Advocacy

Election Thought of the Day

/ The Old Crank

Thinking about the impact of the elections on adult education policy, I wonder if the results of some of the governer’s races are more significant for adult education (and workforce policy generally), than the shift in power in the Senate. While most education-related legislation languished without much progress during the last Congress, the current crew did manage to successfully dispose of the most important piece of legislation for our field, the Workforce Investment and Opportunity Act (WIOA), passing it by a wide margin this summer. The action is really now at the state level, where governors hold sway over WIOA’s implmentation.

What will party switches in the governor’s offices in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Maryland, for example, mean for WIOA implementation in those states?

 

Bring on the Pork!

/ The Old Crank

Homer Welcomes the Return of Pork Barrel SpendingI tweeted this earlier but in case you are walled out by their subscriber paywall, here’s a fair use except of an interesting article in the Legal Times from yesterday concerning the possible return of Congressional earmarks. An earmark is a legislative provision that allows members to direct approved funds for specific projects, usually to a particular organization or project in their home state or district. Earmarks are popularly portrayed as pork-barrel spending and often cited as a corrupting influence on our politics. The practice became enough of a public relations liability that the House instituted a ban on the practice in 2010, and the Senate soon followed suit. Now some lobbyists (who obviously have a vested interest in this) are going around telling people it might come back:

Former Republican Congressman James Walsh, now at K&L Gates, has predicted that federal earmarks could return to Congress next year. The change could revive the lobbying industry and spark a now-stagnant Congress by giving it more discretionary power after the mid-term elections Tuesday, he said during a webinar sponsored by his firm.

“I think it would make things move better up there,” he said. A highway funding plan, he added, could revive the earmark—a legislative procedure that ended in 2010.

His prediction was among many shared by a K&L Gates panel of former members of Congress and a top lobbyist Monday.

Despite earmarks’ bad reputation, there are some who have argued that an outright ban of the practice was actually a bad idea, claiming it has actually decreased transparency in the appropriations process and shifted the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches too far to the executive. Others argue that the ban removed who a useful tool for lawmakers to have at their disposal as a way to broker deals on legislation.

In the case of adult education, would the return of Congressional  earmarks provide advocates with more leverage over the administration on how money on adult education is spent? I have no idea. I do suspect that without strong, knowledgeable advocacy from the field, Congress could also come up with some really bad ways to earmark adult education funds. But it seems to me the opportunity for leverage is almost always a good thing to have. Right now the administration calls all the shots, and I’m not sure that Congressional language “urging” the Department to “increase the focus on adults with the lowest literacy and numeracy skills” or “work with national adult literacy organizations,” as they did in the FY 2014 omnibus budget bill, is taken that seriously.

Invitation to Comment on Implementation of Title II of WIOA

/ The Old Crank

(Updated Below)

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE) is providing the public with an opportunity to kvetch and complain —I mean, submit comments and recommendations—regarding the implementation of the new Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), signed by President Obama in July. Specifically, the new version of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) in Title II.

According to OCTAE, “your input can help us identify issues and concerns that we need to address in order to fulfill the expectations of WIOA, particularly as we develop draft regulations for public comment.” They’ve listed a few specific issues they are interested in hearing about, but you can comment on anything you like. In fact, I usually think it’s best not to necessarily let OCTAE be the one to frame the discussion about their activities.

It is a pretty good list, though:

  1. In issuing definitions of performance indicators under Section 116, what should be considered in regulation or guidance when applying these indicators to adult education participants? How can the use of “measurable skill gain” best support services to low-skilled and limited English proficient individuals?
  2. WIOA emphasizes the importance of connecting job seekers and workers with the needs of employers and the regional economy. States will be required to report on their effectiveness in serving employers. What factors should OCTAE consider when defining how adult education and literacy programs may effectively serve employers?
  3. WIOA requires states to implement adult education content standards that are aligned to their standards under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. What are the timeline and implementation issues that should be considered in supporting this requirement?
  4. AEFLA adds new activities to adult education and literacy services, including integrated education and training and workforce preparation. What should be considered in regulation or guidance on these new activities?

Someone representing local programs asked me earlier today if I thought it was worth their while to submit comments now, or to wait to respond to the draft regulations. I think it’s definitely worth submitting comments now. Comments on the draft regulations will also be important, but just like with legislation, it’s best to let drafters know what your biggest questions/concerns are *before* anything is drafted. It’s been my experience that the further you are along a bureaucratic process, the harder it is to change things. Once drafted, whatever is in those regulations will likely set the parameters of the discussion/debate more narrowly—it may be harder, for example, to add something that’s missing at that stage.

Another way to think of it is this: if folks at the local level don’t submit comments, then we are all relying on the comments submitted by the big national policy shops—who surely will be weighing in heavily on this. While I’m not suggesting that they won’t necessarily submit good recommendations, those groups typically don’t have to worry about actually implementing any of their proposals. It’s the folks on the ground who are going to have to live with the policies and regulations that are produced. So I’d strongly encourage local folks to get into the discussion early and often.

Not a ton of time though: comments are due by Friday, August 29th – roughly between the time almost everyone is on vacation and when they come back.

Again, here is the link to the invitation:

Invitation to Comment on Implementation of Title II and Title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act | Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education.

UPDATE 8/13/14 2:30pm: Added the due date. Made title shorter.

Diversion of the Day: 1980s Ad Council PSA on Adult Literacy

/ The Old Crank

A Dailymotion user has posted one of the old 1980s Ad Council adult literacy PSAs.

http://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x1vo5co?autoplay=1&logo=0&hideInfos=0&start=0&syndication=125600&foreground=&highlight=&background

 

For those interested, here is a little bit of the history behind this campaign:

The [Coalition for Literacy]’s media campaign was officially launched in a press conference held on 12 December 1984 in the Trustees Room of the New York Public Library. The Advertising Council (sponsors of “Smokey the Bear,” “Take a Bite Out of Crime,” and “A Mind Is A Terrible ThingToWaste”) coordinated the media campaign. They recruited the advertising agency of D’Arcy, Masius, Benton & Bowles/Worldwide as volunteers to develop the print and nonprint ads. Two advertising campaign strategies were developed—one to inform and appeal to the general public and the other to raise the awareness of the corporate sector. The theme that was chosen for the general public ads was “Volunteer Against Adult Literacy: The Only Degree You Need is a Degree of Caring.” The audience was identified as those who wanted to become volunteers to help another person learn to read. The advertising theme developed to appeal to the corporate sector [was]: “Volunteer Against Illiteracy: A Literate America is a Good Investment.” This audience is encouraged to bring corporate/private sector resources to assist national and local literacy activities.

The Advertising Council conducted studies to measure the awareness of communities about adult illiteracy before and after releasing the television and print ads. The campaign is now among the top five social awareness campaigns that the council coordinates. Within the first year of the coalition’s advertising campaign, the Ad Council indicators cite that awareness of adult illiteracy has jumped from 21 to 30 percent. The print, radio, and television media have contributed an estimated value of $20 million in advertising space and time to the coalition’s campaign.

—Jean Ellen Coleman, “ALA’s Role in Adult and Literacy Education, “Library Trends (Fall 1986) 207-17.

It’s interesting to read about the corporate messaging strategy—pretty much the same messaging we use today.