Thanks to David Rosen for moderating yet another interesting discussion.  I
must admit I have found the level significance and rhetoric generated around
the distinction between standards and standardized tests to be remarkable in
its irrelevance, kind of like a smoke ring inside a soap bubble.
Standardized tests appear to be designed to demonstrate that students have
mastered (or not) a certain standard of knowledge or content.  Standards
appear to be designed to demonstrate to teachers what standards of knowledge
or content they should teach to students.  It is at least implicit that
teaching to the standards should equip students to demonstrate the content
mastery necessary to perform well on the standardized tests, almost by
definition a neat and tidy closed system of tax dollar accountability.

 

Of course, the real world is not so neat and tidy as evidenced by the fool's
errand of administering standardized post tests to students who have already
attained their GED.  

 

David's question about the endpoint of the adult literacy education system
is an important one to focus on.  Throughout my career in adult education I
have been somewhat obsessed and perplexed in my quest to answer the question
of "GED and then What?".  I remain so.  As I write, the State of Texas has a
new request for proposal on the street to implement a state funded Dropout
Recovery Pilot Program.  The RFP defines a college readiness track that
appears to define minimal success as 

 

*	Successful completion of GED
*	Successful completion of state approved college placement test
*	Successful completion of a college credit "core" course

 

The RFP encourages collaboration with our workforce colleagues who are in
the business of preparing people for demand occupations at the local level.
Often our colleagues utilize WIA Title One money to assist people in the
completion of occupation specific certification and training programs that
can and do lead to good paying jobs and enhanced quality of life.  My
workforce colleagues tell me that these programs rarely require the
completion of a "core" college course.

 

It seems to me that our responsibility is to prepare our students to achieve
enhanced real world outcomes that would include multiple "endpoints" that
should not necessarily be tied solely to completion of conventional
postsecondary education coursework.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jon Engel

Adult Education Director

Community Action Inc.

PO Box 748

San Marcos, TX 78666

Voice  (512)392-1161 ext. 334

Fax  (512)396-4255

Email  jengel at communityaction.com

Web www.communityaction.com 

  _____  

From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of David J. Rosen
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 7:06 AM
To: specialtopics at nifl.gov
Subject: [SpecialTopics 1035] A different state standards issue: the
endpoint of the state adult literacy system

 

Colleagues,

 

In our discussion about state content standards, one of the issues that has
emerged implicitly is what the state standard should be for the end point of
adult literacy education. Should it be the passing the GED? Successful
transition to higher education? Success in at least a year of post-secondary
education? In the past, the answer was clear: passing the GED. Now, in many
states there is a push toward successful transition to higher education,
and/or post-secondary job training and/or apprenticeship. One state
professional association, the New Jersey State Association for Lifelong
Learning (NJALL) now calls for one year of post secondary education and a
certificate as the new standard. (See the conclusion and recommendations in
this policy paper below.)

 

Of course, many students want a GED, and only a GED. They want the pride of
having earned the credential, or they need it to keep their present job. But
the earnings research done by John Tyler and others ( A National Institute
for Literacy-sponsored video panel discussion on this with Dr. Tyler will be
found at http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/webcasts/ged/webcast_ged.html ) shows that
if the student's goal is to affect his/her earnings through increased
education, then more is needed, that passing the GED plus at least a year of
college and a certificate or degree are required. Has your state been
discussing this issue? What are the considerations? Has your state made a
decision on the end point? If so, what? 

 

I did say in my earlier message that I would post only one question today,
but then I saw the recommendations in the policy paper from the NJALL, and I
thought it was so interesting and pertinent that I couldn't help but raise
this in the context of our discussion of state content standards, especially
as for some states an important goal may be to align adult literacy
education with successful preparation for college.

 

Your thoughts?

 


>From the NJALL policy paper:


 

Conclusion 

Considering the available data, the conclusion is inescapable. If adult
literacy educators 

want to do more than educate our students to become members of the working
poor, we 

must rethink our mission. Completion of adult literacy must become the
half-way point 

in a trajectory that leads to transition to and success in post secondary
education. This 

will require new partnerships between adult literacy programs and post
secondary 

institutions at both the state policy level and the local operational level.
If we accept 

anything less, are we meeting our professional responsibility? 

Recommendations 

1. Establish a high-level taskforce between the SETC, the Commission on
Higher 

Education and other stakeholders to study the transitions issue and
recommend a 

state policy response. 

2. Accept one year of post secondary education and a certificate as the new
standard 

for completion of adult literacy education and insure that resources are
adequate 

to meet this standard. 

The full NJALL policy paper will be found at http://www.njall.org/index.php

 

 

David J. Rosen

Special Topics Discussion Moderator

djrosen at comcast.net

 





 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20080620/41a4dd91/attachment.html