[NLA] Low Expectations for Adult Learners (longer)

[Thomas Sticht]

Research Note           October 9, 2002

Thomas G. Sticht
International Consultant in Adult Education

Why Such Low Expectations for Adult Learners in the Adult Education and
Literacy System (AELS) of the United States?

This year the U. S. Department of Education released the first report on
the use of an early version of the National Reporting System (NRS) to
obtain performance data from the states about the Adult Education and
Literacy System (AELS) of the United States, that is, those programs that
receive some funding from the State Grants of the Adult Education and
Family Literacy Act of 1998. . Called, "Adult Education and Family
Literacy Act, Report to Congress on State Performance, Program Year
1999-2000", the report is available on the Education Department’s Web site
at: www.ed.gov/offices/OVAE.

Performance Indicators for Learning

The AEFLA calls for states to report on "Demonstrated improvements in the
literacy skill levels in reading, writing and speaking English, numeracy,
problem-solving, English language acquisition, and other literacy skills."
In the present report, states provided data on what their targets for
achievement were and what their actual achievements were for each of seven
levels of literacy, three for adult basic education and four for ESOL.

In examining the targets for achievement, I was struck by how low the
targets were. For instance the lowest level of ABE proficiency target is
defined as:  "The percentage of adults enrolled at the Beginning Literacy
level who acquired the basic skills (validated by standardized assessment)
needed to complete that level (1999-2000)." Averaged across all fifty
states, the average target for achievement by the least able adult
learners was 22 percent . In other words, the average expectation of the
fifty states was that some 78 percent of the least literate adults would
not acquire the basic skills needed to complete the most basic level of
learning.

In some states, the expectations for learning at the lowest level were
dismayingly low. Three states projected that less than 10 percent of
adults would acquire the skills of the lowest level of literacy.
Astonishingly, Hawaii projected that just 5 percent, Nevada 6 percent, and
Iowa just 8 percent of the adult learners at the lowest level of literacy
would acquire the basic skills needed to complete that level. Actual
levels of achievement were Hawaii 2 percent (!), Nevada 30 percent, and
Iowa 15 percent, with an average achievement of 15.67 percent. Notice here
the large difference between actual achievements for Hawaii and Nevada.

Eleven states gave targets in the range of 10-14 percent. Arizona’s target
(T) was 10 percent and it achieved (A) 37 percent; Arkansas T=10, A=27,
California T=13, A=13, Florida T=13,A=25,Indiana T=14,A=25, Missouri
T=11,A=24, New Hampshire T=11, A=13, N. Carolina T=12, A=54, S. Dakota
T=14, A=35, Texas T=12, A=12. The average achievement for the eleven
states was 26.36, ten points below the national average. As a standout, N.
Carolina, which expected only 12 percent to achieve the skills of the
lowest level of literacy, actually reported an achievement level of 54
percent, well above the national average of 36 percent achievement for the
lowest ABE level.

At the high end of expectations and achievements, Alaska set its target at
42 percent and achieved 64 percent. Ohio was T=30, A=65, Delaware T=43,
A=63. At the top of the targets for achievement was Utah, with a target of
74 percent. And while its achievement was high, at 67 percent, it was
below the state’s target. But all these states with higher targets
achieved well above the national achievement of 36 percent.

At the national level, for the three ABE levels, average targets for the
lowest, intermediate, and highest literacy levels were 22, 24 and 27
percent and average actual achievements were 36, 42, and 44 percent. For
the four ESOL levels, average targets were from the lowest ESOL level to
the highest level, 22, 25, 28, and 27 percent, while actual achievements
were 39, 40, 43, 38 percent. Across all performance levels, it was
expected that anywhere from 73 to 78 percent of adults at a given level
would not achieve the basic skills needed to complete that level.

Is Low Achievement A Self-fulfilling Prophecy?

Over all fifty states, for the lowest ABE level, there was a positive
correlation of +.38 between the target and actual achievement levels,
indicating that as a general trend,  as the state’s target’s for
achievement went up, actual achievement went up.

These data raise some serious questions. Why are there such wide
disparities in targets and achievements among the fifty states?  Why do so
many states have such low expectations for their least able ABE learners?
Why do those states with higher expectations for the least literate, as
indicated by their relatively high target scores, actually achieve better
than the states with the lowest targets? Why do average expectations and
achievements go up from the lowest to the higher levels of performance?

Averaged over the national average data, the overall average target for
achieving the skills at one of the seven levels was 25 percent, and the
average actual achievement was 40 percent. This indicates that in the
AELS, 75 percent of the adults were, on average, not expected to achieve
the skills of a given level, and in actuality 60 percent did not.

Is there some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy at work here such that low
expectations lead to lower achievements? Is it possible that this
marginalized field serving marginalized adults suffers from an inferiority
complex that leads to low expectations and low achievements for its adult
learners?

Possibly if we could move the Adult Education and Literacy System of the
United States from the margins to the mainstream of publicly supported
education, and recognize it and fund it at levels comparable to mainstream
public education, we could find the psychological, financial, and material
resources to overcome any inferiority complex and hold up high
expectations and reach high levels of achievement for our nation’s under
served and undereducated adults.

In this regard, it might be especially useful to look at states like Utah
to find out why they have such high expectations and how they reach
achievements that go along with such expectations, particularly for our
least able adult learners. There may be some power of positive thinking in
these states that can help the entire system reach new levels of hope and
achievement.











_______________________________________________
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