Low Beginning Learners
A brief discussion on the disparity in achievement for low beginning learners.

What we found at CCSF was that students who began at the Literacy Level persisted longer (on average) and advanced more levels (on average) than did students who began at any other level, although it took them longer (on average) to advance each level. Regrettably CCSF did not have data on level of prior education for most of its students. Also their Literacy Level students may not be typical. They have a large Chinese population, and some members of that population would initially be placed in the Literacy level simply to learn the English alphabet and to get a start on other major linguistic differences if they had no English background, regardless of prior education. More importantly, we found that students who began at the Literacy and Low Beginning levels were more likely to advance more levels than were other students, but only about 20% of students who started at the Literacy of Low Beginning Levels advanced more than two levels over a 7-year time period. Does that jibe with experiences elsewhere?

Okay?

Also, it's important to note that few of the students in the Reder longitudinal study are ESL students. So we really need more research on ESL learning by students outside the classroom and post-program. Among the things we need to know more about is the learning of "stop-outs" -- students who enroll, drop out, and re-enroll -- while they are absent from the program. The CCSF research showed that a significant percentage of students stopped out (for about two years on average). Most of them re-enrolled at the same level where they had previously been placed (suggesting no learning gain, or possibly learning loss). Also, while they advanced the same number of levels as other students who began at the same level, it took them more terms to do so. But we don't consider this definitive, because the finding may be partly an artifact of placement procedures. It is possible that students learn a lot of English outside the classroom, but the Census reports an increasingly large number of linguistically isolated households, neighborhoods, and jobs, so this effect may be diminishing. It's important to find out.

Forrest Chisman

Dr. Chisman wrote: "More importantly, we found that students who began at the Literacy and Low Beginning levels were more likely to advance more levels than were other students, but only about 20% of students who started at the Literacy of Low Beginning Levels advanced more than two levels over a 7-year time period. Does that jibe with experiences elsewhere?"

Yes it does. Those at the lower levels have the most ground to make up and do tend to advance more levels as a result. The 20% is also quite accurate. Our learners come with their own goals and life realities and expectancies. Most of those who linger and make more levels have the economic ability to do so. The reality for most though is that they come to class to learn enough English to get a job. It is our hope that we can keep them long enough to be able to understand their job safety and SOP's. Far too often they leave before this with tragic results from a work-related accident that likely would have been prevented with stronger English skills.

We award Basic Skills Certificates as our learners advance levels. One of my favorite students was a working father - he pushed a broom at a local iron forge making minimum wage. At enrollment his reading was a CASAS 170, he had only attended school 4 years, and communication was a challenge.

After a year and a half, he earned his "B" level reading certificate (215), and though far from fluent, communication was significantly improved. When he took the certificate to show his supervisor at work, the supervisor took him to personnel, and they advanced him to an apprenticeship - which came with a hefty raise. He hasn't been back to class because he can now provide for his family in a way that he once could only dream of.

I am sure that with his intelligence and work ethic he could have been successful in any number of programs. However, as is so common with ALL community college students, they know what they want and once they attain that, they depart. It is important that we do all we can to make them aware of the opportunities and provide comprehensive transition assistance. The best information and transitioning program in the world will still be limited by the realities and expectancies of the learner.

Jim Schneider

Jim,

Thanks for the confirmation. We need all we can get!

Your description of the "persistence problem" is an eloquent statement of what we have heard elsewhere. Also, a growing number of programs appear to be offering "certificates," but it's not clear whether they help or hurt.

Does ANYBODY have ANY idea about what to do about these persistence problems? The only ideas I've seen that SEEM to work a bit are: 1) structuring programs so that students can advance so fast that they have a hard time "saying no" to college. 2) lowering college admission requirements for English language proficiency. (At CCSF we found that a significant number of students made transitions from the Low Intermediate Level and did just fine in both credit ESL and other credit courses.) 3) Effectively moving down more credit ESL into non-credit. 4) Packaging all of the above with a lot of guidance/counseling as a "pathways to college" track.

But that's rough and ready. Anybody have any other ideas? Overall, I wish we had the resources to interview more "drop out" students about why they dropped out and what would make a difference. Maybe THEY have the answers.

Forrest Chisman

Back to Transcripts Table of Contents