BASIC ISSUES

Several key assumptions underlie current literacy policies, some of which have not been subjected to sufficient scrutiny. Although some of these assumptions have been studied and others are the subjects of ongoing studies, many questions remain. The first assumption is that a large number of adults in America need and would profit from literacy training. Although few disagree with this assumption in its general form, little agreement exists on the number of adults who need assistance or on their physical and mental characteristics. One of the barriers to resolving this debate is the lack of differentiation for literacy needs. On an absolute level, almost everyone could benefit from further literacy instruction, even lawyers and doctors. For policy- making, however, the most important needs are those that will allow people to be self-sufficient economically, to manage their homes, and to be functioning members of their communities.

However, even within this domain, needs differ widely. The ESL needs of professional immigrants from Eastern Europe are vastly different from the basic literacy needs of some middle school dropouts, and these differ from the literacy needs of high school graduates who want entry to advanced technical skill training. The types of instruction that each of these populations need to qualify them for the same employment opportunities and the same levels of home and civic functioning have different resource and administrative demands. Effective policy requires more than a combined count of all who might profit from further literacy instruction.

A second assumption is that if adults could only be persuaded to attend adult basic education programs, or other types of literacy instruction, they would acquire the skills they are presumed to be lacking. This assumption is relatively untested. We know little about the effectiveness of different literacy programs and have limited experience in measuring literacy program performance (Darkenwald, 1986). Almost all program output measures are of academic or functional skills, yet most researchers agree that attitudes and beliefs also deserve attention. Even the roles of some types of programs are in doubt. Library tutoring programs, for example, usually provide services to adults at the lowest ability levels, using relatively untrained volunteers for tutors. Do we expect appreciable literacy skill gains from such programs or do we expect more confidence building and survival skill acquisition? To what degree should these programs prepare and encourage adults to attend ABE classes?

The third and most important assumption is that adults who acquire whatever is being taught in literacy programs will be better equipped for high-skilled jobs in the labor market, will function better as parents and home managers, and will participate more fully in civic and community affairs. Many literacy programs operate on an open entry, open exit basic, wherein students define their own goals. Although this policy may be successful in encouraging adults to attend programs they might not be comfortable in under different operating procedures, it does not ensure that adults will be striving for the levels of literacy that they need and could attain. Adults with low literacy levels tend to lack confidence in their own abilities to learn. Without assistance in defining what their needs might be, they may aim for far less than what is necessary for their own success.

More serious is the lack of basic understanding of the literacy demands of home and civic functioning. We assume, for example, that one goal of literacy instruction is to improve parenting, particularly for fostering the literacy development of children, yet we have only crude estimates of the amounts and types of reading, writing, and mathematics that are required to succeed at this task. Like most of the other goals of literacy instruction, parenting is dependent upon much more than literacy. In some cases, literacy is only a proxy for some complex of skills and may not be necessary, given compensating conditions. For example, many immigrant and refugee parents in America who are not literate in English are nevertheless quite effective in fostering their children's education (Caplan, Choy, & Whitmore, 1992).

BACK / NEXT PAGE