As stated in the introduction, this project was conceived in the hope that it might lead to some suggested solutions and development of new strategies to the perceived problems of nonparticipation and attrition. From a research perspective, this writer feels that this project has only begun to open up these topics. The exploratory nature, the small samples, and the short time-frame of the project have not provided a solid quantitative base for administrative decision-making across the province.

However, the project was grounded in the field and the respondents, if not fully representative of that field, do provide us with glimpses of their present lives, their past experiences, their aspirations, their worries, and their attitudes towards education. They do represent a cross-section of a population which just happens to have as one unifying characteristic a low-level of formal education. There is an inherent danger in typecasting the target population based on that single characteristic. A recruitment thrust with a single message is unlikely to reach the bulk of nonparticipants any more than a single program delivery approach or any one instructional strategy can be applied to all adult participants. Program planners and practitioners have to work with the population they hope to serve.

Usual research paradigms may just not be applicable to this population as some of the literature reviewed may have suggested. To get to know more about the bulk of nonparticipants in the low-literate population may demand more in-depth experiences over a longer period of time. Ethnographic and phenomenological research approaches are likely more suited to this population than quantitative studies. The heterogeneity of the population together with varied socio-demographic and geographic factors make generalizations difficult. Research results in the United States are not necessarily applicable in Canada, but are useful in stimulating us to reflect on our own knowledge and praxis.