Transcript Document

California Adult Education
Strategic Plan
CAEAA
January 28, 2010
Meeting Purpose
Review process to date and answer
questions
•
•
•
•
Review Needs Assessment findings
Review additional input
Discuss core strategic topic
Answer questions
Process Stages and Timeline
Jan - Sep 2009
Oct - Jan 2009
Feb - Apr 2010
May - Sep 2010
1: Needs Assessment
2: Planning Process
3: Plan Development
4: Review/Edit
Needs Assessment Overview:
Principles and Findings
Principles
The needs assessment was based on a set of guidelines
focusing on state-wide need and a future orientation.
1. Define need in terms of California’s long-term economic and
social success.
2. Use a “program and group neutral” methodology.
3. Use objective data and rigorous research.
4. Distinguish between need and demand.
5. Create a “Living Document.”
Growth in California’s Workforce
2007 - 2032
70%
60%
(share of Growth)
60%
50%
40%
39%
30%
20%
10%
1%
0%
Immigrants
Children of
Immigrants
Other
Source: U.S.C. Demographic Futures Project
The Impact of Demographic
Change on Education
“There will be no net gain in our workforce
for a long time coming from native-born
Americans….And most of our immigrants
are coming from populations who are
poorly educated…So to maintain our
standard of living every working person
must be much more productive…and the
children of our immigrants will have to be
much more productive than their parents.”
Source; Tough Choices or Tough Times--NCEE
Gap Estimates: ESL, ASE, ABE
B
A
Type of
Service
ESL
(English as
a Second
Language)
ASE
(Adult
Secondary
Education)
ABE
(Adult
Basic
Education )
C
Census (ACS) estimate of
population, 2005-2007
D
E
F = D+E
G = F/C
Served by
CDEÕs
Ad ult
i
Schools
Served by
Community
iii
Colleges
Approx.
Total Served
Annually
Approx.
UNMET
NEED
Adults 1864 Who
Speak
English
Ņless th
an
well"
3,059,677
478,217
131,001
iii
Adults 18
and abov e
th
with 9 to
th
12 Grade
(no
diploma or
GED)
2,736,722
204,953
131,001
iii
Adults 18
and abov e
with less
th
than 9
Grade (no
diploma or
GED)
2,599,894
63,626
131,001
iii
Total
ii
> 5,336,616
746,796
609,218
(20%)
335,954
(12%)
393,004
194,627
(7%)
1,139,800
(<20%)
80%
88%
93%
> 80%
Funding Allocation
Need Criteria
Funded Program
Areas
Arizona
By pro gram area:*
Federal 68%
ELA:
ASE:
ABE:
Need Criteria
1. High school drop out
rate
2. Immigration lev el
1. ABE
2. ASE (diploma / GED)
3. ESL/ citizenship
Federal: statewide
com petitiv e grant
Federal program:
com petitiv e grant
State: by ADA
State program: no need
criteria
1. ABE
2. ASE (diploma/GED)
3. ESL/citizenship
4. Vocational education
5. Disabled adults
6. Older adults
7. Parent education
8. Health and safety
9. Home economics
Federal: allocated
geographically based on
need
Federal:
1. Adults 25+ with less
th
than 8 grade education
State 90%
State: to prov iders
- Prior Year Base: 85%
- Performance: 15%
State: no need criteria
Illinois
State and f ederal com bined
and allocated
geographically :
1. Adults in pov erty
2. Unemploym ent
3. Adults with < 9th grade
4. Adults on TANF
5. Population in
households where English
not prim ary
60%
5%
35%
State 32%
* Prior to Prop. 300
California
Federal 10%
State 90%
Florida
Federal 10%
Federal 40%
State 60%
- Need based: 80%
- Performance based 20%
- $25,000 sm all program s
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
ABE
ESL/citizenship
ASE (diploma/GED)
Vocational education
W orkplace readiness
1. ABE
2. ESL/citizenship
3. ASE (diploma/GED)
Kentu cky
Federal 40%
Funding Allocation
Need Criteria
Funded Program
Areas
State and f ederal
com bined:
- Core grant is need based
- Performance bonuses
1. Adults 18 or older
without GED or HS
diplom a f ro m US Census
1. ABE
2. ESL/citizenship
3. ASE (diploma/GED)
4. Fam ily literacy
5. W orkplace literacy/
employability s kills
State and f ederal combined
and allocated
geographically based on
need
1. Adults without GED or
HS
2. Adult population scoring
at the lowest lev el of
literacy
1.
2.
3.
4.
Federal: LEAs paid on
percentage of the contact
hours (e.g., 5% of contact
hours = 5% of funding)
Federal: [TBD]
1. ABE
2. ASE (diploma / GED)
3. ESL/citizenship/civ ic
education
4. W ork readiness
5. Fam ily literacy
State 60%
Maryland
Federal 75%
State 25%
Minnesota
Federal 14%
State:
1. Distric t LEP students
2. Distric t population ov er
21 without high school
diplom a
State 86%
State: allocation to LEAÕ
s
based on school district
size; prior y ear contact
hours; distric t LEP
students; district population
ov er 21 without a high
school diplom a.
New York
Federal: Allocated
geographically based on
need; com petitiv e process
within local area.
Federal
1. Unemploym ent rate
2. Adults ov er21 without
high school diplom a
State: f unds go to any
school dis trict or school
district consortium
(BOCES) that m eets
Em ploym ent Preparation
Education program criteria
based on contact hours
State: No need criteria
Tied to W IBs and c ontrolled
1. Adults functio ning below
th
5 grade using TABE
Federal 25%
State 75%
Pennsylvani a
ABE
ESL/citizenship
ASE (diploma/GED)
W orkplace education
1. ABE
2. ESL/citizenship
3. ASE (diploma/GED)
4. Occupational
education
5. W ork experience
6. Em ployability s kills
1. ABE
Summary of Findings
1. To support sustainable economic growth and equitable social
conditions, California must focus on closing the foundational
skills gaps in the working-age adult population.
2. However, the state’s revenue formula for adult education does
not allocate funding not based on need.
3. Federal policy priorities stress the same core literacy
challenges and are evolving to include post-secondary
transition and workforce alignment
4. Adult education must include a focus on work readiness skills
and alignment with career-technical education (CTE).
Summary of Findings ~ continued
5. The Adult Education system has unique strengths for meeting
the State’s core literacy, language, and workforce preparation
needs.
6. Adult Education can - and must - demonstrate its relevance to
the needs of the state.
7. A needs-based approach can be combined with partnerships
and additional or alternative funding to serve non-core needs.
Review of Additional Input
Outreach Events
December 3:
January 14:
January 19:
Adults with Disabilities
Older Adults
Parenting
Adults with Disabilities - Key Points
• AWD population is diverse
• Students may need more time to reach goals
• Support services need to be included in funding model
• Many AWD programs can fit under CTE and ABE
• Mixing with other students appropriate for some but not for
others
• Differentiated instruction needed if students integrated
Adults with Disabilities - Key Points (cont.)
• Teachers highly skilled/credentialed; if students
placed in other courses, teachers must have the
right skills and credentials
• Serving AWD in CTE could help meet Perkins
goals
Older Adults - Key Points
• Growing boomer group needs programs to sustain health
• Technology knowledge is critical
• OA programs provide income to some students
• Long-term cost savings to society shown in research
• California’s State Plan on Aging affirms need for focused
approach for older adults
• AE educators credentialed to serve OA group
• Many partnerships at local level; many cities depend on AE
to serve seniors
Older Adults - Key Points (continued)
• Must implement OA educational standards to ensure quality
• Continue the CDE Program of Excellence process
• Many older adults would not want mixed-age classes
• Differential fees - a different price for seniors vs. other
students - has been used to cover costs
• Sliding scale fees may be a barrier to some
• Service to older adults should be a local decision
Parenting - Key Points
• Varying parenting programs: help kids learn; building
stronger families; basic skills of adults who are also parents
• Parenting classes add value to the K-12 system in serving
the parents of K-12 students
• AE parenting teachers are highly skilled
• Parent education classes connect adults to the education
system and enable them to promote children’s literacy
• Parents learn to strengthen families and promote values and
heritage; classes address family health and safety concerns
Parenting - Key Points (continued)
• Parents learn goal setting, resource management, accessing
community assets, role balancing, and use of technology –
skills that also contribute to their employability
• Parents form lasting relationships that build community
• Other agencies/courts depend on AE parenting programs
• Parent educators interested in strategies that integrate
multiple aspects of parents education (e.g. CBET), as well a
integration with other disciplines
• Benefits researched; parent educators open to measuring
outcomes
What We Value - What We Must
Achieve
What we value
• Helping those most in need
• Enriching lives through education
• Helping all ages and populations
• We can deliver value in many areas
The challenge we face…
• Biggest recession and economic crisis since the
Great Depression
• 12.5 % unemployment (highest since 1940)
• 22.5 % underemployment (vs. 17.5% for US)
• A labor market crisis threatening California’s
long-term viability and quality of life
• A threat to the survival of adult education
(SF Chronicle, 11/29/09)
Our shared task
The Adult Education community must craft a
sustainable future plan that demonstrates to the
Legislature that we can provide a clear return on
investment to state.
While… maintaining the most fundamental values
of adult education.
Building Our Foundation:
Guiding Principles for
Adult Education
• Responsiveness to students and policy needs
• Collaboration and leveraging of resources – internally
and externally
• Innovation
• Alignment to other systems
• Contextualization to enhance learning
• Accountability for results
• Building on adult learners’ goals and existing
competencies
• Ongoing professional development
Ensuring Responsive Delivery
•
•
•
•
•
Integration/contextualization of services
Partnerships
Alternative funding/fee structures
Regional/local planning strategies
Innovative delivery systems (e.g. online)
California Adult Education
Strategic Plan
CAEAA
January 28, 2010