News, Views, and Clues 

May, 2007

  2007 NTI

  Transition Reports

  ESL & NAAL Discussions

  HS Dropout Rate 30%

  Colleague Question-ESOL Teacher Requirements

  Colleague Question-Regional Programs

  Resource for Your Professional Development Leaders

Preparing for the National Training Institute
 

May 31, 2007
 

To help you make your plans for the National Training Institute for State Directors and their staff members, here are some details.

1. Overview: State Planning Tools

The NAEPDC/NCSDAE National Training Institute for State Directors and their staff members will be held in Albuquerque, NM, September 12-15, 2007. This Institute will focus on providing you the tools for state plan development. We are currently customizing the agenda to respond to your needs, but wanted to give you information on which to submit requests to attend.

The exact requirements for the state plan will come from OVAE once we have legislation. However, typically, state plans have components like these.


1. Certifications and Assurances
2. Needs Assessment
3. Description of Activities
4. Evaluation
5. Performance Measures
6. Funding Procedures
7. Public Participation
8. Strategies for Populations
9. Integration with Other Training
10. Direct and Equitable Access
11. Correctional Education
12. State Leadership


It is not too early to be thinking about those underlined components for when the time comes: your options for gathering information and your program development options.

For instance, you can begin planning what tools you will have to conduct needs assessments, or how you might want to examine options to enhance your local program monitoring. You may want to look at options for funding formulas, or how to integrate your services with other training programs. You may also want to explore options for state leadership activities including enhancing your professional development system.

At the NTI, we will examine frameworks, policies, and strategies in each of the underlined areas above so you will have options for responding to the OVAE requirements and for planning the next five or six years of your program development. In addition, we will provide you with a synthesis of the latest adult education research.

2. Details of Institute content: See attached for topics you and your staff will be able to choose to match you state’s needs.

3. Registration: Registration will be online on June 8. We will send you a note.

4. Costs:
Registration Fees:

NAEPDC/NCSDAE Member Registration fee
• $125 Designated registration fee for ONE PERSON from each state designated by the state director-NAEPDC pays for planned meals and reimburses sleeping room.
• $279 for each additional person from a state
Non NAEPDC/NCSDAE Member Registration fee
• $399 Registration for Non-NAEPDC member.

Hotels: $129 plus tax

5. Overview Agenda:

Wednesday, September 12-Arrival Day
• Planned evening reception

Thursday, September 13, 8:30-4:40
• Breakfast
• In-depth Session
• Lunch
• In-depth Session
• Dinner on your own in Old Town

Friday, September 14, 8:30-4:30
• Breakfast
• In-depth Session
• Lunch
• In-depth Session
• Dinner on your own in Old Town

Saturday
• Breakfast
• In-depth Session
• Adjourn at noon

 

Transition Reports

May 31, 2007
 

Here are two reports relating to transitions to post secondary. Though not adult education topics, they might inform your transition discussions.


Aligned Expectations? A Closer Look at College Admissions and Placement Tests:

Some states seeking to raise high school standards have begun using college admission or placement tests as high school exit exams. This study from
Achieve compares admission tests, including the ACT and SAT, against the
American Diploma Project's benchmarks to inform policymakers' decisions about if, and how, these tests should be incorporated into state K-12 assessment and accountability systems. Read the report:
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=1022506266&msgid=3637570&act=6DWT &c=6913&admin=0&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pathwaystocollege.net%2FPCNLibr
ary%2FViewBiblio.aspx%3Faid%3D2255


Building a Culture of Evidence for Community College Student Success--Early Progress in the Achieving the Dream Initiative

Achieving the Dream is a multiyear, national initiative, launched by Lumina Foundation for Education, to help community college students stay in school and succeed. The 82 participating colleges commit to collecting and analyzing data to improve student outcomes, particularly for low-income students and students of color. This baseline report describes the early progress that the first 27 colleges have made after just one year of implementation. (MRDC) Read the report:
<http://www.mdrc.org/sps/go.cgi?c=42HrYZMJXdRsJMWWzo7o>

 

ESL & NAAL Discussions

May 17, 2007
 

The National Institute for Literacy (NIFL) is sponsoring two upcoming discussions of interest for your teachers and program managers.

The first focuses on implementing ESL Content Standards.

The second will focus on what the National Assessment of Adult Literacy tells us about gender, race and socioeconomic status of adults.

Part I below cites the topics and dates.

Part II below gives all the details.

These discussions are excellent opportunities for your practitioners to connect with colleagues and experts from across the country from the comfort of their computer.


PART I:

1) Topic: Implementing adult ESL Content Standards
Where held: Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
When: May 21-25, 2007
To participate, subscribe: http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/Englishlanguage
List Moderator: Lynda Terrill, lterrill@cal.org

2) Topic: Gender, Race, SES and Adult Literacy: What does the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) tell us?
Where held: Poverty, Race, Women, and Literacy Discussion List
When: May 21-29, 2007
To participate, subscribe: http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/povertyracewomen
List Moderator: Daphne Greenberg, ALCDGG@langate.gsu.edu


PART II:

1) Topic: Implementing adult ESL Content Standards
Where held: Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
When: May 21-25, 2007
To participate, subscribe: http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/Englishlanguage
List Moderator: Lynda Terrill, lterrill@cal.org

Discussion Announcement

Please join us for an upcoming discussion on implementing adult ESL content standards from May 21-25. The discussion will be facilitated by Kirsten Schaetzel and Sarah Young of the Center for Adult English Language Acquisition (CAELA). Kirsten and Sarah will be joined by adult ESL practitioners using standards in the field, including Dr. Lesley Tomaszewski of the Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy and Learning (TCALL) and Karen Gianninoto of the Maryland State Department of Education.

Before beginning the discussion, we would like to provide some background information about standards-based instruction based on two recent CAELA briefs: "Understanding Adult ESL Content Standards" (September 2006,
http://www.cal.org/CAELA/esl_resources/briefs/contentstandards.html) and "Using Adult ESL Content Standards" (March 2007,
http://www.cal.org/CAELA/esl_resources/briefs/usingcontstandards.html).
Content standards are broadly defined as what learners should know and be able to do in a certain subject or practical domain. They describe the knowledge and skills that students will have upon successful completion of an instructional program. Although standards are the foundation for designing curricula, instruction, and assessment, they do
not stipulate the types of lesson plans, activities, or teaching methodologies that should be used. Content standards, curriculum frameworks, and resource guides that states have developed can provide guidance to local programs and practitioners in developing effective curriculum and instruction.

Standards-based education has been a part of K-12 instruction and assessment for quite some time now, but it is a relatively new addition to the adult basic education and adult ESL fields. There are many adult ESL standards-based initiatives currently in development or in use, such as the Adult Education Content Standards Warehouse
(http://www.adultedcontentstandards.ed.gov) where sets of adult ESL content standards from ten states, CASAS, and Equipped for the Future (EFF) are available for download. The Adult Literacy Education (ALE) Wiki Web site on Standards (http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Standards) provides a list of existing and in-development adult education standards, curriculum frameworks, and resource guides from over 20 states, as well as links to standards from four other English-speaking countries. The Standards-In-Action project, funded by the Office of Vocational and
Adult Education, is working with six pilot states to develop professional development and resources for implementing standards in curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

As we prepare to begin our discussion on what adult ESL content standards are and how they are used to improve instruction and learning, please consider the following questions. We look forward to hearing your responses and examining additional questions focused on implementing standards in adult ESL.

How are English language acquisition and skills development approached in content standards, and how does this differ from previous methods of ESL instruction?

Many people on this list have children in standards-based K-12 programs or who have taught in a K-12 setting. How do adult standards compare to K-12 standards? What can we learn or apply from K-12 standards-based education, in terms of research on instructional methods, activities, and materials, assessment, and professional development?

What professional development and supplementary materials are needed to facilitate adult ESL standards implementation?

How can we know if adult ESL standards-based instruction and assessment are beneficial for students, teachers, and programs?

We will be posting some preliminary thoughts about these questions next week, and look forward to hearing from practitioners and administrators in the field who have experience with adult ESL content standards or who are interested in learning more.

Sincerely,
Sarah Young & Kirsten Schaetzel
Center for Adult English Language Acquisition
www.cal.org/caela




2) Topic: Gender, Race, SES and Adult Literacy: What does the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) tell us?
Where held: Poverty, Race, Women, and Literacy Discussion List
When: May 21-29, 2007
To participate, subscribe: http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/povertyracewomen
List Moderator: Daphne Greenberg, ALCDGG@langate.gsu.edu
Guest Discussant: Elizabeth Greenberg

Discussion Announcement

Guest Bio:
Elizabeth Greenberg, is a principal research analyst at the American Institutes for Research (AIR), and is AIR's Project Director for the 2008 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) Special Studies contract. She was also AIR's Deputy Project Director for the 2003 NAAL Design, Analysis, and Reporting contract. In her role as Deputy Project Director for the 2003 NAAL, she led the development of the NAAL background questionnaire and assessment items. She is a lead author or co-author of several reports based on the 2003 NAAL, including A First Look at the Literacy of America's Adults in the 21st Century, The Health Literacy of America's Adults, Literacy in Everyday Life, Literacy Behind Bars, and the 2003 NAAL Public-Use Data File User's Guide. Elizabeth is also an author or co-author of several reports and articles based upon the 1992 adult literacy data, including English Literacy and Language
Minorities in the United States.

Resources for Discussion:
Literacy in Everyday Life http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007480

A First Look at the Literacy of America’s Adults in the 21st Century http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006470

The Health Literacy of America’s Adults http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006483

Literacy Behind Bars http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007473



Key Points from NAAL 2003 related to Literacy, Gender, Race, and SES:

Gender

• Between 1992 and 2003, women's average document and quantitative literacy scores increased. During the same time period, men's average document literacy score decreased and there was no statistically significant change in average quantitative literacy for men.

• Between 1992 and 2003, women's average prose literacy score stayed the same, while men's average prose literacy score decreased.


• In 2003, women had higher average prose and document literacy than men, and men had higher average quantitative literacy than women.

• In 1992, there was no statistically significant difference between men and women in their average prose literacy, but men had higher average document and quantitative literacy than women.

Race

• Between 1992 and 2003, average prose, document, and quantitative literacy increased for Black adults.

• Between 1992 and 2003, average prose and document literacy decreased for Hispanic adults. Average quantitative literacy did not change for Hispanic adults. The percentage of the adult population (age 16 and older) that identified themselves as Hispanic increased from 8 percent in 1992 to 12 percent in 2003.

• Between 1992 and 2003, average prose literacy increased for Asian/Pacific Islander adults and there was no statistically significant change in average document and quantitative literacy for this group.

• Between 1992 and 2003, there was no statistically significant change in average prose and document literacy for white adults, but there was an increase in quantitative literacy.

Socioeconomic Status (SES)

• Among adults with Below Basic prose literacy, 26 percent lived in households with average incomes of less than $10,000 and only 7 percent lived i n households with average incomes of $60,000 or greater.

• Among adults with Proficient prose literacy, 2 percent lived in households with average incomes of less than $10,000 and 65 percent lived in households with average incomes of $60,000 or greater.

• Higher percentages of adults with higher literacy levels than adults with lower literacy levels were employed full-time, and lower percentages were out of the labor force. Sixty-four percent of adults with Proficient prose literacy were employed full-time, compared with 29 percent of adults with Below Basic prose literacy. Eighteen percent of adults with Proficient prose literacy were not in the labor force, compared with 57 percent of adults with Below Basic prose literacy.

• The occupational groups with the highest average prose, document, and quantitative literacy scores were Professional and related and Management, Business, and Financial. The occupational groups with the lowest average prose document and quantitative literacy scores were Service; Farming, Fishing, and Forestry; Transportation and Material Moving; Production; and Construction and Extraction.

HS Dropout Rate 30%

May 16, 2007