Adult literacy learning and instruction.

Abstract

Issues in adult literacy are among the least investigated and most compelling in education. Research has given only marginal attention to the structure of literacy programs, the instructional approaches used in them, the relative effectiveness of instructional approaches in helping adults learn to read, or adults' purposes and uses for literacy learning. Problems in adult literacy programs have long been attributed to factors, such as adults' work dem and s, responsibilities, and motivation, when they may be the result of the incongruence of instruction and adults' needs and purposes for literacy. The present research consists of two studies that examine instructional and policy issues in adult literacy. Study 1 is a descriptive analysis of 160 adult literacy programs in Michigan. Results indicate that more than half of the programs have fewer than 100 students, that they generally use skills taxonomies in reading instruction, that staff have little knowledge about other instructional options, and that they are continually challenged by persistent recruitment and retention problems. Study 2 examines the qualitative and quantitative reading performance of 24 adults, 12 in a program using a language-experience approach and 12 in a program using a word recognition approach. Adults were interviewed about their purposes and goals for literacy learning and their contexts for using literacy. The primary goals for adults in both programs are to become self-reliant and to provide their children with educational opportunities. Reading assessments were administered to measure comprehension, reading awareness, personal efficacy, and self-perceptions regarding reading. Performance of adults in the program using the language-experience approach was significantly higher than the performance of adults in the program using word recognition approaches for all measures except personal efficacy. Observational data also suggest that instructional styles and classroom interactions may contribute to the differences found between the two groups. Moreover, the data point to a need for instructional approaches that capitalize on the contextual, experiential, and social nature of adult literacy learning.