[The following is excerpted from the website of the National Coalition for Literacy, <www.natcoalitionliteracy.org>, where the full concept paper can be found (click on "Policy and Legislation," then "Commitment Three," then "Omnibus Literacy Legislation," then "Concept Paper").]
The National Coalition for Literacy (NCL) is spearheading efforts to produce an omnibus literacy bill in the U.S. Congress. Such a bill would call for changes in a number of public laws that impact adult and family literacy in this country, building on recommendations from the National Literacy Summit Action Agenda. The plan is for this bill to be drafted and introduced by supporters on Capitol Hill early this year, based on the concept paper approved by the NCL last month. Once introduced, literacy advocates around the country can use this legislation to educate and engage senators and congresspersons by asking them to become cosponsors of this bill. The bill may not be enacted into law in its entirely. However, it can be used to shape the federal literacy policy agenda in 2002. Efforts to reauthorize the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act as well as the rest of the Workforce Investment Act must begin in 2003, and this bill could help frame the issues for that reauthorization. Through this omnibus literacy bill, we can also advocate for the improvement of provisions in other relevant laws during the next two years.
The National Literacy Summit 2000 Action Agenda for the adult education, language and literacy system called on all to work toward the following goal: "By 2010, a system of high quality adult literacy, language and lifelong learning services will help adults in every community make measurable gains toward achieving their goals as family members, workers, citizens, and lifelong learners." The agenda for reaching this goal and creating a strong adult education, language, and literacy system has been built around three key priorities: 1) A system of QUALITY services for adult students; 2) Ease of ACCESS to these services; and 3) Sufficient RESOURCES to support quality and access.
Several significant issues cut across the priorities. The first issue is student involvement. As the field's primary stakeholders and customers, students must participate meaningfully in every aspect of the system that exists to serve them. The second issue is communications. Whatever the priority, the field needs greater visibility and recognition as a critical human resource. The third issue is partnerships. All the work to be done requires collaboration within the adult education, language and literacy system and between the system and its partners. Finally, technology has increased the need for greater literacy while also serving as an essential set of tools for achieving it.
Certain programs and populations are also of major importance. Family and workplace literacy programs address two of the primary motivations for adults to seek services, as well as two of our greatest societal needs: stronger families and a more highly skilled workforce. Attention to two issues--provision of English instruction to speakers of other languages and learning disabilities--is essential. English language students account for over 38 percent of adult students today according to the U.S. Department of Education, and estimates of students who have learning disabilities run almost as high, according to the National Center for Learning Disabilities. Finally, the major complicating factors of poverty and racism require particular attention, sensitivity, and appropriate action when dealing with adult students and their families.
Increasing and maximizing resources for adult education and family literacy programs is critically important if we are to ever truly address issues of low literacy in this country. While the total public and private investment in literacy has risen over the past 30 years, amounts are meager in relation to the need for services. Adult education and family literacy services are a low priority for most policymakers at every level of government.
Federal and state funding dedicated to adult education and family literacy services is the major source of funds for the basic skills education infrastructure in this country....The most current federal funding level for adult education state grants (FY2001) shows the investment to be $540 million, with $70 million of that amount set aside specifically for English literacy and civics education. Federal funding, however, provides only a portion of the overall funding for adult education and family literacy efforts. Most local programs, therefore, must rely on funding from states, private foundations, and individual donations.
Federal fiscal support for adult education in the United States contrasts sharply with that of the United Kingdom, although the two countries perform almost identically on international reading assessments. Recognizing the importance of literacy for its economy, its families, and its social and political structure, the United Kingdom is increasing its support annually to a goal of over 400 million pounds by 2003 (approximately $644 million) to serve a total population-in-need of approximately seven million people. For the U.S. to mount an effort proportional to that of the U.K. it would have to appropriate $3.2 billion annually instead of the $540 million that it currently makes available.
Increasing access to adult education and family literacy programs involves responding to a range of student and program needs. For some potential learners it may mean gaining access to information about available programs and what each offers. It may mean being able to enroll in a program that is offered at unconventional hours of the day to accommodate learners who are not available during traditional classroom hours. For others for whom attendance at traditional classroom or tutoring sessions may be impossible, access may mean taking advantage of learning via mail (including e-mail), phone tutoring, televised lessons through broadcast, cable, satellite, tape, DVD, and interactive TV or computer-assisted and web-based instruction.
For some potential learners access to support services is essential to their being able to enroll and persist in instruction. These services may range from career planning to child-care to family violence counseling to housing assistance. Some of these services may be provided from resources available to adult education and family literacy programs; others only through cooperative arrangements with community agencies.
The pursuit of more stringent elementary and secondary school standards nationwide is having an effect on adult education and family literacy programs. Many secondary school students who appear unable to meet the new standards are being "transferred" to adult education and family literacy programs. In this way school districts may avoid having to classify these students as dropouts and, at the same time, give them a genuine opportunity to complete a secondary education. Access to the most appropriate programs for these students would be greatly enhanced if secondary school-based guidance counselors had the information to make appropriate referrals, and if comparable per session funding were to follow the student to the adult education and family literacy program to ensure that these children as well are not "left behind."
To implement the intent of Title II of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), priority must be given to individuals in the community who are most in need of literacy services. However, the WIA's emphasis on performance measurement and incentives inadvertently promotes "creaming," serving those who can meet their education goals quickly and move on. An incentive is needed to maintain the program's focus on the lowest level learner.
The greatest growth in adult education and family literacy programs over the past decade is in the enrollment of students with limited proficiency in English. Indeed they now comprise almost 40% of all program enrollments. True access for this population requires personnel who are familiar with the language and customs of the various language groups and of the organizations that specialize in serving them.
Incarcerated populations, including older "neglected and delinquent" youth, need access not only to programs offered within the institutions in which they reside but also to opportunities to continue their education after release. Finally, learning disabled adults may need assistive technology and accommodations, as laid out in the Administration's New Freedom initiative, to learn about and to choose appropriate programs and to participate productively in those programs.
To mount the kind of national campaign that will be required to provide all adults with the education needed for work, family and community, our nation must make significant investments in the quality of its programs as it expands educational opportunity. This investment in quality must pursue continuous improvement in planning, curriculum design, staff preparation and development, assessment and evaluation, student involvement, and a system of research and development that accurately reflects the changing needs of the adult education field and is quickly translatable into improved practice. Special attention must be given to the role of technology in this effort and the training needed to enable technology to reach its full potential.
An example of what needs to happen can be seen in the literacy initiative of the United Kingdom. Out of the approximately 400 million pounds to be made available, the U.K. intends to devote considerable sums to developing curriculum and curriculum standards, effective mechanisms to identify and assess need, teaching materials, professional development of staff, and research. Special attention is to be given to the role of technology. All of this is to be done to ensure that quality services are available to learners and that the U.K.'s considerable investment in adult literacy reaches its goals.
The goals of any quality adult education program must reflect the needs and aspirations of its clientele as well as the needs and challenges posed by our rapidly changing society. The program must be able to assess each learner's status with respect to those needs and aspirations and deliver a relevant, responsive learning experience of sufficient intensity and duration to produce significant gains that are recognizable by the learner and the National Reporting System. Each state's planning process must have policy and systems in place to help diverse learners in a variety of contexts (e.g., work, family, community) clearly specify their goals, delineate their needs, and develop a learning plan (recognizing that special populations may have special needs) that will identify and align services to meet these needs and attain these goals. The process must involve programs authorized by legislation other than the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act whose services are essential to the support of adult learners. Adult students must be a part of this planning process. Customer satisfaction must be assessed and improved. Professional development and resource services must be available to all providers regardless of their funding source.
Learners must be engaged in an ongoing goal setting/updating process that gives both the learner and provider a clear vision of each learner's expected outcomes. Curriculum should reflect the real-life needs of learners in work, family, and community contexts. Assessment tools must be based upon the curriculum and quickly and accurately indicate initial needs and subsequent learning gains. Standardized tests are not always the most appropriate assessment instruments, especially not for the lowest level learners. Federal and state adult education agencies must develop and utilize reliable instruments that assess learning gains in a real-life context. Programs must employ evaluation designs that reveal how well various program components contribute to learners meeting their goals. Programs should provide students with credentials that clearly indicate learner accomplishment and eligibility for further education, training or employment.
States have encountered a great need for staff development as a result of the enactment of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act. The Act introduced an entirely new reporting system, an expectation of continuous improvement in the results to be reported, and the opportunity for incentive grants to states that exceeded outcome levels negotiated with the federal government. To ensure quality in staff development activity states have instituted (or are investigating) licensing or certification of instructional staff and/or accreditation of local programs.
All of the above has led to a re-evaluation of the rather limited research and development capacity of the nation's adult education and literacy system. There is a great need for additional research into assessment, evaluation, curriculum and standards, use of technology, and planning processes.