[Assessment 1112] Re: No Questions or Comments?!

Archived Content Disclaimer

This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.

Schneider, Jim jschneider at eicc.edu
Tue Feb 5 14:45:38 EST 2008


I have directed a downtown Adult Learning Center for our local community
college for 14 years. The #1 issue that inhibits the success of all of
our learners - ESL, ABE, or GED is funding and infrastructure.

Funding puts severe limits on the pay that is available for instructors,
the hours that classes can be offered, and the support services that
will be available to the learners.

The reality of funding limitations on our program result in

- starting pay of $13.25 an hour, top pay of $15.25/hr - which is not
competitive with K-12 substitute teachers, let alone highly qualified,
instructors with any significant ESL and/or adult education training.
Our instructors work hard and are committed to the learning of their
students, but with an extremely limited well of knowledge training to
draw upon.

- 4-10 hours a week for 38 weeks of the year also severely limits the
pool of interested instructors, as well as inhibiting the learning
opportunities of the students.

Similar to others who have posted - we find that the higher the
literacy/education of the ESL student upon enrollment, the more likely
they are to progress and transition to additional education/training -
which isn't all that different from the U.S. born ABE students.

We do have staff who do assist our learners transition to our short-term
vocational & credit programs as one of several responsibilities. The
majority of ESL learners who have transitioned have done so via
short-term vocational programming - CNA, welding, etc. Those who
transitioned into a credit program were again those who were well
educated in their home country.

Bottom line is that adult literacy desperately needs a serious
commitment of funding, support and infrastructure from the federal,
state and local levels if meaningful learning is going to take place.
The system does very well considering the limitations placed upon it.
Professional development opportunities are meaningless if the system
doesn't support professionals. There isn't an NRS accountability measure
that can create Cadillac-level students with the current Yugo budgets.

Sincerely,

Jim Schneider



________________________________

From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of Marie Cora
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 5:51 PM
To: Assessment at nifl.gov
Subject: [Assessment 1103] No Questions or Comments?!


Hello everyone,

I'm so surprised! No one has anything to comment on regarding your
program's effectiveness at helping ESL students advance?? I was very
curious to know if subscribers experience the same types of issues that
Dr. Chisman and Dr. Crandall found in their research: a lack of
intensity of instruction/few protocols for transitioning students/few
opportunities for professional development.

What are the issues in your program that you feel inhibit the ESL
student from advancing? What do you try to do about that?

Please post your questions and comments now.

Thanks!

Marie Cora
Assessment Discussion List Moderator


Marie Cora
marie.cora at hotspurpartners.com <mailto:marie.cora at hotspurpartners.com>
NIFL Assessment Discussion List Moderator
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lincs.ed.gov/pipermail/assessment/attachments/20080205/f9914127/attachment.html