There is some contradiction as to whether or not participation in a literacy program leads to employment gains. In general, Beder (1999) found that participation in a program resulted in increased earnings and led to a reduction in welfare dependence, but how this occurred in relation to the literacy program was unclear. Other studies have found that students experienced an increased rate of employment (Bingham, Ebert & Smith, 1999) and programs that focused on basic skills and work place preparation supported employment outcomes (Ebert & Bingham, 2000). Contradicting these findings is Malicky and Norman's (1994) study that literacy students returned to the same kinds of low–paying jobs they had before participating in the program. The authors concluded that participation in a literacy program had no "direct, causal" relationship with employment. A key issue from the findings would be to determine the reasons for employment gains where they were noted. Were gains related to programs that had an integrated approach to employment preparation? And, conversely, did people see fewer gains in programs that focused only on literacy skill development?

SUMMARY

Only a fraction of adults who have low literacy skills based on the IALS measures actually participate in adult literacy education programs. Those at IALS Level One who are most likely to seek out a program are over the age of 56 (54%), have neither English or French as a first language (33%), and may have a disability (13%). How should the literacy needs of these adults be met? Could a literacy–as–practices approach be a better way to meet their needs than a skills and tasks approach? In addition, if adults with low literacy are resistant to schooling models, could an approach based on sociocultural ideas be more appealing?

According to Long and Middleton (2001), adults similar to the ones described above are motivated to attend a literacy program by both intrinsically based goals (they want to be more independent) and extrinsic goals (they want to find a better job). Those who hope that improved literacy skills will equate to greater earnings are faced with contradictory messages. Initial statistical analysis of the IALS data supports the notion that higher literacy and education levels equate to higher wages and more stable employment. But a closer examination of these statistics reveals that greater wage discrepancies exist within occupations than amongst people with the same literacy level between occupations. This suggests that discriminatory practices may play a greater role in wage disparities than literacy levels. What does this mean for the students at IALS Level One who hope a literacy program may help them achieve their employment goals?