In May 1988, the International Reading Association (IRA) passed a Resolution calling for the development and promotion of "standards for volunteer tutoring programs and the training of literacy volunteer tutors", and "evaluation standards for literacy programs." In its background statement, the IRA acknowledged the contribution of volunteer tutors in the eradication of illiteracy, but called for well-designed preparation programs. They went on to deplore the fact that most existing volunteer literacy programs offer "as little as 10 hours or less of training." The IRA perceives the high drop-out rate being partially accounted for by program deficiencies and the lack of qualified tutors.

In British Columbia, the Executive of the Adult Basic Education Association of B.C. approved a statement on "Quality Literacy Programs" which was prepared by one of its committees and discussed at the Association's Annual Meeting and Conference in the spring of 1988. Thus, the field appears to be moving towards "quality control." This is a sign of maturity.

The need had been expressed for some kind of "tool" or "process" which could be used for program evaluation - either by the programs themselves (self-evaluation), or by someone external to the program should the need arise. Currently, no national standards exist in Canada. However, most literacy programs using volunteers do engage in some forms of evaluation which usually solicit feedback from learners and volunteer tutors about their experience(s) in the program. Funding and sponsoring bodies often require quantitative and other data as well to justify the disbursement of funds and/or a program's continued existence. It was in this developing climate of concern about "standards", "quality", and "good practice", that this project had its genesis.

Project Assumptions

In designing the process, there were several explicit assumptions:

1. The aim of the evaluation process is to improve program offerings.
2. Evaluation should be an ongoing internal process in the learning community, but there are times when others, not as closely involved with the program, may be called upon to do a review. Thus, the process to be designed could be used either internally or by an external evaluator.