Return-Path: <nifl-workplace@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g98DtwX25225; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:55:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:55:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <p05001901b9c893b9d62d@[146.186.96.31]> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-workplace@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-workplace@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-workplace@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Barb Van Horn <blv1@psu.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-workplace@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WORKPLACE:622] Adult Education, Literacy Development, and Homeland Security X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Status: O Content-Length: 5941 Lines: 101 Dear subscribers, you may have seen this on the NLA list; however, Tom suggested that I post it to this list as well. Barb Van Horn, nifl-workplace co-moderator Research Note September 5, 2002 Thomas G. Sticht International Consultant in Adult Education Adult Education, Literacy Development, and Homeland Security The federalization of security screeners at our nation’s airports has raised questions regarding the value of a high school diploma and various levels of cognitive ability, including literacy ability, in the world of work (see the news article by David Firestone at The New York Times web site Saturday December 29, 2001 03:02 PM EST). Controversy about the high school diploma and what it means has arisen because the regulations that the federal government first put into place for the hiring of airport screeners called for the employment of just high school graduates (HSG). But recently this requirement was modified to make it possible to retain on the job and to hire new employees who are non-high school graduates (NHSG) who can pass certain cognitive tests and have a year of prior, relevant, work experience. The controversy centers on the reports of security experts suggesting that the employment of NHSG employees lowers the quality of the security workforce and increases security risks. This controversy is reminiscent of the controversy over the use of education credentials and cognitive (literacy) test scores that have that have been encountered from time to time in the U. S. military services. The use of the high school graduation indicator of quality results from findings in military research showing that high school graduates with regular four year diplomas have higher first term completion rates than both holders of the General Educational Development (GED) certificate or NHSG, while the GED holders do better than NHSG. However, other research indicates that the effects of HSG or NHSG status or cognitive ability test scores may be different if motivation for service is considered. For instance, the effects of both higher cognitive ability and having a high school diploma may be offset to a large extent by a willingness to delay entry into military service. In one study a first term completion rate of about 75 percent was found for HSG applicants regardless of their cognitive ability or whether they entered into military service right after applying for service or after waiting seven or more months in the delayed entry program. However, for NHSG, it was found that the longer they waited in the delayed entry program after applying for service, the higher their retention rate became. In fact, the lowest cognitive ability, NHSG recruits who waited for seven or more months to enter into active duty had a completion rate of 70 percent, almost as good as higher ability HSG recruits (Sticht, 1992, p. 53). Additional research has shown that in terms of job performance as indicated by either skill qualification tests in the Army or promotion tests in the Navy, NHSG who have stayed in the service through basic training and job technical training may sometimes perform less well, or just as well, or even somewhat better, than HSG in different studies (Sticht, 1992,pp. 57-62). Literacy Education In Defense Despite the generally higher standards for education and basic skills upon entry to the armed services that have been in place for over twenty years, the Department of Defense (DoD) still maintains Voluntary Education programs that provide basic skills education for Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force personnel. While enrollments declined in the AELS by 28 percent from 1996-2000, and basic skills programs offered by the American Management Association corporate membership from 1993 through 2000 declined by 50 percent (see the AMA Survey on Workplace Testing for 2001), enrollments in the DoD basic skills programs increased by over 50 percent from 26,136 in 1996 to 39,413 in 2000. The 1996 DoD basic skills program enrollments were equivalent to the enrollments in the AELS for Delaware, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming combined. For the five year period from 1996 through 2000, a total of 166,040 personnel enrolled in the DoD basic skills programs, which are provided free during duty hours for military personnel. This policy recognizes the value of continuing adult education for all personnel as a means of enhancing morale, increasing job proficiency of a general nature, enhancing personnel promotability, and helping personnel cope with everyday demands of life so that they are not unduly distracted from their military missions. The lessons from the DoD regarding the use of motivation-related techniques such as delayed entrance to identify those adults without high school diplomas who are likely to persist in their security jobs, coupled with the provision of prior service and on-the-job continuing education in literacy skills and knowledge development, seems to me like an enlightened approach to workforce needs. It seems to me that a well implemented set of practices based upon a sound and adequately supported policy of lifelong learning for our nation’s undereducated adults could help our nation meet both our needs for workforce development for economic growth and our social and defense needs for homeland security. Reference: Sticht, T. (1992). Military testing and public policy: selected studies of lower aptitude personnel. In: B. Gifford & L. Wing (Eds.). Test policy in defense: Lessons from the military for education, training, and employment. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers (pp. 1-77).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:41:25 EST