State Policy

Scrambling for Dollars

/ The Old Crank

Somewhat unusual state funding scheme, I think, for adult literacy in New Mexico, assuming this story was reported accurately. I think what is going on here is that the state has decided it wants state adult literacy funds that are not part of their 25%  match under Title II of WIA to be reserved for programs not receiving Title II funding.

It’s very challenging, I think, for coalitions to serve as conduits for state funding and still serve as a broad-based coalition for the field. Even when it works well, the dynamic between coalition members and the leaders of the coalition is different when coalition members rely on the coalition for funding. And of course, program directors that don’t get your funding won’t be happy, and when funding gets tight, disputes like this seem sort of inevitable.

I’m be interested in hearing about other coalition organizations that serve as state funding intermediaries.

And So It Begins

/ The Old Crank / 1 Comment

In case you missed it, the AP, the Wall Street Journal and other sources reported late last week that the New York State Education Department has awarded an $8.4 million, three-year contract to CTB/McGraw-Hill to create an exam that will replace the GED as the state’s main high-school equivalency test.

More here.

And for more background on how we came to this, check out articles here, here and here.

GED Changes Noted in the Wall Street Journal

/ The Old Crank / 1 Comment

In case you missed it, the Wall Street Journal published a piece by Lisa Fleisher late last week on the changes coming to the GED. It’s a pretty good summary of where this all stands at the moment:

Dozens of states are considering whether to jettison the GED, which is now going through the biggest overhaul in its 70-year history, and many are already hunting for alternatives among a growing list of new competitors.

The change may not be simple. Like Band-Aid and Velcro, GED is a brand name often confused as a generic. As states consider their options, a question is emerging: Will colleges and employers recognize an equivalency diploma that isn’t called the GED?

Meanwhile, this story in the Syracuse Post-Standard yesterday looks more closely at New York’s efforts to select an alternative test.

What’s not mentioned in either article is the hardship this change will be for those already in the process of preparing for the GED right now. Those who have completed some, but not all, of the five sections of the current test GED must finish up this year, or be forced to start all over when the new test is launched in January of 2014.

Also lost in most of the coverage of this issue is an analysis of the fundamental differences between running the GED as nonprofit enterprise and running it as a for-profit business, and whether it makes sense from a public policy perspective to shift to a model where a profit motive strongly influences the cost and availability of the test. ACE’s position—that there was no way to update the test without bringing in a for-profit partner—may be true, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it makes sense from a policy perspective. Assuming we think it’s a public good to have more out-of-school adult obtain a high-school diploma, do we think that what’s happening right now the best way to accomplish this outcome? Maybe so! But, the point is, that’s a discussion we’re not really having.

Legislative Analyst’s Office Recommends Restructuring of California Adult Education Funding

/ The Old Crank

EdSource published a good story earlier this week about the continuing effort by advocates in California to fix their broken adult education funding system. As I’ve written previously, (here, for example), a budget mechanism implemented in 2009 known as “categorical flexibility,” has allowed California school districts to divert funds from adult education to support its K-12 programs. Altogether, the LAO estimates that over $450 million in state and federal government funds—more than half of the funds that used to be available—have been diverted out of California’s district-run adult schools since the categorical flexibility law was passed.

California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) recently issued a report that recommended a return to a dedicated funding stream for adult education—on other words, remove it from the list of programs that can be poached for other purposes.

Unfortunately, the article makes it clear that there still isn’t a clear legislative path towards implementing that recommendation.

Don’t miss Bob Harper’s comment on the article, which I think makes a good point:

If it’s the intention of the Governor that adult literacy, English language acquisition and immigrant integration, basic skills related to readiness for work or college, are no longer critical services, then that needs to be made plain in policy discussions, and not be the desultory by-product of budgetary reform. In such policy discussions it would be hard to ignore the historic role that adult education has performed for California, and to discuss in what form that needed service continues.