DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Statement by
Patricia W. McNeil
Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult Education
on
Adult Education and Literacy
May 16, 1997
Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee
Chairman Jeffords, Senator Kennedy, and Members of the Committee:
It’s a pleasure to appear before the Committee. I would like to discuss the need for adult education and literacy programs in our nation, which is the context for the Administration’s legislative proposal. Our bill, which was introduced last week, is our plan for adult education and literacy in the twenty-first century. We know that the twenty-first century will place increasing skill demands on Americans -- demands that the Nation must equip its citizens to meet if they are to succeed as workers, as parents, and as citizens in our increasingly complex society.
The Development of Federal Support for Adult Basic Education
Today, as we start the bipartisan process of reshaping the Adult Education Act, we should look back 30 years to the passage of Title II-B of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, which led all States to establish adult education delivery systems. Just two years later, the Adult Education Act was enacted and authorized programs of instruction for persons 18 years and older whose inability to read or write English was a substantial impairment to their ability to obtain employment. This Act has been amended and its purpose broadened five times since 1966. We should credit the leaders in the Senate and the House for their commitment to these efforts: Chairman Jeffords, Senator Kennedy, and former Senators Simon and Pell, Chairman Goodling, and Representatives Kildee and Sawyer.
Today, the Adult Education Act provides grants to the States to support programs that assist educationally disadvantaged adults in developing basic skills, achieving certification of high school equivalency, and learning English. Fifteen percent of each State’s grant is set aside for demonstrations and teacher training projects. States distribute the balance to a variety of local educational and community agencies that provide adult education. Current law limits the funds that States may use for high school equivalency programs to 20 percent, sets aside a minimum of 10 percent for services to criminal offenders and other institutionalized individuals, and requires that States use some funds for "Gateway Grants" to public housing authorities.
The Importance of the Adult Education and Literacy Programs
The Department of Education’s adult education and literacy programs are integral to President Clinton’s "Call to Action for American Education in the 21st Century," and his GI Bill for America’s Workers. As you know, the President has challenged the Nation to ensure that every 18-year old can go to college and that all adults are able to learn new skills throughout their lives.
Current adult literacy statistics reveal what a challenge this is. The 1993 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) found that between 26 and 30 million adults aged 16 to 64 years [18% of the national total] were at the lowest level of basic skills -- roughly at or below a fifth grade level. Of those at the lowest literacy levels, 25 percent were immigrants and 67 percent were not high school graduates. More than 40 percent of the group with the lowest literacy skills lived in poverty, in contrast to between 4 and 8 percent of individuals scoring in the two highest levels of the literacy assessment.
While there is a significant need for adult education and literacy services in all of the States, the level of need varies across the country. Statistical estimates of States’ populations, age 16 and older, scoring in the lowest level of NALS range from about 11 percent to 37 percent. I have with me a map of the U.S. illustrating the NALS scores estimates.[see attached] A number of the States represented on this subcommittee are in the lower range: the estimated State population at the lowest NALS level is 12 percent for Vermont; 13 percent for Iowa and Minnesota; 15 percent for Washington; and 16 percent for Massachusetts. Higher percentages of adults in the lowest NALS level are found in New York, Texas and the Southern States: for example, 22 percent in Arkansas and 21 percent in Tennessee.
States also differ in the kinds of programs their citizens need. One striking example of this is the need for English as a Second Language [ESL] courses. Nationally, 37 percent of those served in adult education are in ESL. However, only 4 percent of Arkansas’ enrollment is in ESL, in contrast to 45 percent of Washington’s enrollment. Enrollments of welfare clients also differ dramatically by State. States report that between virtually none and 68 percent of their adult education students are welfare clients. The national average is about 17 percent. To give you an example of the diversity among the States, Vermont reports 41 percent of its adult education students are welfare clients, while Connecticut reports 12 percent are welfare clients.
The diversity of State needs and strategies reflect the diverse purposes adult education serves. These include preparing adults for further education, life-long learning, success in careers, being their children’s first teachers, and citizenship.
Adult education programs support State and community efforts to increase access to postsecondary education and training. In 1995, 37 percent of adult education students were youth ages 16 to 24. In 1995, 75,000 adults received their high school credentials through adult education high school equivalency programs and 270,000 were awarded the GED. These credentials open the door to postsecondary education and training. Annually, 150,000 to 200,000 adult education program completers go on to postsecondary education and training. Once they have their high school credentials, adult education students can join the ranks of Americans whom the Administration seeks to help complete at least two years of postsecondary education through HOPE Scholarships, tuition tax deductions, and student financial aid.
New Mexico’s Santa Fe Community College won a 1996 Secretary’s Award for Outstanding Adult Education and Literacy Programs for its innovative strategies for out-of-school youth that opens college doors for very disadvantaged young adults. The program combines volunteer experience that provides work-related skills with teaching strategies and technologies tailored for out-of-school youth. All adult basic education students receive counseling on transition to college. The program had a 94 percent GED pass rate in 1994-95 and, of the GED completers, 40 percent enrolled in college credit courses in 1995-96. Another Secretary Award-winning program at Second Step, a community-based organization in Concord, New Hampshire, has an alterative high school program that has successfully worked with very disadvantaged, at-risk youth by providing the students with highly individualized academic programs that fit their needs.
Adult education is also an important component of life-long learning. Adults of all ages and at all skill levels encounter changes in their lives that make it necessary to improve their basic skills, and the adult education system is there to help when that happens. Sometimes an individual is confronted at work with new technology that requires improved reading or math skills. The companies participating in the Great Oaks Workplace Literacy Program, another Secretary Award winner, in Cincinnati, Ohio, report reduced employee errors, reduced waste in manufacturing processes, increase productivity, better attendance, and more promotions among employees in workplace literacy classes. As the Nation moves from the industrial age to the information age, many workers become dislocated from middle-class jobs. Although they may have learned to function well in their prior occupations with limited literacy skills, these workers are now faced with the challenge of starting new careers or entering job training.
Welfare reform’s emphasis on moving individuals into work will create further demands on individuals to improve their basic skills. More than one out of three AFDC, public assistance, and food stamp recipients who were tested scored in the lowest NALS proficiency level, compared with 22 percent of the total population. The 1996 welfare reform act requires youth who are receiving welfare payments to be in school or work toward high school completion if they do not have a high school credential. It envisions that adult clients making the transition to work will continue their life-long learning through part-time education enabling them to advance in their careers. The adult education system is the foundation on which life-long learning is achieved by the most educationally disadvantaged adults.
It will be a few years before we can assess the national impact of welfare reform on adult education, but we know some trends based on early State experiences. The JOBS program put a much greater emphasis on enrolling welfare clients in education programs than the current "work-first" strategy does. Early indications of the impact of this policy change are mixed; some States have experienced a decline in the number of welfare recipients enrolled in adult education, but many others have not. Declining welfare enrollments may result from adults getting jobs first, getting off welfare, and then enrolling in education programs. States have substantial flexibility, and the impact on education enrollments will depend, in part, on policy decisions that States are just now making. But, eventually, all States will be confronted with welfare clients and former clients who need to upgrade their basic skills, in order to meet the work requirements and life-time limits on welfare.
One trend we are beginning to see is that the types of adult education services needed are changing. Welfare clients need to begin upgrading their basic skills as early as possible, so they can enter the workforce as soon as possible. Many clients will need to improve their basic literacy and numeracy skills concurrently with work: many will supplement a minimum 20-hour week of paid work with course work. New approaches to service delivery will make adult education more accessible to welfare-to-work clients: shorter, more intensive classes that are more closely tied to workplaces will be offered. Some States are creating new linkages between adult education and skills training and job placement services into programs that will satisfy the work requirements. For example, the community college system in Washington State is funding pilot projects to combine vocational training, basic skills, and work.
A trend that concerns us is that few adult education agencies are actively participating in the welfare planning process. In a survey of 25 States by the National Adult Education Professional Development Consortium, 16 State Directors of Adult Education reported no role whatsoever in preparing the State welfare plan; 3 reported that adult education was indirectly represented; and in only 6 States, adult educators were members of the group preparing the plan. We think education needs to be a active partner in welfare to work transition systems. Our new adult education legislation, HR 1562, is a step in that direction.
States and local programs are already adjusting to meet the needs of those making the welfare to work transition. For example, the Connecticut Department of Social Services has requested that programs offer a minimum of 20 hours of instruction, making learning time similar to the work week. Participants like this approach because they complete their educational objectives faster. Rhode Island programs report seeing more young adults on welfare enrolling in adult basic education. Rhode Island’s State Department of Social Services is working to provide clients more employment-related skills, SCANS [Secretary’s Commission on Acquiring Necessary Skills] competencies, and project-based instruction. Vermont, too, reports that an increasing number of welfare recipients are enrolling, and the State already has a relatively high percentage of welfare clients in its adult education enrollment. On the other hand, Alabama reports a decrease in the enrollment of welfare clients as the State implements a welfare reform strategy with a heavy "work first" emphasis.
Adult education also helps America’s immigrants to become citizens. Their economic independence and their ability to exercise their rights and responsibilities as citizens require mastery of the English language. The ESL programs offered by the adult education system enroll about 1.4 million individuals annually. In 1995, 400,000 ESL students attained the basic ESL level and advanced to the intermediate level of study, indicating an initial mastery of basic English proficiency. Rhode Island reports an increase in enrollments in citizenship classes, with local programs trying to increase services to respond to waiting lists of 80 to 150 persons. In Connecticut, enrollments in citizenship classes have increase by about 25 percent during FY 1996 and 1997 with the implementation of welfare reform.
Perhaps the most critical role of adult education and literacy programs is fulfilled when a parent enrolls in order to learn to read to a child. The impact of parental literacy is so profound because of the inter-generational benefits. We must equip parents to become more involved in their children’s learning and challenge them to meet the President’s goal of ensuring that every student can read independently and well by the end of the third grade. Family literacy programs and parents reading to their young children on a regular basis have a demonstrated impact on the literacy and school performance of children.
The Administration’s Legislative Proposal
Let me briefly describe for you how the Administration’s proposal will help the adult education system meet the challenges of the twenty-first century.
First, the bill would promote program quality by establishing program priorities that are based on a strong foundation of research and effective educational practices. In making grants to local service providers, States would give priority to programs that effectively employ advances in technology, provide learning in real life contexts (such as work, family, and citizenship), use well-trained instructors and staff, and are of sufficient intensity and duration for participants to achieve substantial learning gains. Priority would also go to programs that have strong links with other education, career development, training and employment, and social service programs. We would promote quality education by working with States to ensure teaching to high standards. For example, the development of basic skills certificates that are widely recognized credentials of achievement may promote high standards for learning at levels prior to high school completion.
Second, the bill would empower States and communities to meet their unique needs through streamlining and increased flexibility. The bill would consolidate multiple program authorizations into a single State grant. Many set-asides for specific target populations and types of programs would be eliminated. Waivers of statutory and regulatory provisions would be made available in order to help States and localities carry out adult education and literacy programs more effectively.
Third, the bill would include strong performance and accountability provisions to promote program improvement. Working together, the State Directors of Adult Education and the Office of Vocational and Adult Education have begun building a national system of performance indicators to gauge the progress and outcomes from adult education. The bill would authorize the Secretary to continue to work collaboratively with the States to identify and compile information on the participation in, and the impact of, adult education. Building on this system, States would establish performance goals that define the level of student achievement to be attained, and regularly measure and evaluate the progress made toward these goals. The Secretary would be a partner in assisting States to meet the goals, work with States that fail to make progress, and award supplementary grants in recognition of exemplary performance. Similarly, States would be able to work with local grantees to ensure that they make progress toward their performance goals.
It is very important that the program goals established by States and local agencies be approved by the agency that provides them with Federal funds. In order to ensure quality services to their citizens and be accountable to the Department of Education for the use of Federal funds, States must be empowered to ensure that local agencies set sufficiently rigorous performance objectives. Similarly, Congress is holding the Department of Education accountable for the continual improvement of the adult education system, and the Department must be able to approve State goals in order to ensure that the adult education system will meet the goals established for the Government Performance and Results Act. By September, 1997, the Department must complete its annual plan setting performance goals for FY 1999 (which will be the basis of the President’s budget that will come to Congress next February). Annual reports to Congress on actual performance, compared to goals, will begin in March, 2000.
Fourth, the bill would include a targeted formula and financing system aimed at strengthening the Federal-State partnership that supports adult education. Adult education is a Federal-State partnership: the Federal investment makes up about 25 percent of the national expenditures on these programs. In 25 States, the Federal investment constitutes at least 50 percent of expenditures. In addition, the adult education grant pays for about 90 percent of the training of adult education instructors. The Federal-to-State allocation formula in current law would be largely maintained, except for the elimination of the count of in-school youth, who are not part of the target population, and the inclusion of a distribution of 5 percent of the funds based on the number of limited English proficient adults in the State. This inclusion recognizes the important role adult education plays in providing ESL instruction. A "hold-harmless" provision would ensure that each State’s share of the appropriation does not decline more than 10percent per year. A "maintenance-of-effort" provision would require States to continue their investment in adult education.
Our bill would continue to provide grants directly to the State educational agency or other State-designated agency responsible for administering adult education. This is an important issue. Paralleling current State practice and Federal law, our bill would assign responsibility to the "State Educational Agency," as did the Senate’s Workforce Development Act of 1995.
Finally, it is important to note the role the Federal Act plays in building the capacity and quality of the adult education system through flexible State and national leadership activities. State leadership activities would include supporting professional training and development, monitoring and evaluating the quality of services, establishing State content standards for adult education and literacy, developing program performance measures, and promoting the use of technology for teaching, learning, and managing programs.
Our national leadership strategy is carefully focused on activities that will benefit the field and is accomplished through partnerships with the States, the National Institute for Literacy (NIFL), and the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy. We have worked closely with NIFL and the States over the past several months to clarify each of our appropriate roles in technical assistance, research, and development. Our joint strategy is reflected in our legislative proposal. National leadership funds would continue to support such activities as research on the condition and progress of literacy in the United States, the development of effective practices and model programs, such as distance learning, and the evaluation of services and instructional strategies. The Department plans to focus on developing certificates of basic skills that are widely recognized by employers and educational institutions, and new uses for technology. The bill would provide for continued funding of NIFL, as well as national leadership activities, through the adult education national programs authority.
I believe our bill successfully addresses the need for quality, innovation, flexibility, and accountability in adult education and literacy. I look forward to working closely with this Subcommittee to develop bipartisan legislation. I am happy to answer any questions that you have at this time.