| Research has shown that meaningful improvements in adult literacy
require more than the annual average of about 70 hours that adult learners
spend in organized literacy instruction. Low student persistence is therefore
a critical issue for library literacy programs and other providers of
adult education. In response, the Wallace–Reader’s Digest Funds launched
the Literacy in Libraries Across America (LILAA) initiative in 1996. Of
the fifteen participating libraries, five are the focus of the LILAA persistence
study, which is being conducted by the Manpower Demonstration Research
Corporation and the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and
Literacy. This interim report from the study examines the period, starting
in 2000, during which the programs developed plans to improve student
persistence and began to implement service enhancements.
The Adult Learners and Their
Initial Patterns of Participation
- As the initiative began, literacy test scores averaged near the third-grade
level on assessments of reading, phonetic decoding, and comprehension
and at the fifth-grade level on a vocabulary test. Native English speakers
had lower average scores than those who were learning English.
- Participation in program services fell short of the amount that research
indicates is needed to improve literacy levels substantially. Only two-thirds
of entrants remained in the program after three months, and entrants
averaged 57 hours of participation over 18 months.
Early Implementation of Persistence Innovations
- LILAA’s continued focus on improving student persistence shaped program
behavior and stimulated a search for ways to achieve this goal, which
had more significance than many of the innovations originally planned.
- Most of the literacy programs focused on improving instruction and
on changing operational procedures, such as expanding program hours.
- Support services (such as child care and transportation assistance)
were the most difficult innovation for the library literacy programs
to implement.
- People who entered the programs in 2001 participated for more hours
during their period of active participation than did their counterparts
in 2000. But the length of active participation did not differ between
the two years.
Early Implementation Lessons
- Students expressed two types of learning goals: specific “instrumental”
goals that must be reached in order to realize longer-term aspirations
and broader “transformational” goals that entail major life changes,
such as taking on a new social or work role. Literacy programs need
to acknowledge and build on each type of goal to motivate long-term
participation.
- Learners benefited from different types of sponsors — individuals
who provided continuing encouragement and support. Library literacy
programs could help students identify people who can play these roles,
and they could support sponsors’ efforts.
- Learners see library literacy programs as caring and respectful and,
hence, as different from other educational or social service organizations.
Library literacy programs need to preserve this personalized atmosphere
while simultaneously emphasizing more intensive participation.
A final report, scheduled for the fall of 2003, will discuss
key factors supporting and inhibiting participation in adult literacy
programs, changes that the sites made to support student persistence more
effectively, changes in student persistence as these reforms took effect,
innovations that appear to be especially promising, and the relationship
between participation in library literacy services and improved literacy
skills. The final report will also explore how library literacy programs
fit within the broader adult education system.
|
Funders
The Literacy in Libraries Across America (LILAA) initiative is supported by The Wallace Foundation and, with the support also of the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Educational Research and Improvement, is being evaluated by the MDRC and the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy (NCSALL) at Harvard University.
The findings and conclusions presented in this report do not necessarily represent the official positions
or policies of the funders.
|