Dan, I know that's the perception, but I also know that we roll over  
about half of our students from one year to the next. . . and some of  
those students had rolled over the previous year as well. We've  
actually had to put a three year limit on some students (especially  
ESL).

I'm having our data person look this up as well as we can.  
Unfortunately, our data tends to be divided, as David indicated, in  
discrete yearly "lumps." We can get the information, but it's time- 
consuming because the data bases are designed for accountability over  
a contract year.

We certainly do have a lot of students who come in with short term  
goals and leave when these are accomplished. We also have a lot of  
stop out students, who have to put goals on the back burner while  
they work out other issues. I think, however, we do keep a  
significant number of students over time. I think for my own little  
research project, I'm going to investigate gains over multiple years.



Karen Mundie
Associate Director
Greater Pittsburgh Literacy Council
100 Sheridan Square, 4th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA  15206
412 661-7323 (ext 101)
kmundie at gplc.org

GPLC - Celebrating 25 years of literacy, 1982-2007


This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the named addressees  
and is not meant for general distribution.  If you are not the  
intended recipient, please report the error to the originator and  
delete the contents.


On Apr 19, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Dan Wann wrote:


> I wonder if there is enough data to even show that adult basic and  

> ESL students stay with a program in large enough numbers to track  

> over a longer period?   The conventional wisdom of those outside of  

> the adult basic skills network is that basic skills programs have  

> little impact because students do not stay long to make a  

> difference.  Do we have any evidence that shows we work with the  

> same students more than one year and that we work with a high  

> enough number of students more than one year to make a significant  

> difference?

>

>

>

>

>

> Dan Wann

>

> Professional Development Consultant

>

> IN Adult Education Professional Development Project

>

>

>

> dlwann at comcast.net

>

>

>

> From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment- 

> bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of David J. Rosen

> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 2:05 AM

> To: The Assessment Discussion List

> Subject: [Assessment 752] Re: Using Data

>

>

>

> Larry, and others,

>

> Tina, and many other program administrators have observed patterns  

> like this that suggest that a one-year time frame, a funding year,  

> may not be the best unit of time in which to measure learner gains,  

> except for those who are doing basic skills brush-up or who have  

> very short-term goals like preparing for a drivers license test. I  

> wonder if there is a possibility that the NRS might be adjusted,  

> perhaps in a pilot at first, so that a longer period of learning,  

> say three years, might be used to demonstrate learner gains.  Of  

> course, there would need to be intermediate measures, but  

> accountability -- for programs and states -- might be based on a  

> longer period of time.

>

> It seems to me that the one-year time frame within to measure  

> learning gains or goals accomplished comes not from K-12 or higher  

> education, but rather Congressional expectations for job skills  

> training. Would you agree?

>

> Also I wonder if you or others have some examples of programs that  

> track and report learner outcomes over several years, and use the  

> data for program improvement.

>

> David J. Rosen

> djrosen at comcast.net

>

>

> Tina_Luffman at yc.edu wrote:

>

> Hi Luanne,

>

>

>

> I find it interesting that what you are finding in data seems to be  

> consistent with what we see in our GED classes here in Arizona.  

> Often the last group who enter in March are the least likely to  

> stay with the program until posttesting, and the August group seem  

> to have the highest posttesting and retention rate.

>

>

>

> Tina

>

>

>

>

>

> Tina Luffman

> Coordinator, Developmental Education

> Verde Valley Campus

> 928-634-6544

> tina_luffman at yc.edu

>

>

>

> -----assessment-bounces at nifl.gov wrote: -----

>

> To: <assessment at nifl.gov>

> From: "Luanne Teller" <lteller at massasoit.mass.edu>

> Sent by: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov

> Date: 04/18/2007 10:56AM

> Subject: [Assessment 746] Using Data

>

>

>

> Hi all:

>

>

>

> I wanted to chime in about our program’s use of data since this is  

> the focus of our discussion.  Coincidentally, I am in the process  

> of writing our proposal for next year, so I am knee-deep in data  

> even as we speak!

>

>

>

> The use of data takes many forms in our program.  We look at what  

> most people consider the “hard data” -- the raw numbers with regard  

> to attendance, learner gains, retention, goal attainment, etc.  We  

> believe; however, that the numbers alone provide an incomplete  

> picture of what is happening, so we use the numbers as a basis for  

> discussion, not decision making.  After analyzing the numbers, we  

> begin to look at additional sources of data that we find essential  

> in informing our planning---meetings with staff, classes, our  

> student advisory board, and focus groups.

>

>

>

> Here’s an example we’re currently working on---we did a two year  

> analysis of learner retention, and began to document why students  

> did not persist.  We found that the retention for students who  

> enrolled after January 1 (our programs runs on a school calendar  

> year from September to June) was significantly lower than the  

> retention for students who began in September.  Even more  

> compelling, we learned that the retention for students who began  

> after March 1 was 0%.

>

>

>

> We met with staff and students, and did some research around  

> student retention issues.  After a year-long process, we decided to  

> pilot a “managed enrollment” approach.  In Massachusetts , our  

> grantor (MA DOE) allows us to “over-enroll” our classes by 20%, so  

> we enroll 20% more students in the fall.  When students leave, we  

> “drop” the overenrolled students into funded slots.  This allows us  

> to keep the seats filled even with the typical attrition that occurs.

>

>

>

> In January, when we do our mid-point assessments; we move students  

> to the higher level who are ready to progress….that typically  

> leaves several openings in the beginner levels and we begin  

> students in February as a cohort.  This year, we implemented new  

> orientation programs including a requirement that new students  

> observe a class before enrolling.

>

>

>

> While it is still too early to tell if these new procedures will  

> have a positive impact, we are hopeful and we know anecdotally that  

> the transition seems to be easier for some of these students.  We  

> are eager to look at the data at the end of the year to analyze the  

> effectiveness of this plan.

>

>

>

> As we begin to look at our data, we are finding that there seem to  

> be a unique set of issues for our beginner ESOL students.  We  

> suspect that the lack of effective English communication skills to  

> advocate for themselves with employers is influencing their  

> attendance and persistence.  This is an issue that we are beginning  

> to tackle in terms of policy.  Do we need to have a more flexible,  

> lenient policy for beginner students?  Is there a way to support  

> students in addressing these employment issues?  How can we empower  

> students more quickly?  Are there other issues for these beginner  

> level students that affect their participation?  As we enter these  

> discussions, the numbers will provide a basis for developing  

> strategies, but the students themselves with be our greatest source  

> of valuable data.

>

>

>

> Luanne Teller

>

>

>

> Luanne Teller

>

> -------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Assessment mailing list

> Assessment at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> -------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Assessment mailing list

> Assessment at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>

>

>

> -------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Assessment mailing list

> Assessment at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/assessment/attachments/20070419/be41b082/attachment.html