Responses to the Nellie Mae report and other observations relative to adult literacy in Rhode Island and beyond

Links to media coverage and the report to which this letter of response was generated appear on LR/RI's advocacy page.

letter to Nellie Mae from the New England Literacy Resource Center

July 17, 2002

Dear Mr. Rubin,

As a collaborative of state ABE Directors, professional development specialists and practitioners, we at the New England Literacy Resource Center (NELRC) share your interest in strengthening adult literacy services in the region. Therefore we read your recent report, Rising to the Literacy Challenge, with great interest.

While we agree with some of your recommendations, we have concerns about others. We fully agree that our field needs more adequate funding, and several of your recommendations have been in the process of being addressed for some time. We also realize that there must have been limitations on how much research you could conduct regarding the ABE field in New England. However, we were disappointed with the extent of outdated information in your report that does not reflect the current reality of Adult Basic Education in New England. Your report also makes blanket statements about all New England states without regard to the differences between the states, or the ongoing improvement initiatives that are already in place.

For the record, we want to address some of the misconceptions, inaccuracies and omissions. You may also hear from individual states about how they were portrayed.

1) Your recommendation for a clear mission for ABE focused on economic development ignores the broad purposes of ABE that were developed through a national consensus­building process in 2000. As articulated in From the Margins to the Mainstream that captures the results of the National Literacy Summit of 2000, our goal is to build a system of high quality adult literacy, language and lifelong learning services that helps adults in every community make measurable gains toward achieving their goals as family members, workers, citizens and lifelong learners. This goal was an outgrowth of 25 meetings around the country with hundreds of ABE stakeholders.

Your incomplete vision for our field does not acknowledge that the ABE system is also responsible for achieving outcomes related to intergenerational literacy and citizenship, for example.

2) Ever since the National Reporting System (NRS) went into effect in July 2000 as part of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, every state in the Union has been developing outcome-based performance standards. These standards capture precisely the kinds of outcome measures you recommend. With all its achievements, the program that you cite as exemplary, YouthBuild, does not, to our knowledge, have system wide criteria or data systems to ensure the validity, reliability and comparability of the results they report.

3) As part of NRS, each state's performance is measured according to 16 indicators. There are incentive grants for states that exceed these standards. There is already a system in place that evaluates each state¹s performance, much like the report cards you recommend.

4) The question of pathways to advancement through institutional partnerships is certainly an area where there is room for improvement in our region. However, we would like to point out that there are active institutional partnerships in three states: Connecticut, Maine and Massachusetts

5) Your report contends that the national Workplace Literacy Program funding was discontinued by Congress because it was "not perceived as successful" and that "traditional ABE curricula and instructional methods failed to adapt to the challenge." This is untrue. The discontinuation of the funding of this program was not a function of its performance. These funds were folded into the basic state grants as part of an overall consolidation of discretionary grant programs by the U.S. Department of Education. In fact, the Workplace Literacy Program developed contextualized curricula in several states including Connecticut, Massachusetts and Vermont, which is documented and available from the states or NELRC.

6) You claim that "no state has integrated services in ways that would systematically link ABE clients to workplace training or link those entering workplace training programs to ABE resources if they need them" (p.17). The Massachusetts Workplace Literacy Consortium has been in existence since 1994 providing such integrated services. They published a Workplace Education Guide in 1999 that is available free of charge from the Massachusetts Department of Education, Adult and Community Learning Services. The contact person is Andrea Perrault.

7) We were puzzled by your omission of adult learners with learning disabilities in the "Special Populations" section. LD adults are an important special population. While we have devoted increased resources locally and nationally in addressing their needs, we are far from able to meet such needs adequately.

One exemplary project is the Rhode Island Learning Disabilities Project, an initiative in the Department of Human Services that dedicates staff from the Office of Rehabilitation Services and the Family Independence Program to serve individuals with learning disabilities. This collaborative relationship identifies parents on cash assistance with learning disabilities, provides the necessary accommodations and vocational training programs in order for those individuals to become gainfully employed and independent. http://www.ors.state.ri.us/vrld.htm

In general, we found that your report neglected to mention numerous noteworthy practices and a sustained focus on continuous improvement in the ABE field in the New England states. We would like to have the opportunity to highlight these initiatives and practices so that you could see that the label, "cottage industry" is not an appropriate description of the current state of affairs in ABE. We certainly acknowledge the need for improvements in our field, most of which require substantially increased funding to implement.

We hope that in the future you acknowledge the limitations of your report when you speak about it publicly and represent our field to the public.

Sincerely,

Mary Paul Hankinson, Chair of the Board

Connecticut : Roberta Pawloski, Chief, Bureau of Career and Adult Education , CT Department of Education, Andy Tyskiewicz, Division Director, Capitol Region Education Council, CT, Betty Huckbee, Instructor, Adult Training and Development Network

Maine Becky Dyer, Adult and Family Literacy Coordinatorm Maine Department of Education , Evelyn Beaulieu, Director , Center for Adult Learning and Literacy, Univ. of Maine. Betty Gundersdorf, Assistant Director. Lewiston Adult Education, Maine, Connie Patton, Director, Marshwood Adult & Community Education, Maine

Massachusetts : Robert Bickerton, Director Adult and Community Learning Services, MA Department of Education, Maria Gonzalez, Coordinator System for Adult Basic Education Support, Boston, Catherine Snell, Instructor, Worcester Adult Education, Phyllis Whitney, Director, ACCESS Program, Cape Cod Community College, Sally Waldron, Vice President, World Education

New Hampshire: Art Ellison, Director Bureau of Adult Education, NH Department of Education, Patricia Nelson, Program Director, Second Start, Diana Owen, Program Coordinator, Nashua Adult Learning Center, Deborah Tasker, Staff Development Specialist, Bureau of Adult Education, NH Department of Education

Rhode Island : Robert Mason, Director, Adult Basic Education Office, RI Dept of Elementary and Secondary Education, Patricia Bellart, Program Director , Rhode Island Regional Adult Learning , Denise DiMarzio, Coordinator, Literacy Program at Providence Public Library, Janet Isserlis, Director, Literacy Resources, Rhode Island

Vermont: Sandra Robinson, Director, Adult Basic Education Office, VT Department of Education, Amy Brockman, Staff Development Specialist, Adult Basic Education Office, VT Department of Education

cc. Dr. Blenda Wilson
Reno James
Marleen Seltzer
Amy Robins
Marty Liebowitz

What do you think? Send your response via email, indicating your willingness to post your response here -- and include whatever contact information you'd like to share so that others might respond to you, and/or to LR/RI as well.

return to advocacy