Glenn,
 
There are many programs out there that provide excellent instruction within the funding constraints we all have. We are customer focused. We are constantly and actively searching for alternate means of providing student centered instruction. Our 75% retention rate speaks volumes. As I said, we do a great deal of professional development on differented instruction to attempt to meet the needs of our students. 
 
Many times students stop out due to personal issues. If an employer requests additional work hours, the student will do what he/she needs to do to put food on the table and a roof over the family's head. These are issues with which our classroom advisors try to assist the student. We offer the student alternate class days/times, interim tutoring opportunities, packets of materials to do while out of class. 
 
It seems there is no one approach that works for everyone. Technology is a partial answer, but as Tom stated from his research, listening is only one piece of the puzzle. If listening were the total answer, the entire deaf community would be illiterate.
 
Sue McGilloway
Coordinator, Volunteers in Partnership
CAFL Career Advisor
CCBC Center for Adult and Family Literacy
410-285-9933 Phone
smcgilloway at ccbcmd.edu
 
Who I am is not a goal to achieve but a gift to receive, and I'm learning 
to wake up each morning and receive it.

 
     
 

________________________________

From: Glenn Young [mailto:gyoungxlt at roadrunner.com]
Sent: Thu 3/27/2008 2:05 PM
To: 'The Learning Disabilities Discussion List'; McGilloway, Susan
Subject: RE: [LearningDisabilities 1829] Re: are we blaming the victim?



I disagree with the premise you are presenting ... that it's the students
"responsibility" to be ready ...

What is happening is they are coming in with needs and the programs are
offering a response that does not meet their needs .... (Getting the GED
Quickly, for example) And they leave ... and then they find out that they
still need to "get the ticket" so they come back ... and still it does not
meet their needs

But then they find there is no alternative ... so they come back and keep
trying for years ...

This is not a positive picture ... and by saying this is the "student's
responsibility ... this is kind of like "blaming the victim"

We should and can now have a system that really meets the immediate needs of
the learners and focuses on that need ... through a new model ... they don't
need to drop out time and time again ... if we give them what they really
need ... rather then only what we think we can offer ...

We need to be customer focused and not blame the customer if they don't like
or want what we offer ....

Glenn Young
CSLD
530 Auburn Ave
Buffalo NY 14222
Cell 703-864-3755
Phone/Fax 716-882-2842
website: glennyoungcsld.com

-----Original Message-----
From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Cindy Fischer
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 1:28 PM
To: smcgilloway at ccbcmd.edu; learningdisabilities at nifl.gov
Subject: [LearningDisabilities 1829] Re: [Possible
SPAM]Re:Controversialagain

Susan,
I agree with you 100%.  Our learners don't drop out.  On any given day, we
have two three who return after stopping out for more than 3 years.  Many
have to wait until they're ready to make that commitment.  Yes, we need to
"capture their attention" within the first three weeks, or they vote with
their feet.  However, if they're not ready, nothing can change it.  The
beautiful thing is that so many do return when they're ready, and we're here
waiting for them -- no questions asked.
Cindy

"If you believe in good things, you can  make them happen."

>>> "McGilloway, Susan" <smcgilloway at ccbcmd.edu> 03/26/08 1:44 PM >>>

I don't think we fail if a student "stops out". We have many students who do
that. "Stopping out" is one of the characteristics of adult literacy
learners. We had one student who, after ten years in the program on and off,
finally graduated through the External Diploma Program. Sometimes it is a
question of finding the right path for the student. We encourage students to
take whichever path serves their needs. In our program we have a 75%
retention rate. We do a great deal of professional development on retention
and have focus groups among our 100+ teachers where they share their
strategies for retention. Also, we don't keep teachers who have poor
retention. We serve around 1800 ABE/GED students/year and just as many ESOL
and so we see it all. Our numbers are above the national and state averages.

Our instructional specialist communicates with teachers through email and
phone on a daily basis, provides the latest in strategies, ideas for
differentiated instruction, brain based learning research - literally
anything that will promote learning and retention. Her theory is "if you
don't get their attention in the first three weeks, you lose them." We have,
for the most part, a very student centered program in which many of our
teachers use differentiated instruction. We also have paid literacy aides
and volunteers who serve as classroom assistants and individual tutors who
meet with students to supplement classroom instruction.

Our twenty classroom advisors assist students with barriers that prevent
them from coming to class. We have a strong enrollment management plan in
which we offer classes at different days/time/location according to the data
from our market trends. Also, we have year round and late start classes that
serve the needs of those students who can't start right away or who want to
get started immediately. Even with all this, we have a hundred students on
our waiting list for next semester.

Do we fail...absolutely not!

Sue McGilloway
Coordinator, Volunteers in Partnership
CAFL Career Advisor
CCBC Center for Adult and Family Literacy
410-285-9933 Phone
smcgilloway at ccbcmd.edu

    


________________________________

From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov on behalf of Trish Hembrough
Sent: Wed 3/26/2008 9:31 AM
To: The Learning Disabilities Discussion List
Subject: [LearningDisabilities 1816] Re: [Possible
SPAM]Re:Controversialagain


Glenn,
Consider yourself officially asked! I am waiting anxiously - on pins and
needles! :-)
Trish

Patricia Hembrough
Director of Education Services
Adult Learner Program
Project Hope
550 Dudley Street
Roxbury, MA 02119
617-442-1880 ext.250
www.prohope.org <http://www.prohope.org/>
where families move up and out of poverty
________________________________

From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Glenn Young
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:07 PM
To: 'The Learning Disabilities Discussion List'
Subject: [LearningDisabilities 1814] Re: [Possible SPAM]
Re:Controversialagain

Geraldine ... Yes I have a proposal ... but I was waiting to see if anyone
was really paying attention .... So yes I do have you hanging to see if
people were really open to a new approach to the issue ...

So ... if a few more ask ... then I present it ...

Glenn Young
CSLD
530 Auburn Ave
Buffalo NY 14222
Cell 703-864-3755
Phone/Fax 716-882-2842
website: glennyoungcsld.com
________________________________

From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Hayden,
Geraldine M.
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 3:53 PM
To: The Learning Disabilities Discussion List
Subject: [LearningDisabilities 1813] Re: [Possible SPAM] Re:
Controversialagain

Glenn, I always tell my students that if you have a concern or complaint,
you must offer a viable solution.  You seem to have us hanging with a
plausible solution.  What do you have in mind?

Geri Hayden
Geraldine M. Hayden
SPED/504 Coordinator
Department of Correctional Education
Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women

________________________________

From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Glenn Young
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 1:25 PM
To: 'The Learning Disabilities Discussion List'
Subject: [Possible SPAM] [LearningDisabilities 1805] Re: Controversial again
Well at least I started some interesting discussion

And I must add that when we talk "on average" ... what one must do ... dear
I say it ... is not compare their local or even state programs per say ...
but to look at  the national aggravate data ....  We really can not tell
without a great deal of work... where our state or local program fits along
the "bell curve" of all ABE students or all ABE programs ... So, while
people respond to the data I present ... based on their own programs or
states it becomes a bit more problematic in how to have the discussion if
they stand only on their local data ... and want to have a dispute over a
percentage or two ... we need to look at the issues I am raising in a bit
more of global perspective.

And the key point that has been raised so far ... that we can or can not
measure success based on if students meet their goals ... well that is the
crux of my point ... If we don't meet the goals of the students ... what is
our purpose? 

My point on this is that it does not really matter if we think the goals are
unrealistic or not ... it is their goals and they have a reason for  having
these goals ... and a reason often imposed upon them by other factors than
the ABE system, or wishful thinking  ... such as welfare clients being told
they have 6 months to get a GED or they can't stay on welfare ...
unrealistic or not ... the pressures upon them are real and therefore their
goals are real to them ... Also, if a person wants to get into an internship
with a labor union or a training program in the food industry etc ... and
they may require a GED ... the student's goal of getting the GED is an
economic necessity, a great needed item ... often the key to economic
success for that student ... and not something they can wait 3-5 years to
obtain.

So with these pressure, which are very real and very impacting on their
lives ... the ABE program says the goal is unrealistic ... but that really
does not matter to the person coming in, the customer ... the GED is what
they need and the GED is what is their goal ...saying or inferring that the
goal can not be met or met in a timely fashion is a major reason why they
customer will leave, and we failed them. 

Currently the ABE system offers an approach that provides a path to the GED
on average that will take 3-5 years (that means for some its will be a lot
faster, and for other much, much longer, if at all ... ) and  then

We measure our success with a great deal of  "selection bias" , which makes
it appear that our programs do better then they do ... (in this case the
selection is that those who stay often only need a limited amount of help
and those who don't stay are the ones who need a lot more help ... and
therefore ... in the short run it appears out programs work for many of
those who stay ... but the selection bias is very great and we can not
really say that the programs, on average, really work well for the majority
of those in need ...only for whom the current model fits and then only some
of them.)

My point is that we should not be saying ... the goal is unrealistic.  That
does not help the client.  We need to be asking ... how can this client's
goal be reached? To meet her/his needs ... to address to their crisis
....And if we consistently can not meet the goal ... then is it ABE that
needs to be changing, not limiting or changing the goals of the customers
... Can we figure out a way to not say we can't meet these much needed goals
... but to be asking how can we "modernize" to meet the goals? ....   And to
steal a much used phrase of this political season ... yes we can!

So what is the change?   For the person who asked about Orton Gillingham,
while a far more valid approach to reading for adults then the methods
mostly used  ... that is not a solution for the short time ... it still
takes years to gain the skills ...often taking hundreds of hours that builds
on the intensity of each session (something most adults do not have the time
to do, in a concentrated time fashion.) ... and also the key problem in
passing the GED is not just reading skills but knowledge ... and so we need
a solution that focuses gaining the knowledge to pass the GED.) 

Therefore ... again ... I am asking ... is there a different approach, a
different paradigm in which we can meet the needs of the greater amount of
customers?  The ones who appear to have such "unrealistic" but really needed
goals. Not meeting the needs of the teachers in thinking they are helping by
increasing the literacy skills to some degree, but a different way of
helping out customers meet their needs in reaching the much needed goal of
getting the GED, or keeping that job, or getting a new job or staying on
welfare till they can work, or getting into the apprenticeship program, or
retraining to fit the new economy  ... etc... you know, ...  what the
customers needs.
 ...

So I do say yes ... and it is not that more costly ... and considering cost
benefit analysis ... it is far cheaper .... Then the current models, and far
more productive for the customer ... And when I give the solution ... I can
hear all the objections now ... because it is really so customer focused
(and teachers are not the customers of ABE) but I just want the chance to
prove it ...   And if we can just get a state or two to field test the idea
... I can prove it too ... (unfortunately the big grant foundation I was
after, and had high hopes for,  just turned us down ....) anyone got a
little funding to create a new world or opportunities?

Oh yes ... the solution ... like a good cliffhanger  ... details later ...
after more response. 

Glenn Young
CSLD
530 Auburn Ave
Buffalo NY 14222
Cell 703-864-3755
Phone/Fax 716-882-2842
website: glennyoungcsld.com
________________________________

From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Bruce C
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 11:00 AM
To: The Learning Disabilities Discussion List
Subject: [LearningDisabilities 1801] Re: Controversial again

Dear List,
I could write forever about this, but I'll try to be succint:

First of all, adult literacy programs are working with a very challenging
population. We work with people who--for a variety of largely unresearched
reasons--did not learn to read in the ways that most people were able to
learn. It is unrealistic to expect that people who have struggled all their
lives to learn how to read would all suddenly have an easy time of learning.


Also, what are we talking about when we talk about students achieving their
ABE goals? Most people come to my program saying they want their GED. Many
take years to get that. Some don't ever get a GED, but they improve their
literacy levels. What is the impact on income, civic involvement, children's
literacy levels if someone's reading level goes up? We don't know,  but I
would sure like to find out.

Finally, why is it considered a problem if 20% drop out in the first few
hours? 80% stay and 20% decide they are not ready to make the commitment
now. It's like joining a gym. It's easy to sign up, but hard to work out
three times a week. Also, how many of those 20% come back later when the
time is right?

from Bruce Carmel

Glenn Young <gyoungxlt at roadrunner.com> wrote:
        OK David ... but that's just your nature
       
        Are there others?
       
        Glenn Young
        CSLD
        530 Auburn Ave
        Buffalo NY 14222
        Cell 703-864-3755
        Phone/Fax 716-882-2842
        website: glennyoungcsld.com
       
        -----Original Message-----
        From: learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov
        [mailto:learningdisabilities-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of David J.
Rosen
        Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 8:46 AM
        To: The Learning Disabilities Discussion List
        Subject: [LearningDisabilities 1796] Controversial again
       
        Glenn,
       
        On Mar 23, 2008, at 10:20 PM, Glenn Young wrote:
       
        > Well . before I offer arguments on how to change this . I'd like
to
        > see if this stimulates conversation.
       
        I'm intrigued. Continue.
       
        David J. Rosen
        djrosen at comcast.net
       
        On Mar 23, 2008, at 10:20 PM, Glenn Young wrote:
        > OK . I've been urged to come back in and raise a few
        > "controversial" points
        >
        >
        >
        > So . let me start by asking some questions - Leading to the
        > conclusion --- that we need to comprehensive reform of the ABE
        > system . and that reform needs to focus on the extensive use of
the
        > new technologies that are generally available to all (who can
        > afford them) . and these questions are:
        >
        >
        >
        > On average . how long does it take for a person entering ABE
        > programs to reach their goals, if they stay in the program long
        > enough to reach their goals?
        >
        >
        >
        > On average . how many persons entering ABE programs "drop out"
        > before reaching their goals?
        >
        >
        >
        > And again, on average, how many "efforts" (starting and then
        > dropping out and then starting again) does it take for an ABE
        > student to reach their goals?
        >
        >
        >
        > The answer to these questions will of course vary from location to

        > location (great teachers, more "modern" approaches, less
"impacted"
        > students .
        >
        >
        >
        > Also the current answers will change quite a bit as the
        > demographics of the ABE population changes as more of the impacts
        > of NCLB are felt in the ABE programs (which we have seen quite a
        > bit of change in the demographics especially in the South, where
        > ABE has become the standard "placement" for 10th graders who do
not
        > "test well" and high school drop out rates have soared in the past

        > 7 years .
        >
        >
        >
        > OK . given all of that . anyone want to guess at what the "current

        > numbers seem to be?
        >
        >
        >
        > So should I just give them?
        >
        >
        >
        > Well . I will give the best information I have . based on the US
        > DEPT of ED reports based on their National Reporting System .
which
        > really does not cover these points very well . but we can see what

        > we can see ..
        >
        >
        >
        > On average . it currently takes some 3-5 years before a person
        > reaches their goals in ABE programs
        >
        > On average . in actuality very few persons stay 3-5 years and so
        > less then 10% actually reach their goals . at least 20% of people
        > drop out of programs within the first then hours of service .
        >
        > On average - people try something like 3 times before dropping out

        > for good.
        >
        >
        >
        > So . it appears on average the ABE system fails almost all it
        > serves and fails them dramatically
        >
        >
        >
        > So . how do we change this?
        >
        >
        >
        > Well . before I offer arguments on how to change this . I'd like
to
        > see if this stimulates conversation.
        >
        >
        >
        > Thank
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Glenn Young
        >
        > CSLD
        >
        > 530 Auburn Ave
        >
        > Buffalo NY 14222
        >
        > Cell 703-864-3755
        >
        > Phone/Fax 716-882-2842
        >
        > website: glennyoungcsld.com
        ----------------------------------------------------
        National Institute for Literacy
        Learning Disabilities mailing list
        LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov
        To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
        http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities
        Email delivered to gyoungxlt at roadrunner.com
       
        ----------------------------------------------------
        National Institute for Literacy
        Learning Disabilities mailing list
        LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov
        To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities
        Email delivered to bcarmel at rocketmail.com

________________________________

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
now.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8H
DtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ%20>
 
________________________________

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51734/*http:/tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/ca
tegory.php?category=shopping>
________________________________

NOTE: This message was trained as non-spam. If this is wrong, please correct
the training as soon as possible.

Not spam
Forget previous vote


----------------------------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Learning Disabilities mailing list
LearningDisabilities at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/learningdisabilities
Email delivered to gyoungxlt at roadrunner.com



--
BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
------------------------------------------------------

Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 36088048) is spam:
Spam:        https://ssl.ccbcmd.edu:7726/canit/b.php?i=36088048&m=c948e39e9f43&c=s
Not spam:    https://ssl.ccbcmd.edu:7726/canit/b.php?i=36088048&m=c948e39e9f43&c=n
Forget vote: https://ssl.ccbcmd.edu:7726/canit/b.php?i=36088048&m=c948e39e9f43&c=f
------------------------------------------------------
END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/learningdisabilities/attachments/20080327/74a53bca/attachment.html