-----Original Message-----
From: aaace-nla-bounces at lists.literacytent.org
[mailto:aaace-nla-bounces at lists.literacytent.org] On Behalf Of Lennox
McLendon
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:52 AM
To: aaace-nla at lists.literacytent.org
Subject: Re: [AAACE-NLA] How to Aggregate Learner Goals?

Thanks for the question Marty and John,

One option seems to be the 'project learner' idea we have discussed for
a while.

For some students, pre/post testing makes sense.  But other learners
come seeking help with a learning project or goal which does not lend
itself to pre/post test measure.  Of course with project learners, you
do not do away with tests.  As a teacher, I still need to assess
reading, math and/or English skills in relationship to the students
project goal.  So there is still a need for diagnostic assessments.
However, the measure of success is the completion of the project goal,
not post tests in reading, math or English.

So learning projects seem to be a possible option--identify what the
learner wants to know or be able to do, set that goal, assess current
levels of needed basic skills, develop a learning plan, document the
learning and verify that the goal has been attained.  Our colleagues in
England have a history of doing this well.  The External Diploma Program
in the states has a history of doing this well.

In 2002 (or thereabouts) the National Academy of Science did that study
of the national reporting system and I don't have the report with me but
I believe it said that the concern with any documentation used for
accountability and performance is the need for some rigor.  You just
can't have Marty as the teacher saying "Yes, Lennox has completed his
learning project."  Like the External Diploma Program, the necessary
documentation needs to be amassed and an external person validates that
it meets the rigor and that the goal has been attained.  There are
rubrics to guide all of that.

The Coalition is wrestling with this concept now as part of its
reauthorization discussion.  One of the proposals I have been pondering
is putting language in the new adult ed act to ask the Secretary to
designate funding in the national programs funds to create the rubrics
the field needs to establish and ensure the rigor necessary to use
learning projects as valid documentation for adult learning for
accountability purposes.  This notion was in one of the earlier
reauthorization proposals and I think was supported by the Department--I
could be wrong on that second part.

We have the guidelines in the NAS report for the rigor it takes to have
valid data, but this is a big job to create the rubrics to guide local
programs in setting up the documentation process.

I realize I am way in over my head here and I am not a test and
measurement expert.  However, I do know that I had adult learners in my
classes with long term goals for which pre and post test worked just
fine.  I also had learners who had short term learning projects for whom
I had no valid measure of their success nor a way to report that
success.

I also like the idea of learning projects politically because it would
enable us to talk to legislators about adult learning.  Their experience
is only public school and university and our reporting system is only
pre/post test; therefore, they make decisions accordingly.  I would love
to be able to talk about adult learning projects that we had validated.

Some ten years ago I did prepare and submit a paper to the NRS group to
incorporate project learning into the NRS system.  Needless to say, the
idea was not accepted.

One of the concerns from the Department of Ed I heard then was "What
will keep local programs from classifying all or most adult learners as
project learners--what will happen to our data system?"  So, is there an
issue here?  If we were to enable learning projects, would programs
avoid the pre/post problems and classify many if not all as project
learners?  Is that a bad thing?  How would we communicate that data to
policy people who only know pre/post testing?

 From discussions we have had with House and Senate staff and with new
Department of Education appointees, and with the great interest on
career pathways, I think there is a receptive climate now to have these
discussions.  It could start with new language in the Act that said
"states would report performance based on increased levels of literacy
or completion of adult learning projects" or some such appropriate
language.  It might include a national programs requirement to create
the needed rubrics.  

Because a number of my ABE and ESL students had specific learning goals
that were not measured by pre/post tests, I do believe we need a way to
measure and report their success.  So thanks to Marty and John for
raising the issue.  There are folks on this list serv with much more
experience me.  I look forward to reading all the responses and
hopefully producing some options for Congress to consider in
reauthorization.

Lennox McLendon





>>> jrandall at fastmail.fm 5/13/2009 1:59:34 PM >>>

Marty Finsterbusch asked me to post this inquiry for him:

Dear Colleagues,

In a meeting last week with Senate HELP Committee staff, they were  
receptive to our recommendation that learner performance should be  
based primary on personal goal attainment rather than test scores.

They posed a question that we need your help in answering. How could  
data on personal goal attainment be aggregated in order to measure the  
performance of programs and states?

It would be great folks on the NLA list could discuss this. Ideally, a  
field-generated consensus recommendation could emerge, which HELP  
Committee staff would find very helpful.

Sincerely,

Marty Finsterbusch
VALUE Executive Director

#   #   #

- Jon

Jon Randall
jrandall at valueusa.org 



_______________________________________________
AAACE-NLA mailing list: AAACE-NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/aaace-nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org