Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h1BJpCP07078; Tue, 11 Feb 2003 14:51:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 14:51:13 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <se490d52.039@mail.jsi.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Cristine Smith" <cristine_smith@jsi.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:20] advocacy update for professional development X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 5.5.5.1 Status: O Content-Length: 4775 Lines: 113 A brief update related to advocacy for professional development: The President's FY 04 budget, which just came out last week, zeroes out the line item for National Leadership Activities, which in FY 03 was $9 million. These monies were used by OVAE to support national leadership, including professional development. However, this money is not disappearing altogether. It is being "moved" to the Adult Education State Grants line item: last year the State Grants line item was $575 million; this year, the President's budget level funds it at $584 million (so that $575 million is for State Grants, and $9 million is for National Leadership Activities). Cheryl Keenan, giving an update at last week's National Coalition for Literacy meeting, described the change as "cosmetic" and logistical, indicating that the $9 million would be a "set aside" from the state grants to continue to support national leadership, including professional development. It is unclear, however, as the budget proposal goes through the House and Senate, if the $584 million gets cut, what that would mean for the $9 million in national leadership money (whether it would be cut proportionally). We should be prepared, however, to speak up for how we think professional development should be supported through OVAE, whatever the final amount, and to continue to advocate for increased professonal development funding. In other news: Cheryl Keenan of OVAE also gave an update at the National Coalition for Literacy's meeting last week about the Department's current thinking and vision for WIA reauthorization. Although nothing has been decided or set in stone, she mentioned several points of focus that I think may be relevant to professional development, if they become part of the reauthorization of WIA. I caution readers that the following points are from my notes, are not yet finalized by OVAE, and may be subject to change or to a different interpretation. 1. There will be language focusing on improving the overall adult education system, not just the parts of the system that receive federal funding. (This may mean helping non-federally-funded adult ed programs and instructors to take advantage of services offered through the state with federal funds, such as professional development activities, something which I think already happens in many states). 2. There will be language focusing on providing teachers with training and professional development on "research-based reading instruction"; i.e., what the research says about teaching reading, what instructional strategies and practices are most effective for teaching reading, according to the research. 3. There will be an language promoting collaborations between adult education and the private sector (employers), faith-based organizations, and public sector organizations, with the hope that adult literacy will be in a leadership role in these collaborations. What this means for professional development efforts is not clear to me. 4. States will be encouraged to develop content standards focused on a core set of skills, with a clear scope and sequence of instruction related to these skills, so that learners will be clear coming into programs what types of skills they can hope to improve. Cheryl was asked whether this was intended to promote more types of learner completion "licenses" or "credentials" for learners, and she said that was not being emphasized now or directly. How this relates to EFF and what this actually means in practice is not yet clear but we should look for continuing discussions of this. 5. There will be an emphasis on helping learners not just acquire the GED but also prepare for and enter post-secondary education or other types of training beyond the GED. Finally, another note related to professional development and WIA. The ABE state directors came up with a list of "bottom lines" related to WIA that they either already have forwarded to OVAE or are planning to forward to them (I'm not sure of the timing). Among the "bottom lines" was the recommendation that the current language related to proportion of money to be spent on professional development in states be changed: in WIA as it currently stands, states may spend a maximum of 12% (it may be 12.5% currently, I'm not exactly sure) of their funds on professional development and other leadership activities. The state directors recommend that this be changed to a minimum of 15% spent on professional development and leadership, with the option for any state to go as high as 17.5%. If anyone on the listserv has other information about the above, or feels I have misrepresented it somehow, please write in and correct me! Cristine Smith World Education csmith@worlded.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:14:57 EST