adult education

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.

Deep Thought About Sequestration

/ The Old Crank

(Updated below)

What worries me most about sequestration cuts to adult education is not the cut to adult education itself. The federal investment in adult education, while significant to those who benefit, is relatively small in comparison to other federal programs, and by the time you apportion a $30 million cut across 50 states plus territories, the impact will be somewhat diffused.

What worries me more is the rest of the sequestration cuts, and how states respond to them. States have no money. I assume they are going to have to try to move around what little they do have to make up for loss of federal dollars in other, more visible and popular programs. Remember that states are losing money for K-12 teachers and special education and a host of other things. I can imagine some states might be looking at cutting their state investments in adult education and re-allocating that money into those areas, and I can imagine that this could be worse than the sequestration cuts themselves in many states.

If you want to contact your elected representatives about sequestration, the National Coalition for Literacy has an action alert here.

UPDATE: Good summary here of the impact of sequestration on other programs. Education alone will be cut by $2.1 billion, which would result in 1.2 million fewer students served under Title I grants, potentially ten thousand teacher job losses, and nearly 300,000 fewer special education students served. Early-childhood education will be cut by just under $600 million. These are the kinds of program cuts that states are going to be scrambling to try to address in the months and years ahead.

Economic Argument for Adult Education Still Has Some Life in Maryland

/ The Old Crank

On Wednesday night, during his annual State of the County address, Montgomery Maryland County Executive Leggett announced something that sort of sounded like a big push to expand adult English literacy services in Montgomery County, which he called “English Language on Demand.” It’s not clear what exactly this initiative will include—in particular, whether there will be significant new funding involved. (One thing for sure, there is excellent umbrella organization—Montgomery Coalition for Adult English Literacy—that does a tremendous job supporting local adult English literacy programs in Montgomery County. They would surely do great things with more funding should it become available.)

But I wanted to highlight a statistic that he cited during this announcement, because it’s a rare example where an old report—you know, those reports that usually just gather dust on a shelf somewhere—actually seems to have resurrected itself (at least one small piece of it). And the fact that the piece in question is an economic return-on-investment argument is encouraging.

The report I’m thinking of is Stepping Up to the Future, a 2005 report by a panel put together by the Maryland Schools Superintendent to make recommendations on improving adult education throughout the state. Leggett cited a nugget of economic data that I’ve only seen in that report—I’ve never been able to get a hold of the original source of the data. Specifically, when he said during the speech that “every dollar we invest in adult English language training… brings us three dollars in higher productivity,” that appears to be derived from an analysis, commissioned by the panel, of adult education and wage data by a group called ORC Macro. They found, among other things, that “every dollar invested in adult education [in Maryland] yields a return of $3.15.” That’s not exactly what Leggett said—he was talking specifically about English language training, and not in the whole state but just in the county—but I’ll bet that’s where that statistic  comes from. And if it’s sort of a sloppy appropriation of it (assuming I’m right), it doesn’t matter. The important thing here is the suggestion that policymakers in Maryland accept the notion that investing in adult education has positive economic returns.

Anyway, it’s always great to hear support for adult education in one of these annual speeches, and credit is due to Leggett for proposing it. It will be interesting to see where it goes.

Here are Leggett’s comments on his “English on Demand” proposal in full:

My second initiative is English Language on Demand. In Montgomery, our residents speak many different languages – and that’s good. But here, and increasingly around the world, mastering English is the ticket to opportunity and success. When you speak English, you not only learn another language, you also improve your chances of getting a good job – and then getting a better one. It is the ticket to growing your business and to building a better future for your family — which increases the County’s overall tax base.

I recommend as a goal that every adult in this County who wants to learn English – no matter where they come from – has the opportunity to do so. For every dollar we invest in adult English language training, it brings us three dollars in higher productivity. So, let’s invest the necessary resources to help shorten and, in time, eliminate the long waiting lists for individuals seeking the opportunity to learn English. And, we should also encourage County residents to become “teaching volunteers” in our County English language learning network.

And Now Here’s the Republican WIA Bill – Plus a Hearing on the 26th

/ The Old Crank

Sure enough, hot on the heels of the reintroduction of the Democrat’s WIA reauthorization bill from last year (the Workforce Investment Act of 2013, or H.R. 798) last week, Education and the Workforce Committee Republicans announced today they plan to reintroduce their old WIA bill under a new name on February 25th. (At least that’s what it appears to be… I haven’t checked to see whether there might be any substantial differences worth noting.)

Here’s a copy of the bill, which will be known as “The Supporting Knowledge and Investing in Lifelong Skills (SKILLS) Act.” Higher Education and Workforce Training Subcommittee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) will chair a hearing on Tuesday, February 26th to discuss.