[NLA] follow-up to a proposal to "save" the NIFL

[Nashansen@aol.com]

Unfortunately long to some -

NLA listserv readers:

The question before us is whether or not to "Save the NIFL" - with an option 
suggested by Andy Hartman of "Giving Back the Money".   

Christy Gullion asked for our response as NLA subscribers to the following:

<< "What problem are we trying to solve with Andy's proposal?" >>
 And
<< "Can people please explain why they feel the Institute has lost or ignored 
it's focus on adult literacy? What exactly has the Institute done/not done 
that precipitates these feelings?  Or, does this concern stem from the 
Administration's board nominees and/or the field's impression that this 
Administration doesn't care about adult literacy?" >>

Well, Christy, here is my opinion - while I am really questioning whether or 
not someone from such a small grassroots program should even be *speaking* to 
the issue at all, when the chances of any $$ ever even *reaching* this 
desolate area of the country, when larger literacy program administrators 
have hung back in the weeds [other than Deborah Yoho, bless your heart, Deb]. 
 But here goes:

What I feel has been "lost or ignored" is the *future* of adult literacy.  
The changing face of the NIFL in the the board of directors nominations is a 
concrete example that many have taken note of here.  That list shows no adult 
literacy involvement -none on the list.  I felt it was a huge red flag run up 
the flagpole!  It said to me the current Administration has other literacy 
interests.  The current Administration will continue to focus on childhood 
literacy alone - without nary lip service to adult needs.  In President 
Bush's 'No Child Left Behind' document there is not a single word about 
providing services for the non-reading and LD child's parents. It is not 
THERE, listserv subscribers!  I looked specifically for it!!  I don't care 
what people say - if it isn't THERE it is NOT going to happen that parents 
will receive instructional services too!!

Jon Randall wrote (7/16/2002 11:10 AM) that the NCL Executive Committee would 
be receiving a recommendation in a conference call this week.  Should this 
national organization vote on a strategy in their overall plan that responds 
to this current event related to the NIFL situation, it will impact 
allocations in the field.  Marsha Tait wrote on the NLA listserv on 7/15 that 
the NCL would be considering Andy's proposal.  My opinion is weighted by this 
event.

Alice Johnson wrote that it was "highly unlikely that the Senate will hold 
any hearings on the NIFL nominees."  What you see is what you get!  She 
continued writing,  "If the HELP Committee chooses to approve them, they will 
probably do it by voice vote, (i.e. consensus of the Senators who are 
present) at the end of a mark-up/committee meeting on a piece of unrelated 
legislation."  There's the political clout of this Administration.

George Demetrion pointed out (7/18/02  6:03:15 PM):  " ...  I think it's 
important to keep in mind WHO is leading this effort to challenge current 
directions, namely, two seasoned former NIFL staff members of senior rank 
status, both of whom had been in the midst complex and pragmatically-driven 
policy issues for over five years.  These are far from starry-eyed or 
quixotic idealists even though their position on this issue may seem radical 
(others say simply bold) to others."  George made a great many other good 
points in this email about which I agree.

The Institute staff has done an excellent job.  It is the Administration I 
have a problem with.  What we should be concerned about is what will occur 
with the new board.  What will the board look like once appointments are all 
finalized?

It was sad for me to read a well-written email (7/14/2002 10:33 PM) by Archie 
Willard that tells what the NIFL did for him in the past, assisting him as an 
adult becoming a very skilled leader.  It's sad that the leadership NIFL 
provided to adult learners will end.  It needn't end.  

These learner leaders formed the Value organization and became fire in the 
furnace for programs like the work accomplished in Illinois with the AMA and 
voting changes with the Iowa state government will no longer exist.  Just as 
*Archie* commended President Bush for his desire to end an "imperfect 
education system" such as he experienced, we should too.  But in no way 
should we think that this is the end-all for meeting the needs of all 
citizens.  Show us we are wrong, NIFL staff.  

The days of the "silent adult literacy movement in our country" *are* gone, 
just as Archie wrote.  Unfortunately nobody took up the baton where Senator 
Paul Simon and First Lady Barbara Bush left off.

I cannot agree with the opinion that the board members' background doesn't 
matter - that even those with K-3 literacy background can adequately lead 
programs containing several teaching approaches and resources of which they 
have little or no first-hand knowledge.  Yes, people like me can gain 
experience by tutoring and working directly with adult learners.  But folks!  
These board members don't even have adult learners seated on that board they 
can ask questions, much less have direct service experience with! 

Archie in his email encouraged the new board appointees to "take the time to 
get to know adult learners personally and see (them) as real people, not just 
facts and figures."  But how are they going to DO that.  Some say that in a 
year ONE learner could be seated when ONE one-year term vacates.  A year 
away!  I know Archie wants to think the best of these new board members, but 
can his vision happen with no means to "get to know" learners?

Christy mentioned that the mandates of their funding dictate literacy would 
be provided for all three groups (children, teens and adults).  So does this 
mean someplace there are three work plans being formulated that detail where 
one quarter of that money will be spent for adult programming?  And what 
specific plans are there?  Show us the plans.  Prove that our misgivings are 
totally incorrect.

I believe, like Andy Hartman wrote (7/17/2002 11:44 AM) that it may *sound* 
good that "the Reading First money 'float' the NIFL through a difficult time 
and allow the leadership and focus on adults to emerge at some later time 
when conditions are better."  Does that mean, Andy, with a different 
Administration?  The question is:  Is that realistic?  The sad part is there 
is a great, dedicated professional NIFL staff that will have to pick up the 
pieces of a poorly laid list of nominees in the meantime.  Thus the 
"difficult time" Andy mentioned.  Is that truly what the NIFL staff want?  Or 
will the resignations begin almost immediately after the appointments are 
finalized?  

I have to share an example for a moment here and speak from first hand 
experience -- "being supervised" by a volunteer board of directors that 
didn't have a clear vision of what I as their executive director faced 
meeting adult non-readers' needs.  They "didn't GET" how the techniques were 
fashioned to teach *adults* reading skills.  It was a constant struggle with 
these volunteers.  For my program, there isn't even a three-part program 
mission!  OUR program is strictly for adults!  "Aspiring adult learners" the 
mission proclaims!  The board members figured they were like all 
non-traditional adult students.

The long and the short of it was that my board of directors didn't get it!!  
Even with their employment positions in business and bank training 
departments, as an instructor in a nursing school, as head of a spec ed dept. 
in a high school, as a journalism major and news writer for the newspaper (to 
name a few of their "other life" positions), they did not understand the 
agency needs. 

Authorization to formulate *new* program opportunities that would 
aggressively move our adult program materials and teaching techniques forward 
was hard-fought.  The ease of decision-making changed from one year to the 
next, from one period of newly elected members of that board to the next.  

I'm personally glad my years of fire and brimstone are over -- for now, 
anyway.  Someone in the community told me a couple years ago they were 
surprised  - surprised that I "was still around since I had to work with 
*that* board."  I empathize with the NIFL staff for what's ahead for them.

No.  I predict that it is not a reality to think that a board heavily weighed 
in one of the three focus areas (children, teens and adults) will work 
satisfactorily with all three program area needs.  The problem we are trying 
to solve is addressing board appointments that don't truly represent all 
three groups being served.

Next issue:  Will this board impact NIFL staffing, as Andy predicts?  Will 
they as appointees of "this" Administration with the focus on children 
influence the hire of the next director?  I say, they will.  Sorrowfully, 
people have a tendency to place in positions of power people they know.  They 
recommend duplicates of themselves.  The problem we are trying to solve is 
"the future" of the NIFL .

President Bush (when Texas Governor) built a of childhood literacy program 
that he is now tapping for national positioning.  I predict those education 
experts will influence the future of NIFL staffing. 

If we indeed had advocates who could sustain an all-out, long-term campaign 
to influence from the inside out the development of NIFL program and 
leadership, it would be a different matter.  But we don't.  This NLA listserv 
find it difficult to reach consensus and to even *express* their opinions 
openly about A Topic!  To be inside the NIFL as watchdogs would not even be 
viable.

Andy concluded his email from the mile-high city by writing this:

<< "…No matter what we do or do not do …we should not let it quietly slide 
off our screen.  Too many adult literacy advocates worked too hard between 
1988 and 1991 to create this resource to let that happen.">>

And guess what, list lurkers???  **Money Talks**!!!  If we want to open the 
decision-makers' eyes to what is needed, moving money back will tell them the 
adult literacy organizations and advocates are DEAD SERIOUS!  It will say the 
organizations care about serving and teaching adults. It seems like a crazy 
solution to me, but is one that will have impact.

 Haven't we *all* fought too hard?  We've toughed it out and now let's not 
let the cowboy ride over the horizon into the sunset, hanging his head that 
his herd has mysteriously disappeared before his eyes. We need to honor the 
Archie Willard's, Harry I.'s and other learners who lurk here, waiting to see 
what we all will do on their behalf.  If we don't, we let them down instead.  

I feel we need to take a stand for the future of adult literacy.

Nancy Hansen
Executive Director
Sioux Falls Area Literacy Council
sfliteracy at mcleodusa.net
Nashansen at aol.com


_______________________________________________
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