Search

To help improve research-based knowledge of effective instruction for low-literate ESL (English as a second language) learners, the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance of ED's (U.S. Department of Education's) Institute of Education Sciences contracted with the American Institutes of Research (AIR) to conduct a Study of the Impact of a Reading Intervention for Low-Literate Adult ESL Learners. The intervention studied was the basal reader "Sam and Pat, Volume I," published by Thomson-Heinle (2006). "Sam and Pat" was selected as the focus of the study because it offers an approach to literacy development that is systematic, direct, sequential, and multi-sensory. The study produced the following key results: (1) More reading instruction was observed in "Sam and Pat" classes, while more English language instruction was observed in control classes; (2) Although students made gains in reading and English language skills, no differences in reading and English language outcomes were found between students in the "Sam and Pat" group and students in the control group; and (3) There were no impacts of "Sam and Pat" on reading and English language outcomes for five of six subgroups examined. For students with relatively lower levels of literacy at the start of the study, there was some suggestive evidence of a positive impact on reading outcomes. (Contains 1 table, 2 figures, and 5 footnotes.) [For the main report, see ED514094.]

Research has identified the barriers adult learners face in attaining their education and English proficiency goals, entering and advancing in employment, succeeding in postsecondary education and training, and navigating service systems. Most adult learners face long odds in trying to meet these goals. What would it take to address these barriers and produce better outcomes? What policies, focused investments, and public-private partnerships would help change the odds? The American Institutes for Research (AIR) hosted a Symposium, "Changing the Odds: Informing Policy with Research on How Adult Learners Succeed", on September 16, 2009. The panelists and participants discussed innovative solutions and collaborations for supporting today's low-skilled adult learners and challenges to improving adult education and workforce development outcomes facing the nation. Stephen Reder opened the Symposium with a keynote address that discussed the importance of building a "ladder of opportunity" to improve adult learning in the 21st century. Participants also expressed an immediate need for leadership and evidence, and acknowledged that the workforce in adult education and vocational programs has many unmet professional development needs and little infrastructure available to meet them. This paper explores these challenges and solutions in more detail, offering many ideas and alternatives for program delivery and policy infrastructure that could change the odds for adult learners in the United States. Based on the research, it is clear that reforms need to be undertaken to ensure that the potential of the low-skilled adult population can be realized. An evidence-based reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act, now seven years overdue, will help "change the odds" for millions of adults. (Contains 7 charts and 63 footnotes.)

This literature review provides a portrait of the current state of theory, instruction, assessment, and professional development of numeracy education for Adult Basic Education (ABE) students. It addresses the following five research questions by summarizing key findings from the literature: (1) How does adult numeracy develop and how does it differ from the development of quantitative literacy in children? (2) What are the social variables that affect quantitative skill acquisition in adults? How should programs address these social variables to enhance skill acquisition? (3) What instructional practices exist in mathematics education for adult learners that are worthy of replication? (4) What outcomes are most important to address in the evaluation of adult education programs in mathematics? What are the best tools or assessments for evaluating these outcomes? and (5) What practices exist in professional development and certification requirements for teachers of adult mathematics education that are worthy of replication? This literature review is the first report of the Adult Numeracy Initiative and lays the foundation for the other substantive activities in the project's first phase. The review summarizes the definitions, theories, and research around adult numeracy to organize what is known and to point the way for future research and development. This literature review is organized into five parts. Part 1, "Issues in Conceptualizing Adult Numeracy," addresses the first and second research questions and presents an overview of the competing approaches to defining adult numeracy. The section then reviews the main theoretical approaches toward teaching and learning mathematics for adults that reflect these definitions. The concepts and theories in this section provide a background and context for the research in instruction and assessment presented in subsequent sections. Part 2, "Adult Numeracy and Mathematics Instructional Approaches and Interventions," reviews the small number of studies done on ABE students, supplemented with an also small number of studies on adults in community college developmental education programs, on the effects of different types of instructional approaches on mathematics learning among adults. In response to the third research question, this section presents the instructional approaches, findings, and methodologies of these studies. Part 3, "Assessment Issues in Adult Numeracy," then endeavors to respond to the fourth research question as it summarizes the existing knowledge base regarding assessment in adult numeracy, reviews the uses of assessment, analyzes the nature of assessment and how it can be improved, and summarizes the principles for designing effective assessments for adult numeracy. Part 4, "Professional Development in Adult Numeracy," deals with the fifth research question and discusses the state of professional development in ABE around numeracy. The section notes the low-level background of ABE teachers to teach mathematics, presents professional development approaches, and briefly discusses research on the characteristics of effective professional development. Part 5, "Summary and Implications for Future Research," summarizes the findings of the review and suggests future research and how the field of adult numeracy practice and research might progress. It also briefly suggests how research on children's learning of mathematics may inform research on adults, thus also addressing the first research question. Appended are: (1) Definitions of Numeracy; (2) Professional Society Standards; (3) List of Web Sites and Journals Searched; and (4) Summary of Mathematics and Numeracy Intervention Studies Reviewed. A list of references consulted is also included. [This report was prepared by the American Institutes of Research for the Division of Adult Education and Literacy, Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education.]

This study sought to identify ways in which programs can provide effective instruction to improve the English language and literacy skills of English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) literacy students. The study also examined attendance patterns of adult ESL literacy students and instructional factors related to attendance and provided descriptive information about adult ESL literacy students, their classes, teachers, and the instruction that they receive. (Adjunct ERIC Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education) (Author/VWL)

The National Reporting System project was designed to establish an outcome-based accountability system for the state-administered, federally funded adult education program. In the pilot test, volunteer states and their local programs compared the feasibility and costs of these three data collection models: (1) local programs collect all the student information and outcome measures, including measures by phone; (2) states conduct the follow-up measure survey by phone and then combine that data with other student data collected by local programs; and (3) state employment and human services agencies and higher education institutions combine their data with that from the state department of education. Findings for Model 1 (eight programs) indicated survey costs ranged from $500 to over $1500; the largest concerns were cost and staff availability; and programs reported general satisfaction with the educational functional level measures. The primary advantage was having the sampling universe at the program rather than state level. Disadvantages were high costs and time consumption. Findings for Model 2 (three states) indicated costs varied from $40.37 to $132.04 (significantly less than the local survey), and it alleviated the burden of data collection from local programs. The biggest drawback was that outcomes were not identified at the program level. Findings for Model 3 (four states) indicated barriers were confidentiality issues and development of measure definitions common across agencies; vastly different costs for developing and maintaining the database system; and a considerable investment in training and technical assistance at the local level was required to ensure valid, reliable data. (YLB)

The National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL), which is being developed for administration in 2002, will determine the status of adult literacy in the United States and serve as a follow-up to the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey. Three discussion groups consisting of a total of 23 literacy researchers, users of the 1992 survey, potential users of the 2002 survey, and other stakeholders were convened to obtain input on the NAAL's content and issues related to its development. A professional facilitator used a set of structured questions and probes to lead the discussions with each group. Several problems in using the data from the 1992 survey at the federal and state levels were noted. Suggestions for making the NAAL more meaningful than the 1992 survey were quite similar among the three groups. A major focus was on ensuring that the data could be useful at the state level even if states cannot conduct an individual survey. Suggestions for interpretation of the NAAL fell into four topical areas: use of subscales, broadness of levels, utilization of composite scores, and linkages between the 2002 assessment and other surveys. (Appended are a list of focus group participants and overview of the NAAL.) (MN)

This document was developed to help adult education stakeholders involved in efforts to develop/test/implement a national reporting system of outcome measures documenting students' performance in the federally funded adult education program. The report reviews existing/planned accountability systems, examines major issues involved in developing an outcome-based reporting system, and proposes four model reporting systems. Chapter 1 presents background information on the goals of the National Outcome Reporting System Project. Examined in chapter 2 are the following: existing/planned reporting systems; demonstration projects in Illinois, Iowa, North Carolina, Texas, and Washington; implementation of the National Institute for Literacy's Performance Measurement, Reporting and Improvement System initiative in Hawaii, Kentucky, and Tennessee; and state initiatives in California, Florida, Oregon, and Texas. Seven key issues in developing a national reporting system are considered in chapter 3. Discussed in chapter 4 are the following reporting measures/methods: learning gains; credentials; further education and training; economic, family, and community impact; and customer satisfaction. The following reporting system models are detailed in chapter 5: comprehensive reporting model; follow-up survey approach; data sharing/work force model; and menu approach. Appended are a list of Division of Adult Education and Literacy definitions of educational functional levels. The bibliography lists 22 references. (MN)

Implementation of quality indicators in the evaluation of adult education programs of 49 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico was examined. The study focused on development of measures and standards for the indicators and the impact of quality indicators on state accountability systems and program quality. Most states had completed the indicator measures and standards development process, nearly two-thirds had implemented measures of the quality indicators, and approximately half had accompanying performance standards to the measures. An additional 10 states had developed but not yet implemented the measures, and 8 states had developed but not yet implemented performance standards. All states had at least begun developing measures, and all but five states had at least begun developing performance standards. Thirteen states were using the measures/standards in program funding decisions, and 15 additional states planned to do so. State directors of adult education programs in 10 of the 23 states reporting full implementation of the measures and standards uniformly noted the strong positive impact of the measures and standards development process in their states. (An appendix constituting approximately 75% of this document contains information on the use of quality indicators in Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky, and South Dakota.) (MN)

This paper describes a list of quality indicators for adult education programs. The list was developed after consideration of background materials and input from four focus groups. The list is divided into two main areas: student outcomes and program process and content. Within each area, the primary indicators (those identified by at least three of the four focus groups) are presented by topic area, along with examples of measures for each indicator. The area of student outcomes includes two topic areas: educational gains and student personal-social development. The area of program process and content includes six topic areas: program planning; curriculum and instruction; staff development and characteristics; support services; recruitment; and retention. A list of secondary indicators, which are indicators identified by one or two focus groups, follows. For student outcomes, topic areas are as follows: educational gains, student personal-social development, employment-related gains, family literacy, and "other." Topics in the area of program process and content are: program planning, curriculum and instruction, staff development and characteristics, and organizational support. (YLB)

As a preliminary to developing criteria to meet quality control requirements of the National Literacy Act of 1991, this report analyzes four areas where state education agencies examine program quality: local program monitoring to assess compliance or promote program improvement; criteria used to evaluate local program funding applications; program evaluations of state or local adult education programs and evaluations of projects designed to improve program quality; and explicit indicators of local program quality already in use by states. Data were gathered through a review of 46 monitoring instruments and 20 proposal review protocols, requests for proposals, or funding criteria. Following an introductory section describing the research methodology and aims of the study, the report is organized in five sections. Section 2 presents monitoring indicators, section 3 evaluation indicators, and section 4 funding indicators. Each section includes descriptions of documents reviewed and summaries of research methodology, of how the information is used, and of the general topics and quality indicators used in a majority of documents under review. The information is presented in tabular form by component area, topic area, indicator, and specific measure. Section 5 of the report describes explicit quality indicators used in seven states, and the final section lists quality indicators synthesized from all four sources. Appendixes, which make up half the document, present individual summaries of the program evaluation and state summaries of funding criteria. (KC)

As a preliminary to developing criteria to meet quality control requirements of the National Literacy Act of 1991, a study examined federal and state development of measures of program quality and performance standards for programs funded under the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act, the Food Stamp Employment and Training Program (FSETP), and the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program of the Family Support Act. The study found that JTPA implemented performance standards for employment and training programs at the inception of the program that measured cost per entered employment, entered employment rate, and average wage at placement. Reacting to criticism that these standards forced programs to neglect services to the hard-to-place, JTPA created new standards in 1990 stressing job retention. The Perkins Act reauthorization of 1990 requires states to develop performance standards that measure learning gains, competency or job skill attainment, placement into employment or other training programs, and retention in or completion of secondary school or its equivalent; about half the states are having considerable difficulty developing such standards. FSETP and JOBS programs are required to implement performance standards, but they have not yet been developed. Based on the experience of these other programs with performance indicators, the following lessons appear most relevant to adult education: (1) establish appropriate indicators and standards; (2) allow state and local flexibility; (3) develop management information systems; (4) provide states with technical assistance; and (5) take steps to avoid unintended effects of indicators. (11 references) (KC)