Just a thought on this.
   
  While we all agree on the importance of finding out what the students' goals are, when it comes to making policy we always seem to take the superior approach and decide what is best for them.  Honestly, neither of my parents have much education.  They are both in their 60s now, retired, no bills other than property taxes..... We were "working poor" when I was a kid (and sometimes not so much working), but my parents gave me a good life and met their personal goals of taking care of our family and providing for their own future.  They value education, but only as far as it helps you reach your goals.   I am the first and only (as far as I know) 4-year college graduate in my family.  Yet, my brother and sister, neither of whom went to college, earn more than me and have stable and comfortable home lives.  Lack of a college education does not relegate you to "the working poor."
   
  Especially with regard to ESL, the end point of literacy education should be determined by the individual student.  Some want to have just enough English to survive outside of their language community.  Others want enough English to communicate with clients so they can advance in their positions or start their own company.  Some want to get their GED.  Others think it is a waste of time because they have high school or college degrees already, even though they may not be recognized in the US (or need to be validated).  And, yes, some want to pursue a career, technical or professional.  It is not up to me to make the decision of "how much literacy is enough" for them (although, if I see a student with great potential who only lacks confidence I will, of course, encourage him or her to open up to the possiblities.)
  We need to be careful not to impose our goals on our students' goals.  My goal is to help each student reach his or her personal goal, perhaps to gain a broader view of the opportunities available, but never to dictate goals to them.
   
   
   
   
   
   
  
"David J. Rosen" <djrosen at comcast.net> wrote:
    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
  




-------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Special Topics mailing list
SpecialTopics at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/SpecialTopics
Email delivered to glyndalin at yahoo.com


  Grace and Peace!
Glenda Lynn Rose, PhD
Executive Director, English Now
  512-719-9979 (work)
512-789-5131 (cell)
  glyndalin at yahoo.com
  
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20080620/fd1182ea/attachment.html