[NLA] The Fall From the Summit of 2000 Continues

[Catherine B. King]

Hello Nancy and Tom, et al:

The experts are, indeed, our adults and our 
teachers.  They are the one's to say whether our 
programs "work."

Beyond anecdote are the assessments of the programs
by the individual adults who attend them and the teachers
and administrators who develop and watch-over them.  
Their judgments about what "works" are not anecdotal or 
sentimental but are a developed body of facts drawn from 
mounting evidence, critically corrected again and again, 
applied individually and accumulated one at a time.   But 
from what I can tell, who's listening to them?  Isn't this kind 
of evidence ruled out of court as "non-expert"?  

Also, if we have problems with recruitment of a group
of people who we know needs help, then perhaps
it is, in part, because adults have little or no voice in the 
programs' development.  Further, perhaps if our
adults were invited into the process, they would
get a sense that it's **of-for-by** them and not of-for-by
experts, administrators or policy makers as it is
fastly coming to be in AE as well as in K-12.

Peter McLaren talks about "corporate colonization"
where some corporations work beyond and through 
governments to manipulate the polity for their own 
narrow bottom-line purposes.  

Perhaps the pattern of power relations in colonization 
can also be applied to the idea of "experts" and policy 
makers "speaking" for and above adults who are, in
fact, viable members of a democracy, as if adults were 
lab rats ("scientists") and as if education of adults is a
subset of welfare (policy-makers--Bush mentioned adult 
education in a talk this week--AE was spoken of in the 
same breath with welfare recipients--welfare is being 
phased out, and AE is connected with preparing people 
to work--so they don't need it once they have a job?).

Perhaps the perceived gap in identifying expertly given
evidence for adult education programs exists in the perceivers,
in their inadequate views, and in their naive expectations--
and not because adult education programs are inadequate 
or staffed by non-experts. Perhaps it's but because we are 
sourcing evidence in the wrong places and defining evidence 
in the wrong way--on an old and inadequate model based
on non-conscious data--and, further, that this wrong-headed 
view as a general program form is itself affecting the "buy-in" 
of adults who need and want continued education in a
democracy that needs the same thing that they want--their
voices?

You think, maybe?  "NIFL demoted from leader to
pipeline"?

Regards,

Catherine King

-- Original Message ----- 
From: Thomas Sticht <tsticht at aznet.net>
To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Cc: <tsticht at aznet.net>
Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 4:40 PM
Subject: [NLA] The Fall From the Summit of 2000 Continues


> Research Note 5-05-02
> Tom Sticht
> 
> The Fall From the Summit of 2000 Continues:
> NIFL Demoted From Leader to Pipeline
> 
> The Adult Education and Family Literacy Act of 1998, Section 242 states
> that "the purpose of this section is to establish a National Institute
> for Literacy that
> (1) provides national leadership regarding literacy;
> (2)  coordinates literacy services and policy; and
> (3) serves as a national resource for adult education and literacy
> programs."
> 
> In keeping with the law, the Home Page of the National Institute for
> Literacy used to say, "
> "The National Institute for Literacy (NIFL) is an independent federal
> organization leading the national effort toward a fully literate nation
> in the 21st century."
> 
> On a visit to the NIFL Home Page on Sunday, May 5th, 2002, I noticed
> that the Home Page now states, "The National Institute for Literacy
> (NIFL) is a federal organization that shares information about literacy
> and supports the development of high-quality literacy services so all
> Americans can develop essential basic skills." 
> 
> Notice that the idea of being an "independent" federal organization is
> gone. Now it seems that the NIFL is considered as just another federal
> organization. This suggests to me that the NIFL is no longer considered
> as being "independent" in any sense and is now under the strong control
> of the Executive branch and has been commandeered to simply carry out
> the wishes of the present administration. Consistent with this idea on
> the present Home Page there is no statement about "leading the national
> effort.". In fact, I couldn't find any comment on the web site
> indicating that the NIFL offers any leadership regarding literacy.
> Instead, at the "About NIFL" web page, under a section called "Primary
> activities include", it starts off with: 
> 
> "NIFL acts as a policy information pipeline between the literacy field
> and federal and state lawmakers. Through briefings, one-on-one meetings,
> and other activities, NIFL serves as a resource to lawmakers responsible
> for determining policy and funding issues related to adult education and
> literacy. NIFL also keeps the literacy field informed of federal
> legislative developments through regular publications called Policy
> Updates and periodic analyses of literacy policy and implementation
> issues affecting the states."
> 
> So, since the 1998 law, and apparently contrary to that law's intended
> purpose for the NIFL, the present administration has transformed the
> NIFL from an independent or at least semi-independent federal agency
> providing leadership for the literacy field, to being regarded as simply
> another federal organization whose primary activity is to act as a
> resource to the administration providing a policy information "pipeline"
> between federal and state lawmakers and the literacy field. 
> 
> A visit to the present NIFL web pages also reveals that, although the
> NIFL was originally established to promote adult literacy education, it
> is now apparent that references to adult literacy have been reduced, and
> though there are still several activities for adult literacy education,
> the Home Page and About NIFL page narratives do not emphasize adult
> literacy. This reduction in the focus of the NIFL upon adult literacy
> education has been previously noted by messages posted on the National
> Literacy Advocates internet list that point out that the new advisory
> board nominated by the President for the NIFL includes those whose work
> has focused upon childhood literacy development and does not include
> anyone whose primary field of work has been adult literacy education.
> 
> The reduction of attention to adult literacy education is also
> noticeable in the lack of references and links to the National Literacy
> Summit's Action Agenda for moving adult literacy from the margins to the
> mainstream of education. It was previously possible to reach the
> National Literacy Summit Initiative (NLSI) through the NIFL home page.
> Now it is not. This reinforces the idea that adult literacy has been
> de-emphasized as the NIFL has undergone a transformation from a
> semi-independent organization focussed upon adult literacy education to
> a tool of the present administration  to focus upon literacy development
> in childhood in furtherance of its program to Leave No Child Behind.   
> 
> Along with the President's lack of a request for any more funds for
> adult education and literacy for fiscal year 2003 than were available
> for fiscal year 2002, there is also the lack of any apparent movement in
> the National Literacy Summit Initiative (NLSI)  Action Agenda
> discernable on the National Literacy Coalition's web pages at the
> present time. Last year I commented on what was an apparent lack of
> progress on the NLSI on its first anniversary in 2001, and all of the
> foregoing seems to me to portend a further fall from the National
> Literacy Summit of 2000, when the second anniversary of the NLSI  comes
> around on International Literacy Day this September. 
> 
> It seems that if the NLSI Action Agenda is going to stimulate much
> action in the present administration and Congress, the NLSI will have to
> pump a lot more information through the NIFL pipeline to state and
> federal lawmakers than they have up to now. 
> 
> And they better pump fast. I'm beginning to think that with the current
> emphasis on scientific, evidence-based information about adult literacy
> education, and the apparent lack of such information in the adult
> literacy field, the well of acceptable adult literacy information may be
> drying up!
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 

_______________________________________________
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