[NLA] Low Expectations for Adult Learners (longer)

[Sioux Falls Area Literacy Council]

I wish to BRIEFLY confirm what Art is saying in this email.

My opinion is that his comments about Tom's analysis applies *especially* to
the smallest of literacy programs where the standardized assessments have
absolutely nothing to do with the needs of the learners entering at the
lowest of literacy levels.  In the programs where assessments are done to
gauge a starting point for GED studies, *perhaps* they find the tools
helpful, but for programs like the one *I* administer - where not a one of
our New Readers / adult learners are here to study for a GED - the
assessment results mean absolutely nothing.

The measure of skills, just as Art proclaims:
> "...has absolutely nothing to do with student capabilities nor
> curriculum efficiency nor teacher qualifications.  It certainly does have
> something to do with 'time' though, and let's don't forget 'need', from
the
> student's perspective."

Regarding the requirement of the NRS for "annual data"?  The ostriches had
better dig their eyeballs out of the dirt and take a long, hard look at the
demographics of the truly literacy-level program participant.  Finish in a
year?  Finish what exactly??  Be able to gain a *year's* worth of
educational skills when they attend sessions on a very part-time basis as
their busy schedules allow - or get to the next level in the plotted plan??
Totally a farce!

Think realistically for just a second:  If a prized aggressive, motivated
and energized learner with a 0-1 level of recognition of sight words and a
measure of positive self-image and high expectations for themselves, comes
into a literacy program as early as July in a fiscal year reporting period,
you think that this adult is going to "climb out of the pit" to the "next
level" (7 to 9) by June of the same reporting period!?

Oh!  And by the Way.....that adult has a family, a full-time job, bills to
pay causing a second job ... yep!  You are really going to see that adult
accomplish that lofty goal in 12 months!  Heck!  Go ahead!  Flash that stand
ardiszed testing tool at the guy or gal with a 0-1 base of knowledge and see
just how long it takes for them to run the opposite direction of the In
Door.

Nancy Hansen
community-based literacy council
Sioux Falls, SD

----- Original Message -----
From: "Art LaChance" <arthur at ellijay.com>
To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:19 AM
Subject: Re: [NLA] Low Expectations for Adult Learners (longer)


> Tom,
> Your analysis appears to leave out some contributing factors.
> 1) students are not considered to be 'level completers' until they achieve
the
> skills to progress into the next level, which according to your report is
> segregated into three main areas: 0 to 6 grade level, 7 to 9, and 10 to
12,
> give or take a grade level.  To "complete" a grade level ALL skills must
be
> above the 6th grade level for instance in order to move that student into
the
> next level.  That means reading, math, and language skills as measured by
a
> "standardized" assessment tool must all be within the parameters of the
next
> level.
> 2)  All data reported to NRS is 'annual' data.  I find it exceptionally
> difficult to draw any conclusions whatsoever in terms of who, what, where,
of
> the lowest level of adult literacy students based on annual data when it
will
> take far longer than 6 to 12 months to grow a low level student
approximately
> 4 grade levels across the board.  Especially when we probably only see
that
> student in class approximately 6 hours a week and most of the time less
than
> that.
> This scenario has absolutely nothing to do with student capabilities nor
> curriculum efficiency nor teacher qualifications.  It certainly does have
> something to do with 'time' though, and let's don't forget 'need', from
the
> student's perspective.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Art
>
>
> Art LaChance
> Gilmer Learning Center
> Ellijay, GA
>
>
>
> Thomas Sticht wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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