[NIFL-POVRACELIT:550] Vote On Adult Functional Illiteracy

From: Mary Ann Corley (macorley1@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Jul 28 2001 - 14:41:52 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f6SIfqf05074; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:41:52 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:41:52 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <003901c11794$b8002360$23bffea9@hppav>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Mary Ann Corley" <macorley1@earthlink.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:550] Vote On Adult Functional Illiteracy
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
Status: O
Content-Length: 3386
Lines: 70

Mary Ann: This is a cross-post of a message I sent to the National
Literacy Advocates (NLA) list. I thought that perhaps POVRACELIT members
who have followed the debate about the Washington Post article might
want to vote on the numbers of adults to be declared functionally
illiterate, too, and explain to the POVRACELIT members why they voted as
they did.
Thanks,
Tom Sticht

*****************************

Vote On Adult Functional Illiteracy

Stimulated by my post of July 10, 2001 on the NLA list, the Washington
Post for July 17, 2001 ran an article by Jay Mathews in which Andrew
Kolstad, former director of the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS)
said that the NALS overstated the numbers of adults who are in the
lowest level of literacy, NALS Level 1. Kolstad said that the NALS used
a response probability (RP) of .80 to say that adults were proficient at
a given level of difficulty on the NALS. He said that was too high and
created too many false statements that adults could not perform NALS
tasks when, in fact, they could. He argued that a 50 percent RP value
gives the most statistically accurate and valid numbers of adults who
can and cannot perform NALS tasks.  Using a 50 percent RP drops the
percentage of adults in NALS Level 1 from 20 to 9 percent and the
numbers of adults considered "functionally illiterate" from around
40,000,000 to less than 20,000,000.

All this points out that the decision by the NALS developers to use an
80 percent RP level was completely arbitrary and represented what they
thought was a good indicator of "mastery" of literacy at a given
difficulty level. Other RP values give different percentages of adults
in the NALS levels. Since the use of any RP level other than 50 percent,
the statistically most appropriate and most valid RP value,  is an
arbitrary choice, and Kolstad's final technical report for the NALS
gives a wide range of RP values and percentages of adults who would fall
in the five NALS levels using different RP values, it might be of
interest for NLA list members to vote on how many functionally
illiterate adults they want in the United States and explain why they
voted as they did.

Following are some RP values from Kolstad's report and the associated
percentages and numbers of adults who would fall in NALS Level 1 if the
given RP value were chosen to represent the literacy proficiency levels
of adults [I have used 191,000,000 as the 1992 population numbers for
these calculations]. NLA members can use these figures to vote on how
many adults they wish to designate as functionally illiterate in the
United States.

RP 20-5% [9.5+ million adults in NALS Level 1
RP 30-6% [11.4+ million adults in NALS Level 1]
RP 40-8% [15.2+ million]
RP 50-9% [17+ million]-Kolstad's RP value that is most accurate/valid
statistically
RP 60-12% [22.9+ million]
RP 70-15% [28.6+ million]
RP 80-20% [38+ million]-this is the RP value used in the NALS
RP 90-32% (61+ million )

It may be of interest to note that when NALS examiners asked adults
themselves how well they read, about 7 percent [13.7+ million] said they
did not read well or not at all, 93 percent [177.6+ million ] said they
read well or very well.

Those interested can find a discussion of the Washington Post article on
NIFL's POVRACELIT list. The WP article entitled Adult Illiteracy,
Rewritten, can be found at www.nald.ca under Headline News.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:33:07 EST