<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1104107230;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1158752176 67698705 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1405183839;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1171478112 67698705 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-start-at:2;
mso-level-text:"%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Dear Colleagues,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>There has been quite a bit of discussion on various Adult
Education -related listservs about the recent report of the National Commission
on Adult Literacy, “Reach Higher America.” I, for one, am delighted
that the report has aroused so much interest, and a robust discussion of its
findings can only benefit the field, as well as anyone who may wish to act on
those findings.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>In some of the postings, however, I have found what I believe
are a number of misconceptions about what the report says and its implications
that I fear may needlessly distract the discussion. I would like to do what I
can to sort those out. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>In doing so, I want to make clear that, although I have been
affiliated with the Council for the Advancement of Adult Literacy, I had
very little to do with the National Commission on Adult Literacy or its report.
This was partly because I had prior commitments to do a lot of ESL research
that overlapped the Commission’s term, and partly because I didn’t
think Gail Spangenberg, Cheryl King, and the Commissioners needed any help from
me. (Too many cooks, etc.) My only input was to testify to the Commission
on ESL, meet with a group of commissioners and staff to discuss
(inconclusively) a few key issues for half a day, and provide advice on
drafting issues (some of which was followed and some of which
wasn’t). As a result, in most respects I read “Reach Higher
America” in the same way that you do – as an informed outsider.
Certainly, I can’t speak for the Commission about it or for CAAL as the
Commission’s agent, nor do I wish to do so.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>With that long preface, I would like to address three issues
that I believe are needlessly clouding consideration of the report by members of
the Adult Education field and other concerned parties.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>1)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>The notion that the Commission is advocating converting adult
education into a system that would SOLELY or primarily have the goal of
workforce preparation/postsecondary transition. If this were true, I would be
concerned too. But if you read the report carefully, I think you will see that
this is simply NOT what it says<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>It is true that the report
talks mainly about workforce preparation and expanding AE to place more
emphasis on this goal. But there is no place in which it says that existing
efforts in ABE, ASE, and ESL should be diminished, or that workforce
preparation should be the EXCLUSIVE goal of the system. In fact, on page 22, it
says the opposite. And it singles out family literacy, reducing waiting
lists for ESL programs, increasing GED completions, and other issues that are
not strictly workforce-related as priorities, and it emphasizes the importance
of increased investment per student, more supportive services, and greater
investment in staff training THROUGHT THE SYSTEM. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Personally, I think the best
way to read the Commission’s emphasis on workforce readiness is to say
that increasing, enriching, and expanding the AE system’s role in
workforce readiness is the goal that should have highest priority right now
– but not the exclusive goal. (Policy should be able to chew gum and walk
at the same time.) Why should workforce readiness have particularly high
priority? Well, because it is the function that the AE system performs least
well. The system has never been asked to do this, and so it’s no surprise
(or cause for apology) that it doesn’t do much of it. We all know this. A
large number of students come to AE programs with the goal of getting better
jobs, but most of the programs specifically designed to help them in this
regard are small and fragile. Likewise, the Commission says it considers
transition to postsecondary education to be a form of workforce readiness.
Again, although some programs make notable efforts to facilitate this, they do
so largely in spite of existing policy and systems of funding. Only a tiny
percentage of AE students make transitions. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>In short, we simply
have to build up the workforce readiness aspect of the system. Why? Because, as
the Commission so eloquently points out, there are enormous benefits for adult
learners and for the nation’s economy if we do, and enormous penalties
for low-income, low skilled people, as well as economy, if we don’t. And
only the AE system can take on this challenge. If it doesn’t, some other
system will have to be devised to do so. That would be a terrible waste,
because the existing services provided by AE are part of the pathway to
workforce readiness. All we need to do is grow some additional branches on the
tree – something that many programs are trying to do, but for which they
are not receiving much support.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Anyway, that’s how I
read it, and I would invite you to see if it makes more sense if YOU read it
that way. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>In addition, there is another
consideration. I personally believe that there is precious little political
support for any major expansion of AE services or funding UNLESS the system can
be tied to high priority national economic goals. That doesn’t mean that
these must be the system’s only goals. But we’ve all beat our heads
against a brick wall for decades trying to sell AE in traditional terms, and we
have too little to show for it. In contrast, emphasizing the need to expand the
workforce related aspects of the system appears (thus far) to have enlisted
allies in business, labor, and other sectors of education we never had before. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I doubt that the Commission
was primarily motivated by this political calculus. But it is important to
remember that the Commissioners were a highly diverse group of
“outsiders.” Few had an expert understanding of AE, and (contrary
to what has been said) most did not represent the business community in any
way. (It is true that Dollar General Corporation was the largest single
financial supporter of the effort, but they in no way dictated its findings.)
It is, therefore, telling that this group of “outsiders” (with a
little help from Commissioners Bob Bickerton, Sherrie Claiborne, John Comings,
and Sharon Darling) gravitated to an emphasis on workforce preparation as the
best way to expand AE. In fact, my own research on recent major expansions of
AE at the state level indicates that it has invariably come about as a result
of the desire of states to improve the economic competitiveness (workforce
readiness)of their workforces. And in all cases I know of, this has NOT been a
zero-sum game. A rising tide has lifted all boats in the AE system.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><![if !supportLists]><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>2)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> The notion that strengthening the workforce readiness
aspect of AE will in some way result in less emphasis on service to the lowest
skilled adults. I do not see how this can possibly be true. It is precisely the
lowest skilled adults who are most in need of workforce readiness services
– they are the population must likely to be locked into low-wage,
low-skilled jobs. No plan to increase the workforce preparation of adults can
make a dent in the problem without giving priority to their needs. It is
certainly true that many programs that have added special components to
increase employability by increasing transitions to postsecondary education and
specialized vocational programs usually recruit students at the intermediate
levels of ABE and ESL or GED graduates for those components. But that only
reinforces the imperative for workforce readiness efforts to emphasize greater
service to those with lower levels of skills. In the ESL field, for example,
the overwhelming majority of students are at the lowest skill levels. There is
no way that a stronger emphasis on workforce readiness can succeed unless we
greatly enhance our efforts to help those students advance up the AE continuum.
Otherwise, there simply will not be enough students to take advantage of
specialized workforce components. Moreover, it is by no means clear that these
kinds of specialized components are the only way to improve workforce readiness.
Career counseling, teaching “soft skills” (such as the SCANS
array), and infusing more work skills (as opposed to life skills) into the
curriculum can help broaden the options of students at all
levels.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>In short, I do not see any
way in which strengthening the workforce readiness aspects of AE programs is
inconsistent with serving the least skilled adult learners, and I can find no
place in “Reach Higher America” where the Commission even suggests
this. The traditional goal of adult education has been to help as many students
as possible ascend as far as possible up the adult learning continuum. A
stronger emphasis on workforce readiness simply means offering students the
opportunity to improve their employability as they ascend that continuum. Some
students may not wish to take advantage of this opportunity. They will benefit
from AE in other ways. AE has always tried to serve many different learner
goals, and as mentioned above, “Reach Higher America” clearly considers
all of them valid. In this context, the contribution of the report is to
emphasize the need to strengthen service to students who have the goal of
improving their employment prospects – whatever their initial level of
skills, and without prejudice to other goals.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoListParagraph style='text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><![if !supportLists]><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>3)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>The notion that the Commission is advocating a change in the
governance of AE at the state or federal levels. This is simply not true. I
have read this report so many times I’m almost blind. There is NO PLACE
in the report where a change of governance is advocated. In fact, there is no
place in which governance is even discussed. It is not even mentioned in the
discussion of state planning (pp. 26-27). As far as he report is concerned,
states would be free to adopt any governance system for AE they want – as
they are now. The report simply encourages them to engage in more meaningful inter-agency
planning for the role AE in their states than they do now – a requirement
in present legislation that largely honored in the breach – as a way of
acknowledging that states have different needs and can legitimately realize
them in different ways. In this sense, the report reposes more responsibility
at the state level than the present system does. Likewise, the issue of the
governance of AE at the federal level is NOT DISCUSSED AT ALL in the report.
The Commission DOES appear to believe that it would be advisable to get as many
of the separate federal authorities and funding streams as possible under a
single legislative framework. But it is moot about whether the existing system
of divided administrative responsibility at the federal level should be
continued. Personally, I think it’s too much trouble to get into the turf
wars of changing it, but that’s just my view. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I hope, that this overly long note will help to take some
non-issues off the table, and help you in your consideration of the report.
There are a great many very real and very tough issues that need sorting out
before the Commission’s recommendations can become a reality. So I
don’t think we should waste time debating problems that don’t
exist. The Commission will certainly try to have its recommendations embodied
in legislation, and it will need the help of all of you, not only to do that
but to do it right. So I hope we can set aside these differences, or at least
raise areas of concern or uncertainty with Gail or others who understand the
Commission’s intent better than I do, before rushing to conclusions. To
encourage readership and reach people outside the AE field, the report is very
brief. Unfortunately that means that some of its points may seem a bit cryptic
to those who read it with expert eyes. I hope that, when in doubt, you will ask
for clarification, rather than assume the worst. I know enough of the
Commissioners and staff to know that these people desperately want to help the
AE field in all of its aspects, and most of all the learners.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Forrest Chisman
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>