Rise and Decline of the AELS

Colleagues: Following are some data which may be of interest. They illustrate the rise and decline of enrollments in the Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) of the United States over the period from 1984-2012.

 

Program Year     Enrollments

 

1983-1984          2,596,000

 

1984-1985           2,879,000

 

1985-1986            2,797,000

 

1986-1987            2,945,000

 

1987-1988            3,039,000

 

1988-1989            3,257,000

 

1989-1990             3,567,000

 

1990-1991             3,722,000

 

1991-1992             3,838,000

 

1992-1993            3,880,000

 

1993-1994             3,753,000

 

1994-1995             3,875,000

 

1995-1996             4,042,000

 

1996-1997            4,017,000

 

Introduction of the National Reporting System

1997-1998            4,020,000

Introduction of the National Reporting System

 

1998-1999            3,616,000

 

1999-2000            2,891,895

 

2000-2001            2,673,692

 

2001-2002            2,787,414

 

2002-2003            2,736,192

 

2003-2004           2,677,119

 

2004-2005           2,581,281

 

2005-2006           2,452,609

 

2006-2007           2,343,283

 

2007-2008           2,334,751

 

2008-2009           2,398,070

 

2009-2010           2,181,268

 

2010-2011           2,012,163

 

2011-2012           1,804,819

 

Tom Sticht

 

tsticht@aznet.net

 

Comments

Do u have any explanation for the decline in numbers since 1997-8?

Better literacy teaching in schools reducing the need for adults to enroll in classes?

Cuts in funding?

Pressure on colleges to accept only students who are likely to make measurable improvements?

Masha Bell
Ex English teacher, now independent literacy researcher
Author of ebook SPELLING IT OUT (2012),
www.EnglishSpellingProblems.co.uk
http://EnglishSpellingProblems.blogspot.com
http://ImprovingEnglishSpelling.blogspot.com
and Youtube video 'Why improve English spelling?'

Hello Tom,

Thanks for this (sad) picture of the enrollment decline.

The U.S. Department of Education at one point claimed that through public funding we were meeting 10% of the need for adult basic education. I wonder what per cent they think we are meeting now. Can anyone shed light on that?

Tom, are there some particularly hard-hit states whose enrollment decline is more pronounced than others, for example, California? If so, what states?

Tom, or others, Is there a silver lining in this cloud? Are some state increasing their per-student investment and, as a result, getting better outcomes? For example, I read that Arizona is now considered a high performing state, and it was a state whose resources have been cut. See http://explorernews.com/news/article_1c01180e-55d3-11e2-81d8-001a4bcf887a.html (Unfortunately this news article doesn't cite the source -- can anyone --  for example from Arizona, point us to the data that backs up this claim that Arizona adult education ranks near the top in national polls?

Thanks,

David J. Rosen

djrosen123@gmail.com

Tom -

I'd like to use this information in a report to groups here in Colorado.

Can you please respond with either the document citation (from which government agency or non-profit) and/or the website where you found this information.

Thanks.

Dorothea Steinke, math instructor

Front Range Community College

Dorothea, David, and all: The resources for the data for 1983-84 through 1997-98 can be found online using Google to search for Sticht: Beyond 2000. The data for 1999-2009 are from the annual reports to Congress and can be found on the USED OVAE/DAEL web site under Reports. Data for 2010 through 2012 are from the statistical tables on the OVAE NRS site.

 

Regarding relationships of per enrollee funds and educational gains, the following table shows what I have from the annual reports to Congress on the OVAE/DAEL web site.

 

Column labels:

A=Program Year

B=Percentage Making Gain in ABE/ASE Levels

C=Numbers of Enrollees

D=State Grant Funding in Millions

E=funding per Enrollee

 

 

     A                B                  C               D           E

2001-2002      37%      2,787,414      $540      $194

 

2002-2003      38%      2,736,192      $565      $204

 

2003-2004      38%      2,677,119      $561      $210

 

2004-2005      40%      2,581,281      $564      $218

 

2005-2006      39%      2,452,609      $560      $228

 

2006-2007      37%      2,343,283      $554      $236

 

2007-2008      39%      2,334,751      $554      $237

 

2008-2009      40%      2,398,070      $544      $227

 

There was a loss of some 14% of enrollees from 2001-2002 through 2008-2009. What is uncertain is whether there is a real gain trend in percentage of those making educational gains in ABE/ASE levels during the period shown as funds per enrollee increase by about 33-43 dollars from 2002 to 08 or 09. Additional years of data could inform this question.

 

What IS certain is that the federal funds per enrollee are obscenely low. Even adding the average state contribution only brings the per enrollee up to a little over $900 compared to some $8,000-$10,000 per enrollee in Early Head Start and Head Start. Clearly the policy seems to be to sacrifice the parents and let the society rescue their children.

 

Tom Sticht

 

tsticht@aznet.net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Colleagues: Following are data which illustrate the rise, decline, and partial rise of funding per enrollee in constant 2012 dollars in the Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) of the United States from the first year of the Adult Education Act in 1966 to 2012. From 1966 to 1970, funds per enrollee in 2012 dollars increased from $377 to $442 in 1970. They then dropped to $228 in 1980 and took a big two-thirds plunge to $75 in 1985. Then the 1990 funds per enrollee started to rise from $95 in 1990 and rose up to $329 per enrollee in 2012, still 13 percent less than the per enrollee funding when the Adult Education Act was enacted in 1966 and 25 percent below the 1970 funding per enrollee in constant 2012 dollars.

Column titles:

A=Program Year
B=Enrollments
C=Federal Funding in Millions
D=Federal Funding in 2012 Dollars
E=Funds Per Enrollee in 2012 Dollars

   A           B              C         D        E 
1966     377,000      $20   $142   $377
1970     535,000      $40   $237   $442
1975   1,221,000     $68   $291   $238
1980   2,058,000     $100 $279   $229
1985   2,879,000     $102 $218   $75 
1990   3,567,000     $193 $340   $95
1995   3,875,000     $252 $381   $98

Introduction of the National Reporting System
1998   4,020,000     $345  $487   $121
Introduction of the National Reporting System

2000   2,891,895    $442 $591   $204
2005   2,581,281    $564 $665   $258
2010   2,181,268    $628 $663   $304
2011   2,012,163    $596 $610   $303
2012   1,804,819    $595 $595   $329 

I should note that I have had to piece these numbers together from obscure reports going back to 1966 and then various annual reports from the National Advisory Panel for Adult Education through the 1970’s and ‘80’s and then online reports from the annual reports to Congress since the National Reporting System was initiated, and also from some of the data tables at the OVAE/DAEL online NRS web site. I have found some numbers for the same years to differ from one report to another, though usually not by much. It is also somewhat confusing to know about numbers reported as Program Years and others as Fiscal Years. So while there may be some differences reported above and in some other federal or state reports, I don’t think the major trends and conclusions change. It would be nice if a generally available, consolidated, authoritative,  and certified accurate report of these sorts of federal data could be made available from the USED/OVAE/DAEL.

Note: I define the AELS as those adult education programs funded in whole or in part by the Workforce Investment Act: Title 2: Adult Education and Family Literacy Act. OVAE/DAEL states that the FY 2012 appropriation for the AELS includes a $74,708,534 set-aside for English literacy and civics education formula grants to states. The FY 2011 appropriation includes a $75,000,000 set-aside for English literacy and civics education formula grants to states. The FY 2010 appropriation included $45,906,328 for distribution to states in order to remedy an administrative error in prior years. I have left these amounts in the figures above.
  
Tom Sticht
tsticht@aznet.net


 

Tom, 

Thank you for posting this data. I will share with faculty and other admin. In my mind, the most likely culprit for the decline is the recession. Here in So Cal, many people have returned to home countries. Others are afraid to venture out because of increased enforcement vis-a vis undocumented people.

~Allison Pickering

The RISE: From 1980 to 1988 enrollments in the AELS rose by almost a million and then in the decade from 1988 enrollments rose by another million enrollments to reach over 4 million. During this same time personnel working in the Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) of the United States increased from a little over 50 thousand to over 150,000 to service this large increase in student enrollments.

 

The DECLINE: Following the introduction of the National Reporting System into the AELS, enrollments starting falling and eventually by 2012 the AELS had lost over 2 million enrollments and total personnel working in the AELS fell from over 177 thousand in 1998 to just over 103 thousand in 2012.

A=Program Year

B=Total AELS Personnel

C=Total Enrollments

    A                    B              C

1979-1980    52,684    2,058,000

1987-1988   150,686   3,039,000

1997-1998   177,943    4,020,000

[1998 Introduction of National Reporting System]

1999-2000    153,364    2,891,895

2000-2001    146,962    2,787,414

2004-2005    144,169    2,581,281

2009-2010    149,239    2,181,268

2010-2011     105,917    2,012,163

2011-2012     103,290    1,804,819

 

Some have speculated that the decline in enrollments following the implementation of the NRS may have resulted from the reduction of double-counting of enrollments using the NRS procedures. I have not heard speculation about the decline in personnel which accompanied the decine in enrollments. It seems unlikely to me that the personnel decline would be due to double-counting of personnel.

 

Tom Sticht

 

tsticht@aznet.net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These data suggest to me that the decline in numbers of students enrlled in the AELS could be accounted for by:

1. A decline in state and perhaps private funding in many/most states, especially the huge cuts in some states like California and New Jersey, and/or

2. Increased attention on serving fewer students and serving them better in some states (Whether or not that has resulted in improvement in service is another question. Tom, you posted some data earlier on in one of these discussions that suggested that an increase in per student cost -- and services -- may not have resulted in better performance, at least not the kind of performance measured through the National Reporting System)

I wonder if, after reading the data you just poted, and those that you posted earlier, anyone has other thoughts about what accounts for the decline in numbers served by the AELS; or are these two hypotheses the strongest?


David J. Rosen

djrosen123@gmail.com

David and all: Here are two sets of data showing breakouts of Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) personnel by part-time, full-time, and unpaid volunteers for (1) ALL personnel in the AELS, and (2) just TEACHERS in the AELS. Unfortunately I don’t have complete data for the many years from 1966 up to the present but the data which I do show are somewhat informative in indicating that from the 1980’s total personnel rose as enrollments increased up to 1998 and then declined as enrollments dropped.

Interestingly, the 58% drop in unpaid volunteers from 1987-1988 with over 74 thousand volunteers to some 31 thousand in 2012 exceeds the 42% overall decline in total  personnel from 177,943 in 1997-1998 to 103,290 in 2011-2012. Some have suggested that many community-based programs with unpaid volunteers as teachers withdrew from the AELS as the NRS was implemented because they could not manage the new NRS accountability requirements. The data on the high decline in unpaid volunteers from the 1980’s to 2012 are consistent with this idea and add a third hypothesis to your other two.

1. Column Names for Table 1-All Personnel

A=Program Year
B=Total AELS Personnel
C=Part-time Personnel
D=Full-time Personnel
E=Volunteer Personnel
F=Adult Enrollments

      A               B             C          D        E            F
1979-1980  52,684    35,745  16,939  N/A        2,058,000
1987-1988 150,686    63,990  16,939  74,626  3,039,000
1997-1998 177,943    N/A      N/A    N/A           4,020,000
1999-2000 153,364    N/A      N/A    N/A           2,891,895
2000-2001 146,962    69,393  20,866  56,700  2,787,414
2004-2005 144,169    70,923  22,155  51,091  2,581,281
2009-2010 149,239    84,866  26,350  38,023  2,181,268
2010-2011 105,917    54,721  19,491  31,705  2,012,163
2011-2012 103,290    51,954  20,317  31,019  1,804,819

2. Column Names for Table 2-Teachers

A=Program Year
B=Part-time Teachers
C=Full-time Teachers
D=Unpaid Volunteers
E=Total Teachers
F=Total Enrollments    

A                     B          C         D                 E            F
2011-2012 40,631  11,928  18,516      71,075     1,804,819
2010-2011 43,632  11,134  18,928      72,694     2,012,163
2009-2010 70,134  17,122  25,281  112,537      2,181,268
2008-2009 53,764  11,647  26,688    92,099      2,398,070
2007-2008 54,329  10,873  25,979    91,181      2,334,751
2006-2007 62,056  12,666  26,594  101,316      2,343,283 
2005-2006 54,539  12,551  25,637    92,727      2,452,609
2004-2005 55,623  12,276  27,843    95,742      2,581,281
2003-2004 57,739  14,025  26,150    97,914      2,677,119
2002-2003 55,069  11,571  27,967    94,607      2,736,192
2001-2002 50,669  16,921  27,059    94,649      2,787,414 
2000-2001 53,538 10,058   28,992    92,588      2,673,692

1987-1988 51,036 5,995 37,591 94,622 3,039,000

Tom Sticht
tsticht@aznet.net

 

Tom,

These are sobering numbers. As an adult educator in Colorado, I can only speak from what I see happening here.  Colorado is one of only a couple of states that doesn't fund one penny to adult education  (according to the CLASP report, "Sinking or Swimming: Findings from a Survey of State Adult Education Tuition and Financing Policies  http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications/files/Sinking-or-Swimming-State-Adult-Education-Tuition-and-Financing-Policies.pdf ).  Programs in Colorado are dependent upon AEFLA money.  My program is losing its fiduciary host and after forty years of serving 800+ students a year in our community, Adult Education will be no more come July.

We're shackled by the TABOR amendment in Colorado, which prevents any increase in education spending without going to the voters. When barely 30% of registered voters actually go to the polls, the majority is being ruled by the minority and there is a lack of vision in this state when it comes to quality education.  Adult ed is the bottom of the priority list.

I can also say that we saw a dramatic drop in our ESL populations a few years ago when ICE began doing random raids on meat processing facilities.  We lost students, not only because they were afraid to come out, but because they left the state.  Numbers have been slowly increasing, but now our program is closing.  The only option for high school students is a GED. Most of our ESL students will have few options because their English is too low to pass the Acuplacer test at the community college.

I think we're suffering a lack of vision and will. AEFLA expenditures have been at the same level for what? Twenty-some years?  Colorado doesn't fund a penny to adult education.  Our school district can no longer afford to be Adult Ed's fiduciary host, so here we are. There is a lack of vision and will at all levels, in my honest opinion.

Kat Bradley-Bennett, ESL Instructor

Longmont, Colorado

 

Hello-

I don't know that I have an answer to the declining enrollment question nationwide, but for the adult school that I'm the principal of in California's Central Valley, our enrollment has reflected the waves of refugee populations, mostly from Southeast Asia. Our last large influx of refugees occurred in 2004, and those students have cycled through our adult education program and moved on to college and employment. Also, in my opinion, the outsourcing of employment has had an effect on our enrollment, as the need to work in California and send money home to another country has declined.

Colleagues: Regarding the decline of the AELS, the statistical data showing the decline in enrollments, personnel, and providers for the AELS are just one set of indicators of the problems facing the AELS. Another set of problems arise from negative reports about the effectiveness of the AELS. For instance, the only national organization for adult literacy learners, Voices of Adult Learners United in Education (VALUE) has expressed its displeasure with the AELS.

 

In its Social Change Initiative VALUE states: quote”The current system is simply not designed to meet the modern needs of learners in a realistic time frame.”end quote Under its four core principles which guide its work, VALUE takes several important stances with regard to adult literacy education, two which I find particularly important. Under Principle 2, VALUE takes the position that limited literacy is a skill deficiency, not an indicator of low intelligence. They go on to say, quote”For many, adult literacy issues can be traced to previously unrecognized disabilities, failing schools, and family issues - all having more to do with class, race, gender, and cultural bias than intelligence. We must get rid of these biases and break down the barriers of personal shame and public stigma so we can gain the literacy skills needed to increase our contributions to the economy, our families, and our communities.”end quote

 

This is a position I took in my paper written for the The National Literacy Summit 2000. I made the point that we need to combat these types of cultural biases regarding the skills of the less literate. Entitled The Adult Education and Literacy System (AELS) in the United States: Moving From the Margins to the Mainstream of Education, the paper gives examples of the negative ideas about people’s abiilities which hinder the development of the AELS and provides some rebuttal of these ideas. However, much more is needed to combat those who take the position that low literacy and low intellligence or low aptitude are comparable and render any attempts by adult educators and learners to achieve higher levels of literacy ineffective for the most part. I have not seen any adult education research or advocacy papers, including the 2008 report of the recent National Commission on Adult Literacy or the 2011 National Research Council report on Improving Adult Literacy Instruction, address this important issue.

 

In its core Principle 3.VALUE argues quote” We cannot continue to waste the potential of the current adult population by devoting so little attention and resource(*) to the adult basic education system. Since parents are a child's first teachers, the literacy level of the parent is critical to the success of early childhood education. The K-12 education system cannot be the primary solution to this problem; and even if we do fix the K-12 system to address the needs of future generations, our country's economy and security is still severely impacted now, and for a long time to come by the "bubble" of low literacy in the current workforce.“end quote

 

As some of you know, I have long advocated for adult literacy education as a means of improving the literacy development and educational achievement of both adults and their children. In my judgment, we have depended way too much on workforce development issues in our advocacy efforts for the AELS and not enough on the potential which adult literacy education has for improving children’s educational achievement. For instance, Reach Higher America, the 2008, 6o+ page report of the National Commission on Adult Literacy devotes only one page to the intergenerational effects of adult education and then calls for more funding for family literacy programs. but it offers no critical analyses of past family literacy programs and the national Even Start studies which lead to the demise of the Even Start program.

 

In my free workshop for 2013 I once again mobilize data to support this argument. I bring workforce development and children’s educational achievement together. For further information on my workshops for 2013 in which I present a great deal of evidence and methods for promoting the intergenerational effects of adult education while engaged in workforce development contact me at tsticht at aznet.net.

 

Tom Sticht