Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 8
1
Introduction
The Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (Title II of the Workforce
Investment Act (1998) defines literacy as “an individual’s ability to read,
write, and speak in English, compute, and solve problems, at levels of pro-
ficiency necessary to function on the job, in the family of the individual,
and in society.” The United Nations Education, Social, and Cultural Or-
ganization (UNESCO) (2004) defines literacy more broadly as “the ability
to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate, compute and use
printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy
involves a continuum of learning to enable an individual to achieve his or
her goals, to develop his or her knowledge and potential, and to participate
fully in the wider society.”
LITERACY IN THE UNITED STATES
More than 90 million adults in the United States are estimated to lack
the literacy skills for a fully productive and secure life, according to the
National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) (Kutner et al., 2007). This
report synthesizes the research on literacy and learning to improve literacy
instruction for those served in adult education in the United States and to
recommend a more systemic approach to research, practice, and policy.
Conducted in 2003, the NAAL is the most recent national survey of
U.S. adult literacy. Adults were defined by the NAAL as people ages 16
years or older. The survey assessed the prose, document, and quantitative
literacy of a nationally representative sample of more than 18,000 U.S.
8
OCR for page 9
9
INTRODUCTION
adults living in households and 1,200 prison inmates.1 Adults were cat-
egorized as having proficient, intermediate, basic, or below basic levels of
literacy.
According to the survey, 43 percent of U.S. adults (an estimated 56
million people) possess only basic or below basic prose literacy skills. Only
13 percent had proficient prose literacy. Results were similar for document
literacy: 34 percent of adults had basic or below basic document literacy
and only 13 percent were proficient. A comparison of the results with find-
ings from the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) shows that little
progress was made between 1992 and 2003 (see Table 1-1).
Table 1-2 shows the percentage and number of adults in each race/
ethnicity category in the 2003 NAAL survey with below basic and basic
literacy. Certain groups in the 2003 NAAL survey were more likely to
perform at the below basic level: those who did not speak English before
entering school, Hispanic adults, those who reported having multiple dis-
abilities, and black adults. The 7 million adults with the lowest levels of
skill showed difficulties with reading letters and words and comprehending
a simple text (Baer, Kutner, and Sabatini, 2009) (see Table 1-3).
Although literacy increases with educational attainment (see Table 1-4),
only 4 percent of high school graduates who do not go further in their
schooling are proficient in prose literacy, according to the NAAL; 53 per-
cent are at the basic or below basic level. Among those with a 2-year degree,
only 19 percent have proficient prose literacy, 56 percent show intermediate
skill, and 24 percent are at basic or below basic levels. This level of literacy
might have been sufficient earlier in the nation’s history, but it is likely to
be inadequate today (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and De-
velopment, 2005). For U.S. society to continue to function and sustain its
standard of living, higher literacy levels are required of the U.S. population
in the 21st century for economic security and all other aspects of daily life:
education, health, parenting, social interaction, personal growth, and civic
participation.
Civic participation requires citizens to understand the complex matters
about which they need to make decisions and on which societal well-being
depends. Although people might legitimately differ in their beliefs about
what health care policy the country should have, national surveys show
that too many people lack the literacy needed to engage in that discussion.
Parents cannot further their children’s education or ensure their children’s
1 Proseliteracy was defined as the ability to search, comprehend, and use information from
continuous texts. Prose examples include editorials, news stories, brochures, and instructional
materials. Document literacy was defined as the ability to search, comprehend, and use in-
formation from noncontinuous texts. Document examples include job applications, payroll
forms, transportation schedules, maps, tables, and drug and food labels. The survey also as-
sessed quantitative literacy.
OCR for page 10
10 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
TABLE 1-1 Percentage of U.S. Adults in Each Literacy Proficiency
Category by Literacy Task, 1992 and 2003 (in percentage)
Prose Literacy Document Literacy Quantitative Literacy
Proficiency Category 1992 2003 1992 2003 1992 2003
12a 22a
Below basic 14 14 14 26
Basic 28 29 22 22 32 33
53a 33a
Intermediate 43 44 49 30
13a 13a
Proficient 15 15 13 13
NOTE: Data exclude people who could not be tested due to language differences: 3 percent
in 1992 and 2 percent in 2003.
aSignificantly different from 1992.
SOURCE: Data from the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (Kutner et al., 2007).
health when their literacy is low: adults with low literacy are much less
likely to read to their children or have reading materials in the home
(Kutner et al., 2007), and they have much more limited access to health-
related information (Berkman et al., 2004) and have lower health literacy
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2008). Many U.S. adults
lack health literacy or the ability to read and follow the kinds of instruc-
tions routinely given for self-care or to family caregivers after medical
procedures or hospital stays (Kutner et al., 2006; Nielsen-Bohlman, Panzer,
and Kindig, 2004).
TABLE 1-2 U.S. Adults in Each Race/Ethnicity Category with Below
Basic and Basic Literacy, 2003
Estimated Total
Number Across
Percentage Percentage Both Categories
Below Basic Basic (in millions)
Asian/Pacific Islander 14 32 4.1
Black 24 43 17.8
Hispanic 44 30 19.7
White 7 25 49.8
Total Number of Adults 91.4
NOTES: The NAAL included a national sample representative of the total population in 2003
(222 million people; 221 million in households and a little more than 1 million in prisons).
This estimate of the number of people with low literacy (basic or below basic literacy) in each
race/ethnicity category is derived from the percentage of people in each category in the NAAL
survey. The table does not include the 3 percent of adults who could not participate in the
survey due to language spoken or disabilities. It does not include 2 percent of respondents who
identified multiple races. These findings are for prose literacy; the pattern of findings is similar
for document literacy. For definitions of the literacy categories, see text.
SOURCE: Data from the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (Kutner et al., 2007).
OCR for page 11
11
INTRODUCTION
TABLE 1-3 Correct Responses on Reading Tasks for U.S. Adults with
Below Basic Literacy (by language of administration) (in percentage),
2003
Letter Word Word
Readinga Identificationb Readingc Comprehensiond
English 80 65 56 54
Spanish 38 74 37 54
NOTES: The data cover 7 million adults, 3 percent of the population. Adults are defined in
the survey as people ages 16 and older living in households or prisons. The data exclude adults
who could not be interviewed because of language spoken or cognitive or mental disabilities,
approximately 3 percent.
aLetter reading required reading a list of 35 letters in 15 seconds.
bWord identification required recognizing words on three word lists of increasing difficulty—
from one- to four-syllable words.
c Word reading required decoding of nonwords using knowledge of letter-sound
correspondences.
dComprehension required correctly answering a question about the content of a passage
written either at grades 2-6 or grades 7-8 level.
SOURCE: Data from Baer, Kutner, and Sabatini (2009).
TABLE 1-4 Percentage of U.S. Adults in Prose and Document Literacy
Proficiency Categories by Educational Attainment, 2003
Below Basic Basic Intermediate Proficient
Prose
Less than/some high school 50 33 16 1
GED/high school 10 45 43 3
equivalency
High school graduate 13 39 44 4
Vocational/trade/business 10 36 49 5
school
Some college 5 25 59 11
Associate/2-year degree 4 20 56 19
College graduate 3 14 53 31
Document
Less than/some high school 45 29 25 2
GED/ high school 13 30 53 4
equivalency
High school graduate 13 29 52 5
Vocational/trade/business 9 26 59 7
school
Some college 5 19 65 10
Associate/2-year degree 3 15 66 16
College graduate 2 11 62 25
SOURCE: Data from the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (Kutner et al., 2007).
OCR for page 12
12 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
Adults with low literacy also have lower participation in the labor force
and lower earnings (Kutner et al., 2007). Figure 1-1 shows how lifetime
net tax contributions increase as education level increases. It is reasonable
to assume that gains in literacy that allow increases in educational attain-
ment would lead to a higher standard of living and the ability of more
people to contribute to such costs of society as public safety and educating
future generations. Adults with a high school diploma or general educa-
tional development (GED) certificate earn significantly more per year than
those without such credentials (e.g., Liming and Wolf, 2008; U.S. Census
Bureau, 2007). The most recent national survey of adults’ literacy skills in
the United States shows that the percentage of adults employed full time
increases with increased facility in reading prose (Kutner et al., 2007).
If anything, data from the NAAL and other surveys and assessments are
likely to underestimate the problem of literacy in the United States. Literacy
demands are increasing because of the rapid growth of information and
communication technologies, while the literacy assessments to date have
focused on the simplest forms of literacy skill. Most traditional employment
has required reading directions, keeping records, and answering business
communications, but today’s workers have very different roles. Employers
stress that employees need higher levels of basic literacy in the workplace
than they currently possess (American Manufacturing Association, 2010)
and that the global economy calls for increasingly complex forms of literacy
skill in this information age (Casner-Lotto and Benner, 2006). In a world
in which computers do the routine, human value in the workplace rests
increasingly on the ability to gather and integrate information from dispa-
rate sources to address novel situations and emergent problems, mediate
among different viewpoints of the world (e.g., between an actuary’s and a
$1,300,000
$1,400,000
$870,000
$900,000
$467,000
$270,000
$400,000
$100,000
$33,000
No High High School Some Post Bachelor's Master's
School Graduate High School Degree Degree or
Diploma Higher
FIGURE 1-1 Lifetime net tax contributions by education level.
SOURCE: Data from Khatiwada et al. (2007).
Figure 1-1
OCR for page 13
13
INTRODUCTION
customer’s view of what should be covered under an insurance policy), and
collaborate on tasks that are too complex to be within the scope of one
person. To earn a living, people are likely to need forms of literacy skill and
to have proficiencies in the use of literacy tools that have not been routinely
defined and assessed.
A significant portion of the U.S. population is likely to continue, at least
in the near term, to experience inadequate literacy and require instruction as
adults: the most recent main National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP) (2009) shows that only 38 percent of twelfth graders performed
at or above the proficient level in reading; this achievement was higher
than the percentage in 2005 but not significantly different from earlier as-
sessment years. Although 74 percent of twelfth graders were at or above
basic, 26 percent were below basic near the end of high school. Table 1-5
shows the percentage of twelfth grade students at each achievement level
for reading by race and ethnicity. These numbers include students identified
as learning English as a second language: only 22 percent of them were at
or above basic reading levels near the end of high school; 78 percent were
below basic. Results were similar for twelfth graders with disabilities: 38
percent were at or above basic reading levels; 62 percent were below basic.
Similarly, according to the 2007 assessment of writing by the NAEP,
only 24 percent of twelfth graders had proficient writing skills, with many
fewer of the students who were learning English or with learning disabilities
showing proficiency (40 and 44 percent, respectively) compared with those
not identified as English learners or as having a learning disability (83 and
85 percent, respectively).
The NAEP is likely to underestimate the proportion of twelfth graders
who need to develop their literacy outside the K-12 system because it does
not include students who dropped out of school before the assessment,
many of whom are likely to have inadequate literacy. In the 2007-2008
school year, the most recent one for which data are available, 613,379
students in the ninth to twelfth grades dropped out of school. The overall
TABLE 1-5 Percentage of Twelfth Grade Students at or Above NAEP
Achievement Levels by Race/Ethnicity
Asian/Pacific Black Hispanic White
Below basic 19 43 39 19
At or above basic 81 57 61 81
At or above 49 17 22 46
proficient
Advanced 10 1 2 7
SOURCE: Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 2009 Reading
Assessment (U.S. Department of Education, 2011).
OCR for page 14
14 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
annual dropout rate (known as the event dropout rate—the percentage of
high school students who drop out of high school over the course of a given
school year) was 4.1 percent across all 49 reporting states and the District
of Columbia (National Center for Education Statistics, 2010). Although
students drop out of school for many reasons, it can be assumed that these
students’ literacy skills are below those of the rest of the U.S. population
and fail to meet society’s expectations for literacy. In fact, 55 percent of
adults in the 2003 NAAL survey who scored below basic did not graduate
from high school (compared with 15 percent of the entire adult popula-
tion); adults who did not complete high school were almost four times
more likely than the total adult population to demonstrate below basic
skills (Baer et al., 2009).
Given these statistics, it is not surprising that, although originally
designed for older adults, adult literacy education programs are increas-
ingly attended by youths ages 16 to 20 (Hayes, 2000; Perin, Flugman, and
Spiegel, 2006). In 2003, more than half of participants in federally funded
adult literacy programs were 25 or younger (Tamassia et al., 2007).
The problem of inadequate literacy is also found by colleges, especially
community colleges. More than half of community college students enroll
in at least one developmental education course during their college tenure to
remediate weak skills (Bailey, Jeong, and Cho, 2010). Data from an initia-
tive called Achieving the Dream: Community Colleges Count provide the
best information on students’ difficulties in remedial instruction. The study
included more than 250,000 students from 57 colleges in seven states who
were enrolled for the first time from fall 2003 to fall 2004. Of the total, 59
percent were referred for remedial instruction, and 33 percent of the refer-
rals were specifically for reading. After 3 years, fewer than 4 of 10 students
had completed the entire sequence of remedial courses to which they had
been referred (Bailey, Jeong, and Cho, 2010). About 30 percent of students
referred to developmental education did not enroll in any remedial course,
and about 60 percent of those who did enroll did not enroll in the specific
course to which they had been referred (Bailey, Jeong, and Cho, 2010).
Notably, according to the NAAL survey, proficiency in prose literacy was
evident in only 31 percent of U.S. adults with a 4-year college degree.
For a variety of reasons, firm conclusions cannot currently be drawn
about whether developmental education improves the literacy skills and
rates of college completion. What is clear, however, is that remediation
is costly: in 2004-2005, the costs of remediation were estimated at $1.9
to $2.3 billion at community colleges and another $500 million at 4-year
colleges (Strong American Schools, 2008). States have reported tens of
millions of dollars in expenditures (Bailey, 2009). The costs to students of
inadequate remediation include accumulated debt, lost earnings, and frus-
tration that can lead to dropping out.
OCR for page 15
15
INTRODUCTION
STUDY CHARGE, SCOPE, AND APPROACH
To address the problem of how best to instruct the large and diverse
population of U.S. adults who need to improve their literacy skills, the
U.S. Department of Education asked the National Research Council to
appoint a multidisciplinary committee to (1) synthesize research findings
on literacy and learning from cognitive science, neuroscience, behavioral
science, and education; (2) identify from the research the main factors that
affect literacy development in adolescence and adulthood, both in general
and with respect to the specific populations served in education programs
for adults; (3) analyze the implications of the research for informing cur-
ricula and instruction used to develop adults’ literacy; and (4) recommend
a more systemic approach to subsequent research, practice, and policy. The
complete charge is presented in Box 1-1.
The work of the Committee on Learning Sciences: Foundations and
Applications to Adolescent and Adult Literacy is a necessary step toward
improving adult literacy in the United States. Through our work, which
included public meetings and reviews of documents, the committee gathered
evidence about adult literacy levels both in the United States and interna-
tionally and the literacy demands placed on adults in modern life related to
education, work, social and civic participation, and maintenance of health
and family. We considered a wide array of research literatures that might
have accumulated findings that could help answer the question of how best
to design literacy instruction for adults.
Conceptual Framework and Approach to the Review of Evidence
Figure 1-2 presents the committee’s conceptual model of the develop-
ment of literate practice, which we used to identify research most germane
to this report. We also used it to convey the range of factors that require
attention in our attempt to identify the instructional practices that work for
learners and the conditions that support or impede instructional effective-
ness and learning. The model focuses mainly on the factors that research
shows are amenable to change through particular approaches to instruction
and the creation of supportive learning environments. It is derived mainly
from understandings of literacy development from K-12 populations and
extended to accommodate adults’ motivations and circumstances, which
differ from those of younger populations learning to read and write.
In view of the charge that motivates this report, we define literacy to be
the ability to read, write, and communicate using a symbol system (in this
case, English), with available and valued tools and technologies, in order
to meet the goals and demands of families, individuals, and U.S. society.
Literacy requires developing proficiencies in the major known components
OCR for page 16
16 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
BOX 1-1
Committee Charge
In response to a request from the National Institute for Literacy (NIFL), the Na-
tional Research Council will convene a committee to conduct a study of the scientific
foundations of adolescent and adult literacy with implications for policy and practice.
In particular, the study will synthesize research-based knowledge on literacy from the
multidisciplinary perspectives of education, cognitive and behavioral science, neurosci-
ence, and other relevant disciplines; and will provide a strong empirical foundation for
understanding the main factors that affect literacy learning in adolescence and adult-
hood generally and with respect to the specific populations served by adult education.
The committee will develop a conceptual and methodological framework to guide the
study and conduct a review of the existing research literature and sources of evidence.
The committee’s final report will provide a basis for research and practice, laying out
the most promising areas for future research while informing curriculum and instruction
for current adolescent literacy and adult education practitioners and service providers.
This study will (1) synthesize the behavioral and cognitive sciences, education, and
neuroscience research on literacy to understand its applicability to adolescent and adult
populations; (2) analyze the implications of this research for the instructional practices
used to teach reading in adolescent and adult literacy programs; and (3) establish a
set of recommendations or roadmap for a more systemic approach to subsequent
research, practice, and policy. The committee will synthesize and integrate new knowl-
edge from the multidisciplinary perspectives of behavioral and cognitive sciences,
education, neuroscience, and other related disciplines, with emphasis on potential uses
in the research and policy communities. It will provide a broad understanding of the
factors that affect typical and atypical literacy learning in adolescence and adulthood
of reading and writing (presented in Chapter 2) and being able to integrate
them to perform the activities required of adults in the United States in the
21st century. Thus, our use of the term literacy skill includes but encom-
passes a broader range of proficiency than basic skills.
Our synthesis covers research literature on
• cognitive, linguistic, neurobiological, social, and cultural factors
that are part of reading and writing development across the life
span;
• effective approaches for teaching reading and writing with students
in K-12 education, out-of-school youth, and adults;
• principles of learning that apply to the design of instruction;
• motivation, engagement, and persistence;
• uses of technology to support learning and literacy for adolescents
and adults;
• valid assessment of reading, writing, and learning; and
OCR for page 17
17
INTRODUCTION
generally and with respect to the specific populations served by adult education and
such related issues as motivation, retention and prevention.
The following questions will be among those the committee will consider in develop-
ing its roadmap for a more systematic approach to subsequent research, practice, and
policy:
• oes the available research on learning and instruction apply to the full range of
D
types of learners served by adult education? If not, for what specific populations
is research particularly needed? What do we know, for example, about how to
deliver reading instruction to students in the lowest achievement levels normally
found in adult basic education?
• hat are some of the specific challenges faced by adults who need to learn lit-
W
eracy skills in English when it is their second language? What does the cognitive
and learning research suggest about the most effective instructional strategies
for these learners?
• hat outcome measures and methods are suggested from research addressing
W
literacy remediation and prevention in both adolescent and adult programs?
• here are there gaps in our understanding about what research is needed
W
related to retention and motivation of adult literacy learners?
• hat implications does the research on learning and effective instruction have
W
for remediation and prevention of problems with literacy during middle and/or
high school?
• hat is known about teacher characteristics, training, and capacity of programs
W
to implement more effective literacy instructional methods?
• re there policy strategies that could be implemented to help ensure that the evi-
A
dence base on best practices for learning gets used by programs and teachers?
• instructional approaches for English language learners and the vari-
ous influences (cognitive, neurobiological, social) on the develop-
ment of literacy in a second language in adulthood.
Several reviews of research relevant to the charge informed the work of
this committee, among them a report of the National Reading Panel (NRP)
(National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000) and
a recent systematic review of the literature on adult literacy instruction
(Kruidenier, MacArthur, and Wrigley, 2010). In such cases, we did not
duplicate existing works but incorporated from previous work the core
findings that we interpreted to be most relevant to our charge, augmented
with targeted searches of literature as needed to draw conclusions about
the state of the research base and needs for development.
We included both quantitative and qualitative research with the rec-
ognition that different types of research questions call for different meth-
odological approaches. We concentrated mainly on the most developed
OCR for page 18
18 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
Goals
Goals for learning and Text features
literacy
Tools embedded in
Instructional practices
text
Motivating features
Motivating features
Cultural and language
Skill demands
norms The
Text and
Learning
Tools
Context
Literacy
The
Activity and
Learner
Purpose
Development
of Literate
Practice
Knowledge/skills for comprehension,
production, and use of text
What goal does this
Motivation
literacy activity achieve
Neurocognitive differences for the student?
Education
Linguistic background
Literacy learning goals
FIGURE 1-2 Conceptual model of the development of literate practice.
Figure 1-2
research findings and included promising, cutting-edge areas of inquiry that
warrant further research. In reviewing the research, we asked: Are the data
reliable and potentially valid for the target population? What are the limits
of current knowledge? What are the most useful directions for expanding
knowledge of literacy development and learning to better meet the needs
of adult learners?
An assumption of our framework is that to be functionally literate one
must be able to engage in literacy practices with texts and tools that are
demanded by and valued in society. Thus, we include a focus on writing,
which has a smaller base of research than reading. We also refer throughout
the report to new literacy skills and practices enabled by a digital age and
include a more complete discussion of these issues in Appendix B. Although
we assume that literacy skills enabled by the use of new technologies are
now fundamental to what it means to be literate, researchers are only be-
ginning to define these skills and practices and to study the instruction and
assessments that develop them in students of all ages (e.g., Goldman et al.,
2011). In the final chapter, we stress the importance of including writing
and emerging new literacy demands in any future efforts to define literacy
OCR for page 19
19
INTRODUCTION
development goals for adults and to identify the instructional approaches
that comprehensively meet their skill development needs.
Study Scope
An examination of the relevant literatures revealed a diverse range of
information and disparate literatures that seemed unknown and uncon-
nected to each other, despite the fact that many share a focus on reading
and literacy. The literatures differ in the ages of the populations studied;
definitions, theories, and working understandings or models of literacy de-
velopment; research topics; and research methods. Several literatures were
severely underdeveloped with respect to the charge because of the nature of
the topics studied or because the data are mainly descriptive or anecdotal
and have not yet led to the accumulation of reliable or relevant knowledge.
This information gathering led the committee to focus the charge in these
ways.
We focused on a target population (to whom we refer generally as
“adults”) of individuals ages 16 and older not in secondary education,
consistent with eligibility requirements for participation in federally funded
adult literacy education programs. We considered what is known about the
literacy skills and other characteristics of these adults and their learning en-
vironments in programs of four general types: (1) adult basic education, (2)
adult secondary education (e.g., GED instruction), (3) programs of English
as a second language, and (4) developmental (remedial) education courses
in colleges for academically underprepared students. We focused mainly on
research that could be applied to the development of instructional methods
for these populations, and we did not focus more broadly on segments of
the U.S. population, such as the elderly, who might benefit from enhanced
literacy or strategies that compensate for age-related declines in literacy
skills.
The lack of research on learning and the effects of literacy instruction
in the target population is striking, given the long history of both federal
funding, albeit stretched thin, for adult education programs and reliance on
developmental education courses to remediate college students’ skills. As we
explain in Chapter 3, although there is a large literature on adult literacy
instruction, it is mostly descriptive, and the small body of experimental
research suffers from methodological limitations, such as high rates of
participant attrition and inadequate controls. As a result, the research has
not yielded a body of reliable and interpretable findings that could provide
a reliable basis for understanding the process of literacy acquisition in low-
skilled adults or the design and delivery of instruction for this population.
In contrast to the scant literature on adult literacy, a large body of re-
search is available with younger populations, especially children. Although
OCR for page 20
20 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
the majority of this work investigates the acquisition and instruction of
word-reading skills, more is becoming known about how to develop vo-
cabulary and reading comprehension. A growing body of research with
adolescents in school settings focuses on such topics as academic literacy,
disciplinary literacy, and discussion-based approaches that warrant further
study with both adolescents and adults outside school. Although major
research studies have been launched by the U.S. Department of Education,
the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and oth-
ers to increase knowledge of literacy development and effective instruction
beyond the early elementary years, the efforts are too new to have produced
numerous peer-reviewed publications on effective instructional practices.
Similarly, research on adult cognition, learning, and motivation from other
disciplines is constrained for our purposes. For the most part, such research
relies on study samples of convenience (e.g., college students in introductory
psychology courses) or the elderly.
Given the dearth of research on what is the target population for this
report, the committee has drawn on what is available: extensive research
on reading and writing processes and difficulties in younger students, a
mature body of research on learning and motivation in relatively well-
educated adults with normal reading capability, and comparatively limited
research on struggling adolescent readers and writers and adult literacy
learners. These constraints on the available literature mean the commit-
tee’s analysis and synthesis focus on examining instructional practices
that work for younger populations that have not been invalidated by any
of the available data with adults; extrapolating with caution from other
research available on learning, cognition, and motivation to make addi-
tional suggestions for improving adult reading instruction; and articulat-
ing a research agenda focused specifically on learning and reading and
writing instruction for adult literacy learners. The committee decided that
examining the wealth of information from the research that exists with
these populations could be valuable to the development of instructional
practices for adults, with research and evaluation to validate, identify the
boundaries of, and expand this knowledge in order to specify the practices
that develop literacy skills in adolescents and adults outside school.
Although the charge specified a focus on reading, we chose to add a
focus on writing for four reasons. First, integrated reading and writing in-
struction contributes to the development of both reading and writing skills,
as described in Chapter 2, most likely because these skills require some of
the same knowledge and cognitive and linguistic processes. Second, from a
practical perspective, many reading activities for academic learning or work
also involve writing (and vice versa). Third, writing is a method of devel-
oping content knowledge, which adults need to develop to improve their
reading, both in general and in specific content domains. Fourth, writing is
OCR for page 21
21
INTRODUCTION
a literacy skill that is important to adult literacy education, given that it is
needed for GED completion and for success in college and in the workplace
(Berman, 2001, 2009; Carnevale and Derochers, 2004; Kirsch et al., 2007;
Milulecky, 1998; National Commission on Writing, 2004, 2005).
Because of the large variety of literatures, the report does not focus in
depth on domain-specific literacies, such as quantitative literacy, financial
literacy, health literacy, or science literacy. These topics are large and sig-
nificant enough to deserve separate treatment (e.g., Condelli, 2006; Nielsen-
Bohlman et al., 2004).
The report includes research about literacy development with ado-
lescents of all ages as well as children. However, given the breadth of the
charge and in consultation with the project sponsor about the primary
interest, the committee narrowed its focus to synthesizing the implications
of that research for instruction in adult literacy education (defined as in-
struction for individuals 16 years and older and outside K-12 education).
This focus was chosen to fit with the requirement that federally funded
adult literacy programs are for youth and adults older than 16 and not in
the regular K-12 system. Although there is a broad universe of information
on adolescent and adult literacy and the factors that affect literacy, the
committee and this report covers the research findings about the factors
that affect literacy and learning that are sufficiently developed and relevant
for making decisions about how to improve adult literacy instruction and
planning a research agenda. Consistent with the sponsor’s guidance, we
did not address the question of how to prevent low literacy in U.S. society,
but the pressing and important problem of how to instruct adolescents and
adults outside the K-12 system who have inadequate English literacy skills.
Although the report does not have an explicit focus on issues of prevention
and how to improve literacy instruction in the K-12 system, many of the
relevant findings were derived from research with younger populations, and
so they are likely to be relevant to the prevention of inadequate literacy.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
The discussion of research relevant to the population of adult learners
is complicated by substantial differences in the characteristics of learners,
learning goals, and the many and varied types and places of instruction.
In theory, it is possible to organize this report according to any number of
individual difference variables, learning goals (e.g., GED, college entrance,
parental responsibilities, workplace skills), general type of instruction (adult
basic education, adult secondary education, English as a second language),
places of instruction, or various combinations. As Chapter 3 of the report
makes clear, however, it is premature, given the limits of the research avail-
able, to disentangle the research along these dimensions. On one hand,
OCR for page 22
22 IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY INSTRUCTION
learners across the many places of instruction share literacy development
needs, learning goals, and other characteristics; on the other hand, learners
at a single site vary in these characteristics. In many instances, it would not
be possible to know how to categorize the research because research reports
do not specify the place of instruction, describe the goals of instruction, or
clearly and completely describe the study participants. Indeed, one of the
critical needs for future research is to systematically define segments of the
population to identify constraints on generalizing research findings and
specific features of instruction that might be needed to effectively meet the
needs of particular subgroups.
Thus, this report is organized according to the major topics that deserve
attention in future research to develop effective instructional approaches.
The topics reflect those about which most is known from research—albeit
mostly with populations other than one that is the focus of our study—and
that have the greatest potential to alleviate the personal, instructional, and
systemic barriers that adults outside school experience with learning.
Chapter 2 provides an overview of what is known about the major
components and processes of reading and writing and the qualities of in-
struction that develop reading and writing for both typical and struggling
learners in K-12 settings. The chapter presents principles for intervening
specifically with struggling learners. Although supported by strong evi-
dence, we stress that caution must be used in generalizing the research to
other populations. Translational research is needed on the development of
practices that are appropriate for diverse populations of adolescents and
adults.
Chapter 3 describes the adults who receive literacy instruction, includ-
ing major subgroups, and the demographics of the population, what is
known about their difficulties with component literacy skills, and charac-
teristics of their instructional contexts. The chapter conveys the state of
research on practices that develop adults’ literacy skills and identifies pri-
orities for research and innovation to advance knowledge of adult literacy
development and effective literacy instruction.
Chapters 4 through 6 synthesize research from a variety of disciplines
on topics that are vital to furthering adult literacy. Chapter 4 summarizes
findings from research on the conditions that affect cognitive processing and
learning. The chapter draws on and updates several recent efforts to distill
principles of learning for educators and discusses considerations in applying
these principles to the design of literacy instruction for adults. Chapter 5
synthesizes research on the features of environments—instructional inter-
actions, structures, tasks, texts, systems—that encourage engagement with
learning and persistence in adolescents and adults. The chapter draws on
research from multiple disciplines that examine the psychological, social,
and environmental factors that affect motivation, engagement in learn-
OCR for page 23
23
INTRODUCTION
ing, and goal attainment. Chapter 6 applies what is known about literacy,
learning, and motivation to examine in greater depth one aspect of the
instructional environment—instructional technologies—that may motivate
essential practice with literacy activities, scaffold learning, and help to as-
sess learners’ progress. Technology also may help to resolve some of the
practical barriers to more extensive literacy practice related to life demands,
child care, and transportation, which adult learners cannot always afford,
in either dollars or time.
The next two chapters discuss the research for two subgroups of the
adult learner population. Chapter 7 synthesizes what is known about the
cognitive, linguistic, and other learning challenges experienced by adults
with learning disabilities and the uses of accommodations that facilitate
learning. Chapter 8 considers the literacy development needs and processes
for the population of adults learning English as a second language, which
includes both immigrants and U.S. citizens and is diverse in terms of educa-
tion, language background, and familiarity with U.S. culture. This chapter
points to the major challenges experienced by English language learners in
developing their literacy skills and outlines the research needed to facilitate
literacy development. Given that the basic principles of reading, writing,
learning, and motivation have been discussed in previous chapters, this
chapter focuses on issues specific to the literacy development of adults who
are learning a second language.
Chapter 9 presents the committee’s conclusions and recommendations
in light of the research reviewed in previous chapters. Our conclusions
stress that it should be possible to develop approaches that improve adults’
literacy given the wealth of knowledge that exists. The challenge is to
determine how to integrate the various principles we have derived from
the research findings into coordinated and comprehensive programs of
instruction that meet the needs of diverse populations of adults. In this
final chapter, we urge attention to several issues in research and policy that
impinge directly on the quality of instruction, the feasibility of completing
the much-needed research, and the potential for much broader dissemina-
tion and implementation of the practices that emerge as effective.
