This article was posted to the NLA (National Literacy Advocacy) listserv in September and is being reprinted here with the author's permission.
The new outcome measures required of adult educators under WIA (the Workforce Investment Act) are a mix of education and employment indicators, some would say an uncomfortable mix. We are required to demonstrate progress in three education areas (completion of level of ABE or ESL, acquisition of a secondary credential or its equivalent, and entrance into postsecondary education or training) as well as two employment ones (getting a job and retaining a job). Why this mix, and why now?
The debate over the WIA and the role of adult education and family literacy within it continues an ongoing discussion about the relationship between education and employment that is central to ideas about social equality in the United States. Adult educators often invoke this relationship when writing proposals and advocating for funding. We point out how important the efforts of adult educators and learners are to economic productivity and success in the new information-based global economy. However, we stop short of saying that it is our job as educators to find people jobs and to make sure they stay in them, and most of us recognize and address our teaching to the multiple needs and goals of adult learners, rather than to their employment objectives alone. Indeed, the very notion that education's primary purpose is to prepare adults for jobs runs counter to the belief of many adult educators that the right to education for its own sake is a basic human right. Are we educators, or job trainers/developers, or both? Why does this new role feel so uncomfortable, and why do the rules for documenting employment cause panic?
Could it be because the basis for the rules is rooted in contradiction, the contradiction that education is both related to work and not the only or always the main influence on employment? We know from our own experiences and those of our students, as well as from research and data on employment, that many other factors complicate the relationship between education and employment:
Although statistics such as census data clearly show that the higher the education level, the greater the earning power of an individual and the longer that person is likely to be employed, the correlation between education and employment is just that&emdash;an association that means an individual's chances of earning more money and having more job security tend to rise with his or her education. It does not prove that education, by itself, can predict stable income for every individual, or that education is the sole cause of success in the labor market.
For adult educators, the picture is complicated by the fact that there is no evidence that participation in literacy programs helps the employment prospects of individuals. This is probably because in an economy increasingly bifurcated into high and low wage jobs, it usually takes more than an increase in basic literacy to make a dent in earnings. In fact, research shows that postsecondary education may be necessary for most single heads of households to achieve job stability and an income that can support a family. This means that most of the students in our programs qualify for entry-level jobs, many with wages below poverty levels. Many educators feel uncomfortable with having a role in this kind of job placement, yet learners may want and need such a job given their current options or lack thereof.
The same individual with the same education credentials can have a very different experience depending on the state of the labor market. When there is a tight labor market and employers scramble for workers, there are opportunities for everyone and education requirements are relaxed. This is characteristic of the boom economy we are experiencing now. The reverse is also true, as we know from the late 80s and early 90s. Yet, in any economy, education positively affects the wages and job stability.
At every education level, earnings vary by race and gender. Job segregation by type, wage inequality, and glass ceilings are structured by race and gender. For single heads of households, labor market discrimination is compounded by the lack of affordable child and health care, putting enormous burdens on single mothers who must support households, find child care, and manage health problems with a minimum of social supports. However, women and people of color have fought for access to education of all kinds precisely because, in the absence of white and/or male privilege, it affords them greater access to better jobs and working conditions.
Government decisions, as well as the efforts of individuals, greatly determine wage levels, how education is rewarded in the workplace, and access to education and training. We live in a society where it is legal and possible for employers to pay full-time workers wages below the poverty line. In countries where unions and workers have a strong political voice in decision-making, paychecks more adequately support a decent standard of living. In many of these countries, child care, health care and other social services support workers more fully as well, and education and training at no or low cost is more widely available. Paradoxically, education becomes more important as a means of advancement in the United States precisely because it is one of the few avenues available to workers and the poor.
Despite the hype about the greater skill requirements of work, researchers have found there is a mismatch between what individuals actually need to know to do a job and what employers look for in applicants. In other words, assumptions about the information economy and about the technical and literacy requirements of today's jobs may influence the skills or credentials required more than the actual demands of the work. For example, anyone seeking work in a New York City hospital now will find that a high school diploma or GED is required for any job. Yet, individuals without such credentials have been doing these jobs for many years, and doing them well. However, adult education students wanting to acquire or advance beyond entry-level jobs are going to need educational credentials, regardless of the daily relationship between what they study and what they do.
What does it mean to move forward in such contradictory circumstances? It means acknowledging any differences between the objectives of funding, our own, and those of adult learners, and doing our best to fulfill all of the above. It means recognizing the dissonance between believing that education is a socially acknowledged human right and operating programs within a political arena that sees employment as a matter of personal responsibility. For some, it means working to change the latter, by building a movement that supports a political climate more congenial to their views. For all of us, it means living with the contradictions that our students face when they try to combine education and work, when they try to achieve their educational and personal goals while supporting their families. Finally, it means strengthening the common ground we have with funders, and supporting our own claims for the power and achievements of adult education with data. Such data may provide the best argument that adult education is doing its job, that learners are struggling to do theirs, and that all of us deserve to have other factors that impact on employment addressed by policy makers.
(For a fuller discussion of the tension between education and employment for adult educators, see NCSALL Report #10: The Impact of Welfare Reform on Adult Literacy Education, available at <www.gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall/research/reports.htm>.)
Debby D'Amico is a researcher and consultant in the field of adult basic education and literacy based in New Jersey.