering changing OERI would find convincing. George might
demonstrate how those people he listed ( Dewey, Mezirow et al) showed
that they could design, develop, and implement an adult education
program teaching literacy or other important subject matter, that was
more effective in some ways than an existing program. Of the people in
his list, I am only familiar with Paulo Freire's work to actually
develop and deliver a literacy program. I don't recall seeing any
evidence demonstrating that his program was more effective than programs
others had developed. Perhaps such evidence exists but I am unaware of
it. 

Regarding Bob Bickerton's comments about reducing numbers served and
thereby improving quality of instruction for those fewer served,   I
think it would be important to know why the AELS lost over a million
enrollments in two years and whether this had any thing to do with
showing some improvements in programs in the AELS.  Having lost  large
numbers of enrollments, and then showing that adults peristed longer in
programs, does not actually demonstrate improvement in the quality of
instruction. It could be that sample bias was introduced and that those
adults who would have left early were not enrolled and those adults who
would have stayed longer actually did enroll. This would increase
average hours of instruction but not because those enrolled were staying
longer than they would have but because those who would have left early
and lowered the hours of instruction were not enrolled. I don't know if
this is the case, of course, because to my knowledge no one has yet put
out a report showing why so many adult enrollments were lost from the
AELS, nor am I knowledgeable about any reports from Massachusetts
demonstrating the efficacy of the use of the "reduced enrollments to
improve quality of service" strategy. 

Overall, it seems that if we are to make a good case for continued
support of research in adult education and literacy development, we need
to put forth some pretty convincing evidence that past research has made
some payoffs in improved services for adults. 

But I am likely wrong about the importance of trying to show that our R
& D has been effective in some ways. Probably there only has to be some
political contacts made to congress people in the states where research
centers are now located and then have these congress people go in and
fight for "their" R & D centers. Don't bother them with data, just get
personal! I've seen it work many times before.
_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org