Information to Users

INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

UMI University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 Nortfi Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600

Order Number 9201623

Reconceptualîzîng literacy learning for adult ne w literates in one-to-one teacher/student interactions

Bradley, Darcy Hepler, Ph.D.

The Ohio State University, 1991

UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106

RECONCEPTUALIZING LITERACY LEARNING FOR ADULT NEW LITERATES IN ONE-TO-ONE TEACHER/STUDENT INTERACTIONS

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

Darcy Hepler Bradley, B.F.A., M.Ed.

*****

The Ohio State University 1991

Dissertation Committee; Approved By:

Dr. G.S. Pinnell Dr. J. Hickman Dr. C. Lyons ^Advisor Dr. B. Mitchell College of Education Copyright by Darcy Hepler Bradley 1991 To the Students in the Study; Candy, Donald, Edward, Lee, Leonard, Robert, Ruth

11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many people make a dissertation possible. The members of my committee have each made a special contribution to this research and my education. Gay

Pinnell, my advisor, trusted my judgment and never failed to help me when I needed it. Janet Hickman listened to endless tales from the field and helped me see the value in my stories. Carol Lyons' clear thinking assisted me when mine wasn't. Brad Mitchell deepened my understanding of the political nature of literacy and education.

Families are critical factors as well. Susan

Hepler helped me keep a realistic perspective and my sense of humor. John & Ingrid Hepler, and Mariel &

Brad Bradley believed in the value of my research and studies. Kent Bradley did more than was fair, gladly and willingly, to help me finish.

Diane DeFord and Mary Fried taught me how to learn from my students, Marie Clay and her work helped me understand emergent literacy, and Charlotte Huck started me on the journey of life-long learning.

iii VITA

November 24, 1949...... Born - Mt. Pleasant, Michigan

1972...... B.F.A., California College of Arts and Crafts, Oakland, California

1975-1978...... Classroom Teacher, Brookfield Academy, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

1978-1981 & 1982-1985...... Instructor/Program Coordinator, Colorado Mountain College, Aspen, Colorado

1985-198 6 ...... Counseling Paraprofessional, Aspen High School, Aspen, Colorado

1986-198 8 ...... Business Owner, Albuquerque, New Mexico

1988...... M. Ed., Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado

PUBLICATIONS

(1991). John Steptoe: Retrospective of an Imagemaker. The New Advocate (4) 1, pp. 11-23.

FIELDS OF STUDIES

Major Field: Education

Studies in:

Reading...... Gay Su Pinnell Children's Literature...... Janet Hickman Literacy Issues...... Carol Lyons

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION...... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... iii

VITA...... iv

LIST OF TABLES...... viii

CHAPTER PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION...... 1

General Background...... 3 The Statement of the Problem...... 4 The Purpose of the Study...... 9 The Significance of the Study...... 10 Overview of the Methodology...... 11 The Limitations of the Study...... 14 Writer's Notes...... 16 The Subjective "I"...... 17 Definition of Terms...... 19 Dissertation Organization...... 24

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE...... 26

The History of Literacy...... 27 History of Adult Education...... 32 Assessment in Adult Literacy Programs...... 35 Instruction in Adult Literacy Programs ...... 43 Current Theories of Adult Literacy Learning...... 49 Children and Current Theories of Literacy Acquisition...... 54 Linking Adult New Literacy With Emergent Literacy...... 59 Approach to Assessment and Instruction...... 65 Summary...... 67 V III. METHODOLOGY...... 69

General Methodological Approach 69 The Sites...... 73 Gaining Access and Entree...... 83 The Students...... 87 Procedures...... 112 Time Line...... 126 Data Analysis...... 127 Summary...... 128

IV. RESULTS...... 129

Review of the Methodology...... 128 Reading and Writing Histories..... 130 Reading and Writing Goals...... 136 Literacy Survey Test Results...... 149 Response and Attitude Toward Literacy Survey...... 158 Literacy Beliefs and Attitudes 169 Tertiary Analysis of Interview Data...... 184 The Instructional Program...... 202 Candy's Instructional Program..... 205 Lee's Instructional Program...... 223 Summary...... 250

V. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS...... 253

Question 1: Funds of Knowledge 250 Question 2; Specific Knowledge of Reading and Writing...... 260 Question 3: How Assessments Can Inform Instruction...... 267 Question 4: Progress of Instructed Students...... 271 Implications of the Study...... 276 Recommendations for Further Research...... 279

APPENDICES

A. Literacy Interview...... 282 B. Literacy Survey...... 288 C. Research Permission...... 295 D. Lee's Letter...... 297

vi LIST OF REFERENCES...... 300

V l l LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1. Demographic Information...... 88

2. Current Reading and Writing Habits...... 144

3. Literacy Survey Results...... 150

4. CAP Items Familiar to All Students...... 154

5. Variant Responses to CAP Items...... 155

6. Literacy Survey Test Scores Range...... 157

7. Other Tests Students Remembered Taking.... 164

8. Students' ABLE, TABE, WDI, TLR Scores 186

9. Problem Solving Strategies Used For Reading and Writing...... 171

10. Students' Choices of Good Readers and Writers...... 173

11. How Students Would Help Someone Having Difficulty Reading and Writing 179

12. How Students Think Teachers Would Help Someone Having Difficulty Reading and Writing...... 180

13. Students' Definitions of Reading and Writing...... 182

14. Patterns of Interaction With Candy in Prison...... 206

15. Patterns of Interaction With Candy at Home...... 209

16. Patterns of Interaction With Lee...... 224

viii 17. Books Lee Read During Instruction...... 229

18. Lee's Pre and Posttest Scores on Three Literacy Tasks...... 247

IX CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

"Does literacy make men happy? Only highly literate people seem to ask this question. And only the well-educated seem to say that it does not. They are like the rich who doubt that money makes one happy. Significantly, such doubts come only after they have accumulated enough money and so do not have to worry." J. Chall (quoted in Kozol, p. 11, 1985)

Literacy for all citizens is perceived as essential

for maintaining the ideals of democracy and making

productive social decisions. Policy makers generally

agree on the importance of literacy for all as a necessary, although not sufficient factor in securing

quality of life in United States society. At the same

time, issues related to literacy are controversial.

Educators, politicians, and representatives from the

business industry do not agree on what constitutes

literate behavior nor how to achieve a literate

population. Despite fifteen years of increased literacy

initiatives and campaigns in the United States directed

at both adults and children (e.g. Project Literacy

United States (PLUS), Reading Is Fundamental (RIF),

Laubach Literacy Action (LLA), Literacy Volunteers of

America (LVA), Right to Read) it is widely accepted that

current literacy programs reach less than 10% of the

— 1 — adult population that needs literacy assistance (Brizius

& Foster, 1987; Holmes, 1987; Hunter & Harmon, 1985).

Increasing high school drop out rates in the United

States, the trend toward service and information occupations, and a world population explosion are all factors that have created a growing concern for addressing problems related to literacy. Minimal levels of literacy that were acceptable in the past are now considered insufficient in the present and for the future in the United States. Highly competent readers and writers, and many of them, are viewed as necessary for economic and democratic survival in the 21st century

(Chall, 1987a, Awer-irta 2000).

Considering current advances in technology as well as the need to communicate at a global level, it is not surprising that literacy needs have multiplied in the adult community as well as the E-12 school setting.

Technology and communication systems have become increasingly complex; likewise, literacy issues have become more complex and cause greater societal and educational frustrations.

There is a need for successful adult literacy programs that are based on sound theories and practices not only of language learning but on human learning and needs. The knowledge base of those who would participate, the assessment of that knowledge base, and the instructional use of that knowledge base is the focus of this study.

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Uncertain political and economic times generate a renewed interest in literacy and literate behaviors

(Gee, 1988; Graff, 1987; Meek, 1989). Interest in raising the literacy levels of the population appears to be at an all time high in the United States. Yet solutions to educational problems tend toward polemics.

An historical overview of reading and writing instruction reveals pendulum swings toward “top down" approaches or "bottom up" approaches. Proponents of top down models view literacy learning as a social and integrated language process in which the learner is centered. This approach to learning acknowledges that students (or learners) acquire knowledge on many different fronts, in many different ways, from many different sources, at many different times. Proponents of bottom up approaches believe that effective literacy learning consists of dividing what needs to be learned into small parts. These parts are then assimilated systematically by the learner and applied when needed in a logical fashion.

Similar to the polemics of literacy acquisition, assessment issues can also be viewed from top down and bottom up perspectives. Test makers would all agree that the purpose of assessment is to inform instruction.

Yet what is the test really testing and how will the information from a test be used to create a basis for student instruction?

THE STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Several studies (Forester, 1988; Smith-Burke,

Parker & Deegan, 1987; Young & Irwin, 1988) suggest the need for alternatives to the remedial and clinical mind set that overlays most adult literacy instruction.

Recent research in adult literacy education supports the need for alternatives to traditional assessment procedures in adult literacy programs (Balmuth, 1986;

Diekhoff, 1988; Lytle 1988). Even though bottom up type tests have been severely criticized by the educational community, they are still widely used in existing adult

literacy programs (Lytle, p. 1, 1988). Chall (1987a) stated that "there is a need for greater and more

systematic research and development effort in how

literacy develops among adults -- as compared to

children. Such efforts will require more sophisticated assessment diagnostic instruments, as well as more effective methods and materials" (p. 79).

Another important educational issue revolves around how humans learn. For instance, do children and adults acquire knowledge in similar ways? Malcolm Knowles

(1980), an acknowledged parent of the adult education movement generated an entire new term — "andragogy", the study of adult learning — to separate adult learning and teaching from pedagogy. A commonly held assumption in the adult education field is that because adults have a larger store of background knowledge and experience, they must learn differently than the child learner. Ho consensus has been reached on whether children and adults learn similarly or differently.

The entire April (1988) issue of the Journal of

Reading is given over to adult literacy. A third of the articles published on adult literacy learning in this issue reference at least one major researcher whose work has focused on literacy acquisition of young children.

It is apparent that some experts in adult literacy education find value and application from their counterparts in the emergent literacy fields.

Although Becoming a Nation of Readers (Anderson, et.al., 1984) focused on the state of literacy in United States elementary schools, the afterward in that report

(written by Jean Chall) compared the literacy difficulties of the adult population to those of children. Chall (1984, 1987a, 1987b) and Jones (1981) suggested that solutions to literacy problems encountered by adults can be found and applied by studying the reading processes of children. Forester

(1988) commented that there are “remarkable parallels

[between adults and children] at work in acquiring

literacy" (p. 804). A recent review of the literature

revealed that adult educators tended to borrow theory and practice more freely from child educators than the

reverse.

Clay's work on emergent literacy in children has spanned three decades. When Clay began her studies on

children in the 1980s, she observed what high progress young readers and writers do while engaged in reading

and writing activities. From what she observed these

children doing, she designed a progrsuo, called Reading

Recovery, that would help low progress first grade

readers and writers become more like the successful

readers and writers.

Reading Recovery was designed solely as an

intervention program to individually tutor low progress first grade students. Students in the program participate in a short series of informal reading and writing tests called the Diagnostic Survey (pp. 16-46,

1988). The tasks on the survey measure what young children already know about reading and writing. Other procedures and methods in the Reading Recovery program are designed to provide maximum knowledge of a student's literacy behavior. Specially trained teachers employ this knowledge during instruction to enable the student to use what he or she already knows about reading and writing to generate new understandings of literacy processes.

Clay makes it clear that Reading Recovery is not specifically designed for older students. Once reading and writing failure has occurred, students have paid a price in self-confidence, educational lags, and habituated ineffective responses to reading and writing

(Clay, p.11, 1988). Other research focusing on older beginning readers and writers supports Clay's point of view. Yet Clay's theories of learning and teaching are based upon sound learning and teaching theory. The underlying principles of literacy implied by the Reading

Recovery model appear to have some benefit for older students who are having severe difficulties with 8

literacy learning. Kannerer (1990) found that there was potential both for training of adult literacy tutors and adult literacy learners based on concepts and procedures used in Reading Recovery. Even if some of the specific procedures need modification or deletion, the underlying principles could be used as a basis for creating new methods and assessments. Some of the key teaching and learning concepts from Clay's theories have relevance for struggling literacy students and their teachers and provide further assumptions that guide this study. Many of Clay's theories of teaching and learning are compatible with adult learning theories and will be explored further in Chapter Two. They are that:

1. Learning occurs on many different mental and physical fronts.

2. Reading and writing whole messages ("connected text") are necessary in order for learners to develop efficient reading and writing strategies.

3. The student controls the processing of reading and writing.

4. Every student brings a body of usable literacy knowledge to the instructional setting.

5. Reading and writing have a reciprocal and generative value in the literacy learning process.

6. Instructors can often help students do more difficult literacy tasks than the student can do alone. 7. Tapping and using background knowledge is important for developing as independent readers and writers.

8. Instruction builds on strengths that are carefully identified by initial assessments and lesson by lesson observation.

9. Teachers must carefully observe the student's literacy behaviors in order to make the most valuable instructional decisions.

10. Each student's unique knowledge of literacy can be systematically and informally assessed to provide a sound basis for instruction.

THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This research sought to develop an informal assessment that would help uncover what adult beginning readers and writers already know about literacy and how that knowledge can be used to the tutor's and student's advantage in one-to-one tutorials. Adult beginning readers were assessed using an informal Literacy Survey based on Clay's Diagnostic Survey (pp. 16-46, 1988) and personal interviews to determine their current literacy knowledge. The assessments and interview questions used in this study went outside the functions of gatekeeping and remediation utilized in most adult literacy programs to explore the body of literacy knowledge each student brought to the learning environment. The knowledge gained through assessment was used in an instructional plan for two of the students in the study. 10

In my role as researcher, I functioned variously as a teacher, an interviewer, and an assessment interpreter. The study specifically addressed the four following research questions:

1. What funds of knowledge are reported by adult beginning readers and writers?

2. What do adult beginning readers and writers know about reading and writing as measured by an informal literacy survey?

3. How did information from a literacy interview and an informal literacy survey inform the instruction of adult beginning readers and writers?

4. What was the progress of beginning adult readers and writers who participated in one-to- one instruction based on information from an informal literacy survey and literacy interview?

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

There are many personal testimonials to the value of literacy (e.g. Anderson, 1990) and compelling calls for change in existing adult literacy programs (Brizius

& Foster, 1987; Fingeret, 1984; Hunter & Harmon, 1985;

Kozol, 1985). Chisman (1989) and Newman & Beverstock

(1990) point out that while numerous existing programs have yielded numbers of handbooks for practitioners and workbooks for students, there is little actual research data on which to base instruction or assessment. 11

Some of the major problems identified by adult literacy educators are poor existing methods and materials for adult instruction, and inappropriate assessment techniques (Balmuth, 1986; Chall, Heron &

Hilferty, 1987). Research in adult literacy is needed to find out what works, especially for the very beginning adult literate who frequently is the most difficult to assess and teach. Clearly, a new series of informal assessments designed to discover the literacy knowledge adults have under control would be useful in terms of designing instruction and appropriating relevant reading and writing materials.

OVERVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY

This research was undertaken from an interpretive stance. Little research has been conducted on the use of informal assessments and using their results with adult beginning readers and writers. As a preliminary exploratory study of a series of studies on assessment and adult beginning literacy learners, a flexible and open methodology was necessary.

Interpretive inquiry focuses on creating "the conditions for mutual understanding and consensus between members of different social orders as well as producing practical knowledge' (Maguire, p.16, 1987). 12

The research was conducted as a multi-site study and

employed methods from qualitative traditions (Bogdan &

Biklen, 1982). Multiple sources of data were used:

field notes, interviews of both teachers and students,

student records, my own teaching records, and both

formal and informal test data. Participant observation

was the major method employed for data collection.

I recruited subjects with help from Adult Basic

Education (ABE) teachers and directors, prison

authorities, and the students themselves. All subjects

participated in a standardized open-ended interview

(Patton, pp. 284-287, 1990) and were given a diagnostic

reading and writing assessment called the Literacy

Survey. Intensive data collection took place formally

starting the first week in September, 1990 and ended

December 13, 1990. Contact with key personnel and

subjects continued through phone calls, personal

contact, and letters on an as-needed basis.

Two of the students in the study additionally

participated in intensive one-to-one tutoring sessions.

Instruction sessions with these students averaged 1.5

hours on a daily basis for two and a half months.

During tutoring sessions, participant observation became

more complex from when I was merely interviewing and 13

assessing students; during instruction, besides taking notes of student actions, I had to teach. Although I spent time outside of the lesson times looking for books that were appropriate for the students and reading field note/lesson plans from previous interactions to guide the instructional focus, lesson records, written during teacher-student interactions, took the place of preplanned lessons.

The instructional phase of the study required wearing many hats. As a teacher, it was my responsibility to keep the lesson going and respond to the moment-to-moment learning needs of the student. As a researcher, it was my task to take detailed field notes and record not only what the student was saying and doing, but what I was saying and doing as well.

Patton (1990) suggests that there is a continuum of participant observation that extends from the totally immersed to onlooker status, and that a researcher's place on that continuum may change back and forth over time (p.206). That flexibility which allowed for those multiple roles no doubt influenced the outcome of this research. 14

THE LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Complex problems with entree and access restricted the number of students that could be interviewed and assessed within the time frame available to conduct this study. A total of seven settings were considered.

After visits and phone calls to personnel in these settings, four had the necessary acceptable components in place. Of the students (N=14) initially included as subjects for the study, 1 was able to gather usable data from a smaller sample (N=7) to complete the analysis.

Traditional definitions of generalizability are not appropriate for this study (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Given the small number of students, conclusions will not be generalized to other populations. The range of participants, however, crossed ethnic, linguistic, age, and gender lines, allowing for broad explorations of the complex factors related to adult literacy assessment and instruction, and providing a rich context for generating hypotheses. The assessments and interview questions used, though rooted in current literacy theory and practice, have never been used with an adult population.

The responses to the assessments and questions have painted a “thick description" (Geertz, 1973) of the participants and their literacy knowledge from which the 15

analysis was made. The information the data yielded contributes to the current theories and practices of adult literacy instruction and assessment.

As Newman & Beverstock (1990) point out, undertaking adult literacy research is fraught with the many challenges: The field of adult literacy research is relatively new; adult beginning literates tend to be a transient group; access to adult beginning literates that are necessarily representative of the population is nearly impossible. The conditions in my research were no different. Even though two of the students in my study were in prison (which does suggest easy and dependable access), daily sessions were interrupted and hampered by illnesses, legal trials, day-to-day security issues (e.g. AH and PM inmate counts), and in one case, prolonged solitary confinement.

With three of the students in the study, I was able to tape record interviews and assessment proceedings.

Even when allowed this privilege, I also took field notes. In the prison setting, however, I was unable to obtain permission from the warden to record my interactions with the students there. Two of the students from two different ABE sites did not wish me to tape our sessions either. Although my field notes from 16

these untaped sessions are quite detailed, they are not as authentic and rich as transcribed tapes might be.

Not all researchers, however, find tape recorders to be indispensable; Heath (1983) did not always tape sessions with subjects in her studies, and Bogdan & Biklen (1982) suggest that tape recorders can be intrusive in the interviewing process.

WRITER'S NOTES

I have chosen to write this dissertation in the first person for ease and simplicity in writing style, and because I was not merely an onlooker in this research; I was, as Wolcott (1990) commented "squarely in the scene" (p. 47) as a teacher, an interviewer, and an informal testing expert. The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (1984) suggested that for some studies, writing in first person acknowledges and avows the writer's importance to the research (p. 35).

A study of first or third person editorial preference conducted by Polyson, Levinson, & Miller

(1982) found that psychological journal editors were about evenly split over whether research articles should be reported in first or third person style. Those who favored first person style did so for reasons of 17

readability, conciseness, and forthrightness. The collected data for this study came from my ability to develop and maintain a relationship of trust, respect, and rapport with the participants. Writing in the first person acknowledges the integral and integrated role a researcher plays in conducting her own research.

THE SUBJECTIVE "I"

The idea that research in social settings can be value-free and objective is challenged by many researchers (Green & Smith, 1983; Lather, 1990; Lincoln

& Guba, 1985; Peshkin, 1988; Reinharz, 1979). Even the most highly trained scientists operate from paradigms and beliefs that affect the outcomes of their research.

This is especially true of participatory research where the currency of data is generally earned and spent in words instead of numbers. While the intent of this study was not to determine the superiority of qualitative or quantitative methodologies, it is

important for the consumer of this research to understand that I, like other researchers and

scientists, am influenced by what Haquire (1987, p. 14)

referred to as the "lenses and windows" through which I

view the world. 18

Here I wish to disclose those inner biases which I have explored and examined throughout my study. Peshkin

(1988) drew two conclusions about his own subjectivity as a researcher that guided my thinking about the relationship between research and bias in my own study:

First, I decided that subjectivity can be seen as virtuous, for it is the basis of researchers' making a distinctive contribution, one that results from the unique configurations of their personal qualities joined to the data they have collected.

Second, I decided...! would actively seek out my subjectivity. I did not want to happen upon it accidentally as I was writing up the data. I wanted to be aware of it in process, mindful of its enabling and disabling potential...(p. 18).

Two brief disclosures are helpful here in order to provide the consumer of this research a guide to part of what shapes my interpretation of the data; my Reading

Recovery Teacher Leader training, and my ethnic and

economic background.

Participation in two years of Reading Recovery

Teacher Leader training has affected the way I view all

new readers and writers, and how I view myself as a

teacher. As I conducted this study in order to monitor my subjectivity, I continually reminded myself that

other people with other programs have been teaching

adult new literates to read and write for years with

some success. 19

I an a member of what is currently known as the mainstream culture (e.g. white, middle-class, protestant tendencies, small-town midwestern birthplace). Prior to being a doctoral student I had experienced little prolonged engagement with those outside a white middle- class culture. Initially as I conducted my study I experienced feelings of fear and resistance; for instance, I feared for my safety in prison and in the neighborhoods of my students, I resented the security guards at the prison going through my carryall and subjecting me to an electronic security search on a daily basis. The longer I worked in the field, the more

I became accustomed to and flexible with places and procedures.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

S.tl3Ld.ejl.t.

The term student is used throughout the study to discuss the participants for several reasons. All of the participants in the study had engaged in literacy instruction either with me or an outside source; program coordinators and other teachers who located the participants for me always introduced me as a teacher.

The term student implies a belief or attitude toward learning as well as learning activities. 20

Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (1988) states that a student is "one who attends a school" (p. 1170) and further identifies students as learners or scholars.

In the course of the tutoring phase of this study, the two students who received instruction introduced me to friends and family members as "the teacher I've been telling you about."

Adul t Beginning L iterate oil Adult New Literate The term illiterate is considered insulting, demeaning, and out-of-date with the most current theories and practices of teaching adults to read and write. In a letter to the editor of a 1989 issue of

"Reading Today", an LVA tutor stated that most adult students started instruction with some knowledge of the printed language, therefore they were not illiterate.

Lee, one of the students in this study, had this to say about the term illiterate (which is a term I never used but several of the students did when they spoke of themselves):

They need a different word. Why do people say that word? You know, if people came to my home, people would be surprised. My home is beautiful. People don't believe illiterates can have nice homes. They think illiterates just sit around and do nothing. Why, I put in a crystal chandelier in my house, with a dimmer switch and I did it all myself. It looks like it's always been there.

The terras adult new literate, beginning literate, or 21

adult new reader or writer have recently emerged as more acceptable terminology through programs run by the

Literacy Volunteers of America and Laubach Literacy programs. As a result of a 1989 meeting of the Adult

Education Caucus with New York state legislators, literacy students recommended that the term illiterate be replaced with adult learner or adult new reader.

Teachers of adult new literates have become more sensitized and learners more vocal as the problems of literacy learning are addressed and uncovered. As

Newman & Beverstock (1990) pointed out

we see no one right way of referring to those who for any reason do not read and write as capably as they might wish, but we do have increased awareness of the feelings of people trying to become more literate (p. ix).

These new terms, however, have a ring of hope to them and give a sense of forward motion and personal progress. Lee spoke for many other literacy students when she said "Just because you can't read, doesn't mean you can't use your knowledge."

Literacy

Literacy has become an over-used term with many different meanings and implications. Literacy is a dynamic term and defined by cultural needs or beliefs

(see Gee, 1988; Graff, 1987; Fingeret, 1988; Hirsch, 22

1987). For exanple, the United States government has played an important role in determining literacy levels in this century. During World War I a fourth grade reading level was the measuring stick for functional literacy. The functional literacy definition increased to a 8th grade level during World War II. Now the government deems a 12th grade reading level as functionally appropriate for military service (Chall,

1987a). Of note here is that at least two of the participants in my study were denied the opportunity of military service because their reading levels were not considered high enough by government standards.

Certainly a basic definition of literacy is defined as the ability to read and write but by today's standards the definition must be more comprehensive.

Kirsch & Jungeblut (1988) extend the definition of literacy as "using printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one's goals, and to develop one's knowledge and potential" (p. 3). Against the backdrop of this definition, add that literacy is a continuum along which all levels of literates progress and change (Venezky, 1990), and a socially constructed process (Fingeret, 1988). As Venezky (1990) also, however, reminds us: 23

a sharply bounded definition of literacy is not as important as the understanding that literacy must be coupled with other abilities to achieve the individual and social goals that most of us agree are desirable for this country at the end of the twentieth century (p. 73).

Definitions of literacy will continue to change as the dynamics of power, educational beliefs, and technological advances alter the face of society.

For the purposes of this study, literacy must be defined by the attitudes, beliefs, understandings, backgrounds, and goals each of the participants

(including me) held for themselves.

Formal and Informal Literacy Assessments

For the purposes of this study, formal literacy

assessments refer to standardized tests that measure

achievement or ability and generally produce a grade

level score. Knowledge is typically measured by the number of correct responses to multiple choice or fill-

in-the-blank tjrpe questions. Students are scored

against a norm or criterion or what Fillmore (1989)

refers to as an "ideal" reader and writer.

Informal literacy assessments are defined as those

kinds of tests that are designed to discover the

performance level of a "real" reader and writer. They

provide an insight into the current processes and

understandings a student has of the reading and writing 24

processes. Knowledge of the literacy processes are measured by collecting a portfolio of student's work

over time to show progress or lack of it, or at a point

in time by close observation of how and what a student can read and write or is currently reading and writing.

Strategies

Clay (1991) defined strategies as occurring

"in the head" (in contrast to many overt behaviours fostered in teaching programmes). It has strategic control over how external and internal information is dealt with in the brain. It is a critical concept in an explanation of how we learn to read by reading, or how the bootstrap effect operates to allow the good reader to get better at literacy tasks. The acquisition of appropriate strategies could explain how such a system extends itself (p. 331).

In the instructional component of this study, literacy

lessons were structured around teaching “for" strategies

not the teaching "of" strategies.

DISSERTATION ORGANIZATION

The dissertation is organized into five chapters.

The first chapter gives an introduction and overview of

the study. In the second chapter, a review of the

appropriate literature frames the study and provides a

basis for the approach to the study.

The methodology for the study is explained in-depth

in Chapter Three. The setting, subjects, procedures,

and timeline are detailed. 25

Chapter Four presents the results of the study, which are then discussed in Chapter Five, the final and last chapter. Implications of the study are drawn and recommendations for further research are also presented in the last chapter. CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The literature relevant to this study includes topics ranging from adult education and emergent literacy. New knowledge about literacy and literacy learners and teachers has been generated by three decades of intensive research on emergent literacy acquisition. Furthermore, since the implementation of

Adult Education Programs (spawned by the Economic

Opportunity Act of 1964) more interest in adult literacy learning has been generated (although not to the levels or degrees of research and practice of emergent literacy learning).

The study of literacy has gone beyond the domain of education to include the fields of anthropology, sociology, sociolinguistics, political science, and psychology. As a result, the ideologies of literacy are in a state of flux: new knowledge, and conflicting viewpoints and philosophies require literacy educators to maintain a global knowledge and flexible stance.

1 will present a brief history of literacy research followed by a short exploration of the history of adult education. A review of how adult new literates are

—26 — 27

currently assessed and instructed will be presented; I will also discuss current theories of adult literacy learning. Children's literacy acquisition and how emergent literacy might be linked to adult beginning literacy learners will be explored. Finally, I will present an explanation of my approach to instruction and assessment of the adult new literate.

THE HISTORY OF LITERACY

Using the current multifaceted definitions of literacy today reopens historical questions, for example, whether literacy began with the first evidence of written language.

Historical evidence indicates that as long as

30,000 years ago, humankind communicated through some form of written symbols (Gombrich, 1951). The evolution of writing includes the pictographs of cave men and women, the cuneiform of the Sumarians, the hieroglyphics of the Egyptians, the alphabetics of the Phoenicians,

Greeks and Romans, and the ideographs and phonograms of

Orientals and American Indians (Hillyer, 1924; O'Brien,

1926). Each of these systems of written language has contributed in some way to the modern practice of written language that exists today. 28

Yet as the understanding of the complexity of literacy has increased, historians and other researchers have questioned the narrowness of literacy defined as writing and reading only. Pattison (1982) and Graff

(1987) have explored other cultures rich in oral traditions, some in which being able to read and write was considered non-intellectual, subversive to the state or church, or a non-productive activity for its citizens. While an acknowledged brilliant orator and writer himself, Plato was said to have attacked writing for contributing to the eroding of the mind, memory, and the inability to internalize important thoughts; he was also an alleged elitist who believed that intellectuals were born, not made, and should be employed at the highest levels of the state (Gee, 1988). Thus, literacy has had a long and political history of association with

the elite populations of the church and the government

(see Graff, 1987). Fingeret (1988) began her address to

the National Urban Literacy Conference with this

statement: "Adult literacy education always has been political --choices about who reads, what they read, and

how they use what they read always have been connected

to the distribution of power in a society" (p. 1). 29

When interest in literacy is high, campaigns for literacy abound (Amove & Graff, 1987; Kazemek & Rigg,

1985). Historically, literacy campaigns have been linked with times of great social change and economic upheaval (Graff, 1987; Meek, 1989). The most successful

literacy campaigns were composed of the following elements (Amove & Graff, 1987):

1. The campaign was a long term effort (i.e. ten years or longer).

2. The campaign was initiated at the grassroots level before becoming a national initiative.

3. The campaign reached the most needy population.

4. The campaign included the very young in its implementation.

5. The campaign took into account the political, cultural, and social aspects of literacy.

The literacy campaigns in the USSR (1919-1939), Vietnam

(1945-1977), the People's Republic of China

(approximately 1950-1980), Burma (approximately 1960-

1980), Brazil (1987-1980), and Tanzania (1971-1980) were

identified by Bhola (1982) as exemplars, using the

criteria listed above, of 20th century national literacy

efforts.

Literacy campaigns in the United States have rarely

been cited as exemplary. Kazemek & Rigg (1985) call

adult literacy "America's phoenix problem;" as the 30

crusade for literacy burns out, a decade later it rises from the ashes in the same shape and form, similar to the mythical phoenix bird (p. 1). The death and re birth of interest in adult literacy in the United States has been a recurrent theme since the 1880s (Soifer, et.al., 1990). Nineteenth-century America, however, has been noted for its massive literacy efforts (for white persons) through the proliferation of both religious and secular presses (Amove and Graff, 1987). For black slaves in the mid-1800s, learning to read and write was prohibited by law (Newman & Beverstock, 1990). Although some slaves learned to read and write from each other or adolescent children of white owners, there were perilous risks of physical punishment involved for the teaching and learning of literacy (Cornelius, 1983).

Following the Civil War, World War I, and World War

II, progress was achieved in making literacy more inclusive and accessible to all (Chall, 1984; Newman &

Beverstock, 1990). As immigrants flowed into the US during the first half of the twentieth century, a commitment toward education for the masses was crystallized with the passage of the Smith-Lever Act of

1914 (Cook, 1977). 31

Since the 1960s, literacy has been increasingly identified with the processes of consciousness raising and human liberation (see Fingeret, 1984; Freire, 1970;

Kozol, 1985). As such, the political and social context of literacy has become a focal point for continued research on the theories and practices of literacy learning. For instance, when Heath (1982, 1983) examined the literacies of three distinct cultural communities in the Piedmont Carolines, she discovered that each group had different ways of socializing their children into literacy. Freire (1970; and see Campos' interview with Freire, 1990) has explored reading as a political act in which students of literacy must be able to interpret their surrounding worlds before interpreting the "word." He stated that "literacy, thought of in terms of reading words, must necessarily be preceded by 'reading' or 'deciphering' of the world around us. Learning to read and write is tantamount to

're-reading' the world of our experience" (p. 4, 1990).

Graff (1987), Pinnell (1991), and Weber (1975) have warned, however, that literacy is not a guarantee for success. That literacy itself will lead to a better democracy, political stability, jobs for all, and creative, innovative people who will change the world is 32

what Graff (1987) terms a "literacy myth." Gee (1988) suggested that the literacy myth is dying, but current evidence suggests otherwise.

Now that literacy and literate behavior has been linked to the economic welfare of this country and the global market, business and industry leaders have joined educators to address literacy learning and its related

issues in the schools. The National Center on

Education and the Economy created a commission to study the skills of the American workforce. This task force suggested a major overhaul and reframing of the United

States' educational systems (see America's Choice : High

Skills ox Low Wages. 1990). One of America 2J3ilQ.'s

(1991) six education goals states that

every adult American will be literate and will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in a global economy and exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship (p. 9).

How these politically and economically based documents will affect adult literacy programs and adult education

is unknown.

HISTORY OF ADULT EDUCATION

Since the inception of adult education in the

United States, adult educators have worked hard to develop special theories of adult learning. Many adult

educators have attempted to separate themselves from 33

theories and practices of pedagogy (see Roy-Singh, 1990;

Weber, 1975). Malcolm Knowles, an acknowledged founding father of adult education, even introduced a new educational term in the early 1970s to foster acknowledgment and respect for the differences between adult and child learners; "andragogy" -- the teaching of adults -- became the term of choice for many adult educators and is still used today in adult education courses and materials.

Central to the issues of andragogy are adults' extensive background knowledge and their advanced

capacities for self-directed learning behavior

(Brookfield, 1987; Cross, 1981; Jones, 1981; Knowles,

1980). The hallmarks of good andragogical practices as

outlined by Knowles (1980) and others are:

1. The teacher's role is facilitative not didactic.

2. The curriculum is learner centered and developed not imposed.

3. The physical environment is comfortable, adult- suited, and non-threatening.

4. The psychological environment is warm, informal, authentic, caring, and trustful.

5. Instruction and assessment is mutually planned by both learner and facilitator.

Those priciples were designed to acknowledge that adult

learners were not just "tall children" (Bowen, 1987) but 34

learners that already brought a substantial amount of knowledge with them when returning to school.

Concurrent with the rise of interest in adult education was the Adult Basic Education (ABE) movement.

ABE in the United States is a phenomenon of this century. Developed in the early 1960s for adults over the age of 18 who had not succeeded or never completed an educational program in the traditional United States

K-12 classroom, ABE was a way to begin to address the learning inequities experienced by non-mainstream citizens and in keeping with the Civil Rights movement

(Fingeret, 1988). Through ABE adult students could prepare for and obtain the General Educational

Development diploma (GED), prepare for United States citizenship, learn English as a Second Language (ESL), and improve basic reading and writing skills. While serving millions of students annually and with many individual success stories, ABE programs have been criticized more recently (as interest in adult education issues has grown) for poor instruction and assessment practices (Balmuth, 1986; Chall, Heron & Hilferty,

1987). Locating and recruiting practices of learners has been an additional criticism of ABE (Balmuth, 1986;

Kozol, 1985) as well a retaining those learners in 35

programs once they are there (Anderson & Darkenwald,

1979; Roy-Singh, 1990).

Theory and practice typically do not keep pace with one another. In ABE programs, the theory of the adult as a self-directed learner has translated into a mutant variety of the traditional US classroom. As Buchanan-

Berrigan (1989) observed of an ABE classroom in her study of adult new literates

....classrooms were organized in traditional ways, with the teacher as the chief speaker and the adult students working alone at separate carrels, using worksheets leveled at graded stages. Only beginning GED students were seated at a communal table, but they too worked from prepared, standardized sheets of copied writing from the teacher's direction on the board (p. 54).

This "individualized practice" has been standard issue since ABE began.

ASSESSMENT IN ADULT LITERACY PROGRAMS

Along with the issues related to adult literacy instruction is the twin issue of assessment. How should adult literacy programs be evaluated? How can adult new literates best be assessed? What is the assessment designed to tell about the new literate? Chall (1984,

1987a, 1987b), Chisman (1989), and Newman & Beverstock

(1990) all discussed the lack of applied and basic research in both assessment and instruction for beginning adult literates (although many more articles 36

and books exist on adult literacy instruction than on adult literacy assessment). Chall (in Anderson, et.al.,

1965) pointed to a vast number of research studies and new knowledge on emergent literates (children acquiring literacies prior to and in the early years of schooling) but to a scant few studies on that same "emergent" adult literate. The literacy assessments that do exist for use with the adult new reader tend to be standardized multiple choice tests (see Jackson, 1990) or national assessments geared toward finding out what illiterate

"really" means and how many illiterates are "out there"

(see Newman & Beverstock, 1990).

Over the past two decades, seven national studies on adult literacy have been implemented in the US; the

Survival Literacy Study (Harris, 1970), the Reading

Difficulty Index (Harris, 1971), Miniassessment of

Functional Literacy (Gadway & Wilson, 1976), Adult

Functional Reading (Murphy, 1975), Adult Performance

Level Study (Final Report, 1977), English Language

Proficiency Survey (Barnes, 1986), and Young Adult

Literacy (Kirsch & Jungblut, 1986). The majority of

these tests operate on the evaluative premise that

literacy is either present or absent in the participant.

Although these national tests tended to be based on 37

those basic literacy tasks that are accepted as part of day-to-day living (e.g. writing checks, reading a classified ad, ordering from a menu, figuring correct change), Newman & Beverstock (1990) pointed out that the literacy/illiteracy dichotomy designation

introduces the conceptual difficulty of reducing literacy to a single literacy-is-present or literacy-is-absent judgment, which does not fit our understanding of the spectrum of literacies. The arbitrary labeling of literate/illiterate sets up a stumbling block in the use and interpretation of many of these studies (p.64).

Despite two decades of national efforts at identifying and describing the United States' illiterate population, there is still little agreement as to what illiterate means, who the illiterate are, and how to assess illiterates' knowledge of reading and writing (see

Chall, Heron & Hilferty, 1987; Kozol, 1985; Stedman &

Kaestle, 1987; Venezky, 1990; Venezsky, Kaestle & Sum,

1987).

Kirsch (1990) identified three categories of adult assessment that are in use today: traditional methods that produce standardized scores; competency-based methods that use non-school type materials and produce standardized scores; and profiles that offer a range of real world reading and writing tasks and produce multiple scores or interpretations. As Jackson's (1990) 38

work suggests, most adult literacy tests fall into

Kirsch's first two categories. New types of assessments based on informal measures that include ethnographic interviews and multiple literacy tasks have been explored by Fingeret (1988), Johnston (1985), Lytle

(1990), and Padak, Davidson & Padak (1990). These researchers used non-standard methodologies such as case studies, ethnographic interviews, and action research.

Davidson (1990) has developed a comprehensive holistic reading and writing assessment package for adult new literates based on the whole language theories espoused by Ken and Yetta Goodman since the 1980s. Thistlewaite

(1988) argued that informal assessment is valuable at the beginning of and during instruction with the adult beginning reader. Furthermore she stressed the importance of obtaining information about past learning experiences through personal interview:

Before beginning instruction, talking with the adult about earlier attempts at learning to read and discussing an approach that you think will now be effective are necessary (p. 7).

Informal measures and interviews expand Kirsch's (1990) profile category while offering adult literacy instructors new options for their literacy programs and new ways of looking at adult new readers and writers. 39

Overview of Tests

Three assessments widely used with adult new literates in the United States are the Tests of Adult

Basic Literacy (TABE), Adult Basic Learning Exam (ABLE), and the Literacy Volunteers of America's Reading

Evaluation Adult Diagnosis (READ). Both TABE and ABLE have been identified as the most popular assessments for placing adult students for literacy instruction in current ABE programs (Jackson, 1990). TABE and ABLE can be administered individually or in groups. The READ test can only be administered individually.

The TABE test was developed by CTB/MoGraw Hill in

1957, with a most recent revision in 1987. An all multiple choice test with seven different language and math sections, this test claims to measure reading, writing, and math achievement combining "the most useful characteristics of norm-referenced and criterion- referenced tests" (TABE, p. 1). The entire battery of tests takes about three hours.

The ABLE test was developed in 1967 by Bjorn

Karlsen and Eric Gardner for The Psychological

Corporation and purports to measure basic education skills of adults. Adults receive grade level scores in

each of five or six subjects (depending on the test 40

level form) based on testing norms. Each of the test sections takes from 20-35 minutes to complete. This test has undergone several revisions through 1988. Most of the test items are multiple choice questions. (One of the sections at the basic level gives students a spelling test). Students must be able to read at least at a second grade level to take this test.

The READ test was developed by Colvin & Root in

1972 for LVA to assess students' reading needs and reading progress during and after instruction. This three part instrument assesses sight word knowledge, the application of phonics to unfamiliar words, and comprehension through answering questions after the student has read aloud and/or listened to short reading passages. Although LVA's literature states that they use a "student centered whole language approach in its individualized tutoring of reading and writing" their assessment does not measure the student's writing knowledge. Students need at least a grade one reading level in order to take this test.

Jackson (1990), in a comprehensive look at the current assessments available for adult new literates, reviewed 63 instruments for adult students designed to measure such items as critical thinking, the basic 41

skills of reading, writing, and arithmetic, oral English proficiency, and self-esteem. Thirty the reviewed

tests were designed to measure the basic skills of

reading, writing, and arithmetic. Of these tests, ten measured reading only, three measured writing only, and

seventeen measured

reading and writing. Two of those tests, however, do

require students to read and write: the Test of Written

Language (TOWL) and the Reading/Everyday Activities in

Life test (R/EAL).

The TOWL has four parts: writing in a missing word

of a sentence; writing stories with a picture prompt; a dictated spelling test; re-writing sentences using

correct punctuation and capitalization. Scores are

normed by student age and taking the test requires at

least a fifth grade reading level.

In order to take the R/EAL test, students must have

a reading level of at least second grade. Students read

material from "everyday" life (e.g. job applications, TV

viewing guide) and write answers to questions about the 42

materials. A score of over 80% correct indicates that the student is "functionally literate."

Jackson (1990) was critical of literacy tests that required a reading level of a second grade or greater for use with beginning adult literates (p. 94).

Seventeen of the thirty basic education instruments

Jackson reviewed indicated that in order for students to take the test at least a second grade or better reading level was desired. The use of multiple choice questions to measure adult literacy knowledge was prevalent, especially in assessing components of writing (e.g. spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar) and many adult literacy tests still include lists of progressively difficult words as a measure for reading knowledge (Jackson, p. 11, 1990). Jones (1981) and Metz

(1990) pointed out that many normed and criterion referenced tests of adult literacy are scored based on children's grade level equivalencies and only perform gatekeeping functions.

The widespread use of TABE and ABLE to determine grade reading and writing levels of new literates and to measure student progress and program success suggests that informal reading and writing assessments are either not valued or not available to adult literacy educators. 43

The information from Jackson (1990) and others confirms the fact that informal reading and writing assessments are not readily available.

In short, there are limited assessments for those adults who are in the beginning areas of the literacy continuum. There are few published informal reading and writing assessments for adults. Few reading and writing assessments take advantage of the growing body of research that provide evidence of the interrelatedness of reading and writing tasks. Few reading and writing assessments acknowledge the importance of "knowing" the adult literacy learner's background. Few assessments are designed to assess the most needful adult literacy learner.

INSTRUCTION IN ADULT LITERACY PROGRAMS

The popular notions of adult literacy instruction are influenced by the ideas that anyone who is literate can teach someone who is not; if enough people volunteered to teach another adult how to read and write, the literacy crisis in the United States would be solved. Not only are those beliefs promoted by the popular press (see Anderson, 1990; Cornman, 1987; Kozol,

1980; Reynolds & Reynolds, 1988); they are fostered by two of largest and longest lived literacy programs in 44

the United States: Literacy Volunteers of America (LVA) and Laubach Literacy Action (Laubach), the United States version of Laubach Literacy International. The information presented in the next paragraph was gleaned from recent promotional and informational materials that

LVA and Laubach send out.

Both LVA and Laubach are national organizations that publish books and newspapers for volunteer teachers and and their students, provide training workshops for volunteer teachers, and offer memberships to their organizations. Both are used for literacy teaching methods in existing ABE and ESL programs. Outside of those formal educational settings, both programs depend heavily upon volunteer teachers.

Colvin & Root (1976) developed a literacy program for adults in the early 1960s and continue to be active

in refining their assessments and instruction today.

The focus of LVA's tutoring has traditionally been on one-to-one teacher/student interactions but has gradually come to include group instruction as well.

The literature that LVA sends out to interested parties states that their teaching practices encompass

a learner centered whole language approach in its individualized tutoring, whether it is done one to one or in small groups. 45

A whole language approach recognizes that reading takes place only when there is comprehension of what is being read. It also recognizes that people bring their life experience and knowledge of what sounds right in English to the reading experience. The student centered whole language approach makes use of this knowledge and experience (n.p.).

Teachers administer the READ test (which is discussed further in the section on adult literacy assessment) and provide instruction based on the results of this test.

Van Allen's (1976) Language Experience Approach (LEA) is a popular instructional method in LVA in which teachers write stories and messages dictated by the students for the students to read back. Other kinds of instruction involve teaching a pre-determined core of sight words, and teaching phonics application through individual letters and letter clusters.

Laubach was developed by Frank Laubach (1970), a

Christian missionary who began developing his literacy program for non-English speakers of Third World countries in the 1940s. Laubach is a highly structured program using workbooks that are designed to help new readers and writers progress to a 6th grade reading level. The Laubach method is based on the idea that adults learn

better through association than through rote memory. Letters and sounds are presented through key words with picture associations. In early lessons, each picture has a super-imposed letter to 46

associate sound with sight (Laubach Way to Reading. p. 8).

The instructional focus in the Laubach method is on phonics, controlled vocabulary reading and writing, and copying of letters, words, and sentences. Literacy students start with the beginning workbook and work sequentially to the end of the program. Laubach explained the research base for his program these ways:

English has an alphabet of 26 letters, which are used to express 43 sounds. The five letters called vowels represent at least 18 different sounds. The 25 major consonant sounds are represented by 21 letters. So a major problem in English is that there are not enough alphabetic symbols to represent the sounds of the language.... When Frank Laubach began developing English lessons in the 1940's, he did research to find the most regular way of spelling each vowel sound. The study showed that about 88 percent of the commonly used words have regular spellings of vowel sounds and that the short vowel sounds are the most frequent.... From the research, the Laubach team concluded that the letter-sound relationship in English can be best taught by introducing the vowel sounds in the order of frequency of their use and by showing the most regular spellings for vowel sounds which are spelled in more than one way.... If, in his early reading, the student should come across a sentence such as T h e little bee is on the beautiful red flower, he would be confused by the many sounds of e . But if he reads a sentence such as Ellen Bell sells fresh eggs, he can see that the letter e represents a certain sound.

Each of the four skill workbooks for the student has a corresponding manual for the teacher, like a basal reading series for elementary school teachers. Shannon 47

(1989) found that most teachers believed that by following the instructions in the teacher's manual in a basal reader, anyone can teach reading; Laubach and LVA materials encourage a parallel belief.

Some of the power of both LVA and Laubach programs are the number of years they have been in existence, the enormous number of tutors and tutees who have participated in the programs over the years, and the number of like programs LVA and Laubach have spawned

(for examples of programs that appear to be influenced by LVA and Laubach techniques, see Bauer, 1985; Brown,

1985; Fenholt, 1987; Hawkins, 1984; Philippi, 1987).

LVA claims that over 30,000 tutors and students are involved in their reading programs and a 1988 Laubach fact sheet stated that during a twelve month period between 1986 and 1967, 70,000 volunteers taught over

100,000 adults in 750 communities in 45 states.

Anderson's book Read With üê. (1990) offers compelling testimonials to the power of Laubach from its teachers and students.

In a detailed review and lesson analysis of the

Laubach approach to reading, Meyer & Keefe (1988) were critical of what they viewed as outdated methods to teaching and learning literacy. They pointed out that 48

the Laubach materials and research base have changed little over the past 25 years (p. 8) and charged that the current research data that Laubach disseminates about the success of the program is dependent upon numbers of people participating and personal testimonials. They concluded that the Laubach system maintained

an antiquated philosophy of reading which is reflected in materials placing a great deal of emphasis on decoding and isolated vocabulary skills at the expense of comprehension. We're concerned about the wide spread use of the Laubach series with little evidence of the scheme's effectiveness. We hope adult educators and literacy volunteer groups will explore other methods and materials consistent with current reading theory and the daily literacy needs of adults who wish to learn to read (p. 10).

Chisman (1989), Kinney & Harry (1991), and Meyer & Keefe

(1988) suggested that adult literacy programs must keep current with state of the art and up-to-date knowledge of the literacy fields in order to develop and maintain literacy programs that really work.

Challenges have been issued to policy makers, educators, and business representatives to create new approaches to and more encompassing views of literacy and literacy learning (Hunter & Harmon, 1979; Kazemek &

Rigg, 1985; Kozol, 1985). 49

CURRENT THEORIES OF ADULT LITERACY LEARNING

Lytle (1990) divided theories of literacy into four categories of orientation: literacy as skills; literacy as tasks; sociopolitical literacy; and critical literacy. This frame is used to discuss the educators who are currently seen as the major contributor to each literacy orientation.

Literacy as Skills

Skills are decontextualized tasks such as phonics, grammar, and spelling, when taught in isolation. Chall is well known for her "stage theory" <1983, 1984) of the reading process. The six stages are defined by grade levels (from grades 0 through college) and the mastery of certain skills (e.g. knowing that a set of letters produces certain sounds and words) before being able to progress to another stage. Chall (1987a) suggested that

the course of reading is essentially the same for adults and children, although perhaps there is a need for somewhat different emphasis depending upon maturity, and different text content....Both the 6 year old beginner and the 40 year old beginner need to learn to recognize in print the words they know when heard or spoken....Most difficulties [beginning readers] have in understanding what they read stem from inadequate recognition of words. It is their limited knowledge of the alphabetic principle and its automatic use that keeps them illiterates or non-readers (p. 10).

Chall is one literacy educator who is found in the literature of both children and adults. Her influence 50

on literacy as skills teaching has been pervasive and influential in both adult and child literacy learning theories and practices.

Literacy &s. Tasks are those functional aspects of day-to-day language use, such as writing checks, reading the newspaper or phone book, and those tasks identified with workplace literacy (e.g. reading memos, identifying job specific vocabulary, reading manuals or instructions).

Larry Mikulecky and Thomas Sticht have investigated workplace literacy over the past decade as a probable and potential place for adult literacy learning.

Academic reading is different from vocational reading

(Mikulecky & Ehlinger, 1986) and a job specific approach to reading is more functionally relevant and motivational to those adults in a vocational setting

(Sticht & Hooke, 1982). The national concern over a shrinking pool of qualified workers for entry level jobs has helped create a concern for literacy learning on the job (Philippi, 1988).

Sociopolitical Literacy

This theory of literacy is centered in the meaning of individual lives and communities. Literacy and literacy learning is not culture-free nor context-free 51

(Fingeret, 1987; Harman, 1985; Heath, 1983; Kazemek,

1985, 1988; Kozol, 1985; Lytle, 1988). These theorists hold that for successful literacy intervention to occur, the context, history, and background that comes with the literacy learner must be incorporated in instruction and assessment. In Lytle's (1988) call for alternatives to traditional adult literacy instruction and assessments she pointed out that

....learners bring their own intentions or purposes, considerable prior knowledge of language, and diverse strategies for organizing and using what they know.... reading and writing are social and meaning-making processes. They are best learned -- and assessed -- together and in relation to the particular goals and interests of groups and individuals (p. 2).

Critical Literacy

Critical literacy is concerned with posing and solving problems of empowerment and oppression. Paulo

Freire is a founder of critical literacy theory which emerged from the study of oppressed Third World beginning readers and writers. In his theory literacy learning is viewed as an active and political creation designed to transform the political consciousness not only of the learners but of the social and political context in which they live (Freire, 1970). This political consciousness was based on the idea of authentic help which means that 52

all who are involved [in the learning environment] help each other mutually, growing together in the common effort to understand the reality which they seek to transform. Only through such praxis -- in which those who help and those who are being helped help each other simultaneously -- can the act of helping become free from the distortion in which the helper dominates the helped (Freire, p. 8, 1978).

Freire, like Chall, is one of the few adult educators who also discusses children's literacy acquisition. He related literacy acquisition to knowledge in general:

....the equilibrium we seek as we attempt to construct our knowledge is doomed to be destroyed as soon as it is achieved. If we accept the idea that knowledge is an ongoing process, then we must always be ready to retrace our steps. We accept this disequilibrium because we know that it is the prerequisite of a new equilibrium. This position is just as valid for the teacher as for his relationship with others. This other being who speaks to you from a marginal, minority culture that is quite different from your own, is capable of introducing you to his or her cultural context if only you are prepared to accept the disequilibrium. Return to a state of equilibrium is dependent upon contact and dialogue and not upon a way of thinking that will leave you isolated in your so-called competence.... the key to literacy training lies in this kind of intensive, dynamic interaction (Campos, p. 9, 1990).

Summary sf. Literacy Orientations

Lytle's (1990) framework is somewhat arbitrary but useful in trying to describe the current major

contributors to adult literacy learning. No orientation

is pure and exclusive. It is important to understand

that the work of each contributor overlaps other 53

orientations.

Of further importance is that the use and interpretation of various theoretical orientations has been criticized by others. For instance, Fingeret

(1988) argued that workplace literacy is popular for the wrong reasons:

....today's political talk about literacy is not a.bout "empowerment" of people who are poor and disenfranchised; it is about maintaining the present distribution of wealth and power in America.... the claim is being made that the skills needed for the lowest level of jobs has shifted -- or is in the process of shifting. This is not about literacy for social mobility, but is about literacy for basic, entry-level employment (p. 2).

Chall (1984) criticized not Freire, but what she saw as misinterpreted knowledge when implementing a Freirean literacy program:

Many teachers of totally illiterate adult tend to see themselves as teaching concepts, ideas, and knowledge from the start. This view....may come from the enthusiastic acceptance of the theories of Paulo Freire, who emphasizes the need for political consciousness among adult students.... sometimes it is overlooked that his adult learners had little or no previous schooling while the typical adult basic literacy student in the United States today has been to school for a number of years and is considerably more sophisticated. There is also a tendency to overlook the fact that Freire's reading program for beginners was developed with great care to teach them how to read. Only the most vital words are to be taught at the beginning and these are selected also to teach a maximum number of sound-to-letter relations. Thus word recognition and decoding are a vital aspect of the Freire program, along with motivation and political consciousness. This is in 54

contrast to many of our reading programs for adult beginners which assume that interesting and vital content will lead naturally to word recognition (p. 10a) .

Theories of adult literacy are relatively new and experimental. How these theories parallel or do not parallel current theories on child beginning readers and writers is a topic that has just begun to be explored.

CHILDREN AND CURRENT THEORIES OF LITERACY ACQUISITION

"Emergent literacy", a term attributed to Clay and developed by her in the 1960s, has driven nearly three decades of research. Knowledge from research on emergent literacy has helped integrate the processes of language learning (i.e. speaking, listening, reading, writing, and thinking). Strickland (1983) stated that

"the development of the language arts.... represents an interdependent network" (p. 118).

For young children, learning how to read and write parallels the acquisition of oral language (Clay, 1979,

1991; Durkin, 1966; Ferreiro & Teberosky, 1982; Teale &

Sulzby, 1986). Ninio & Bruner (1976) discovered that infants as young as eight months old participated in meaningful dialogues with their mothers, centering around labeling and naming objects. Learning begins early and is shaped by experiences in the home. 55

Children experiment with reading and writing similar to the ways in which they learn to speak.

Harste, Woodward & Burke (1984) discovered that children's early production of print looked remarkably similar to the language used in the home. Doake (1988) discovered that infants were capable of reading-like behaviors (e.g. holding a book, turning the pages, eye- tracking, and verbal response) with an adult and on their own. From an in-depth exploration of the pre school family reading experiences of six children, Doake

(1988) concluded that

children do not learn about letters and words and the role they have in writing and reading by being told about them. They must generate these abstract and complex understandings for themselves, as the result of a wide variety of experiences with written language used in highly functional and meaningful ways (p. 56).

Dialogue between children and a significant adult

(e.g. parent, teacher, older sibling) creates a

"scaffolded" learning situation in which the child's knowledge is advanced to higher levels (Bruner, 1970;

Cazden, 1988; Clay, 1991; Vygotsky, 1982). Children also make discoveries about language by themselves, using their own complex and rule-governed systems as they learn to accommodate to the literacies that exist at home and at school (Clay, 1991; Doake, 1988; Harste, 56

Woodward & Burke, 1984).

Ideas about how children learn have been transformed through the works of Dewey (1916), Piaget

(1952), Vygotsky (1978) and others from a transmitted view of learning to one that is more child centered.

The child is not viewed as an empty vessel to be filled with knowledge as Adler (1982) suggests but as an active knowledge seeker who brings a significant background of literacy theories of her or his own to any formal or informal learning environment (Clay, 1979, 1991;

Goodman, 1986;, Smith, 1978). Smith (1978) suggested that

it would be far more appropriate....to regard the human brain as an artist, as a creator of worlds, than as a device for acquiring, storing, organizing and utilizing information. Literacy... is more than the shunting of information between one person and another. It is the exploration of worlds of ideas and experience, for readers and writers alike (p. viii).

Clay, Goodman, Smith and others have used emergent literacy theories to design instructional bases for child-centered learning and print-rich environments in schools, instruction that acknowledges that whatever knowledge a child brings from home is a starting place for learning in school.

Goodman (1978, 1984) has developed a theory of whole language instruction that holistically integrates 57

the language arts through the use of children's literature and children's writing about themselves and their experiences. Goodman acknowledges teachers in this process as expert facilitators who are adept at

"kidwatching". Kidwatching is a type of informal assessment that allows teachers to make informed instructional decisions that will support the learning of each child.

Smith (1978, 1988) has addressed how educators must re-frame their thinking about children as learners and school as a place of learning. Children are active and self-directed literacy learners, who learn through collaboration with others:

Children not only become familiar with the ways in which they see written language being used, they learn about its form. Before children know a what a word is they understand that there are spaces in sentences. Long before they know the alphabet they recognize that words consist of letters and have conventional spellings.... little of this learning can be attributed to deliberate instruction. Adults never say to children, "Pay attention in the back there — this is your day for learning about the televison guide." Children learn when they are enrolled in the activities of people who use written language, when they join the literacy club (Smith, p.68, 1988).

Smith acknowledges that this re-framing and re-making of literacy learning will make instruction, assessment, and teaching different. Along with Goodman and Clay, Smith stresses that teachers must have and maintain a current 58

knowledge and theory about literacy processes that informs their own practices on a day-to-day basis.

Based on observing and recording the reading and writing behavior of low, average, and high progress readers and writers through what she calls "close observation of young children". Clay (1991) came to understand that modern teaching practices

must take into account what children can already do with print when they come to school and any need for enriched opportunities for booksharing and exploring with a pencil; for these are things which are learned through interactions with people and with print (p. 10).

Clay's understanding of the processes of good readers and writers enabled her to develop a program, Reading

Recovery, that identified young students before they failed at reading and writing in school and helped them make rapid progress to the average reading levels of

their classrooms.

Chall (1989) and Adams (1990) largely ignore the body of research on emergent literacy but acknowledge

the importance of teachers and children learning in

print-rich classrooms and the importance of operating on

connected text in both reading and writing. Chall,

Adams, and others have a competing theory of literacy

learning, one that focuses first on learning sound to

letter correspondences, and only later extends to 59

problem solving processes emphasized by the emergent

literacy theory. In this theoretical orientation

literacy learning is regarded as an exact process of seeing and recognizing words so that readers can use this knowledge in reading for meaning. Chall (1989) stated that

a code emphasis for beginning reading (phonics, decoding, and word recognition) is one way to help us improve the read or our children and to help prevent reading problems among all students (p. 532).

The issues and debates that surround beginning literacy

learning tend have lead to polarized views, at one end code-emphasis methods and practices and at the other end meaning-emphasis measures and practices.

LINKING ADULT NEW LITERACY WITH EMERGENT LITERACY

Parallels do exist between supporting the beginning

literacy acquisition of young children and adult new readers. Since the field of emergent and beginning

reading of children has a longer history of both

research and practice, it is not surprising that child

educators do not normally draw from the work of adult

educators. Adult educators, however, have begun to draw more heavily upon the work of those involved in

children's literacy studies (e.g. Jones, 1981; Kazemek &

Rigg, 1984). Adult educators continue to debate the use 60

of children's materials in the adult literacy instructional setting.

Parallels Between Adult and Child Emergent Literacy

Educators of children are calling for child- centered curricula (Goodman, 1984), in which the teacher's role is that of a collaborative facilitator of children's knowledge (Clay, 1985; Smith, 1978, 1988;

Wells, 1986). These educators also promote utilizing and accepting the socially constructed literacy knowledge children bring with them to school (Cazden,

1988). These views parallel the calls adult educators have been making since Knowles' (1970) first edition of lilS. H.9d.9.rn Practice af. Adult Education which focused on adult learning as learner centered and self-motivating activities.

For instance, Yetta Goodman (1989) described an elementary classroom in which there was

respect for the power of language, greater understanding of the importance of children being actively involved in their own learning and that children learn language best as they use it for real and functional purposes.... there is a more conscious awareness of the importance of taking into consideration the social community of the classroom and its influences on learning language (p. 29).

Soifer (et.al., 1990) described a successful adult

literacy class setting that sounds very similar to the 61

elementary classroom Goodman discussed:

Meaningful lessons are centered on purposeful interaction and communication rather than on the study of language elements. Effective reading and writing activities involve constructing and imparting messages, ideas, feelings. They do not center on studying the elements of language (letters, sounds, parts of speech) as pre requisites to the real processes of reading and writing. These elements are important, of course, but are learned as a result of the need to use them in the process of sharing thoughts and ideas rather than in preparation for future applications to reading and writing (p. 18).

It is clear that literacy learning in both the context adult literacy and children's literacy can be thought of as parallel. Many more studies, however, on the issues that surround child literacy have been conducted than on those same issues that surround adult literacy which suggests that theories on children's literacy has a deeper and stronger base.

Borrowing Theory and Practice From Emergent Literacy Research

Kazemek & Rigg (1984) credit much of their belief system on adult literacy acquisition to the reading theories of Ken Goodman, Frank Smith, and Louise

Rosenblatt. Implications for adult instruction center on the idea that materials must be meaningful for the reader and there can be no one right answer for the meanings individual readers and writers create from their responses to text (Kazemek & Rigg, p. iv, 1984). 62

In designing an instructional program for the adult new literate population, Forester (1988) built on the writing research by Calkins (1986), Graves (1983) and

Harste, Woodward & Burke (1984). Forester (1988) noted parallel literacy learning processes at work in both adults and children. She further commented that the adult student found it "too difficult to relate [the practice of reading and writing] to abstract rules" (p.

605). Johnston (1985) used Clay's (1979, 1982) theories on helping low progress young readers to develop a case for more strategic and metacognitive instruction for adult new readers. Niokse, Speicher, and Buchek (1988) used the work of Clay (1982), Chall (1979), and Chall

& Snow (1982) to build their adult intergenerational literacy project. Kammerer (1990) designed a training. program for adult literacy volunteers from her own

Reading Recovery training experiences. Jones (1981) drew heavily upon emergent literacy work to design a theory and practice text book to help the instructor of the adult new literate. He stated that

it might be helpful to examine the experience children who have learned to read before attending school and without being taught, and also how children learn to speak. These processes offer additional insights which seem to be relevant for the instruction of adult illiterates (p. 71). 63

Few of the established names in adult literacy theory, however, appear in emergent and beginning literacy research. Smith (1988) used Freire's (1972) ideas to discuss collaborative classroom learning. Clay

(personal communication, 1991) observed, at a conference on adult literacy sponsored by IRA, that many more adult literacy educators seemed to be focusing on what their adult students already knew about print and used that knowledge as a basis for instruction. Usipg Children's Materials W.ith AduLL Nea Literates Adult literacy practitioners have been concerned about the use of children's materials with adult literacy learning. Coles (1977) noted that many of the written materials used in ABE programs were similar to basal readers used in the elementary school. Although

Fingeret (personal communication, 1989) noted that recent novels and other reading materials published by

New Reader's Press (a division of Laubach) and other publishers to be of better quality.

Weber (1975), Boraks & Richardson (1981), and Bowen

(1987) have challenged the notion that literacy acquisition is the same for children as it is for adults. Bowen (1987) stated

although educators have long recognized that children are not just small adults, there is 64

apparently more difficulty in dealing with the inverse conclusion that adults are not merely tall children (p. 208).

Despite this concern, Boraks & Richardson (1981) make

recommendations along the lines of Goodman's miscue

analysis for helping adult new readers become aware of the cues they are using when reading text.

Family or intergenerational literacy practices have

made use of the picture book in helping adults become

better readers and writers with encouraging results (see

Buchanan-Berrigan, 1989; Boraks & Richardson, 1981;

Crocker, 1989; Darling, 1989; Nickse, Speicher, &

Buchek, 1988). Children learned to enjoy books and

related literacy activities as parents became more adept

at sharing picture books with them.

Over the past decade, the number of books published

for children has increased tenfold with the production

of picture books having the largest increase (Huck,

Hepler & Hickman, 1987). The picture story book is no

longer just in the domain of children (Nodelman, 1991).

Shavit (1986) noted the ambiguous nature of many

children's stories and picture books and pointed out

that they have generally always been written,

illustrated, published, and bought by adults. Picture

books can be deceptively complex, multiply layered and 65

veiled in both picture and text. Today's picture books offer many topics of interest to both adults and children, and are neither childlike nor childish (Meek,

1989). Other children's literature experts have pointed out that "the line between children's literature and

adult literature is blurred" (Huck, Hepler & Hickman, p.

4, 1987). To exclude the use of picture books from

adult literacy instruction seems short sighted.

APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT AND INSTRUCTION

Most adult new literates have experienced literacy

instruction as children and in many cases have sought

help as adults; they have failed in both situations.

For the majority, literacy learning in school looks

similar for children and adults. Students fill out

workbook pages alone, read basal-type stories, and fill

in the blanks for writing activities. Assessment for

the majority of these same children and adults is

generally standardized in nature with grade level norms

placing students in high, middle and low reading groups

or in grade-level materials. Despite the theoretical

evidence that exists to support learner-centered

literacy instruction and assessment for both child and

adult literacy learning, changes have been slow to show

up in instructional practices of both. 66

The present study was developed with seeds from many contributors to the field of literacy in general.

Several premises underlie the principles of this study:

1. Adults can be assessed informally for their literacy knowledge (based on the work of Clay, Fingeret, Goodman, Kazemek, and Smith).

2. Knowledge gained from these assessments can be used to design an interesting, engaging instructional program with adults on a one-to- one basis (based on the work of Clay, Lytle, Soifer, et.al., and Smith).

3. Informal literacy assessments that assess both reading and writing performance are needed in the field of adult literacy (based on the work of Chall, Clay, Johnston, Lytle).

4. Informal literacy assessments should include an interview component to understand the adult's literacy background (based on the work of Fingeret, Freire, Geertz, Kazemek & Rigg).

5. The use of picture books and reading aloud to students can be an effective literacy learning strategy (based on the work of Buchanan- Berrigan; Crocker; Darling; and other intergenerational projects).

This work was also undertaken with the idea that

using children's materials with adults is not

objectionable if the adults are treated as adults. The

objection from adult educators is focused more on HOW

that adult is treated not what materials are used for

instruction, although caution must still be used in

selecting appropriate choices for adults to read based

on the teacher's knowledge of the student. 67

SUMMARY

Literacy learning is more that just learning how to read and write. Literacy is a social construction, based on an individual's circumstances, beliefs, perceptions, and surroundings. Even with the small research base for adult literacy learning, the current practices have not kept pace with the current theories.

Research on adult literacy acquisition, while acknowledging the political and social aspects of literacy learning, have failed to make links with what knowledge might be valuable in the large body of research that exists on beginning literacy acquisition in children. Conversely, children's educators have not considered what research on adult learning might be relevant and useful to the continually developing theories and practices of pedagogy.

I wanted to incorporate my knowledge of beginning child readers and writers with that of beginning adult readers and writers by focusing on two problem areas: beginning adult literacy assessment and instruction.

Through the use of Clay's informal assessments and instructional techniques for young low progress readers and writers, as well as the use of children's picture books, and the use of current adult literacy theory, I 68

hoped to contribute a new perspective on adult literacy assessment and instruction, one that is compatible with current theory on how adults learn and learn literacy. CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter contains methodological information with details on how the data was gathered, where it was gathered, and who provided it. The general methodology will be presented first, followed by details of the setting, subjects, and procedures. Information about the timeline and data analysis will conclude this chapter.

GENERAL METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH

This study utilized two interrelated, concurrent, data gathering phases. Phase I involved assessment and instructional modification and development while tutoring selected students (H=2> over a four month period. During Phase II, assessments and interviews were administered to an additional number of students

(N=5) over the same four month period.

This interpretive study was conducted in the mode of participant observation. This type of research

“involves fieldwork to identify how participants reason about a situation, and the language that enables individuals to participate in a world of collective symbols and shared meanings" (Popkewitz, p. 41, 1984).

-89- 70

Interpretive participant obaervution utilizes multiple integrated methodologies within detailed and explicit records of people, incidents, environments, and social conditions. Also incorporated in this research were elements of case study and ethnographic approaches; interviews, field notes, audiotapes, home visits, assessment information (collected historically from previous student files when allowed access and administered during the data collection period), and collection of selected artifacts (e.g. letters, worksheets students had completed with other teachers) provided the data base for this research.

The transferability and trustworthiness of the data come from the voices of the participants themselves. It is the specific instances and experiences of the students in this study that engage "the power of the scientific imagination to bring us in touch with the lives of strangers" (Geertz, p. 16, 1973). The credibility of a study lies in the techniques and methods employed to ensure quality findings, the experience the researcher brings to the study, and what paradigm orientation and assumptions underlie the study

(Patton, 1990). 71

One of the values of participant observation is that the observer is able to “discover things no one else has ever really paid attention to" (Patton, p. 204,

1990). He identified five primary dimensions of variations in approaches to observational research (p.

217, 1990} that allow the latitude necessary to conduct participant observation research. These dimensions allowed for a certain degree of flexibility in the multiple roles I played in the research as teacher,

interviewer, and researcher. Patton's (1990) five dimensions of variations in approaches to observations

(p. 217) follow continuums (e.g. from full participation

observation to onlooker observation as an outsider); I

functioned as a full participant observer (not an

onlooker) with the students, I made overt observations

(i.e. participants knew that I was observing them), I

gave everyone involved in this study a full explanation

of the purpose of the study (i.e. I was participating

overtly, not covertly), I made long term and multiple

contacts with the participants of the study, and the

focus of the study was broad (i.e. I expanded my focus

to include both literacy assessment and instruction

instead of focusing on one particular element). Through

these dimensions and multiple perspectives, the 72

collected data provided a systematic and organized view of both the students' and the researchers activities together.

There were four stages of data analysis.

Preliminary data analysis occurred during the collecting phase. Miles and Huberman (1984) have suggested that the practice of data analysis during the data collecting period offers opportunities for thinking strategically and tactically about the research and redirecting efforts when necessary. During the data collection phase, field notes were typed on a computer disc, re read, and analytic comments were recorded on the notes.

The second stage of data analysis focused on the student interviews and assessments. Student's answers to questions, informal testing results, and responses to the tests were organized and reviewed across tasks; that

is, student responses were aggregated by question and task, then reviewed for major patterns and themes. Test

results, selected interview data, and demographic

information were reduced for the purposes of presenting

the data in charts and tables. Student and test files were developed; they contained the interviews, copies of

the tests the students had taken, and any artifacts the

students had given me (e.g. journal or workbook pages 73

they had completed in class or at home).

In the third stage of data analysis, student responses from the interviews were reduced, sorted, and color-coded by themes. The categories used to sort the data and develop themes were allowed to emerge from the data. The main categories clustered into four general categories; perceived barriers to literacy learning, perceived bridges to literacy learning, perceived consequences of literacy, and miscellaneous. Over 450 responses were categorized into the general clusters and then, with the exception of the miscellaneous category, further analyzed into more specialized themes.

The fourth phase of data analysis centered upon the question of instruction. Portraits of the two students who received instruction are drawn and developed in this section.

THE SITES

Seven sites were considered for conducting this

study. Two prisons and five Adult Basic Education (ABE)

sites had been previously contacted about this research.

Four of the directors or teachers at these sites

expressed interest in the study and offered to help find

students for the study. The director at the remaining

site allowed me to visit her facility and talk with her 74

about her program and my research but did not act upon my request to interview and assess students at her

location.

Of the four remaining ABE sites, one was not used

because it was too far to travel (a three hour round

trip from my base of operations). Of the three

participating ABE sites, two were urban and one was

rural. Following are descriptions of the four sites

(three ABE centers and one prison) that made up the

study.

Thompson County Prerelease Center

The Thompson County Prerelease Center was located

at the edges of both the county and the city lines. The

prison was a new and modern low-slung buff-colored

sandstone structure surrounded by high cyclone fences.

Circles of concertina or "razor" wire were looped around

the top strands of barbed wire that were angled inward

toward the walls and exercise yard. Despite the fact

that state officials called this a "prerelease center"

it was still a prison.

Posted by the visitor entry door, a white sign with

bright red letters warned visitors that they could be

searched at any time, and that drugs, firearms, and any

other contraband were strictly prohibited. No bell. 75

knocker, or door handle by the heavy and windowless metal door greeted the visitor. The door could be opened or closed by key only, and was unlocked for the purposes of employees or visitors entering or exiting the building.

Guards at a security desk inside the lobby doors stopped and searched any employee or visitor before allowing access to the prison offices, visiting areas, and inmate units. They maintained an entry and exit log and permanent passes. If your pass could not be located, you did not get in.

Further down the main hallway, were other halls off to the right and left that led to the administrative offices, a small inmate library, and other rooms serving various purposes. A commissary where inmates could obtain personal items and snacks was also located in the main building. When the commissary was not open, a white sign with large black letters stated "You are out of order. The commissary is closed."

At the entrance to each living unit in the prison compound were small offices that housed a secretary and a director of that unit. Small windowless offices further into the units housed teachers and counselors who were employed by the prison. Each unit had a 76

security desk maintained by a guard located in a recreation room for the inmates. The recreation room I saw on a daily basis for almost three months, was generally inhabited by ten or so inmates. Inmate activities I observed were ironing, playing pool, talking on the telephone, watching TV, picking up mail at the security desk, and sweeping/mopping the floors.

The linoleum floors and cathedral ceilings without acoustic tile increased the noise level in the room.

Sometimes the noise from this room was distracting during lessons.

The room in which I met the students was a small office belonging to one of the prerelease program teachers. The room was approximately six feet square, with walls of yellow painted concrete blocks. I was told to never give anything to an inmate. When I asked if I could loan the students a Walkman so they could listen to books being read on tape, I was told this was not allowed. Although I could loan the students books,

I could not give them paper, stamps, or folders. They were also not allowed to have any money.

The inmates had educational options at the prerelease center. A four-year religious affiliated college was site based and conducted courses which were 7 7

designed to help inmates develop employment readiness and life coping skills. According to the program summary, the college was

committed to addressing issues of specific needs of incarcerated women....Inmates are assessed upon intake to the Thompson Pre-Release Center in the areas of educational level achieved, previous work and institutional job assignments, and limitations due to nature of offense and geographical location upon release.

ABB and GED course were also conducted through a separate educational program at the center.

Unlike the three ABE sites where the balance of the data was collected, the prerelease center was a paramilitary setting. I spent over half my time collecting data at this site where two of the students participated in both phases — the assessment and

interview phase and the instruction phase— of this study.

Adult. Basis. Education Sites ABE facilities are frequently found in modular structures, renovated factories or high schools, or

existing high schools. The three ABE sites in this study were typical ABE settings in that they were making use of already existing settings. ABE programs are

state and federally funded. Adults who wish to complete

a high school education or improve their English skills 7 8

can attend a variety of free classes — from English as a Second Language (ESL) to the General Educational

Development (GED) diploma preparation.

Providing evidence of the standard ABE open enrollment policy, students came and went at various times for both classes and placement exams in all three sites. Staff members were busy helping new students get started, keeping old students going, directing classroom aides and volunteers, and solving various program problems with ABE directors and personnel.

Other factors the three ABE sites held in common were their bonds of institutionalization: classrooms with standard classroom equipment (blackboards, desk/chair combinations in lines or tables and chairs in rows, locked metal cabinets stocked with text books and work books, a teacher's desk); hall or office bulletin boards with informational notices pinned on them; old or weak floors that creaked or had cracks in them; poor lighting; the shiny green, yellow, or gray-white painted walls; and the absence of any evidence of student contributions to any displayed materials on the walls in the classrooms or the halls.

Following are more detailed descriptions of each of the three individual ABE sites. 79

Downtown Adult and Community Education Center

(DACES^■ Located in the heart of an urban downtown area, access by foot, bus, or auto is convenient for most of the clientele who come to this ABE site. The building covers an entire city block, and has been converted from a shoe factory to a multiple use building for the city's school district.

The entire bottom floor of this building has been given over to ABE. Displayed on the walls are informational bulletin boards and colorful promotional posters of literacy campaigns and literature. These efforts did not hide the institutional effects produced by shiny green and yellow paint over concrete blocks, small over-heated rooms with uncontrollable radiators, and windows that were painted shut.

The classroom in which I spent the most time was an experimental classroom that used computers for a self- paced program designed to help adults become better readers and writers. Although the implementation of the program was new in this district, the program, IBM infoCourse: Principle of. the. Alphab.e.t Lit eracy System, is copyrighted by John Henry Martin (1987) and used in other adult education centers around the country. 80

In my field notes, I noted that this classroom was a better facility than the other classrooms being used at DACES. The floor was newly carpeted, the room was large with twenty computers for student use, a storeroom contained computer and class supplies, and an office for the three teachers that rotated class times was provided. When I asked another teacher in the building about the difference between this program and the GED classes, she told me not to ask anyone about it.

She revealed that this program was a sore point with some of the teachers because it was believed that it would replace reading and writing instruction in the rest of the GED classes.

Often students would spend one hour in the computer lab working and a second hour working in another classroom across the hall on specific GED activities.

One student who was attending both the IBM InfoCourse program and a GED classroom agreed to be part of my study.

Longfellow Education Center. Longfellow Education

Center is an alternative high school that offers both day and night classes for teenagers and young adults.

In addition, an evening ABE program was offered for adults of all ages. Even at night, school bells 81

regulated the changing of classes and controlled the waves of student movement in the halls. Older students who came for instruction seemed to ignore the bells and go on with whatever work they were doing in their classrooms.

This gray stone structure, built at the turn of the century, was located in the heart of a lower to middle- class university neighborhood. The doors to the building sat underneath carved stone lintels that were engraved with maxims.

I worked mainly in one classroom at this setting.

The room was set up in a typical classroom style. A teacher's desk headed the room. Polished wooden floors creaked as volunteers and students got up to take breaks, work together, or sharpen pencils.

The students in this room had scored below the fifth grade level on the TABE test. Some nights there were five students, other nights there were fifteen.

All of the students were working in various workbooks to improve reading, writing, or math skills. When a student needed assistance, s/he went to the teacher's desk or raised their hands for assistance. The teacher and her volunteers roamed the room and frequently sat down next to a student to help with assignments. Many 82

of the students were working in different levels of

Laubach Literacy Action workbooks. Two of the students for the study came from this setting.

Custer Job TrainingPartnership Act Programs Center. The Custer Job Training Partnership Act Program

(JTPA) is housed in a small modular unit that has been remodeled into an office building three blocks from this rural town's center. This program, specifically designed for economically disadvantaged youths and adults, was supported by federal funds and had been serving the county since 1984. Students from this program were generally referred from social agencies and had the option of participating in basic or remedial education, GED preparation, job skills training, and/or placement services.

The teacher of the GED class told me that attendance fluctuated greatly in her classes — some days one or two students would show up, other days, her small classroom would be bursting at the seams with twenty students. Several old model computers lined the class room walls. Long tables with folding chairs were set up for the students. Students sat around the tables instead of on one side facing the front of the room. 83

During my first meeting with a student, I was given an office in which to meet. For the other times, I used a small conference room, set up with long tables and folding chairs. During the times I interviewed students, I could hear the sounds of the working day: the telephone ringing, people entering and leaving the building, and various conversations the building inhabitants were holding. Two students from this site participated in my study.

GAINING ACCESS AND ENTREE

Patton (1990) compares access and entree issues to a never-ending game of chess in which “players and pieces are manipulated to accomplish some ultimate goal"

(p. 265). Access was the greatest problem and threat to my study. A professor who had conducted a number of successful research projects at local prisons suggested that I conduct my litracy research at a local women's prison. The academic education administrator at the state Department of Rehabilitation was interested in facilitating this study and assured me that my project could be handled as an "in-house research project". Due to the fact that this study was seen as a literacy study, the administrator determined that the prison's human subjects review was unnecessary. 8 4

Prior to this study I had understood from other researchers who had conducted studies in prisons that access could be particularly difficult to obtain, so I had already talked with a colleague who worked at a prison prerelease center and through her, had the opportunity to meet and test an inmate. I also approached three non-prison alternative sites with my research proposal. Two of these alternative sites ultimately became additional sites for my study.

As I began to assess and interview the first

inmate, I also began a long wait for "official" permission to conduct my work in the prison. Due to a misunderstanding between the educational administrator of the state prison system, the warden and the educational director of the prerelease center in which I was already working, I was never able to receive

"official" permission to conduct my study in the prerelease center. Although I was given a permanent visitor's pass for the three months I was there, I was denied access to more than the two students with whom I was working and was not allowed to tape record the

sessions with the them. The misunderstanding centered upon whether or not it was necessary for my study to be

approved by the human subjects committee at the prison. 85

As Bogdan & Biklen (1982) pointed out, getting permission to conduct research in some educational systems can be a long laborious process (p. 122).

During this prolonged wait period, I continued to work with one woman in the prerelease center on a daily basis. Through her, I met another woman who became part of my study. Both of these women helped me maintain entree in the prison because they told the director of the prerelease center and other prison personnel how much they appreciated being able to meet with me every day, and about how much they felt they were learning.

One of the students carried books that she read during our lessons around with her in the prison and read them to anyone who would listen. The “publicity" these two students gave my study helped me maintain both access and entree. The prerelease center warden also told me that she would never deny any inmate volunteer literacy assistance.

In the 1990 October/November issue of "Reading

Today", Healey stated that it is important to understand the strict and complex official and unofficial hierarchy that exists in prisons. Subsequent interviews revealed that each person I met with advocated a specific literacy program for prison use. Access for this study. 8 6

therefore, was influenced by conflict within the setting and thus was limited.

My proposal was accepted at two of the ABE sites.

Patton (1990) pointed out that successful participant observation studies frequently are dependent upon reciprocity of services (p. 253). The terms of each exchange relationship emerged as I got to know different teachers. In one classroom, the teacher asked if I would show her the Literacy Survey test results of one of her non-readers, and if I would volunteer in the classroom whenever I could. Another instructor asked me to help with an evaluation of his literacy program in order to prepare for an upcoming staff meeting. In classrooms that I visited often, students borrowed books from a small library of adult paperbacks that I carried with me in a box. Instructors expressed interest in the paperback collections and talked with me about ideas for classroom lending libraries.

All of the students who committed to participating in the study continued to meet with me until the interviews and assessments were completed. When requested by the students, I read them notes and descriptions I had written and asked for their feedback.

When I was not sure if I had understood a statement or 8 7

an action I would read aloud what I had written and ask for clarification.

Gaining and maintaining access and entree was an ongoing process. As Lincoln & Guba (1985) suggested, both processes are developmental tasks that begin well before the study starts and continue throughout the study. Even though I had officially stopped collecting data at the end of the year, I was still in contact with several of the participants in and facilitators of this study.

THE STUDENTS

Following is a description of each of the students.

The descriptions were taken from field notes, from observations others who knew the students had made, and

from the students' comments about themselves.

Demographic information about each of the students

is provided in Table 1. Information found in the table

include name, age, gender, birthplace and race, the

grade each student dropped-out of school, and the length

of time each had participated in reading and writing

instruction as an adult.

The youngest student in the study was age twenty-

three, the oldest was age sixty-one. Four of the

students were male and three were female. The drop-out 8 8

TABLE 1

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Name Age Gender Birthplace Drop-out Class Attend and Race Grade ance Length

Edward 23 H Ohio 10th 5 years Anglo-Amer.

Leonard 61 M Georgia 1st 1 week Afro-Amer.

Candy 36 F Ohio 6th Hasn't sure Anglo-Amer.

Robert 46 M Ohio 8th 3 years Anglo-Amer.

Lee 47 F Kentucky Age 15* Hasn't sure Afro-Amer.

Donald 41 M Kentucky 6th 5 weeks Anglo-Amer.

Ruth 44 F Ohio 9th 2.5 years Anglo-Amer.

* Lee' s information on when she dropped out of school was varied. This age reflects when she told me she ran away from a school for the feeble minded. 89

rate was 100 per cent and the time for leaving the educational system ranged from first grade to tenth grade. Student's time for participating in alternative schooling systems (e.g. ABE programs) ranged from one week to five years. Following is a description of each subject. gçtag,Æd. There was not a lot of reading around me. My parents never read. My mom had literacy problems too. I was put in special ed classes pretty young. It did more worse than good, but regular class was worse because kids would make fun of you. They didn't work hard enough with you [in learning disabled (LD) classes]. They gave up. They gave up if I [gave up]. They should have kept pushing.

At twenty-three, Edward was the youngest of the adults in this study. He worked two jobs: one full-time and one part-time. His wife was a dental technician who had completed high school and they had a one-year old daughter with another child expected in the spring. His teacher told me that Edward's attendance at class was sporadic because of a flexible and busy work schedule.

For several months he would come two nights a week; then he would be gone for several months — an established pattern for the five years of Edward's attendance at the program. His goal was to obtain his 6ED.

Edward explained that his parents were divorced when he was a teen-ager and that his mother "broke down" 9 0

as a result. He never finished tenth grade and got a job when he was fifteen at the company that still employs him part-time. As he put it when we were discussing his reading and writing history

Being from a divorced family don't help and getting a job at fifteen didn't help either, but I got tired of the electricity being turned off and not having any food to eat. ... My past experiences [in school] were frustrating. I didn't feel like I did any good. Confidence and feeling has a lot to do with it.

In my field notes, I observed that Edward looked directly at me when he spoke. His speech was rapid, without hesitation, and he gave succinct and direct answers to my questions. He did not want me to tape

record any of his responses and instantly became quiet when the teacher who had lent us the office for the

interviews walked into the room.

Edward had been placed in LD classes after first grade. He indicated that first grade was where all his

troubles with school and literacy began:

...the first LD class I was in — that's where it all started. They held me back in first grade, then I went to LD. It destroyed my whole idea of reading. I got into trouble a lot, but I grew out of it by high school.

When Edward came to the ABE center, he spent half of his

time working in the computer lab on reading and writing

skills and the other half of his time in a regular 6ED 91

classroom working in workbooks. He felt through his experiences with the computer that he had gained a better understanding of reading and writing. He credited the computer with being the first program that had made him feel like he was making progress in being able to read and write. Although he felt that his two current teachers were understanding and helpful, it was the computer that was helping him most with his reading and writing.

I've been coming [to classes] on and off — I've probably spent about six months on the computer. The computer told me things that people never told me. I go to two sides of the room — one side is for the abc's and the other side is for writing. Anything I would see I would read. I would spell it out and then try to read it. ... I didn't really know how to write at all — the computer showed me how to write sounds on paper. I had teachers all my life show me things but it went in one ear and out the other. It just didn't stick with me. [With the computer] I can go back any time I want. The computer doesn't get tired — it's always with me. It don't get up and walk away to help someone else.

The teacher who had worked with Edward the longest told

me that Edward wanted to figure out why reading was so

difficult for him. Edward thought that if he

participated in the study he might gather some new

insight about himself. He was the only student I tested

who wanted to know exactly what he "missed" after each

portion of the test. 92

LeoaaiLd I'm a loner. Let me put it this way. I'm just free-hearted. I would say I'm just a person that don't know nuthin. I know somethin but I just don't know what I should know. See, I'm just a lonesome person. I used to be pretty wild — wild as a jack-rabbit — drink a lot, fight a lot, in prison a lot. I did things to myself, I didn't do it to nobody else. I did things that I shouldn't have did. I never hurt nobody, just myself.

Leonard was the oldest participant in the study with the least amount of formal education. The interview and assessment took Leonard less time than anyone else in the study. I met with him four times for about forty minutes each time. Leonard had quick and concise answers for most of the interview questions, which we completed in two sessions. For the last two sessions, we did some extra reading and writing together.

Occasionally he talked about his recent spiritual experiences and told me that he went to a bible study group every Monday night.

Leonard told me that he had nine children by nine different women, and two grandchildren. His youngest child was currently attending kindergarten. The day I met Leonard, he informed me that his sixty-second birthday was the following Sunday and he spoke of the gifts he thought his children would surprise him with that weekend. 93

Although Leonard had lived in Ohio for the past twenty years, he had grown up in Georgia where he began

"playing hookey" in first grade and had left home for good at age thirteen. He expressed his regret at dropping out in first grade, as this dialogue reveals:

Darcy: What do you remember most about being in school?

Leonard: Only thing I remember is they put me in first grade and I try to get away from it. I was just playing hookey. If I know what I know today, I wouldn't have [played hookey].

Darcy: What was the last grade you finished in school?

Leonard: First grade — I left in first grade. I never went to school no more.

Darcy: How did you survive on your own so much?

Leonard: My parents couldn't keep up with me. I'd shoot in the house and get something to eat and shoot out before they could talk to me.

Darcy: What did your parents do about your not going to school?

Leonard: Kuthin. They let me go. Mom couldn't sit with me at school every day.

Darcy: Where did you go? What did you do when you weren't in school?

Leonard: I'd go to the movie show — trying to kill time til school got out and then I'd go home with the other kids. When they told me to go to school I'd just say "yes mam, yes mam."

The night I met Leonard was the first time he had

come back to school since first grade. When I sat down 94

to talk with Leonard he had just received his first

Laubach lesson from the teacher. Hot only did his

teacher tell me that he was a non-reader, Leonard told me he couldn't read and write. He had identified

himself to the admissions personnel the same way, so he

did not take any reading or writing entrance test. He

was working on the first lesson in Laubach Skill Book

Number 1. Initial observations of Leonard's writing

from my field notes read

He is painfully copying from the very first [Laubach] skill book "This is a bird. This is a hand." He carefully copies each word and practices each letter as it appears on the workbook page. His printing is slow and labored. It is an effort for him to even copy. Occasionally he prints the letters upside down, checks it, and realizes he has made a mistake. His writing is crammed into the far left hand side of the page, with pencil printing. Some of the letters look more drawn than written.

Leonard felt that if he could learn to work on a

car, he could certainly learn how to read and write.

When I asked him how long it took him to learn how to

work on a car, his response was three months. Â major

motivating factor in coming back to school was the idea

of being able at some point to read the bible. He

explained that

there are two things that made something out of me. Learning the bible and the fellow who started me on the bible. That's really why I wanted to read so fast, so bad, to where I can just set down and 95

enjoy myself with the bible. I talk about that all day — every day I think about that. The only thing I can really be worried about is that I can't read and write.

He made many references to the idea that trying was an important concept in learning and told me "all I need's a little help. I don't ask for a miracle, I just want to be able to read and write a little before I die." He expressed some concern about being too old to learn and during our third meeting he asked "Do this look bad, a sixty-two year old man coming to school? Do this look bad to you?" He had found out about the school from one of his children who had brought home a telephone number and name of a woman to call and she had helped him enroll.

Candy

The special classrooms had spelling words on the board — it was more like a playroom — we'd sing, take a nap, have fun. I didn't have to do anything because I couldn't, and they didn't make me do nothing. By the time I was old enough, it was too late to do anything. All my report cards had F 's. 1 never got any A s on my report cards [in regular classes]. I liked going to [special classes] because there wasn't anything I had to face. Then my report card had good grades — that made me feel good. I didn't have the pressures. I think reading groups are good. Things are better now than when I went to school. Back then the teachers just wanted to help kids who wanted to learn. I used to give up and get aggravated and mad. I couldn't comprehend what was going on. Mom would help me for three hours a night and she'd get aggravated with me. Mom said I wasn't paying attention. I'd say, "Mom, I can't help it, I can't 96

remember it." Teachers would say "She's got the ability. She could do it but she doesn't want to. I stayed by myself for that reason. I don't have very many friends. I don't want someone to get close to me because they might find out [that I can't read and write]. I can do a lot of things as far as surviving — I know how to do that.

A word Candy used frequently was "aggravated." She was aggravated by her home life, aggravated that she couldn't learn, and aggravated that she was in prison.

Although she had lived a few years of her adult life in another state. Candy was a thirty-six year native of Thompson County. Her youngest son, John, was attending the same elementary school Candy attended as a child. She dropped out of school in seventh grade because she was pregnant:

I had three kids before I was married then I got divorced when I was twenty-one. [John's] from a second marriage. Even though [his father and I] aren't officially married, we've been together for twelve years.

Candy's children were ages twenty-one, twenty, eighteen, and eight. While she completed her year's prison term.

Candy's eight year old son, John, was living with one of her married daughters who had several of her own children. Candy's seventy-eight year-old mother was unable to take in Candy's son because she lived in some retirement apartments that didn't allow children. 97

Candy had successfully owned and operated her own cab for four years but gave it up when the cab business got too competitive. She indicated that she had gone to other educational programs from time to time:

When I was driving cab, I went with this literacy program twice a week. I'd pick up magazines and newspapers to read. Then I had to drop out because of my kids. I really wasn't concentrating; I was worrying about my home front. There were just too many other demands, but the teacher I had was a retired elementary school teacher who was very nice.

Candy had been working on and off at a factory as a clothes sorter; the factory sorted donated clothes by material type and paid workers daily checks at minimum wage. Although Candy disliked the work and wages, she said she preferred it to total welfare help.

I saw Candy both in and out of prison. She had asked if I would help her and her youngest son with reading and writing when she got out of prison and I agreed that I would. We managed to meet nine times when

Candy was released from prison but Candy cancelled six other times we had arranged to meet due to family problems, medical problems, and housing and transportation problems. When Candy got out of prison she had no money and no car. She also told me that her family and friends had taken her furniture. No one picked her up the day she got out of prison; she took a 9 8

taxi to her mother's nearby apartment and spent the next six weeks there trying to find an apartment where she and her son could live. Her mother had no telephone and no transportation.

Robert

I was eighteen when I was in the eighth grade. They went ahead and kicked me out of school. I wanted to keep on going. I didn't care how old I was, as long as I could get my education, but they wouldn't let me go through.

This statement, from Robert's reading and writing history intake, illustrates my perception of an important aspect of his character: quiet determination.

Robert was a man of forty-five years with a slight, five-foot six-inch frame. Although he talked willingly to me, talking did not appear to be easy for him, as evidenced by his frequent long pauses as he answered my questions. One of the middle children in a family of twelve, he told of an upbringing filled with neglect, poverty, illness, and numerous beatings about the head from his father. Each time Robert talked with me, he wore an outdoor jacket buttoned all the way up to his neck and a dark-colored baseball cap that was never removed.

Despite a painful past, Robert spoke of a happy marriage, being a loving parent, and his two teen-aged 99

straight-A children who still lived at home. An Ohio native, Robert had worked hard to get where he was; he worked at an animal rendering plant for nine years and

an aluminum company for eight years, and had a series of

odd jobs.

In his quiet voice and southern Ohio dialect,

Robert answered my questions with great thoughtfulness

and dignity. He never indicated that he felt sorry for

himself or bitter toward his parents. Throughout his

life, education has had value and been a dream for

Robert. He was referred to JTPA programs because he

felt that he could not get the kind of job he wanted in

electronics unless he completed his education.

When asked about his reading and writing goals,

Robert mentioned several times that he wanted to get his

GED. The following dialogue reflects the value Robert

had for education:

Darcy: You told me one of your goals is to get your GED.

Robert: Yeah. It's what [the job counselor], he's the one that's got me on here, and they's going to put me on a job program. I told him then I don't want no job program because some of the stuff I couldn't do because of my reading, my writing. The best thing for me to do is go through that school [the GED program through JTPA]. Cause if you ain't got your schooling, you can't read nothing, they ain't nobody going to hire you. 1 0 0

Darcy: Do you think that's always been true?

Robert: Yep.

Darcy: Even back when you were 20, it was still hard to get a job if you couldn't read or write well?

Robert: Yep. Back then it was the same thing. Cause nowadays they ask you if you got your high school education. If you tell them no they just walk away from you. They won't even talk to you.

Robert expressed a love for reading, claiming the

Western for his favorite genre. From yard sales and other sources, he bought "books after books [he] sit[s] down and look[s] at" at home. The local newspaper was

Robert's second favorite reading material. At the time of the interviews, Robert had been attending GED classes at Custer for seven months where he felt that he had been making some big improvements. When asked to talk about what he was reading then, he indicated that the

[m]ost thing I read now is newspapers. Magazines, Enquirer. I read a lot of books on animals. Anything I get my hands on, I can read. It's so I can improve my reading. It's interesting reading some of the stories and knowing what you read. Where before I couldn't read at all, I didn't know what they were saying. That's all I could do is look at the pictures, and try to make out what they was doing all on this and that, because I couldn't read it. How I can read it and enjoy what I was reading, and know now what they're doing in the picture.

In field observations, I noted that seven months of

classes for two nights a week had made Robert feel 1 0 1

differently about his reading skills, as illustrated by the above statement. Yet in this same interview, he mentioned that he had never read to anyone else and

ended that statement with "I don't know how to read".

When he did read, however, he said that he kept “going

over it until I get the meaning and the understanding of

what I've read The main important thing is to know

what it means".

Writing was a different story. Although reading

was a meaning-making activity for Robert, writing was

driven by good penmanship and accurate spelling.

Statements about penmanship and spelling recurred

throughout our conversations:

I can't write very good but I can write. And my spelling's bad. My spelling is real bad. I never could spell very good. I probably could write if I could spell my words. That's the trouble I have. I can write a sentence, I can make my own sentence but writing it and spelling the words is what's got me puzzled.

Robert felt that he had made progress in classes in both

reading and writing, and so did his teacher. Her

measure of progress was based on what she observed

Robert doing in class and from the homework he turned

in, not from test scores. She also commented that

Robert "seemed a little different since the interview

and tests he took with you. I don't know, he just seems 1 0 2

to be walking a little taller and has better self esteem. "

Lee

You know, some of us need a little boost. For many years I couldn't read. I'm forty-seven years old. For many years I couldn't read anything and here you come along and move that block that was in the way of me of thinking of reading. And sometime I realize I don't think as sharp as I should. Many times I get overexcited or overexhausted, but that come from a whole lack of training, understanding, someone explaining.

Lee's early life, as she reported it, was very difficult. She told me that she was "born afflicted but

I growed out of it. The doctor told my mom I would be a slow learner." In first grade, Lee's twenty-eight year- old mother had been murdered by her father. When he was sent to prison, Lee was sent to live with relatives: a grandmother who did not want her and beat her frequently for crying, and an uncle who picked her up every day after school and raped her. She was sent to an institution for the feeble-minded in Kentucky where she stayed for nine years before running away. She indicated that she had never completed the first grade, even though she talked about attending classes in the institution. Lee was sixteen years old when she had her first daughter (one of two children). As Lee said about her early life "I can remember too many bad things." 103

In her mid-twenties, Lee wanted to join the military and be a cook. She told me that she was refused entry on the grounds that she was illiterate — a term she used herself. To protest this action, she wrote a letter to the White House (dictated to a friend who could write) and expressed how unfair she thought the decision. She was disappointed by the fact that she never got a response.

As an older woman, Lee had tried to get help in adult programs but remembered being told that she was

"too emotional too learn" and was "having too many flashbacks to be helped."

Lee freely admitted to other inmates that she could not read and write, and openly asked people for help; others took dictated letters from her, addressed envelopes home, and read mail and court documents to her. One of the counselors told me that other inmates sometimes called Lee "Miss" Lee or "Aunt" Lee. Lee obviously commanded respect from many inmates and prison personnel, yet during sessions with me she complained of others who teased her for being unable to read and write very well.

Lee talked often and proudly about her use of

"common sense" and belief in herself to solve problems. 1 0 4

....I've learned now in my inner self that you can be whatever you want to be. You don't have to be scared. All you have to do is trust in yourself, believe in yourself, and do it.

Over the past ten years, she has held jobs as a grounds

and house caretaker and in the food service industry,

although she told me that she was receiving disability

checks at the current time. She had a driver's license,

and liked to buy books for her two grandchildren. When

asked how she accomplished all this without being able

to read and write she responded

It's because 1 got common sense. People are always puzzled and ask me how 1 [pick out books and cards]. 1 go ask someone for help. 1 quietly tell them 1 can't read. 1 go to the lady and 1 tell her what 1 want and she helps me pick it out...... People ask me "[Lee] how did you get your driver's license?" Everyone else like you goes into one big room, you have headphones and they read the question to you and tell you what to do. You just use your common sense. 1 passed [the driver's test]. People ask me "[Lee] how do you know what it say?" Common sense stuff you see everyday like stop and yield and no turns.

Lee kept up with current events by watching TV and

talking with people. When we met she would frequently

ask if 1 had heard about some news event and admonish me

for not keeping up with current affairs if 1 had not

heard about the story. Lee dreamed of becoming an

evangelical minister and told me that she wanted "to be

able to read the bible and to speak." 1 0 5

She felt that she had to learn to read before learning to write. While her desire to learn to read was strong, learning to write was a different story.

When I asked her if she had any writing goals she said

"you know how I feel about that — it disturbs me. I can only concentrate on one thing at a time. I got no goals here."

Lee asked more questions about the study than any

of the other students. She wanted to know what I was doing with all the notes I was taking, what kind of a

college degree I was getting, how the educational process for getting a Ph.D. worked, and about the dissertation I was writing. She told me that someday

she was going to write a book about her life because it

had been so unique. She wanted to make sure that I

would give her a copy of my dissertation so she could

see what I wrote about her.

Donald

At work, all the men looks up to me because I try to help them. I talk to the owner for them. A lot of them has a good education. I guess my years of experience, dealing with people makes a lot of difference. I've had a lot of people comment on me; a schoolteacher that worked for me one summer, matter of fact two summers, he couldn't believe the education I had. He was surprised because what I could do, the way I talked...relate to people, he just couldn't believe it. 106

Although self-conscious and regretful about a school education that ended in sixth grade, Donald was proud of his achievements on the home front and in the work force. As a child, Donald attended a one-room schoolhouse with eleven other children in the hills of

Northern Kentucky. As Donald recalled his past school experience, how well he did in school each year seemed to depend on how much extra time the teachers spent helping him. Donald thought that success in learning how to read and write "depends on the teacher. Ninety per cent of it's the right teacher, starting a kid off, getting at the right point" and "if you had a problem,

[good teachers] would work with you until you got it solved — if she had to work ten or five minutes a day extra, to learn you how to do that, she would do it."

Donald remembered receiving all "A's" in third grade and counted that year as his best educationally.

In fourth and fifth grade he started having trouble, and by sixth grade he told me he "was lost — I eas worser off than when I started." He was from a poor family and felt that the students who had parents who were comparatively well off and involved at school received more attention from the teachers as the following quote indicates: 1 0 7

We was poor kids — it seemed like [school] was harder on us. I don't know, it might have been maybe my opinion, just been me. It's the way I feel about it. If they [teachers] had spent time with me and helped me with things instead of getting mad or frustrated from showing me over and over, I would have learned something.

The first time I met Donald, he had been coming to

ABE classes for about five weeks. I sat next to him while he wrote answers to comprehension questions from a

Laubach passage. He copied each question in even-sized script and as he wrote answers to that question, looked up words in the text when he was not sure how to spell them.

Donald worked as a tree surgeon and decided to come back to school in order to prepare for the state arbor's test. A job advancement to company salesman was promised if he passed the test and improved his reading and writing.

The job I have is what determined me to come to class. You probably heard of this test. It's an arbors test. Well, reading it I was lost. I had to get my wife to read most of it to me. So we got another one coming up, it's called the Ohio Certification test. And we're just starting on it. I have the same problems, but I got to do this on my own, you know. That's the reason why. I figure if I can come to school, learn how to read, I can do it on my own without any help. And another thing was, I got a good position I can move up to in the company, but I got to be able to read and write a lot of things now.

He depended on his wife and two boys to help him read 108

and write things that he felt were too difficult for him to do on his own. For instance, his wife helped him write reports at night about accidents that occurred on the job during the day.

Donald talked about coming back to school to learn how to read, yet he told me that he read as much as he could about trees because he loved them, and that he liked to "read books about things that happened in what

I call the olden days...true stories like pioneers, what they did when they celebrated Thanksgiving and stuff like that." Donald told me he also worked crossword puzzles but they were difficult for him; he frequently looked at the answers in order to complete the puzzle.

Both Donald and his teacher felt that Donald was making progress. The teacher told me that Donald was a hard worker who always showed up for class and Donald told me that she reminded him of his favorite teacher from the past because she took time to help him when he needed it. One of Donald's measures for progress was

that he felt his penmanship had improved greatly since

he had started the class.

Ruth

My husband looked at the [news]paper. He could look at the cartoons ...He'd look and see the wrecks and stuff like that. He tried to read it. He did pretty good for him, for what education he 109

had. [My family] all said, "Well, D— s just dumb" and I said "No he's not, he's just handicapped." When he was a kid, he had to get out and go to work. He was the oldest one. His brother went to the army where he was killed, he was killed in the war. [He] was D — s idol. He's the one that taught him how to be a mechanic. [D— ] can work on anything. He could take and tear it down and leave the parts and if nobody'd bother him, he could put that thing back together again. His brother showed him to put different things different places and that's where he would put them, then he would know where they went back in. That man could do anything and his nephew's just as good and he hasn't got an education either.

At the time of the first interview with Ruth, her husband had died four months earlier. Ruth talked about him, her ten-year old daughter, and other family members during many parts of the interviews. Relatives from the past and the present — young and old, living and deceased — were central to many of the conversations between Ruth and me. She talked longer than any other participant in the study. During one of our interview sessions, Ruth wanted to talk about some of the problems she was having with her daughter and asked me to turn off the tape recorder and not take any notes.

Ruth moved to an apartment in a different town so she could attend classes at Custer more regularly. Two and a half years of ABE classes had been a social and academic force in Ruth's life. Her goals were to get a

GED, be able to use a computer, and obtain a job where 110

she could help people. Ruth often talked about how beneficial a computer was to her learning and enjoyment of learning, and how much she liked the role of teacher and helper. Her current GED teacher felt that Ruth attended class mostly for social reasons, but Ruth talked about her own progress and showed me samples of her work, such as her daily journal and comprehension questions she had answered from stories in a workbook.

Ruth: [Going to ABE classes] has been a good experience for me. I started going over there to [another town]. I just wasn't getting anything out of it. I had to read in a book [but] I love computers. I can get more out of a story or spelling out of the computer. I been writing some stories out, off the computer. I can see that I've picked up my writing quite a bit. I can spell some words now where I couldn't spell them before.

Darcy: Is the computer one of the things that keeps you coming here?

Ruth: Yep. I pick up on the computer. I pick up on how to run them. I show other people in here when they first get in if [the teacher] is busy or the other teacher is busy. I'll try and help as much as I can to help them do that.

Ruth quit school in the tenth grade and had repeated fifth grade, ninth grade, and thought she might have repeated first grade. Ruth's memories of past schooling experiences revealed frustrations, although she felt that her daughter was having a better school experience than Ruth had as a child. Ill

It's different now than when I went to school... I was getting all D's and F's in everything — all but a couple of things. My dad told me, well, if you want to you can quit and go to work. Well, I just quit and went to work because I just got to the point where I couldn't do nothing. Every time I'd try to do something. I'd get D's and F's.

At one time, Ruth owned a set of the Laura Ingels

Wilder Little House series and many of the Nurse Ames books which she said she had read over and over again.

She bought a Childcraft Encyclopedia set for her daughter but explained that she often used it herself, either as bedtime reading to her daughter or for her own reference purposes. Although Ruth made it clear that she did read for pleasure and information, answers to questions about reading and writing goals ultimately resulted in responses that were "word" oriented.

Reading a novel, I can do that, but it's just that I don't understand some of the bigger words in some of these books. I look them up in the dictionary. ....All I want right now is to learn how to spell different things from the grocery store. I'm having a little bit of a problem trying to remember how to write like bleach. I can remember how to write my soap powders and stuff like that — I have trouble with my fabric softeners. Different things like that, that's longer words. ... My goal in writing is just to be able to spell some of the words out.

At age forty-four, Ruth felt that she was addressing and solving some of the problems encountered in her life through school, through counseling, and through family relationships. 112

PROCEDURES

The following sections detail sampling procedures, instruments used in the collection of data, the timeline that was established in order to collect the data, and how data analysis was accomplished.

S h w d I ing

For this study, purposeful sampling techniques were employed. The logic and power of purposeful sampling is that it allows researchers to study information-rich cases in depth (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982; Lincoln & Cuba,

1985; Patton, 1990). Elements of chain (snowball), criterion, and critical case sampling (Patton, 1990) were used to obtain participants.

For chain sampling, a researcher asks current participants to identify others who might be similar to that participant (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982). When I felt that a participant and I had established a special rapport, I asked if they knew of anyone else having problems with reading and writing that might let me interview or work with them. In one case, a student I was working with told me about two other people that would be good participants for this study. As a result of these two contacts, another student was located for partieipat ion. 113

Patton (1990) defined critical cases as those that make points quite dramatically and are particularly

important in the grand scheme of the study (p. 174).

The two students in the study who participated in both

Phase I (the interview and assessment phase) and Phase

II (the instructional phase) provided this function.

They were the students I learned the most about because

I had more contact with them than the other students in

the study. Their contributions to the study were dramatic in that these participants were first-time

inmates in prison, they had particularly difficult early

and current life struggles, they expressed a strong

desire to learn, and they spoke eloquently of themselves

and their experiences.

Patton (1990) defined the logic of criterion

sampling as studying all cases that meet some

“predetermined criterion of importance" (p. 176). The

criterion used to obtain participants was to ask

teachers and prison personnel to identify those

students/inmates who were at the lowest levels of

reading and writing based on whatever measures they had

currently been using to identify such students.

To obtain most of the participants for the study,

teachers in existing programs identified and initially 114

contacted students they knew for me. Two potential participants called me on the telephone, the rest I recontacted myself to explain the study. By these various sampling strategies, fourteen potential students were contacted. Out of this participant pool, seven students provided usable data for the study.

Instruments

Field Notes. A research log was maintained throughout the course of the study to record dates, events, and analytical notes of the progress of the research resulting in ninety-four handwritten pages of notes. The notes were used to provide historical information that participants and I had created together during the course of the study as formal data analysis began.

Observational field notes were also taken during every interaction with students, whether or not I was allowed to tape record. Two years of Reading Recovery

training enhanced my ability me to take detailed observational notes while both interviewing, assessing, and teaching. When no audio tape of the interactions with the students was allowed, the field notes from that

interaction were immediately transcribed and elaborated

on a computer disc. This resulted in 251 pages of 115

single-spaced typed notes, not counting the tape transcriptions.

Literacy Interviews. All students participated in individual interviews that focused on their literacy histories (both school and personal), current literacy goals, and current literacy attitudes and beliefs. The literacy interview questions were designed based on existing literacy interviews previously developed by

Burke, 1980; Johnston, 1985; Snith-Burke, Parker, &

Deegan, 1987. Most literacy interviews, however, focus on reading. Every question I asked students about reading, I also asked about writing. A copy of the literacy interview is included in Appendix A.

Although the questions were pre-structured, they were open-ended. If a student had difficulty answering a question or if s/he said something of particular interest, it was further probed. I asked students for access to any of their testing records at the institutions they currently attended. All of the students gave me permission to do this. From these records I obtained birth dates and access to any reading and writing tests (with scores) that they had taken recently. 116

Literacy Assessments. Students were given a battery of six different informal reading and writing assessments based on Clay's (1979, 1986) assessments for emergent readers and writers that I refer to as a

Literacy Survey. The assessments in the Literacy Survey included a Letter Identification Test (LIT), a Word Test

(WT), a Concepts About Print Test (CAP), a Writing

Vocabulary Test (WV), a Dictation Test (DT), and a Text

Level Reading Test (TLR). Samples of the tests that made up the Literacy Survey are in Appendix B.

While students completed the writing and reading tasks, I recorded their behaviors (e.g. attempts at solving problems, ease or difficulty with the tasks, comments they made during the tasks). These tests were informal (but not unstructured) and as such, allowed for interaction between teacher and student (e.g. encouragement on the part of the teacher such as “you knew all of those didn't you", or support from the teacher such as "say that word slowly and write what you hear" or "can you think of some words that you might write at work"). The testing situation also gave me an opportunity to observe, record, and help manage the student's response to the task at hand; although I had developed some rapport with each of the students before 117

testing them, some appeared nervous during certain portions of the test. When this occurred I became more supportive and kept the task going. In only one case did I have to stop testing because of a student's emotional response but we were able to resume testing minutes later after resolving the problem together.

The tests are explained below in the order in which they were given to the students. The reason they were ordered this way was not only because that was one of both habit and purpose; 1 had learned to assess children in this order, but 1 also felt that the order provided an appropriate balance between reading and writing tasks (two reading tasks, one "read to", two writing tasks, one reading task). 1 made the assumption that most adults would know something about the alphabet so that it might be reassuring to see the LIT first. 1 viewed the CAP test as one of the most supportive tasks because 1 did the reading and could control the pace and that occurred in the middle of the testing. The TLR which 1 originally perceived as being potentially the most difficult for students 1 kept as the last part of the test. 1 banked on the idea that even those who considered themselves non-readers would be able to read some of the materials that 1 selected for reading 118

because I could support their reading (e.g. each book or story was introduced to the student to set a framework for reading it and students were simply told any word that gave them difficulty for longer than an in-my-head count of five seconds). Each part of the test was used to develop further rapport and build confidence in the students so they could perform as well as possible on each reading and writing task. The following paragraphs give more specific information about each of the tasks.

Letter Identification IssLfc.- This test consisted of fifty-four letters — the entire upper and lower case alphabet plus alternative forms of the letters "a" and

"g." The letters were randomly arranged first in upper case, then in lower case. Students were asked what they called those (I pointed generally to the letters), asked which ones they knew, then asked to read them from left to right. If the student had difficulty I pointed to each letter to keep the task going or provided a long piece of paper to cover the subsequent row of letters.

From this assessment teachers can learn the preferred modes of the student's letter identification, and what letters are known, unknown, or confused. This assessment was used to find out what letters the student knew in order to integrate that knowledge into the 119

student's instructional program, not because students must be able to identify all the letters in order to read (Pinnell, DeFord, and Lyons, p. 8, 1988; Clay, pp.

23-24, 1988). Few existing literacy tests for adults assess letter knowledge and those that do generally ask students to "recite" not "read" the alphabet.

Word Test. Students were also given a word test, which was made up of seventy-six high frequency words.

This list was developed from the Literacy Volunteers of

America's (LVA) list of 100 highest frequency words in the English language and Rush, Hoe & Storlie's (1986) of highest frequency words for ten occupations (p. 65).

The words I selected appeared in both sources and were randomly ordered in three typed (print) columns in the print type and size in which this dissertation is printed.

Many adult literacy tests continue to use word lists to assess reading (as a component of a comprehensive test or as sole determiner of reading level). Usually word lists are ordered from easy to difficult and test to the adult's frustration level in order to obtain a grade level score. In this case, however, each student was asked to read part or all of

this list, depending upon his or her current ability to 120

do so. Students were asked to read a practice word at the top of the page. If the practice word was unknown,

I told then the word and had then read it back to ne. I exposed each of the three lists one at a tine to the student. Students who had any difficulty reading the list were asked to look for some of known words and read those. While this test did not provide any infornation about the student's ability to read extended text, it did reflect the student's current body of knowledge about frequently occurring words (Clay, p. 31, 1988;

Pinnell, DeFord & Lyons, p. 8, 1988). This test not only revealed a corpus of known words but other aspects of how the student night be responding and reacting to print (e.g. Did the student guess at the words? Were guesses closely related to the word as in reading

"brown" for "down?" Did the students read the lists with great deliberation or quickly?)

Concepts About Print. The CAP test was designed by

Clay to reveal what conventions of printed language students controlled and understood (e.g. the difference between a word or letter, in which direction print is read, what punctuation tells the reader or writer).

Student and teacher interacted while the teacher read a specially constructed book for the purpose of assessing 121

a student's knowledge of print and how it works (Clay's

Sand or Stones. 1988). No other test for adult literacy uses a such a component for new literates, although some other adult tests ask students to rewrite sentences that have purposeful errors in them using the correct conventions (e.g. punctuation, capitalization, grammar) or to pick the correctly spelled word out of a list of incorrectly spelled words.

Writing Vocabulary Test. During the writing vocabulary test, students were asked to write as many words as they could in a ten-minute period. If the student stopped writing or commented that she or he could not think of or did not know any more words, I prompted with questions like "Can you think of any other family or friend's names you can write?" or "Are there any words you write while you're on the job (or go shopping)?" No adult literacy test assesses writing or spelling by asking students to write the words they know how to write. A usual measure for adult writing assessment is an orally dictated word spelling test or a written prompt that is designed to generate a student essay. Many adult new literates may be able to write only a small lexicon of words or phrases and can not perform on spelling tests or essays with any high degree 122

of success.

The WV test allowed a teacher to observe how a student forms letters and words, even if it is a small personal lexicon; and provided, for instructional purposes, a bank of words that the student knew how to write and insights into the student's inner processing of print production from observing both accurate and inaccurate attempts.

Dictation Test. During this test, the student was asked to write a simple sentence that I dictated. Two different sentences of varying length and difficulty were used. The main purpose of this test was to observe how a student analyzed a word s/he said or heard into a sound to letter correspondences (Clay, p. 38, 1986).

The students were told that I was going to read a short story to them and then I would ask then to write it down. I emphasized that it was not a memory test and that I would repeat each word slowly so they could write it down. If the student told me that s/he could not write a particular word, I asked them to say the word slowly and write what they thought they heard or I said the word slowly for them. I offered various comments or statements, even if the attempt was incorrect, to keep the task moving at as brisk a pace as possible (e.g. "I 123

like the way you wrote that so quickly" or "You knew a lot about writing that word, let's just skip it and go on to the next one.") The emphasis was always on writing the sentence down and writing what the student thought s/he heard, not on accuracy. As with the WV test, no test was found during the literature review of existing tests for adult new literates that measured a student's ability to make sound to letter correspondences in this way. The usual way sound to letter correspondence knowledge is assessed is to have students read a list of "nonsense" words or to attempt to decode words of great difficulty.

Secondary purposes for using this assessment included gathering information on how students handled writing a piece of connected test, their preferred mode of writing, what letter forms were controlled, and what other words the student could spell accurately.

Text Level Reading Test. The last test was based on the student's oral reading of extended text. I took a "running record" of the student's reading from an extended piece of text, e.g. a story or a book with a plot. A running record is a specially annotated system used to record a student's reading behavior. Records can then be analyzed both qualitatively and 124

quantitatively for how the student was using cueing systmes in reading, that is, how the student was processing meaning, language structure, and visual information from the text. Text used included some of the Scott, Foresman and Company (1979) testing booklets from the United States Reading Recovery testing packets, passages from adult novels, and adapted stories for adults. Like other tests that use connected text to assess adult readers, each "story" had a grade level correspondence that was previously determined by the book or story publisher. The passages I used or adapted were novels published by Hew Readers Press (Frommer,

1990; Keller, 1979) and Educational Developmental

Laboratories (Bethancourt, 1990; Colby, 1990), who had already determined a grade level based on various readability formulas. There were some important differences in the administration of reading passages in this test compared to most adult literacy tests that assess reading knowledge and comprehension using connected text: students were introduced to each passage or story before attempting to read it; students were encouraged to look at any pictures, thumb through the text, and read silently before reading the text orally; and the student and I informally talked about the story 125

after it was read. Typically, reading passages in adult literacy assessments are read silently, with multiple choice comprehension questions that follow.

Tests in the Literacy Survey were interactive; that is, they were individually administered and allowed the tester to prompt and support the student during the testing situation to allow for the student's maximum performance. The purpose of the tests was to find out what written aspects of language (through actual reading and writing tasks) each student could already control.

Responses to Tests

Students were then asked to respond to taking the tests in an structured set of open-ended questions. The response questions were designed to reveal how appropriate the adults judged the reading and writing tasks to be for them, and how they felt these tests might be adapted for use with other adults. Copies of all the interview questions used are in Appendix A. Audia lapss. Eighteen ninety minute audiotapes were collected throughout the study. Audio tapes were obtained when students gave me permission to tape their responses.

All but two students allowed me to audio tape them. No audio tapes, however, were obtained in the prison 126

because the warden would not allow it, even though I had permission from those participants. When I visited those same students in their home, some of the sessions, when appropriate, were audio taped.

Eight of the tapes were fully transcribed as they contained full interview and assessment data from three of the students. Pertinent segments and portions of the other ten tapes were transcribed. These ten tapes contain records of informal conversations as well as literacy lessons held with the two students after their release from prison. One of the tapes was of one of the students who initially did not want to be recorded but it is nearly unusable because the student's voice did not record well in the echoey room.

Permissions

Each student received a verbal explanation of the study and were read human subjects permission slips which they and I signed. The permissions were adapted from The Ohio State University's human subjects forms.

Each student was given a copy of the slip that they and

I had signed. A copy can be reviewed in Appendix C.

TIME LIMB

The assessments, interviews, and tutoring were completed over a four month period, from September 1990 127

through December 1990. Preliminary and recruiting activities began in August 1990 and continued throughout the study as new developments occurred. Follow-up continued through May of 1991 and included collecting other test scores and further clarification of notes and continuing contact with several of the students.

In all, seventy-nine site visits were made which broke down in the following ways:

1. Recruiting visits to various sites = 9

2. Assessment/Interview visits with students = 27

3. Instructional interactions with students = 43

DATA ANALYSIS

In an interpretive study, data analysis must be continuous and start immediately with the collection of data in the field. I used the research log not only as a register for occurrences in the field but to ask myself questions that initially helped guide and frame data collection. Observational lesson plans were reviewed to assist in planning for future instruction.

Notes, lesson plans, and audio tapes were scanned during data collection to search for early patterns. For instance, students' resistance to writing was revealed early. Field notes and transcriptions of audio tapes 128

were sorted and coded after official data collection stopped. Data from the Literacy Interviews were sorted in two ways: responses were aggregated by question, then re-aggregated by themes that emerged through the sorting and coding process. Data from the Literacy Survey was aggregated by chart and interpreted.

Data from the lessons was analyzed in chronological order and shifts in reading and writing were recorded.

Books that were read in lessons were charted as were the messages that were produced in the writing portions of the lessons. Selected running records were analyzed for shifts in reading.

SUMMARY

The interpretive approach as a participant observer

to the study of both assessment and instruction of adult beginning readers and writers required the use of multiple measurements and flexibility in the collection

of data. Chapter Four presents the findings organized

around the important themes that emerged during the

study and the assessment results. CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

This chapter uses the data to discuss the participants' reading and writing histories, their reading and writing goals and their reading and writing beliefs. Both formal and informal test results are presented as well as students' specific responses to literacy tests. The instructional phase of the study is also presented.

REVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY

Data analysis occurred in four overlapping stages.

As the data was collected during the first stage, analytic notes were taken that guided the strategical and tactical thinking about the how the analysis might be framed. As each student participated in the interviews and assessments during the second stage, field notes were elaborated and typed on a computer disk. When all the interviews and assessments were complete, responses were aggregated by question and task, then reveiwed for patterns and themes.

During the third stage of data analysis, student responses to the interview were disaggregated, then reduced, sorted, and color-coded by themes that emerged

-129- 130

as the sorting occurred. Four general category clusters emerged during this sorting process of 450 responses.

They included the students':

1. Perceived barriers to literacy learning.

2. Perceived bridges to literacy learning.

3. Perceived benefits of literacy learning.

4. Miscellaneous.

With the exception of the miscellaneous category, these categories were further analyzed into more specialized themes which are clarified in this chapter.

The fourth stage of analysis centers on the instructional activities that occurred during interactions with two of the students who participated in individual tutoring with me.

The patterns and themes from the standard aggregation of the Literacy Interview and Literacy

Survey is presented first, followed the reaggregagted data from the Literacy Interview alone. The last section documents the instructional progress of the two students who received individual tutoring.

READING AND WRITING HISTORIES

Part of sound literacy instruction is developing a rapport with students. Johnston (1985), Metz (1990),

Padak, Davidson & Padak (1990) and Thistlewaite (1990) 131

recommend an intake device that allows teachers to know more about their students. Knowledge of an adult student's prior educational life and literacy beliefs offers another clue for designing successful instruction for adult students.

Like the less successful elementary students in

Wells (1986) landmark study of how early home learning experiences affect children's success in the school classroom, few of the adult students in this study had been read to as children and all claimed that whatever advances or knowledge of reading they felt they had acquired had been accomplished on their own. Robert's response to the question "who helped you learn how to read" was representative of many of the students: "I mostly did myself, because in school, they never helped me in school. They just passed me on."

Two students — Candy and Donald — recalled their mothers reading to them, but not very often; Candy remembered her divorced mother always being at work when

Candy was small and Donald said access to books was minimal due to his family's country location and their poverty.

Responses to questions about writing invariably centered on spelling and penmanship. Frequently 132

students interpreted writing to mean cursive writing (as opposed to printing), and indicated, as they did for reading, that they had mostly learned to write by themselves. This learning occurred in the context of the classroom. None of the students mentioned writing activities from home as part of their histories. Both

Edward and Ruth brought up how the use of a computer in their current schooling was helping them with writing.

As Edward stated "I didn't really know how to write at all. The computer showed me how to write sounds on paper."

Students as. Parents

All of the students in the study were parents of children. The children's ages ranged from ages 18 months to 30 years old. All of the students with one exception, believed that children should learn to read and write early, even before formal schooling began.

Two of the parents had experienced Headstart programs with their children. All of the students made it known that their children were not like them when it came to reading and writing, and that their children were not going to grow up as they did (with reading and writing problems). The students' children and grandchildren were popular topics during interviews. Lee brought 133

letters for me to read that her grandchildren had sent her, as proof of their literacy ability. Candy explained that all of her four children could read and write better than she could and told of a literacy experience she had observed when John, her eight year old son, had visited her in prison:

The last time [John] was here, he was reading a book to me. He didn't know a word and he sounded it out all by himself. I'll never forget how he figured out that word. He's been learning all by himself. I think kids should learn to read and write young — maybe [when] they're 4 or 5 years old. I taught John how to write his name, I got him into Headstart. I wished they had had something like that for me.

All students (except for one in the study) had either attempted to read to their children or made sure their spouse had read to their children. A dialogue with Donald revealed the frustration of trying to read out loud to his children:

Darcy: Have you ever read to anyone else?

Donald: Yeah.

Darcy: Who?

Donald: I read to my kids — little story books.

Darcy: What are some of the things you remember about reading to them?

Donald: It was hard. A lot of things I'd be a- reading, come to a word you didn't know you'd have to skip over it. Kind of makes you feel bad when you can't read it all out to your kids when they're small. 134

Other students told of similar experiences when reading to their children. Lee relayed to me that she simply told a story to her children at bedtime based on a book's pictures, but she never felt that was really reading.

Literacy Experiences Remembered

Four of the students recollected observing literacy activities at home. Those activities revolved around homely aspects of literacy; parents or siblings read or wrote letters, did homework, left notes on the refrigerator, paid bills, read or looked at the newspapers. Three of the students could not remember

observing anyone reading or writing anything at home.

Memories of school were both positive and negative.

Students in the study ranged in K-12 school attendance

from less than a year to twelve years, although no one

had received a high school diploma. Two of the students dropped out in high school but had repeated several

grades. Those who attended school longer than a year

discussed certain grade years or subjects in which they

felt they had done well. Five of the students recalled

special teachers from their past, frequently by name.

In this dialogue Donald expressed some of his memories

of school: 135

Darcy: What do you most remember about being in school?

Donald: What do I most remember? OK. Third grade was my best year, my best teacher. That was my best teacher — she worked with us. That was the only year I made straight A's in school. She would have been my 4th grade teacher. Even if my 4th grade teacher would have been like her, I would have still been making straight A's.

Darcy: What did this teacher do that was so different for you?

Donald: The third grade teacher? She spent her time with you. If you had a problem she would work with you until you got it solved. If she had to work ten or five minutes a day extra, to learn you how to do that, she would do it, until she got it worked out for you. The fourth grade teacher was just the opposite. If you didn't learn it as she went along, she wasn't going to spend her time.

Three of the students recalled missing a lot of school;

Leonard and Edward talked of frequently "playing hookey" and Candy of being ill so much in first grade. She put

it this way:

Starting to school, I had a lot of sickness — whooping cough. I missed a lot of school. In first grade, I remember starting to read and write and spell. I never made good grades except in special [ed] classes), but that wasn't really learning.

I met Candy's mother. Rose, when I visited Candy at

home. Rose confirmed that Candy had missed a lot of

school due to illness but hinted at other reasons which

she never divulged. A job on the swing shift at a

hospital made it difficult for her to get up and help 136

Candy get ready for school.

Summary of Reading and Writing Histories

All of the students in this study had dropped out of school. School was generally not a satisfactory experience for the students. Litanies of special classes, being ignored and passed along in school were expressed. The students indicated they had had limited

interactions with books and writing at home and at school. Past remembered experiences generally focused on the functional aspects of literacy (e.g. observing family members reading the newspaper or writing

letters). Although there was a range of remembered reading and writing activities in the home and school, the range was from none to some.

READING AND WRITING GOALS

Adults with literacy difficulties seek reading and writing help for a variety of reasons. Two of the students were motivated by the idea of being able to

read the bible. Five of the students came to classes because they wanted to get a GED and dreamed of

increasing their employment opportunities. When asked

if he thought his life would be different if he could

read and write better, Edward stated

I'd have a better job. It's holding me back from getting a better paying job. Same thing for 137

writing — a lot of desk jobs you have to sit down and write — you have to take down people's orders. One job I'm actually trying to get with [a freight company] — you have to actually do reading and writing. [To get this job] I'd have to get a chauffeur's license and take a test.

Those students who currently held jobs had what one referred to as "cheat sheets" that they referenced when making or receiving work orders. Donald's boss had filled out a sample work order form that Donald used when he wrote out estimates for customers. Edward addressed his orders from a client list written on a blackboard. At home, Edward had sample checks he referred to in order to pay monthly bills. Ruth had generated handwritten lists of common grocery store items, and used them to form new weekly and monthly shopping lists of the items she needed.

Even though all the students spoke of successes they had experienced in other parts of their lives, they demonstrated that they believed higher literacy skills would enable some greater meaning in their lives. Lee explained that not being able to read and write made her life less private, for she was always having to ask someone to read her mail. She expressed her feelings this way: "I would be more secure — I'd feel better about myself completely. I'd have more privacy. I'd be more independent." 138

Leonard, the student who demonstrated the least amount of literacy knowledge of the students in the study, felt that just being able to read and write would generically make life better, as evidenced in the

following dialogue.

Darcy: What do you think might be different in your life if you could read better?

Leonard: Well, I think {long pause} I could read things like stop signs and things like that. I could read the signs that say walk and don't walk.

Darcy: How about writing? Would anything be different in your life if you could write better?

Leonard: If I could write I think my life would be a happy life.

Darcy: What do you mean?

Leonard: Because I know something — cuz I could read and write.

Even though every question that was asked about

reading, was also asked about writing, the students

spent far less time talking about writing and often

commented that they really wanted help in learning to

read. Writing goals continued to center around good

penmanship, spelling, and being able to write someone a

letter. Donald (who already wrote very neatly and

carefully) stated that "If I had a pretty hand, I would

write more for it to be better." The students were

afraid that their writing didn't look right or good and 139

felt that it was a prerequisite for success on the job and in school.

Letter Writing

The value of sending and receiving letters was high for students, especially in prison. Lee brought

letters from her family and the courts for me to read that she had received. Candy recopied a letter for me

that she had written to her son and the first time we worked together on the computer, she typed a brief

letter to a friend. Candy explained that

I'd like to write a real letter. A lot of people I know say "write me a letter." The nurse I told you about wrote me a letter but I'm too ashamed to write her back. I want to express myself on this piece of paper {points to a sheet of paper lying on the table} but I think more than I can write. It's all up here but I can't get it all down because I don't know how to spell. I have it all up here {points to her head} and I want to put it down and I can't. ... People like us miss so much. Writing ImRCQMament The students were aware that to improve their

writing they needed to actually do much more of it but

the means of accomplishing that resulted in two

different kinds of answers: three of the students said

they did not know how someone could help them become

better writers and three others said they should copy

something someone else wrote. That could include

spelling words or a story. Edward, who had attended ABE 140

classes for a longer period of time than anyone in the

study said that a teacher should

set down and help me write. You should read a story and [the teacher should] make sure I get the meaning of the story. Then you write an essay or story about the story you read. After you get it done, the teacher reads with you to make sure you got [the spelling] right. You could copy the story but then you wouldn't do it yourself. It's got to come off the top of your head because that's how it is in real life. You can't carry a dictionary with you all the time.

Yet, all of the students who did write used copying as a

coping strategy in their work or home life.

The students were currently using writing in a

variety of different ways. Edward talked of writing

songs. Ruth, Robert, Donald and Leonard showed me

workbook pages they had filled out. Donald worked

crossword puzzles (although he told me he looked

frequently at the answer key for the word spellings).

Lee wrote me three letters over a two month period and

told me they were the first letters she had ever written

by herself. Candy showed me letters she had written to

her son from prison. Candy and Lee both shared resumes

with me that they had worked on in prerelease classes.

Reading Improvement

The students spent less time talking about

their writing goals compared to their reading goals.

Their goals for writing tended to be more concrete and 141

functional than their goals for reading. Only one student, Edward, spoke of being able to read his bills better. The rest of the students stated that they just wanted to be able to read anything they chose to read whether it was a newspaper or a book picked up at the library. The students frequently talked about not being able to read the bigger words in reading material they picked up and expressed that this was bothersome and frustrating. Donald's comment exemplifies this feeling:

I would like to be able to go check out a book out of the library and be able to set down and read the whole book and then get the meaning out of it. I felt like, when I was reading, when I started missing words I was losing part of the story. I think if you can't read the whole book, every word in it, then you're not getting nothing out of it. I know that's been my problem.

Although most of the students believed that reading was supposed to be meaningful and pleasurable, they were often stuck at the word level of decoding. Ruth often told of reading to her fourth grade daughter and revealed her strategy for resolving problems with words she didn't know:

Well, I'd like to learn how to read the bigger words — some of the words in the newspapers and some of the words in these [work]books and stuff. Like poetry. Some of the words in this poetry book [I'm reading to my daughter] I don't know. I just skip over them part of the time. I try to make up something to rhyme with what I'm saying for her, because I don't know the word so I just try to work something in that would {starts to laugh} go with 142

what the poem is saying.

All of the students expressed that they loved to read, even the newest literates.

Attempts Tp. Reach Literacy Goals

Three students said they had no idea how to reach any of their reading goals. The others felt that if they could come to school more often where they could read more and study harder they would improve their reading abilities. All of them felt that they were receiving appropriate help from their various teachers in their current educational setting. One of the major complaints from the students who had attended school as children for longer than five years was that teachers had not paid enough attention to them in class and had

"passed them on" from grade to grade or class to class.

The current teachers were viewed as filling the students perceived needs for patient and individual help.

Students were looking for other sources of reading help on an ongoing basis. I became aware of this type of search when Candy and Lee both asked me to help them find other places and people to continue their literacy work when I could no longer work with them.

Four other students (one who could not participate in the study but who borrowed books from my small adult 143

lending library) told me about radio and television advertisements for Hooked on Phonics (a controversial reading program that purports to teach phonics to music). All four of these students expressed an interest in purchasing this program. Lee asked me to call about it for her (which I did) and one of the students at an ABE site actually ordered the $149.00 program but cancelled the order based on her ABE teacher's advice.

Current Re.ading and.Writing Habi t s

What students were currently reading and writing as well as what they liked to read and write are compared on Table 2. The first column shows what the students read or looked at and the second column shows what they wrote.

The students were reading a variety of materials during the time I talked with them. Lee chided me for asking the question "What do you read now?" and told me to "change it to 'what do you look at' if you want to get people to answer that one." Although the students' levels of reading and writing varied considerably in the study, all of them "looked at" or read books. The students all associated reading with the idea of reading a book. The kind of books they mentioned included many 144

TABLE 2

CURRENT READING AND WRITING HABITS

What They Read or What They Wrote Looked At (# students (# of students making reference) making reference)

Wall Signs (2) Songs (1)

Billboards (2) Checks (1)

Cereal boxes (1) Daily Journal (1)

Books (7) Letters (4)

Magazines (3) Fill in workbooks (2)

Letters (1) Nothing (1)

Directions/Instructions (1) Grocery list (1)

Bible (3) Work orders and reports (2) Newspapers (2) Applications (1)

Stories (1)

Crossword puzzles (1) 145

genres: children's books, poetry. Westerns, informational stories and biographies, the bible, dictionaries, and romances. Three of the students in the study alluded to title reading as assisting with book selection; that is, one of the criteria for picking a book was if the book's title could be read. One of the students who didn't have the time to participate in my study but who borrowed books from me said about the process of selecting books that it was

easy when you can read the title. The title tells you mostly about the story. I won't read [the book] if I can't read the title. If you can't read the beginning of it, there's no use in looking at it.

Other students spoke of using this same selection method when choosing books to read.

Some of the students who had been receiving formal literacy instruction talked about how they were more aware of the print in their environments. Lee told me that when she watched TV she had started to try to read what the ads that used print said, and during an early

instructional session she read my initials on the bag I brought in every day and told me she was sure that the

"D" on the bag stood for my name, Darcy. Edward and

Ruth both spent time looking at billboards, food

ingredients, and wall signs and tried to read them 146

whenever possible. An interchange between Edward and me demonstrates a conscious effort on his part to make use of his environment for reading purposes:

Darcy: What do you read now?

Edward: ...I try to read what's on the walls.

Darcy: How long have you been doing that?

Edward: A few years — I spell out a word first and then I read it. I read some billboards over and over. [I read] cereal boxes — ingredients to make sure it's good for you.

Also shown on Table 2 is what students were currently writing. While the writing habits list was more diverse than the reading habits list, the students made more references to reading materials than writing.

Reading seemed to be a more familiar activity than writing. Mainly, writing activities surrounded the functional aspects of surviving at home (e.g. Ruth's grocery lists, maintaining personal relationships through letters), in school (e.g. completing workbook pages), or on the job (e.g. Edward's and Donald's work reports and orders). Letters to friends and family was the most frequently listed writing activity which was in keeping with the frequency with which the students spoke of their social and familial relationships.

All of the students in this study saw a value in rereading something they had read before. They saw it 147

as a problem solving activity not only for helping them remember what they had read but for developing a higher level of understanding about that reading topic. Again, individual words were perceived as problem. Robert and

I discussed the value of rereading:

Darcy: After you've read something once is there any value for you in reading it over again?

Robert: Yeah.

Darcy: Why is that?

Robert: I keep going over it until I get the meaning and the understandings of what I have read. If you don't get the meaning or the story don't make sense, what you read — I go over it and I get more out of my reading that way too. Lot of people read a book and just leave it down (unintelligible) I always go back over.

Darcy: If you've read something that's pretty easy for you do you read it again?

Robert: Yeah. If some of the words in it I can't understand or make out, I keep going over it til they — I can understand them.

Darcy: Do you think you can understand something without getting all the words? Robert: Sometimes, most times through the picture, you can get the idea of what the story's all about.

Darcy: You told me when you go to garage sales that you buy paperbacks most of the time. They don't have pictures, do they?

Robert: No, not the paperbacks — most of them d o n 't .

Darcy: But you read them.

Robert: Yeah. 148

Darcy: Then what do you do if you can't get all the words? Are those the ones you read a couple of times or read once and go that was fun?

Robert: Yeah, I go over them too. Cause I don't know — the big words I ask my son what they say. Sometimes he reads it to me and I go over it. I get more out of the book then. If a guy can't read, and he don't know all those big words and stuff like that, he don't know the meaning of the book. The main important thing is to know what it means — what you read, that's the main important thing.

Although dropout rates from typical adult ABE programs are higher than 70% (Harmon, 1987) the students

in this study believed that going to school and working hard were keys to attaining their goals. Like Lee they

felt that if they would “study harder, pay more attention and be willing to learn and do" that they

could improve or develop their reading and writing. Sumnagx of. Rs.ad.ing. and. y.r-i.t.ing fioala. All of the students in this study wanted to be able

to read and write better. They believed that higher

literacy skills would bring more independence and

happiness to their lives. More time was spent discussing reading goals than goals for writing; writing

goals were always secondary or non-existent. Being able

to write a letter was frequently viewed as the ultimate

writing activity but writing goals were always

predicated on accuracy and perfection — in penmanship. 149

spelling, and grammar.

The students read a wide range of materials and expressed a high regard for books; some understood that reading was supposed to be a meaningful experience but all were often consumed by the idea that every word must be read accurately. The students tended to focus on accuracy and perfection in both reading and writing.

LITERACY SURVEY TEST RESULTS

The results of the six informal tests that were part of the Literacy Survey the students took in this study are displayed on Table 3. Each student took all six of the tests which included a Letter Identification

Test (LIT), a Word Test (WT), a Concepts About Print

(CAP) test, a Dictation test (DIC), a Writing Vocabulary test (WV), and Text Level Reading (TLR). Students demonstrated a range of scores on the Literacy Survey.

The range of scores and the mean scores are displayed in

Table 6.

Letter Identification l e s t Results.

The LIT scores revealed a mean score of 47.8 out of

a possible 54. The lowest score was 20 and the highest

score was 54. These scores indicated that most of the

subjects had a high knowledge of the alphabet. All but

one of the students identified the page of letters as 150

TABLE 3

LITERACY SURVEY RESULTS

Student LIT *T CAP WV Die TLR Name/ (si Age acc)*

Edward 54 69/78 23 50/58 57/67 #Gr.4 @ 93% age 23 8/18

Leonard 20 0/20 8 3/4 4/37 Preprimer age 61 0/13 (Level 1 @ 80%)

Candy 54 57/80 22 47/51 57/64 Gr.7 @ 93% age 36 11/18

Robert 53 73/78 19 27/37 54/60 Gr.6 @ 92% age 46 9/18

Lee 49 9/78 17 14/25 17/37 Readiness age 47 3/13 @ 96% (Level 1)

Donald 52 73/76 21 57/60 60/87 Gr.4 @ 96% age 41 11/18

Ruth 53 76/78 23 42/46 61/67 Gr.4 @ 90% age 44 16/18

* sX means sound to letter analysis score. acc means accuracy score.

# Edward never tested to the frustration level. 151

the alphabet or the "abc's" and identified the letters by their letter names. tford Test Results

The #T contained 78 high frequency English words randomly assigned into three columns. The print was the same size as the print in this text. Students were shown a trial word, then asked to read words that they knew in the first column. If this task appeared to be easy for them, I asked them to attempt the other two columns. If the task was extremely difficult for any student, s/he was asked to read just from the first column. All but one of the students attempted all three columns. The lowest score for this test was a 0 out of a possible 20 and the highest was 76 out of a possible

78. The mean score was 51.

Concepts About Print Test Results

The CAP test was given to students to discover what they knew about the printed conventions of the English language. Stones. the CAP test book developed by Clay, revealed a low score of 8 and a high score of 23 out of a possible 24, resulting in a mean score of 18. Table 4 on page 154 shows the items that all students in this study knew and Table 5 on page 155 shows the variant responses students made. 152

Every student in the study knew where the front of the book was located, the directionality conventions of printed English, and could identify a letter.

Only one student knew the meaning of quotation marks, and three, the meaning of a comma. Five students did not notice a change in the word order of a sentence, and four did not notice a change in the letter order of a word.

Writing Vocabulary T.es.t Results

The WV test was used to discover what words the student could write and read. This ten minute exercise provided further evidence of students' current familiarity with the act and conventions of writing, and revealed individual preferences for print or script, preferences for use of upper or lower case letters, and ease or difficulty with letter formation. Only one student wrote in script, the rest printed the words they knew. Three students, however, asked if they should use print or script, and I deferred to their choice. Two students did not use the full ten minutes, saying they had written everything they knew, even after my prompts.

All students reached points during this test where they did not produce any more words. At that time, I prompted them with open-ended questions (e.g. "I'll bet 153

you know some color words.”} The lowest score was 3 and the highest score was 57 (based on accurate spellings of words). Every student attempted more words than s/he scored. The fewest attempts were 4 and the most attempts were 60. The mean accuracy score was 34.2 and mean attempts were 40.1.

Dictation Test Results

The DIC test was given to students to attempt to discover their ability to make sound to letter analyses and, like the Writing Vocabulary test, add to the

teacher's understanding of the student's knowledge of

the conventions of writing. An accuracy score and a

sound to letter analysis score was given. Two different

sentences were used for dictation and administered based

on the student's previous performance during this

testing. Because of the use of two sentences, no mean

score -can be derived. The lowest sound to letter

analysis was 4 out of a possible 37 to a high of 61 out

of 67. Spelling accuracy scores ranged from 0 out of a

possible 13, to 16 out of a possible 18.

Summary of Test Results

Although the Literacy Survey test results

demonstrate adult beginning readers and writers all can

read and write something, results of this study indicate 154

TABLE 4

CAP ITEMS FAMILIAR TO ALL STUDENTS

I ten # Question Asked Concept

1. "Show ne the front Knowledge of how a of the book." book works.

3. "Show ne where to Knowledge of start reading." directional novenent in English.

4. "Which way do you go?" Sane as above.

5. "Where do you go after Sane as above. that?"

7. "Show ne the first part of Understanding of of the story. Show ne first and last. the last part."

8. "Show ne the botton of the Knowledge of how a picture." book works.

11 Where do I start reading?" Knowledge of directional novenent in English.

21. "Show ne just one letter." Understanding of what "Now show ne two letters." a letter is. 155

TABLE 5

STUDENT RESPONSES TO CAP ITEMS

Item Concept ^/Variant Student Responses # Responses

2. print contains 1 NR* message

6. word by word 2 Repeated sentence. matching Unable to do.

9. print upside 1 NR down

10. line order 2 Responses directed altered toward an action in the picture.

12. one change in 4 Same as above. word order

13. and 14. change 3 Same as above. in letter order

15. meaning of (?) 1 "I've heard that men tioned before. Would that be a p '?"

16. meaning of (.} "Run into the water and sink."

17. meaning of (,) "Drown." "I think it's a period" "Question." "Quotation mark."

18. meaning of (") 5 "Looks like dot dot." "Comma marks." 156

TABLE 5 CONTINUED

"I don't know about then. Pay attention? I see people put that in letters." “These here's the ones that got me, those little tiny ones. I don't know. I see a lot of periods like those in the books." "It tells you some thing about the story."

19. locating lower There ain't a case "t" and "b" little b. They make b different." NR

20. locating reversible 2 Located visually sim words was and no ilar words in text.

22. locate one word ; 1 Located two words and two words four words.

23. locate first and 1 Showed first and last last letter of word words.

24. locate capital Selected the w in letter "down".

NR* means no response. 157

TABLE 6

LITERACY SURVEY TEST SCORE RANGE

Low (attempts) High (attempts) Mean (attempts)

LIT 20 54 _ 47.8

*T 0 51 78 - 51 -

CAP 8 - 23 - 19 -

WV 3 4 57 80 34.2 40.1

DIC 4 - 61 - * * (si)

DIC 0 - 16 — * * (acc)

TLR approx. approx. pre-primer 6th grade **

- no score given as students generally attempted all a priori items.

* no mean possible due to use of different sentences and texts. si means sound to letter analysis acc means accuracy score. 158

that there is a dramatic range of practical knowledge.

Information from the Literacy Interview coupled with the practical knowledge from the Literacy Survey indicate the students' theories of reading were more advanced than their own practices of it. Their theories of writing, however, tended to more closely match their practices of it.

RESPONSE AND ATTITUDE TOWARD LITERACY SURVEY

Students were tested in an informal setting and I was present during the all of the test taking exercises.

Similar to the interview portions of data collection, the tone during the testing was conversational and low key, yet the pace was brisk. The students were told that the particular tests they were taking had originally been designed for children but that I had made some changes for the purposes of using them with adults. I did not mention which parts I had modified.

I also made it clear that they were.the first adults ever to participate in taking these tests, and I needed their help in terms of honest opinions and suggestions in order to make the tests better for other adults who might take them in the future.

The general response to the battery of tests was favorable. The students tended to see the testing as a 159

learning experience during which each could demonstrate their current knowledge of reading and writing. Often they made comments regarding how adults should know or know about the kinds of tasks that the Literacy Survey included in order to learn how or improve their reading and writing skills, and they should expect to take tests as part of the learning experience. As Lee put it,

"part of learning is taking tests. If they really want to learn, you have to start from the beginning." The tasks in the Literacy Survey seemed to be viewed as necessary elements to reading and writing.

The students had few suggestions for improving the survey, even when pressed as the following dialogue between Ruth and me demonstrates :

Darcy: Remember this book? {showed the Concepts About Print book. Stones, that I had read to her}.

Ruth: Yeah.

Darcy: You saw almost all of the reversed things {referred to rearranged letters in words and rearranged words in sentences}. I mean, if somebody's [noticing] that, you know they're good [readers]. What did you think of this book? {handed her Stones}.

Ruth: I liked this. This would be good for an adult if they knew how to spell — that would be all right. But if they didn't know how to spell the words and they couldn't get this word here {points to the word "that" which is spelled "taht"} like they knew the "a" was wrong in here and yellow was spelled wrong {spelled "yelolw" in the story}, they wouldn't know that. 160

Darcy: They wouldn't know they missed that — I wouldn't say "you missed that." I'm looking for information to see where they are. What about the pictures?

Ruth: Oh, the pictures were great.

Darcy: You don't think they're offensive to adults?

Ruth: No. {pause} No. My husband would probably tell you [the same thing], I know that. He would tell you, I know —

Darcy: Is this obvious to you that this is for kids?

Ruth: No. No.

Darcy: I was thinking of redesigning this whole book doing the same thing, but not having the pictures.

Ruth: No, have the pictures.

Darcy: It's okay?

Ruth: Yes, I would think it would be. The pictures show what's saying in the story.

Darcy: Even though it's got a little kid in it, no adult's going to go "oh, man"?

Ruth: No, I don't think so. I don't think so myself, but maybe somebody else would. See maybe somebody else would think that but I don't. I think the pictures shows — the little kid in the pictures shows what's going on. I think it's good to have kids — people in a picture.

Darcy: I was just wondering if I needed to do something where there would be adults in the pictures instead of kids.

Ruth: Yeah, that would be good too. That would show the adults what they could do, what adults could do too. That would show like, like this boy 161

here running {picked up a Scott, Foresnan book called So. Can I. and points to the page that shows a picture of a boy running where the text reads "A boy can run. So can I."} You could put this as a man running, or a man playing with their children or whatever.

Even though I was worried that the some of the instruments would appear childish or offensive to the students, none of their comments indicated that the nature of the instrument was a factor during the test taking activities.

Lee was the only student who demonstrated anxiety during the testing period, but she was also the only student in the study to take the tests before answering any questions from the interview. Although I attempted to do parts of the interview with her before the testing, she kept asking when she was going to be tested to find out “where she was". I made the decision to administer the tests sooner than I had with the other students because she kept bringing the tests up in the course of our conversations. In general, the students' did not talk negatively about this Literacy Survey or any other tests they had taken in the past.

All of the students mentioned the different books or stories they had read during the testing process as a favorite part of the test. Two of the students (Leonard and Lee) both told me that they had never read a whole 162

book by themselves before. After the book reading part of the test, Lee (who told me the first time she met me that she couldn't read) stated that she could now read, and Leonard chose one of the testing books as the one he wanted to keep so he could take it home and prove to his wife that he could read. Candy talked about her feelings of success as a reader during the story reading part of the test. When I asked her if any part of the test had been particularly fun or enjoyable for her, she responded :

Candy: Going through the books {pauses to look through some of the Scott, Foresman books she had read}.

Darcy: Why was that?

Candy: You asked me what happened in the story. You asked me why. The questions you asked me about the animals were neat. {She's referring to my question about why she thought all the animals ran away from Mr. Jumble when he was trying to take a picture of them with his camera in the story Hr. Jumble at the ZiJjB.) - ^ liked that — I was paying attention. I found out I was able to read the stories and explain what happened.

Even though Candy read the story at a 99% accuracy rate,

which was an indicator that the book was an easy read

for her, there was satisfaction for her in recognizing

that she had understood something she had read and could

talk about it with me. 163

Four of the seven students mentioned the Concepts

About Print book. Stones. as being an item of interest

to them in the test. Edward called it "a neat little

trick book" and felt that even a college graduate might

"miss" something while reading this book. Leonard, who

received the lowest CAP score, specifically singled out

Stones and told me, "I like that book because I would

keep in my mind what I heard, then I could re-do it",

that is, as he listened to me read each page out loud,

he wanted to try to read it out loud himself (which he

did for the entire first half of the book).

All of the students when asked if they had ever

taken a test like the Literacy Survey before indicated

that they had not. Lee, one of the newest literates,

explained that "nobody ever took that much time with

me." They had, however, participated in other kinds of

tests as shown in Table 7, but none of them could

remember the test names. Table 7 shows the type of

tests the students' recalled taking and how many took

that kind of test. 164

TABLE 7

OTHER TESTS STUDENTS REMEMBERED TAKING

Type of Test # of Students Taking Type of Test

Psychiatric 3

Math 4

Reading 5

Spelling 1

Writing 1

Word 1

None 2 165

When students attended other institutions that required entry and/or maintenance tests, I was able to obtain their test scores. Table 8 displays scores and dates for the TABE and ABLE tests that some of the students took in other locations and compares the TLR score from the informal battery of tests in this study.

Test scores reported in Table 8 use grade level equivalents. Table 8 shows only those students who had records of tests they had taken and who had taken multiple tests. The scores of the students' listed for the Word Discrimination Inventory (WDI), the Adult Basic

Learning Exam (ABLE), the Test of Adult Basic Education

(TABE), and Text Level Reading (TLR) are compared.

Students' experiences with tests were mixed. Some of the testing experiences recalled vivid memories, others did not. Candy said she could have received more welfare benefits if she had allowed the authorities to give her, based on scores she received from tests she took, a mentally retarded classification. She refused the classification. At one time she went to a psychiatrist's office to be tested for what she thought was reading:

They sent me to this guy — it took a really long time, 1 was there from 1 to 6 it seems. [John's] father took me there to get some help. They set up a place for this test — the doctor was a 166

TABLE 8

STUDENTS' ABLE, TABE, AND TLR SCORES

Name Date #DI ABLE TABE TLR

Ruth 9/88 3-6 No form stated 9/89 3.4 Form H 9/90 2.5 Form H 10/90 Gr.4 @ 90%

Robert 9/88 6.9* Form E 10/89 2.0 Form E 9/90 2.5 Form E

10/90 Gr.6 @ 92%

Candy 3/90 2.9 Level E 9/90 Gr.7 @ 93%

11/90 6.0 Form E

Edward 9/89 2.0

10/90 4.8 Form E 11/90 #Gr.4 e 93% 167

TABLE 8 CONTINUED

Name Date WDI ABLE TABE TLR

Donald 9/90 3.8

11/90 - - — Gr.4 @ 96%

* Robert's teacher challenged the results of this reading test. She felt there was a clerical error.

# Edward was not available for further TLR (might have tested at a higher reading grade level). 168

psychiatrist. I didn't feel very smart when I was going through it. There were a lot of true and false questions.

She also told me about the tests she took upon entry to prison:

Candy: There was an evaluation in the [prison], stuff like how do you feel about your mother — that's about the only question I remember. I was the last one done [with the test]. I just started marking off anything by the end because I'm so slow. I probably shouldn't have done that. Â guy at the prison told me my level was a 4th or 5th grade level. At ---- , I took a math and reading test. I got very low scores.

Darcy: How do you know?

Candy: Because I didn't know — I couldn't read what I was supposed to do. I'm not good in math.

Darcy: Why do you think that is?

Candy: I don't know it. I don't know how to divide but I can add and take away. I'm not so swift at my times tables. When I didn't never learn how to read, I couldn't learn math. The math books that I remember in school had a lot of reading, so not knowing how to read affects everything.

Edward, who had attended night school longer than anyone in the study, shrugged off the idea of tests when he said that he “didn't think [taking tests] would actually prove anything. You could take three different tests and you could be on different levels." Yet he

liked the interactive nature of the Literacy Survey and commented that the survey “could prove more than 169

anything where you were [in reading and writing].

Actually going through them with me — you're here — I don't know how that makes a difference, [but] you can find out more about the real level." The fact that the students remembered taking more reading tests than any other kind of test suggests that, as discovered in other parts of the interview and assessments, the students thought that reading and being able to do it was singularly important (see Table 7).

Summary of Responses to Tests

The student responses to the Literacy Survey tests were positive. The students, however, also tended to not talk about other testing experiences as being particularly negative and two of the students did not remember having taken any other tests. They were intrigued with the CAP booklet and expressed a liking for the interactive nature of the Literacy Survey.

LITERACY BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES

Throughout the interview, students generally had less to say about writing than reading. Students infrequently made references to reading and writing as

integrated literacy tasks. They were able to make more comments about what they did or would do to solve problems in reading than in writing, as evidenced in 170

Table 9. In Table 9, a comparison of the problem solving strategies the students used when reading and writing is presented. Since students seemed to use reading tasks more than writing tasks in their daily lives it would follow that they had fewer strategies for solving writing difficulties than reading difficulties.

The question asked for reading was "When you are reading and come to something you don't know, what do you do?"

The question asked for writing was " When you are writing and come to something you don't know how to say or spell, what do you do?" Host of the responses centered around the idea of individual difficult words encountered while reading and writing.

Â popular strategy for solving an immediate problem encountered while reading or writing was to ask someone for help. For solving a reading problem, asking for help was the most talked about strategy by the students in the study. For writing help, students indicated that they were more likely to consult a dictionary or their own "cheat sheet" before asking someone for encoding assistance.

Beliefs About Sojod Readers and Writers

When asked to select good readers and writers, students chose different people for each question as 171

TABLE 9

PROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGIES FOR READING AND WRITING

Reading (#/student Writing (#/student references) references)

Write it down (1) I don't write that much (4)

Break it up (2) Do the best I can (1)

Sound it out (2) Ask someone (3)

Ask someone (5) Skip it (1)

Use picture (1) Use dictionary (4)

Skip it and go on (2) Refer to list or correct sample form (3)

Use dictionary (2)

Figure it out (3)

Go back and reread (2)

Quit reading it (1)

Look ahead (1) 172

indicated in Table 10 below. Shown in Table 10 is a comparison of who the students selected as good models of reading and writing. For good reader choices, all of the students selected a family member. If a family member was selected as a good writer, it was never the one who had been selected as a good reader. Some of the students referenced more than one person in their responses.

Host students stated that their good reader selections were based on the idea that good readers read a lot. For example, Edward told me "[my wife] reads all the time. She sets in bed all night reading a book.

Every time you turn around, she's got a book." Other students shared similar thoughts on their selected family members. The selection by students of at least one family member as a good reader suggests that reading

is of immediate importance, and part of a repertoire of the students' daily life.

Answers surrounding writing again presented a different picture. The fact that three students said

they did not know a good writer suggested that the

students rarely saw people actively engaged in writing.

Whereas reading may have been an observed part of their

normal family component, writing was not viewed the same 173

TABLE 10

STUDENTS' CHOICES OF GOOD READERS AND WRITERS

GOOD READER (# of students GOOD WRITER (# of students referencing) referencing)

Spouse (3) Don't know anybody (3)

Mother (1) Brother (1)

Son (1) Boss (1)

Abraham Lincoln (1) Members of Congress (1)

Granddaughter (1) Judges (1)

Sister (1) Book writers (1)

Schoolteacher (1) Darcy (2)

Daughters (1)

Person who takes shorthand (1) 174

way. The overwhelming selection of non-family members as good writers suggests that writing is an outsider function — performed in courtrooms, on television, and by people like me. Two of the students responded to the fact that I was constantly writing down notes during the interviews and tests, and selected me as a good writer they knew.

Host of the students felt that even good readers and writers ran into difficulties when engaged in reading and writing activities. Lee understood that

[for writing] everyone who are human has this trouble [picks up a pencil and points to the eraser}. That's why they put these erasers on pencils.

[For reading] somebody who's human comes to a word that will stumble them — even you [points to me}. Not only sometimes you can't read it but you just don't understand it.

Robert, however, seemed adamant about the idea that neither his son nor his brother, whom he had selected as his respective good reader and writer choices, ever had difficulty with any reading or writing activity. Robert had much more experience as a reader and writer than did Lee. The following dialogue over three separate parts of the interview illustrates Robert's perceptions of his son and brother as superior readers and writers, compared to himself. Yet when pressed, Robert indicated 175

that he thought they would use the sane strategy asking someone for help — as he did when he encountered something in print that he couldn't do.

Darcy: When you're reading and come to something you don't know, what do you do?

Robert: I always ask someone. I always ask them, even in class or when I'm home. Ask — most of my kids are around when I do my homework and they help me a lot. If there ain't nobody around I keep on going over it til I get the words right in the sentence. If there are big words, I keep on going over it. I usually look in the dictionary or something like that or I go to the library.

Darcy: When you come to something you don't know how to say or spell, what do you do?

Robert: I look in the dictionary or ask somebody that knows how to spell.

Darcy: Do you ever do anything else?

Robert: Host generally I ask somebody if it's a big hard word I can't pronounce or something like that. I'll always ask somebody.

Later on in the same morning interview, Robert talked about his son as a good reader and described some of the properties and characteristics that make up a good reader :

Darcy: Who's a good reader you know?

Robert; I got a son's a good reader.

Darcy: What makes your son a good reader?

Robert: Books. That's all he does, he reads books all the time — stories — everything he gets ahold of he reads. 176

Darcy: Do you think your son ever cones to something he doesn't know when he's reading?

Robert: No. I never notice anything. He knows just about everything in the reading. Sometimes he even tells my wife what the big stuff is {pause} cuz he's pretty smart {pause} on reading and writing....

Darcy: Well, if your son ever did come to something he didn't know while he was reading what do you think he might do?

Robert: I guess he'd wait til he went to school probably and ask one of the teachers — he won't let us'n know if he can't spell or anything like that....

Darcy: Do you think he might do anything else?

Robert: I recollect he's just good in everything.

Also on the same morning, Robert was asked to identify a good writer he knew and to talk about that person as a good writer:

Darcy: Who's a good writer you know?

Robert: I got a brother who's a pretty good writer.

Darcy: What makes your brother such a good writer?

Robert: Cuz he went through school further than I did. He went clear through school. He got a high school graduate. I didn't go clear through four and up to where there's any writing skills and stuff.

Darcy: Can you think of anything else he does that makes him a good writer?

Robert: Yeah, cuz that's all he does, he does book work {unintelligible} he runs a farm and he has to do all the book work. There's a lot of people work just doing that. The guy he runs the farm for is 177

out of state and he has other farms out of state. They send him the money and stuff to run the farm on and he had to write all that stuff down.

Darcy: Do you think your brother ever comes to something he doesn't know when he's writing?

Robert: No.

Darcy: You don't think he ever has a problem writing anything down?

Robert: He don't have no problems.

Darcy: Well, if he ever did come to something he didn't know while writing, what do you think he'd do about it?

Robert: I think he'd go ask somebody something about it — I don't know where he would go at. He wouldn't like nobody to know that he didn't know it {chuckles for a moment — then unintelligible} not asking his family.

Darcy: [He wouldn't ask] anyone in his family?

Robert: No. An outsider.

Darcy: Why is that?

Robert: Because {unintelligible}....

Darcy: [You mean] it would be ok for an outsider to know but not anyone in the family.

Robert: Yeah {pause} yeah.

People identified as good readers and writers were described as practicing all or several of these qualities: reading and/or writing a lot, being able to read and write, having more education than the students themselves, and having good penmanship. 178

Students ' Understandings of the Processes to Literacy

Generally, students were aware that to become a good reader and writer one had to engage in these activities frequently. Student responses to how they would help someone who was having difficulty with reading and writing are shown in Table 11. Shown on

Table 11 is a comparison of how the students would help someone who was having trouble with reading and writing.

Only one person (Ruth) suggested that a starting point

for literacy help might be to see what someone could

read and write.

Depicted on Table 12 is what the students thought a

teacher might do to help that same person, the one who

was having difficulty reading and writing. Table 12

also compares how the students thought teachers would

help a student struggling with reading and writing.

Their answers again reflected the students' previous and

current in-school experiences. The responses "I don't

know" and "get to know the person" may be a reaction to

the strong feelings many of them expressed about being

"passed along" in school when the students felt that

they hadn't learned anything. The other responses were

based upon techniques for learning to read and write

that students had previously encountered (or were 179

TABLE 11

HOW STUDENTS WOULD HELP SOMEONE HAVING DIFFICULTY READING AND WRITING

Reading (# of students) Writing (# of students)

Don't know (3) Don't know (2)

Way I learned or Tell then it looks bad (1) an learning (2) Copy stories and words (2)

Find soneone to help Find soneone to help then (1) then (1)

See if they could read See if they could write sonething (1) sonething (1) 180

TABLE 12

HOW STUDENTS THINK TEACHERS WOULD HELP SOMEONE HAVING DIFFICULTY READING AND WRITING

Reading (# of students) Writing (# of students)

Help person sound Correct the spelling of it out (3) something person wrote (1)

Try to know person (2) Try to know person (2)

Read with person (2) I don't know (2)

I don't know (2) Copying story/words (4)

Teach vocabulary and speech (1)

Person reads story and teacher asks questions (1) 181

currently encountering) in classroom experiences.

The students made three kinds of choices in their

answers: they did not know how a teacher might assist a

literacy learner, a teacher must establish rapport with

the literacy learner, or they offered examples from the

kind of instruction in which they were currently

involved.

Students Definitions of Reading and Writing

Each student had several ways of defining reading

and writing, although definitions of reading tended to

be more complex than definitions of writing. When I

asked the question "What is writing?" to each student, I

explained that I didn't mean cursive writing. (Many of

them had responded earlier in the interview that they

didn't write, they only printed. I wanted to make sure

that they understood that I was asking a broader

question at this time). Students' definitions of

reading and writing are displayed in Table 13.

The reading definitions reflected a range of

knowledge about print and its purposes from the

functional and utilitarian (being able to read warning

signs) to the global and broad (using reading for the

purposes of gaining more knowledge and greater

understanding). Students as a group spent much more 182

TABLE 13

STUDENTS' DEFINITIONS OF READING AND WRITING

Reading (# of students) Writing (# of students)

Everything is reading (2) Writing checks (1)

Reading warning signs (1) Writing books/papers (2)

Reading mail (2) Taking notes (1)

A part of you (1) Writing mail (4)

Something a person needs Self-expression (1) to know (1)

Knowledge (1) Making a sentence (1)

Reading takes you to Using punctuation (1) new places (1) Being neat (1) Reading out loud (1) Spelling (1) Reading to yourself (1) Signing name (1) Reading magazines, books, newspapers (3) Writing store order (1)

Understanding (1) Writing words (1)

Like a conversation (1)

Reading directions (1) 183

time defining reading than writing.

Writing definitions tended toward functional aspects such as the mechanics of writing, writing signatures, and making out checks. Writing letters

(mail) was the most popular response, which suggests that students saw a definite value for letter writing, even if they didn't actually engage in writing letters themselves.

Summarv of Literacv Attitudes and Beliefs

The students demonstrated a wide range of knowledge about literacy in their answers. Throughout this part of the interview students demonstrated that they had a more flexible view of reading and its purposes than they did of writing. Their answers varied from how they would help someone having reading and writing difficulties to how they thought a teacher would help that same person, although several students didn't know how they or a teacher would help that person.

One of the most popular methods for solving reading and writing problems was to ask someone for help.

Although the majority of students felt that to become a better reader and writer involved plenty of reading and writing practice, their methods for achieving that practice were limited. 184

TERTIARY ANALYSIS OF INTERVIEW DATA

To accomplish the third phase of analysis, all of the student's responses to interview questions were cut into strips and sorted into general categories that emerged from the sorting process. If a longer utterance had several main ideas, the utterance was separated as needed. Identifying key sentences and words helped in the process. Each strip was coded with the students' initials, which part of the interview the utterance had come from, and the date for the purposes of cross checking information (e.g. no overload of data from one interview section in one category).

Four categories emerged during the content analysis of interview responses: (1) perceived barriers to literacy; (2) perceived bridges to literacy; (3) perceived benefits of literacy; and (4) miscellaneous.

The miscellaneous category contained single responses that were not analysable in this context (e.g. "no", "1 don't know" "I'm sure they do") and will not be further discussed.

Perceived Bridges to Literacy

While their ways of operating on print were not always successful, students had some ideas about how to improve their own literacy practices. The term 185

"perceived bridges" refers to the students' ways of continuing their own literacy learning.

Specific categories that define the cluster category of perceived bridges to literacy include literacy helpers, current schooling and educational opportunities, using pictures that surround print, practicing and doing literacy activities, making an effort to learn, and decoding and encoding operations.

Literacy Helpers. Literacy helpers were defined as outside agents that were available to assist the students with decoding or encoding problems. Assistance came generally from family members but the two students viewed the computer as a valuable assistant. The

largest number of responses occurred in this category.

Examples of statements that define this category

include :

"I'll ask somebody [for help] if I trust them."

"Sometimes my kids read to me. My kids would help with letters or a paper."

"My husband wasn't able to read. He would be — he could sit down — I think he knew part of the words but he didn't know all of them. I helped him with most of the words. My daughter helped him with words too."

"[I taught] myself. I got help here and there but mostly myself. I'd pick up a book and try to read it. When I was married I'd ask my husband for help." 186

"I haven't really learned [how to read] yet. I taught myself and the computers here have helped me . ''

"I have a friend that's in Lucasville, and he isn't able to read. He was able to go back to school....I've written to him once....Then he would send me papers that he would do part of them, they would give them to him and he would send them to me to show to [my husband], what he could do, so he could push [my husband] up too, see. It was sort of a family or community thing."

Current Schooling/Educational Opportunities.

Although students talked about the difficulties and problems of previous educational experiences, they frequently mentioned the educational experiences in which they were currently involved. Examples of comments in this category were:

"Going back to school — it's about the best thing I ve ever done is going back to school and keep on reading. That helped me a lot. There before I couldn't read, it helped me a lot there."

"My writing's doing better since [I started coming back to school]. At first when I came in they couldn't read my writing — looked like a chicken scratched up there. How I can write pretty good where they can read it."

"My ex-wife, she went to school and she learned. I don't know if she finished high school or not but she know words, she know a lot. She know how to attend to business. You can't run a business unless you can read and write."

"Now since I started to school and found out what it is, I would recommend [others] to come to school." 187

Using Pictures. One of the ways the students in this study "survived" in the world of print, was to use pictures to help understand what they were reading or looking at. Some of them felt that it was "cheating" to look at pictures while or instead of reading; but using pictures was a conscious reading strategy. Examples of comments about were:

"Once you look at the pictures, it helps you with the story."

"Where before I couldn't read at all, I didn't know what they were saying. That's all I could do is look at the pictures and try to make out what they was doing all on this and that because I couldn't read it. Now I can read it and enjoy what I was reading and know now what they're doing in the picture."

"I look at the pictures [in magazines and newspapers] and see if I can recognize some names."

Practicing/Doing Literacy Activities. This category was defined by responses students made about any kind of reading and writing in which they were currently involved. The act of reading and writing was perceived as important to becoming more literate.

Examples for this category include:

"If I didn't get the meaning of [what I read] I'd sit down and read it again to understand it. I'd only do it if I didn't get the meaning or only if I have to seriously know it again. And only if it 188

interested me.

"Just like I say, you got to read a lot, you got to write a lot, and you have to put the time in if you want to be good."

"I'd have to read a lot of material to get better in my reading. I don't think I could just sit down and read a half hour a week and be a good reader."

"I think about the best thing there is is reading out loud or reading in a marathon where I read a lot of books."

"I love to read."

"You should read to a kid from day one. As soon as they start talking they should learn to read. I try to read little story books [to my daughter]. I read the story so that it will make sense, but I don't want her to see my mistakes and pick up my bad habits."

Making an Effort. These responses centered around the belief that trying harder, making a greater effort, or doing the best job possible in school would result in greater literacy success. Examples from this category include:

"Study harder, try to learn, really work at [reading and writing] if I can." "Just show me how to get it together and I'll try to get it together. Just get me right on it and turn me loose."

"It's important to be good at everything you do. If you're doing the best that you can, that's it."

"You know, you been talking about writing so much, you make me feel like I should try to do more writing." 189

"I don't think nothing's dumb when I need help. It tell the teacher I'm trying."

"I never in my life been so anxious to learn as I am now. I have to have someone like you [teach me]. You don't make me feel like I'm illiterate."

"[The teacher would] find out what makes [the student] tick, what he's trying to learn."

"You have to keep working hard at it and it will come to you. To be a good reader you have to be able to relax your mind and you have to want to do it. You can't doubt yourself, you can make it."

"Study -harder every chance I get and keep my mind looking at books. I got to be willing for help from who ever."

Decoding/Encoding Strategies. These responses relate how students helped themselves during problems encountered while reading and/or writing. These responses centered around what students themselves would do, and did not include any references to relying on a literacy helper.

"Sound it out or work it out."

"Just try to spell it as best as 1 can, then if 1 have a dictionary or something that's available to me at the time, 1 try to look up the word and 1 try to spell as best as 1 can." "I'd like to learn how to pronounce the bigger words. Some of the words in the novels I've been reading are hard, but 1 try to sound them out."

"So that's the main thing, 1 think. If you know your sounds."

"[The teacher] shows me how to break down words. It helps me when I'm reading a book, 1 can look at some words now if 1 don't know em, I can break them down into three words and sometimes come up with 190

the word."

"That's not a hard book to read either. It's got a lot of know' and 'she' and was' and all that. Well, like you said a while ago, you cone across a lot of those words and if you look, a lot of those words is right in this book."

"If 1 write sonething out. I'll reread it and sonetines 1 can find a lot of mistakes I've made just reading it over."

“1 spell out a word first and then read it."

Summary of Perceived Bridges to Literacy. The students used both internal and external bridges to literacy. Students relied the most on literacy agents for help (e.g. other people, schools) but tried to solve reading and writing problems on their own by making an effort and "sounding out" or "breaking down" difficult words in connected text.

Perceived Barriers to Literacy

Just as the students implicitly or explicitly identified perceiyed bridges to literacy, they also experienced perceived barriers. Barriers are factors that impede an understanding of or progress toward literacy, as defined in this study. Perceived barriers were identified as neatness and accuracy, physical conditions and/or ill health, lack of or inadequate prior schooling, previous home life, poor memory and attention span, and societal alienation/frustration and 191

self-doubt.

Neatness and Accuracy. The students were concerned with the neatness and accuracy in spelling, penmanship, grammar, and punctuation. They indicated their awareness of this by frequently discussing their own inaccuracies in the reading and writing they did with me. The following comments are representative of this awareness :

"If you don't know your abc's then you're in trouble."

"I think if you can't read the whole book every word in it , then you're not getting nothing out of it. I think that's been my problem, is when I read a book I don't know a lot of the words."

"Actually if writing means spelling, then I'd go down to [the lowest score of] ten."

"If I had a pretty hand I would write more."

"Yeah I just say a lot of words — if I could just spell them out I could probably say it."

"The last person who worked with me started me out with sounds of the letters, knowing the vowels, trying to make me hear it but I couldn't hear it. My mind just goes blank. I just don't understand what I'm hearing."

"Writing is really hard for me to do. I do bad writing. Looks like a second grade writer. I don't put my capitals in there where they are supposed to be. And my periods, I don't put them in there."

"If I was good at [writing] I'd enjoy it more."

"I probably could write, if I knew how to spell and stuff, half my words." 192

Physical Conditions/Illness. Although this is the barrier category with fewest responses, students did mention bouts with illness and physical conditions as a past difficulty to learning. Examples of responses from this category are:

"Why I didn't get my reading very good while I was in school, cause when I was in second grade, I was supposed to have glasses and my parents was just so poor we didn't get them. And I couldn't see the blackboard or anything."

"Starting to school, I had a lot of sickness — whooping cough. I missed a lot of school."

"Well, the only thing I know they were testing me for to see what my ability was. See, I had sleeping sickness when I was 13 months old. It just made my whole body where I couldn't do nothing. I had to learn to walk, I had to learn to talk, I had to learn to do other things over again."

Lack of or Inadequate Previous Schooling. These responses centered around formal or informal learning opportunities or experiences students felt they missed out on by choice or circumstance. ' Examples include:

"Only thing I remember they put me in first grade and I try to get away from it."

"Mostly [my mom read] books like Alice and Jerry and stuff like that but we wasn't access to get a lot of books where I was raised."

"I believe I would have did better if the teacher would have showed more interest in helping me. It just seemed like it was a burden on them to really get down and teach everybody." 193

"Teachers just get tired of [students who need help]. Host of [the students] just get passed. Teacher want to get rid of then anyway because they are too nuch trouble."

"Spelling, a lot of my problem is spelling so that's — catch up on my education when I couldn't get through school. I didn't want to pass away stupid."

Previous Home Life. Although most of the students felt they currently had a positive home life, childhood experiences had frequently been difficult. Examples from this category are as follows:

"Being from a divorced family don't help. Getting a job at 15 didn't help either."

"I didn't see [my parents] read in my home. I left home when I was thirteen."

"I quit [school in 7th grade] because I got pregnant. I had 3 kids before I was married, then I got divorced when I was 21."

"My mom had literacy problems too. I was put in special ed classes pretty young."

"When I got raped, do you think this affected my ability to learn?"

"I've had quite a lot of sickness and loss."

"I think if we would have had more [books at home] that would have really helped. Like I said, the more you can bring into the kids, the better off you are." you are."

"I had to put school behind me for awhile until I got the rest of my life straightened out and then I came back."

"My dad used to beat me all the time. That's one reason that I wasn't learning anything. He always 194

beat us in the head with a shoe, or anything he got his hands on. And I think that's done something to our minds in this way." "I know what you're getting at here. If my family had read to me. I'd be ok. I understand that. I don't hate the world anymore. I'm not mad like I used to be."

"My parents was strict for themselves. They never set down with any of the kids — there was 12 of us in the family — and they never did set down with neither one of them and read a book or (unintelligible) or stuff like that."

Poor Memorv/Attention Span. This category contains responses that referred to memory processes and having a long enough attention span in order to learn. Examples include :

"Nouns, pronouns — things like that — 1 can't remember any of that."

"1 never had a special tutor or anything. It was just, 1 had so much problems trying to remember what I read. I can remember songs where 1 can't remember what 1 read in stories part of the time."

"1 just wouldn't pay attention in school."

"We started with the basics like learning the sounds of letters and throwing spelling words at me. I wasn't registering with what she was saying. She said 1 wasn't paying attention so I'd even watch her lips."

“1 can do something today, and then tomorrow, 1 done forgot it. My memory's that bad."

A1ienation/frustration/Self-Doubt. Responses in this category revealed concerns with differences from the norm, alienation from others, frustrations and 195

aggravations over slow or no progress toward literacy and personal goals, and fears about looking bad or being wrong in front of others. Examples that defined this category include:

"The computer doesn't get tired — it's always with me. I don't get up and walk away to help someone else [like a teacher would]."

"I don't lie to my grandkids — I want to be really honest with them. I tell them not to bring me books because I don't read. I'm scared I'll tell them something wrong."

"If the problem I have is genetic, then why am I wasting time?"

"I'd like to write a real letter. A lot of people I know say write me a letter.' The nurse I told you about wrote me a letter but I'm too ashamed to write her back."

"I been alone a long time now. I never notice what someone else is doing, I stick to my own business."

"At times, people just feel like they're shutting me out. I don't know why."

"My past experiences were frustrating. I didn't feel like I did good. Confidence and feeling has a lot to do with [learning]."

"Most of the time I be knowing the word but I be scared to say it."

"I feel too uncomfortable [if I read to someone]. If I get something wrong, they feel like they got to tell me. If I got one word wrong and everything else right, it would actually throw me off."

Summary of Perceived Barriers to Literacy. The

largest number of responses in the barriers categories

focused on comments about neatness and accuracy. The 196

students felt that their efforts at producing text (both in reading and writing) were not good enough to be successful readers and writers. Although they indicated that their childhood schooling experiences had not been particularly satisfactory, they had a tendency to blame themselves for their literacy problems (e.g. could not pay attention, could not spell, bad penmanship, scared of being wrong).

Perceived Benefits of Literacv

All of the students in this study believed that people who were more literate than they had certain benefits and advantages in the world. The responses in this category fell into one of the following five subcategories: issues of trust, issues of communication,

issues of opportunity, issues of self-esteem, and issues of perfection.

Issues of. Trust. These responses included students' comments about how other people treated them and how they perceived themselves surrounding issues of being literate. Examples of responses in this category

include:

"Without knowing how to read, you have a hard time in life, and people are cruel to people like that."

"I used to ask her [for literacy help] because I felt comfortable with her." 197

"I believe that through the grace of God and my attitude I'll get [to my reading and writing goals]."

Like the participants in Fingeret's (1984) and

Moll's (1991) studies, the students in this study (while acknowledging that their lives had been and were difficult) had long and short term "literacy helpers."

There was a great deal of concern, however, on just how trustworthy the helpers were. Candy kept hidden that she couldn't read and write very well and would only request help when she felt comfortable enough with a particular person to ask for help.

Although the students had responded positively to the literacy tests they took with me, they often referred to other literacy tests they had taken as being

"weird" or not "proving anything." Host tests were viewed as not telling them much about themselves as

literacy consumers.

Students expressed the concern that literacy

helpers (even sometimes family members) would not tell

the truth about what a letter said or write down

verbatim something that was dictated. Lee had developed

a check and balance system for her helpers: “I have

someone write [what 1 dictate] and then ask someone else

to read it to me and make sure they said what 1 wanted." 198

That method did not always result in what Lee desired.

For instance, when Lee left prison, she had made me an elaborate card of a drawing of a crying woman reading a book. Lee had asked one of her helpers to write the word "Literacy" on the book but the helper decided to write "American History" instead, much to Lee's

irritation, which was evident when she explained the picture to me.

Students had a strong tendency to believe that people take advantage of those who can not read or write. Leonard felt that "most of the crooks won't read what it really says [to you]" and Edward pointed out

that "if you can't read [your rights] you can sign your

life away."

Issues of Communication. Communication issues and their benefits centered around family and friends, and environmental print. Examples of responses that

informed this category are:

"You can keep in touch with people [if you can write letters]."

"I can read my bills now. I know what that means now, like if it's the last statement you'll get."

"I tried to read to my children — it was aggravating. I'd go blank when I came to something I didn't know. I'd try to sound out the word." 199

Students' recognized the importance of reading to

their own children but had great difficulty doing it.

Many of them tried to read to their children but it was

an agonizing experience for most of them. There was

perceived power, however, in being able to read well out

loud. Donald described his mother's reading with near

reverence in this dialogue we had about reading:

Donald: My mother was a real excellent reader. The way she. read things, she more or less made it wave out. Instead of someone just saying it out, she'd get you interested in listening to it.

Darcy: What was the word you used, waved out?

Donald: Just like it waved out, like if she sang a song it was waving along.

Though aware of how "good" reading sounded, Donald

did not read that way himself. He pointed out, however,

that "if you're reading to somebody and you're a good

reader, they will listen to you." The students were

aware of what they considered to be their bad reading

and writing habits and wanted to avoid passing them

along to others.

Other benefits associated with communication

processes involved comments on illegible writing

(Edward's co-workers told him his writing looked like

Arabic and Robert thought his own writing looked like

Chinese) and paying more attention to the world of print 200

that is part of every day life. Reading directions when the VCR does not work, understanding bills that come through the mail, understanding the print that further details a picture in a magazine or a newspaper, were all perceived as part of the process of written communication.

Issues of Opportunity. Opportunity issues and their benefits centered around job prospects — both missed and in the future. Examples of responses from this category were:

"I almost had a job as a nurse's helper. Hot being able to read and write held me back. I got the job. I had someone fill out the application but I couldn't go on the first night."

"I wanted to go in the service but service wouldn't take me because I couldn't read and write."

"If I could read the bible, I could help a lot of people."

The students held to the belief that with a good education and good reading and writing skills, they would no doubt have better jobs in the future or would have had better jobs in the past. Better jobs meant more money and more opportunities at work and at home.

Family members or friends who attempted schooling of any kind were seen as trying to improve their performance at some task. For example, to Donald that meant being able to help his wife at home with check writing and bill 201

paying, and at work, being able to pass the Arbors Test in order to hold a higher paying job with more responsibility. To Candy, it meant she could help her son with homework.

Issues of Self-esteem. The category of self-esteem was defined by those responses in which students spoke of their feelings about themselves as readers and writers. Examples of these comments included:

"I feel embarrassed if I don't get something right. I might read it but someone might laugh."

"I couldn't say. I don't do so good myself."

"I used to didn't think I was good as you are and other people. Only thing that ever bothered me was that I can't write."

"I want to make something of myself before I get too old and die."

Despite the fact that many of the students had raised or were raising families, were employed, had survived many difficult life circumstances, and demonstrated pride in many of those kinds of accomplishments, they all struggled to some degree with their self-esteem. They did not dwell, however, on their life circumstances in their responses to any of the questions. Surprisingly, this category was one that was made up of a much lower number of responses than most of the other categories in this part of the 202

analysis. Students may give themselves more credit as problem solvers and problem survivors than other studies about adult literacy learning indicate.

Issues of. Perfection. Students never discussed themselves in terms of perfection or near perfection but they did describe others who they felt were more literate in those terms. Examples of responses that centered around perfection were:

"He just knows everything."

"His words looks perfect when he writes them."

"No, she really don't have much problem reading."

"He might go to the dictionary [if he had a problem but] I think that would be it."

The students were apt to describe good readers and writers as people who made few mistakes when reading and writing. Like their views on reading and writing which centered on the neat penmanship, good spelling, and being able to read every word, people who were more highly literate tended to be perceived as perfect.

THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM

The instructional component of this study was analyzed by reviewing observational notes and running records from the lessons. Notations of progress were made during and after data collection and are reported here through descriptions of interactions with the two 203

students who participated in the literacy survey, the informal assessments, and instruction.

Instructional Components

Two of the seven students (Candy and Lee) agreed to work with me on a daily one-to-one tutorial basis. Both

Candy and Lee were in a prison prerelease center. For these two students, I wrote a Literacy Summary — that is, from the interview and assessment data I had gathered, I looked for evidences of literacy strengths and weaknesses and then thought about how these discoveries could be used in reading and writing activities for each student. For instance, Lee was very anxious to show me that she could read something and brought in a primer she had borrowed from the prison

library from which she had memorized a poem to read to me. She told me that she had never read a book all the way through. It seemed important to establish right away that she could, in fact, read a book all the way

through. I used carefully selected short books that I

thought she could read, introduced the story to her, and made some suggestions to her that I thought might be

helpful to her as she read the books (e.g. use the

picture to help you read, use your finger to point to

each word, think about what might make sense when you 204

come to a hard spot). Lee was able to read five books the first time we met alone together. We had developed an initial introduction through a meeting with Candy, but the rapport that was generated and established in

this first lesson was a valuable factor in beginning to

frame an instructional program based on Lee's needs and

expressed interest.

The materials used during literacy interactions

included many of the materials used in Reading Recovery.

I had a set of upper and lower case magnetic letters for

word and letter work. I had painted the letters black

so they looked like real print. Blank-paged writing

books, colored thin marking pens, pencils, long strips

of paper on which to write adult generated sentences for

cutting up and putting back together, scissors, and

specially selected picture books and novels for each

student (some of which they would read themselves and

some of which I would read to them). As I daily

observed Candy and Lee as readers and writers, I

modified my instructional decisions.

I initially structured the lessons guided by the

Reading Recovery framework (i.e. a few minutes writing

previously learned words quickly, familiar rereading, a

running record of yesterday's new book, writing a 205

message, cutting it up and reassembling it, new book introduced, new book attempted by student) but it became apparent that modifications were necessary for both students. For instance, when I discovered that Candy could read the advanced text in Hey. A1 (Yorinks &

Egielski, 1986) and that she could write a number of high-frequency words, the cut up sentence seemed to have little learning value for her. For Leo, who did not ever recall being read to, hearing books read was important part of each interaction we shared. In the case of both students, the conversational aspects surrounding lessons was also an important part of each interaction.

Charts document what occurred in sessions with each student. I was not able to keep track of time on each task because of my involvement with the pacing and activities of the lesson.

CANDY'S INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM

An outline of the fourteen interactions with Candy during her incarceration is displayed in Table 14. The reading activities columns document the books that Candy or I read. The writing activities column shows what messages Candy generated to write and what words, from the context of the books she had read or sentences she 206

TABLE 14

PATTERNS OF INTERACTIONS WITH CANDY IN PRISON

Date/ Reading Writing Time Activities Activities (hrs)

9/13 Literacy Survey and Literacy Interview. 2.0

9/17 Same as above. 1.75

9/18 H.eZa-Al They really found paradise. 2.0 They made it back home. I will call him a tropical bird. A colorful bird."

9/19 Hey A1 "A1 was a janitor and he is .75 good at his work."

9/20 Fish For "1 remember early Sunday morn .50 Supper ings my father coming in and waking me up to go fishing."

9/22 Fish For 2.0 Supper Finished yesterday's Read her my sentence. field notes.

9/24 Eia h F-OX "They got to take it to their 1.5 Supper new home. She told the H z Noah's children about the ark that Ack. her father had made." Jackie Q. ( looked at pictures). 207

TABLE 14 CONTINUED

9/25 Hey. Al 'They got together, 1.25 Fish For flap SüPP.ex. flapping Read to : Dad flaps Gunmit and Ma Foot

9/26 My Noah's Ark I still remember on that .50 rainy day my aunt sat me down and made me a covered wagon." Generated words from it and sat.

9/27 Hsz*. Generated words from 1.0 Louis ihs. rainy. Fish (shared reading)

9/28 Fish For together, flitter, .75 Supper flitted, croaked, Hey. Ai. quacked, honked.

10/1 Deac Long .50 Los±L Monica (1st chapter)

10/2 Dear. Long. Alan looks like his 1.5 Lost Monica father. Tall and dark (Had finished hair with dark eyes." book on her own reread favorite parts).

10/3 C. reads (No writing. Discussion about 1.0 Hey. A1 to reading and writing with Lee). Lee and me. 208

had written on that day, were analyzed. Our topics of conversation nor are the words we analyzed documented in this table for efficiency and clarity of data presentation. Not shown on the table are the numerous conversations that occurred between Candy and me as we read and wrote. Topics of conversation centered around the books we read, what she was going to do when she was released from prison, dialects, and her family members.

For instance. Candy told me a detailed plot summary of a

Don Knotts movie that was very similar to Louis the Fish

(Yorinks & Egielski, 1980). She also told me that she was planning to read H e v . A1 (Yorinks & Egielski, 1986) to her son the first thing upon her release to show him how much better she could read. She said "minners" for the word "minnows" in Goffstein's (1976) Fish For Supper and then asked me which way she should say it which prompted a discussion about dialect.

Table 15 was created to differentiate instruction and interactions around Candy in the prison setting from interactions and instruction on the "outside" after she was released. Candy called me to arrange meetings and frequently had to cancel or make last minute changes.

Meeting was difficult as she had no.car, no furniture, no money, and no apartment of her own. She was staying 209

TABLE 15

PATTERNS OF INTERACTIONS WITH CANDY AT HOME

Date Time Reading Activities (hrs)

10/19 1.5 Borrowed Hev. A1 and The Red Rose to read to John.

10/26 2 .0 . Read books on dinosaurs and cartoon characters that John had borrowed from the public library. Candy had borrowed The Island of the Blue Dolphins. I lent her two books on tape (unabridged) with the books: Plain's Tapestry and Hemingway's The Old. Man and the Sea. John, Candy and I read Howe's Jack and iha Beanstalk.

10/28 CANDY CANCELLED

10/29 .75 NO READING AND WRITING

11/4 4.0 SPECIAL OUTING TO MY UNIVERSITY OFFICE AND PUBLIC LIBRARY

Candy reads from Rollo's Face. John reads by himself. Both generated messages on the computer

11/7 CANDY CANCELLED

11/9 CANDY CANCELLED

11/11 2.0 Filled out job application for Candy. Took John back to the university to read and write on the computer. 210

TABLE 15 CONTINUED

11/19 2.0 Helped Candy enroll in ABE class. (1 interviewed and assessed other students while she worked).

11/26 2.0 Took Candy to ABE. (Sane as above).

11/28 2.0 Sane as above.

12/3 2.0 ABE CLASS CANCELLED. Took John and Candy to university to read and write.

12/5 CANDY CANCELLED ABE.

12/10 Sane as above.

12/11 3.0 CANDY CANCELLED ABE. (Did errands and had dinner together. Gave Candy and John gift books, read lease to Candy so she could sign it). 211

temporarily with her mother who had no car and no telephone and a limited amount of money. Young children were not allowed to stay at the apartment with Candy and her mother, so Candy's son John had to continue living with Candy's married daughter.

A writing activities column is not included in

Table 15 because we only had one writing interaction that occurred on a computer at the university. Candy's son John usually worked with us.

The discussions that are not documented in the

Table 14 took up more time than the personal discussions that occurred in the prerelease center. These discussions centered around another court appearance

Candy had to make, where to get a cheap car, how difficult it was to get an apartment and job with a prison record, how to talk with the teacher and principal at the school where John was in trouble, and

Candy's financial and family constraints.

Working ExsiBL Candy's Assessments and Interviews Candy's teacher in a prerelease class told me that

Candy had told her she was illiterate and could not learn. Candy apparently asked the teacher to find someone to help her. The teacher was surprised, because in the life skills class. Candy acted like a reader 212

(i.e. she collected all the papers and followed along in the text when page numbers were mentioned). Candy told me about previous formal and informal schooling experiences in the first fifteen minutes of our introductory session:

I was always trying and wouldn't get anywhere in school but they'd keep passing me. I couldn't get smarter. I didn't really complete the 7th grade and I was always put in classes with the slow learners. It seemed as if we always learned drawing and singing. I think I've probably learned more out of school than I did in school. I try but there seems to be something wrong there. An inmate who worked with me tried to help me here. She'd say 'You're not listening. You're not paying attention.' She didn't have enough patience and she was trying to teach me little things like sounds of the alphabet. She wasn't the person for me.

Based on Candy's preliminary self-report, I was surprised that she performed so well on the tests.

The following excerpt from my Literacy Summary regarding

Candy's reading and writing strengths illustrate how I began, to make instructional decisions:

Reading Summary [Candy] identified the alphabet by letter name quickly and accurately. She read 57 out of 60 words accurately and rapidly. She attempted all 60 words. The attempts on the other three words were visually similar (e.g. run for ran). [Candy] had a high level of knowledge about print as indicated by a CAP score of 23 out of a possible 24. She insisted on reading much of the CAP book herself and focused her eyes on the print (rarely looking at the pictures). [Candy] read at approximately 7th grade level at 93% accuracy with no self- corrections. Her favored cue was visual information {i.e. when 213

facing a problem word, she attempted to sound it out, substituting a word that was visually similar to the word in question or a nonsense word that sounded like the word looked}. She neglected meaning and structure cues when attempting to solve problems. She re-read parts of sentences to confirm [the meaning of the story] and sometimes points to each word as she reads. Generally she read in a halting monotone, even if the story was easy.

It was evident after listening to Candy read, that she had control of many of the processes of reading and could actually read between a fifth and seventh grade

level. She relied almost exclusively on sounding words out when she did not know them, yet in the interview she

had told me that learning the sounds of the letters did not work for her. When asked how she would help someone

learn to read, she said she would "show the sounds of

the letters."

Candy demonstrated many writing strengths. An

excerpt from the Literacy Summary I wrote continues:

Writing Summary [Candy] attempted 51 words [on the WV test] and wrote 47 accurately. The inaccurate attempts (as in the reading) were visually similar (e.g. rig for rug). She needed few prompts and probably could have written more words after the ten minutes expired. The further into the task, the faster she wrote. She printed each word, using capital and lower case letters as appropriate. [Candy] demonstrated that she could say words slowly that she was not sure how to write and make a close sound to letter analysis (but not always in sequence). She also demonstrated that she visually analyzed words for accuracy in spelling (e.g. wrote littel for little, said it didn't look right and 214

changed it to little). She started the sentence with a capital letter and wrote the rest in lower case but did not use any punctuation. Her writing is very legible and she writes quite quickly.

Candy had an adequate lexicon of known words and a strong enough knowledge of sound to letter relationships to be an independent writer. Despite the evidence she provided that she was frequently able to correct her writing, she may have been constrained by her belief that good readers have perfect control of the mechanics of writing. This point is well illustrated by the following excerpt:

[My daughters] are neat when they write. Their handwriting doesn't look sloppy. Their letters don't look sloppy. They use periods and question marks. Not like me. I don't write my letters like they do. Just let me get what I'm saying on this paper — I get aggravated and it's tiresome. I just don't think about starting another paragraph and going down. I really want to spell it right....I'11 ask someone [if I don't know how to write what I want to say]....I don't write that much. I've got a list of words that I use. When I write Mom I'll put "Mom Hi" and I'll always say the same thing. I'll write something about my spirits being good — I think you spell it S-I-P-T-S — I don't think that's quite right. I'll look it up on my list or I'll try to look it up in the dictionary.

Candy revealed a lot of information about her literacy (and personal) beliefs through the interview and assessments. Following is the initial instructional direction summary: 215

InstructionsLl üir.ec.tAnn It will be important for [Candy] to realize that reading is for meaning and pleasure, not an exercise in sounding out words. Since she mentioned her eight-year-old son [John] so much in the interview, using appropriate picture books might be a way of approaching reading improvement. It will also be important for [Candy] to have a number of adult books she can read herself when I'm not there. She needs to learn that she can use meaning and structure cues along with her strong use of visual cues to solve reading problems. It will also be important for [Candy] to practice fluent and phrased reading for enhancing meaning while reading. [Candy] needs to practice capturing her thoughts in writing quickly while not focusing on accuracy. At some point it will be useful to work on analyzing sounds in sequence and thinking about the use of punctuation.

Although Candy had many of the individual components that make a competent reader and writer, they may not have been integrated into a useful pattern for her.

Observed SMfiks. i n CandY-la Reading and. Writing

Reading Shifts. Some shifts in reading occured during the initial testing phase. When Candy read to me from books with pictures, 1 suggested she look through the book and glance at the pictures first. I had given

Candy some books to look at when she had time. When she discussed them with me, I realized that she may not have been encouraged to look at pictures while reading.

Following is a dialogue that Candy and 1 had about some picture books I had lent her: 216

Darcy: Tell me what you thought of these books.

Candy: I looked at the pictures first.

Darcy: Why?

Candy: Because you suggested it before. [These books] on Ben Franklin fWhat's the Big Idea. Ben Franklin by Jean Fritz and a biography on Jackie Robinson} were the hardest for me....I liked Hev. A 1 . It was a cute story....

Darcy: Would your son like Hev. Al?

Candy: Yes, because it's like a fantasy. Since it takes him off to an island — it's so colorful {she thumbs through the book}. I thought it was really colorful — especially when he starts turning into a bird {chuckles at that picture in the book}.

Hev. Al (Yorinks & Egielski, 1986) is a picture story book of Al, a janitor, and Eddie, his dog. Bored with life in New York, they accept a strange bird's invitation to go to paradise only to find that the real life is frequently better (and safer) than an imagined idyllic life. In a subsequent reading of Hey. Al early on in our interactions, my field notes show how Candy began to practice reading differently from when she started sessions with me. Fluent reading increased and maintained around the time Candy experienced a

revelation about the purpose of her reading as

illustrated by the following observational entry. (I was unable to capture all of the dialogue during this

encounter because of the rapidly unfolding discussion 217

over the reading):

The last 45 minutes we spent reading and talking about Hey. Al which I think she likes reading more and more. I talk to her about reading it like were having a conversation [together] and making it sound like a story. Today she pretty much stopped pointing [as she read]....She does a lot of re-reading to confirm and hesitates before hard words. Her most relied upon [cue] is to sound it out and she uses that term a lot! But there are glimmerings of using the context [of the story] to figure things out... The end of the story says "Sometimes paradise lost is Heaven found." When I ask her what that means she says "You might not realize the time you had was really good until....you lose it. Like I took a lot of things for granted when I was out [of prison] until I came in here and found out what I lost." We read the book together [for fluency] but [Candy] noted that she couldn't quite keep up with me. We stopped many times to chat about the pictures and what was happening in the story, e.g. [the book read] "But ripe fruit soon spoils" [and Candy told me] that means "you get tired of it." .... I ask her if she can find any places where the birds have human features, and she searches the picture on the page with no [text] and finds some human hands. She laughs with pleasure and says she really never noticed things like that before. I said the same thing was true of me — I had read that book several times before I noticed the island shape looked like a bird's head.... We talked about what context meant [based on her resolution of the sentence in the story] "But ripe fruit soon spoils".... She was sounding out the word ripe and said rap but then self- corrected. I explained that context was something like shopping for apples and finding them in the meat section of the grocery store — that would be out of context. I explained that I thought she used context to figure out that word [ripe]. I also said that good readers always read for meaning, to make it make sense. She said no one had ever told her that before and was visibly excited. I talked a little bit more about how readers don't read every word one by one [and] she seemed astounded. 218

Even though the data from the interview revealed that

Candy knew other people read for meaning, she seemed unable to practice the same strategies herself until this was made explicit for her. As our interactions continued. Candy read more fluently, using phrasing and expression in a way that was different from her reading during the text level reading part of the assessment.

When Candy was released from prison, I met her eight year old son, John, who commented to me when we were alone, "Mom sounds different now when she reads to me."

Not only did Candy start using meaning or contextual links while reading with me, she also started making comments about problem words, trying to link them with her own knowledge of words. For instance, Mv

Noah's Ark (Goffstein, 1978) contained this sentence about the animal inhabitants of the ark "Two spotted leopards, two meek sheep, two gray horses and two white doves were already in their compartments in the ark, when my father gave it to me." Candy read "Two spotted leopards, two HAKE sheep" three times, commented that

"doesn't make any sense", then said, "But it has two e's like in sheep," then self-corrected "make" to "meek".

Another time, she borrowed Dear Long Lost Monica

(Bethancourt, 1990) and told me about a problem-solving 219

experience she had encountered when reading the book to herself the night before, which I recorded this way in my field notes:

The word that [Candy] figured out herself last night was "Reverend" {Reverend Fulton was a character in Dear Long Lost Monica who officiated at the funeral of the detective's grandmother}. I asked her how she [figured out the word]. She said she thought about who would say the words at the grandmother's funeral and said she recognized [the words] "ever" and "end" [in Reverend]. Then she said, "I should have known that word because I buy Revlon products and [the word Reverend] starts just like that." That was a link she [told me] she made today — not last night.

When I asked Candy if she used these methods to solve reading and writing problems before, she responded that she was not sure or she did not know. She was unable to answer questions about what progress she felt she was making, frequently turning her comments to me:

You make it feel like I'm getting somewhere. You make me feel positive. You're just doing something different. You seem to have a little surprise each time you come [talks about the novels I bring for her to borrow}. I don't get bored with [coming to these meetings]. It's fun. I feel good about it and I like it. That's all I can say.

After twenty-three meetings. Candy exhibited more self-correcting behaviors, used meaning and syntactic language cues more frequently to solve reading problems

(although predominantly resorted to visual information or sounding things out), and read more fluently. 220

Writing Shifts. None of the evidence I have shows that Candy made any shifts in writing. While Candy wrote a message almost every day, I drifted from my own instructional plan for writing. I am not sure why this happened. Instead, I followed a more traditional

Reading Recovery lesson format and tried boxing words and cutting up sentences. These activities did not appear to help Candy make shifts from her accuracy- focused writing orientation. While Candy showed evidence of becoming a more flexible reader (i.e. using different reading strategies to solve reading problems) no new evidence appeared in the writing.

"Outside" (Prison) Versus "Inside" Interactions

My field notes taken during Candy's time in prison provide evidence about her motivation to improve upon

her literacy knowledge. She was always on time,

appeared eager to read and write, borrowed many books

from me, increased her fluency and phrasing in reading,

and even found another student for me to work with.

While the majority of our time during interactions was

spent on reading and writing activities or discussions

around books we read together, some of the time was

spent on personal agendas. Candy told me about her

family and the plans she had for when she was released 221

from prison, and I shared information about my family, my job, and my research. Candy asked if I would continue meeting with her after her release and if I could also help her son, John.

Two weeks after Candy was released, she called me to set up a meeting for one week later. Although Candy,

John, and I did some reading and writing together our first three sessions, more and more of this time was spent discussing Candy's personal problems with money, employment, transportation, family, and men. Numerous problems to solve and circumstances appeared to dictate

Candy's life. Once out of prison, continued literacy learning (while still a desire and of acknowledged importance to Candy) took second place to surviving on the "outside." Once when I went to meet with both Candy and John at her mother's house, I ended up taking John to my office where we read books, wrote on both the computer and paper, and talked. Candy had a bad headache.

Candy and I had talked about getting her enrolled

in school so she could learn to use a computer. Since one of my research sites at an ABE facility was near

Candy's house, we arranged to enroll her there and I picked her and John up on the two nights a week of 222

class.

We had six chances to go to the ABE program (see

Table 15). After her first attendance at the ABE class, my field notes indicated that Candy:

was elated. She said she couldn't remember one thing about the story {IBM infocourse "Invention of the Alphabet Story"} but she was carried away by the idea that she, [Candy] "was sitting in this chair, in a class, learning how to use a computer." ...She was surprised and pleased that she tested at a [grade] reading level of 6.0 (ABLE)....she missed four out of forty. Later [she] confided that she should have gotten them all right and is bothered by [the fact that she didn't].

Candy told me that she enjoyed going to these classes and when she got a car was going to continue to go, and take John with her.

Getting to class was still difficult, even when I picked her up. Candy came with me for three of the times, cancelled twice (to pick up a refrigerator for an apartment she had just rented, and to do laundry). The third time the class was cancelled. Since Candy had no telephone, she wasn't notified.

As Candy and John resumed the patterns of their lives and confronted the problems that too little income cause, there was little time for left for classes. 223

LEE'S INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM

Table 16 shows an outline of the twenty-eight interactions Lee and I shared during her incarceration.

The date, amount of time spent, and the books Lee read out loud or I read to her are listed. Not included are the messages Lee generated and she and I wrote together, nor the word and letter work in which she participated.

The sentences she generated were based on stories she read and discussions that occurred as a result of an experience or book I read to her. Samples of Lee's writing are included in Appendix D and will be discussed later. Lee read a total of 44 books 114 times

(excluding the books she read during the Literacy Survey and the books from the missing files from 10/19). Lee borrowed these same books from me and read them to others in prison. Although I had asked her to keep a record of how many times she read the books outside of our meetings she did not tell me. Running records were kept on each reading of every story. Lee used meaning and language structure cues initially and relied upon many "toIds" from me to read the books. Hear the end of the instructional period she began to use visual cues 224

TABLE 16

PATTERNS OF INTERACTION WITH LEE

Date Time Lee's Reading Darcy's Reading (# of times read)

10/3 1.0 Candy reads Hey. Al to Lee and me.

10/10 1.0 3 basal poems she selected. (Starts Literacy Survey).

10/11 1.0 (Literacy Survey)

10/12 .3 Who Will Be Mv Mother?

10/15 1.5 The Red Rose Kha la Who? (Literacy Survey)

10/17 2.75 Who is Who? Who Will Mother? S-t-QP W ait Skates (Literacy Interview)

10/18 1.5 Stop (2) Stevie Wonder me 1.5 Ihe. Bus Ride story from T.hie. Trolley EAdg. Listen Children

10/19 1.5 Lesson Plans Missing

10/22 1.0 Red Socks and Yellow Socks T.Q.Q. Many Balloons Try It. My. Noah's Ark. Catch That Frog Sam's Mask

10/23 CANCELLED AT LEE'S REQUEST

10/24 10/30 LEE IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT 225

TABLE 16 CONTINUED

10/31 1.75 Reads list of words she El Chino wrote in solitary con finement . Who Will B& Mi Mother? Dan the Flying Man Our Teacher Miss Pool (2) Shared reading: Oh. No Mrs. Wishy Washy (2) The Farm Concert

11/1 1-5 Mrs. Wishy Washy Q.h .i- N o T h e Chijck and. the. Duckling.

11/2 1.25 2 books she Pie-Biter borrowed from the prison library: Playtime Kith Babx Jay., A, Buzz is Part of a Bee. T-Shirts Who is. Who?

11/5 2.0 S.t.QP. 1 Know Why Red Socks and. YeII.o.w S.o.cka .tb.e Caged. Who Is. Who? Bird Sings The Chick and Duckling Noise (2) The Cooking Pot (2)

11/8 CANCELLED BY DARCY

11/7 1.5 Our Teacher Miss Pool (2) Miss I Love Cats Rumohius Mrsr W i s j h z Washy Where is. Miss Pool? Along Qomss. Jake.

11/8 2.5 Where is. Miss. P.q .q .1?- I Know Why the Along Comes Jake Caged Bird Sings Just Like. Me. The Wreck of the Zephyr 226

TABLE 16 CONTINUED

11/9 2.0 Who Will Be My Mother? How My Parents Along Cones Jake Learned to Eat Pat's Hew Puppy 11/12 1.5 Along Comes Jake The Heart of a Fun With Mo and Toots Woman Shark in a Sack (2)

11/13 1.33 The Trolley Ride Same as above Wake Up . Mom The Cat. the bird and the tree (2)

11/14 1.5 Trz It Same as above S h a r k in. a Sack The Cat, t h e. B-ir.d and the tree (2) Painting (2) William's S.kat.eh.c a r d (2)

11/15 1.5 Willi am.Is Skateboard The Cat the Bird and the Tree Red Socks and Yellow Socks Our Teacher Hiss Eo.o.l. Stop Same as above Helping

11/16 1.75 Who. Is. Sim.?. 'Little Eight Pat s New Puppv John" from The William's Skateboard People C o u l d Helping Fly The Heart of a Woman. 11/19 2.0 The Red Rose The Heart of a Mrs■ Wishy Washy Woman Helping What Did Kim Catch? Little Car

11/20 2.0 Helping All 1 See What Did. Sim. Catch Little Car The Witch's Haircut (2) 227

TABLE 16 CONTINUED

11/21 1.25 Helping Little Car The Witch's Haircut The Eacar. Cxane. The Amazing Popple Seed.

11/28 1.75 D-sar. Santa She. Come Wake Up . Mom Bringing Ha. What Did Kim Catch? That Baby Girl Shark in a Sack The Amazing P.q b p _Is Seed Dad s Headache

11/27 2.5 The Witch's Haircut. Red Socks and Yellow Socks Dad's Headache The. Heart of a Helping Woman

11/28 1.25 Along Comes Jake Same as above Dad rs. Headache. Dan the Flving Man My Boat

11/29 2.0 Our Teacher Miss Pool Same as above The Witch's Haircut. Stop Hz Boat The Laughing Cake

11/30 3.0 Shark in a Sac.k Same as above What Did Kim Catch? The Laughing Cake Ants Love Picnics Too One Cold Wet Night 228

(e.g. using first and last letters to make predictions) in addition to meaning and structure cues. She also developed fluency and phrasing in reading, especially on familiar text.

Lee saw and heard fourteen high quality literary stories and picture books (see Table 16) that were selected based on knowledge gained from the original interview and knowledge of her life and interests that she discussed with me as instruction progressed. I read the picture books and stories to her, and conversations developed around the content and/or the pictures in the stories.

Table 17 presents the books Lee read in a different format. The book titles are ordered by the first time she read the story, followed by the number of times she read the story over the two month instructional period.

The last column shows the book's level of difficulty as determined by the Illinois Reading Recovery Booklist

(1989). Lee read twelve of the books four or more times. Of those twelve books, all but three had strong story patterns. Lee read the book Who Is Who? more than any other book (six times). This level 6 (beginning first grade) book has one short line of text on each page, is heavily patterned, with a plot about twin boys 229

TABLE 17

BOOKS LEE READ DURING INSTRUCTION

Book Title # of Times Read Level of Difficulty

Who Will Be My Mother? 4 10 The Red Rose 2 7 Who Is Who? 6 6 Stop 5 4 Wait Skates 1 13 The Bus Ride■ 1 4 The Trolley Ride 2 2 Red Socks and Yellow Socks 4 4 Too Many Balloons 1 6 Try It 2 5 Catch That Frog 1 8 Sam's Mask 1 7 Dan the Flying Man 2 4 Our Teacher Miss Pool 4 6 Mrs. Wishy Washy 4 8 The Farm Concert 1 5 Oh, No 2 9 The Chick and the Duckling 2 6 Playtime for Baby Jay 1 unknown A Buzz is Part of a Bee 1 unknown T-Shirts 1 9 Noise 2 12 The Cooking Pot 2 8 I Love Cats 1 unknown Where is Miss Pool? 2 5 Along Comes Jake 5 6 Just Like Me 1 7 Pat's New Puppy 2 7 Fun With Mo and Toots 1 3 Shark in a Sack 4 5 Wake Up, Mom 2 4 The Cat, the Bird and the Tree 5 8 Painting 2 3 William's Skateboard 4 11 Helping 5 10 What Did Kim Catch? 3 7 Little Car 3 10 230

TABLE 17 CONTINUED

The Amazing Popple Seed 1 11 Dad's Headache 3 10 The Witch's Haircut 5 12 My Boat 2 11 The Laughing Cake 2 10 Ants Love Picnics Too 1 7 One Cold Wet Night 1 6 231

who look exactly alike but have opposite likes and dislikes. Lee read five more books five times each.

These books ranged from level 4 to level 12. Two of the books were heavily patterned and three were not.

Working From Lee's Assessments and Interviews

The last day I met with Candy in prison was the first time I met Lee. Candy brought Lee with her so Lee could decided if she wanted to continue to meet with me.

Candy had set this whole meeting up herself, and told me, "I think [Lee would] be interesting for you [to work with]." When I asked Candy why she had told me about

Lee and gone to the trouble of arranging this meeting she said, "I've gotten some help and I wanted someone else to get help too." The catalyst in this meeting was

Candy's reading aloud of Hev. Al. The following excerpt from my field notes demonstrate an entire literacy event constructed from the reading of this book:

I ask [Candy] what she wants to [show Lee about our lessons] and she smiles and says "You know, did you bring it?" [referring to the book Hev.All. ...[Candy says to help [her] if she gets stuck. She first holds the book up like someone who is going to read to a group. The reading goes smoothly for the first three pages and [Lee's] body language show she's interested. A couple of times [Candy] asks me if she said a word right and I ask her if she thinks she's right — does it look okay and sound okay? She did this with [the words] "growled" and "snapped". At one point [Candy] stopped and [Lee pointed out to me] "She's stuck." ....But [Candy] figured it out by [herself]. When 232

we get to the page where the bird has stuck his bill into Al and Eddie's bathroom, [Lee] says, "Look — it's a big bird" and laughs. [Candy] laughs too and says "You ain't seen nothing yet." ([Candy] asks for some confirmation on [the word] 'Huh', which she has said perfectly! This is her best reading yet, but she is asking for more confirmation than normal....)

[Lee responding to picture]: Look! He dropped his suitcase.

Darcy: Yeah, he isn't going to need that where he's going!

([Candy] shows [Lee] how the island is shaped like a bird head): It took me a long time before I noticed that in this book. Umm. Here's the hard page [reads it carefully, stumbling over the word lush}.

When we get to the picture spread that shows all the birds looking at Al and Eddie who landed in a tree. Candy shows Lee the bird with human hands and head, asks me to help her show Lee this page. Lee asks with astonishment, "What kind of bird is THAT?"

On the next page (Al is drinking a pina colada and lounging in the stream).

Lee: He quit his job to go there!

Darcy: That looks like a great place.

Lee (to Candy): You read so exciting.

Candy (to Lee): You can learn to read out of books like that.

The next page shows Al and Eddie turning into birds. I hear an intake of breath from [Lee]. Twice she points to the feathers feathering out of Eddie's legs, "Look, he's growing wings." Then she points to Eddie's mouth which is turning into a duck bill, "Look at his mouth. Won't do him no good to leave now." All three of us laugh. By this time [Candy] is really relaxed and I comment 233

that this is just how books should be shared with people.

Throughout this reading when Candy fixes something up. I'm saying "I like how you did that" or "I like how you made it sound." At one point, I commented to Lee, "Doesn't she make it sound just like she's talking?" and Lee nods back....

Lee: This book is too hard for me now.

Candy: It was hard for me too. It's still hard for me.

Lee {after Candy finished the book}: Thank God [Eddie and Al] made it back to normal.

Candy: Well, what do you think?

Lee: Yes, I want to do this. Are there books like this I can read?

This literacy event was important for several reasons. Host of the students in this study demonstrated a distinct word orientation toward reading.

In this reading of Hev. Al both Candy and Lee experienced the act of reading or meaning and for pleasure, using pictures, text, and discussion to form a shared basis for knowledge construction. Lee also observed Candy functioning as an independent problem solver while reading text, instead of relying on me to correct her inaccuracies or help her the instant she stumbled while reading.

Lee let me know that she could spell anything in this initial meeting but that she could not read. 234

Several times in the early phases of our interactions, she mentioned that she could not understand why, if she could spell everything she saw, that she could not read.

Well, I can't read. I wish I could do what [Candy] does. I can write anything I see {spells a number of words from posters she sees on the wall: {Bolshevik, supermachoman (asks if the "p" is a "b"), get}.

Lee was always anxious to show me what a hard worker she was, was very vocal about what pleased and displeased her, and determined to "master" (a word she used frequently when talking about problems) reading.

I thought I would interview her first, as I had Candy.

My first question "Who helped you learn how to read?” made Lee very upset. She told me no one had ever helped her then told me stories about her childhood (e.g. experiences with sexual abuse from her uncle). Due to her distress, I then changed my tactics because it appeared that she needed to act, not to talk. On our first day alone, we did all the informal assessment tasks, and continued to read books when the interviewing started.

Following are excerpts from Lee's diagnostic summary that focus on her knowledge of reading, her knowledge of writing, and my thoughts about her

instructional direction: 235

Reading Summary Lee was confident that she knew all of her letters and scored 49/54. She knew all of the capital letters and the lower case letters that were confused were visually similar (e.g. b, d, p). She correctly identified 8 words on the word test and spelled out each of those words before she said them. From CAP I learned that she had good book handling skills, had directional behavior under control, understood the differences between words and letters and the concept of first and last. She did not notice many of the hierarchical or specific concepts about printed language i.e. did not identify the change in word or letter orders, located the word "went" for "was". She knew what a period or question mark was for but not the use of commas and quotation marks (but she did comment that she had seen people use those before in letters). The text reading was exciting for Lee. She told me she had never read a book through by herself yet she read 4 books on the first day we met. She tested out at Level 1 with 96% accuracy and no self-corrections. She could one-to-one match and was very focused on the words and letters, although she did comment that what you read has to make sense. She spelled out many words before she made an attempt and appealed to me frequently to read a whole sentence to her or tell her a word. She re read some sentences and words, occasionally self corrected and read with little expression or fluency. She read fast enough, however, to keep the meaning of the story going.

About reading, Lee said that "it's got to be hard or you're not reading" and that it was "cheating to look at the pictures for help." During the Literacy Survey and initial instruction, Lee frequently asked me questions about her performance, for example; "Did I do good?"

When I asked her how she felt she did, she would say 236

"You tell me. You're the teacher.” If spelling out a word did not work in a satisfactory resolution, Lee would immediately say, "Help me. I'm stuck", "What is that?" or "That word wouldn't be _____ would it?"

Lee was very observant about print and its message.

For example, just after I started working with her, Lee made this comment about the word "the" (which is a word that she could both read and write); "I see this word in everything you read — it shows up in every book." She also remembered trying to write "look" on the WV test

(which she wrote as "cook"). When she read the sentence

in a story that said “The boy looks at the monkey" she pointed to the word "looks" which she had just read as

"look" and said "That's that word I was trying to write." In another story, one of the sentences said "A

hippopotamus sat on the table." The picture on that page showed a number of animals and people sitting on the

table. Lee substituted the word "people" for

"hippopotamus", then said "woooo, that's a long word,

{pause} That still isn't right. It wouldn't be person."

Writing was very frightening for Lee; several times

she come close to crying while writing and told me how

upset she was about writing. I supported and cajoled

her to keep the writing tasks going. 237

Writing Summary Lee wrote some of her words in cursive writing and some in print. She wrote 14 words but attempted 25. She frequently appealed to me "Is that right?" and became very upset and shaky. She used both lower and upper case letters. It seems easier for her to print but she is determined to use cursive as much as possible. Lee was able to make some sound to letter correspondences in the dictation. She heard and wrote some of the beginning sounds of words like the "B" in bus, the "c" in coming, the "S" in stop. She attempted every word but "let" and was able to analyze 17 out of 34 sounds correctly. Some of the words were known words to her like "me" and "the". She wrote "the" for "get" and "me" for "her", and "Goob" for "on". She appealed quite a bit. She was able to say the words slowly but not get a full analysis of the sounds. The spacing and printing of the words were legible and left a space for the word that she didn't attempt.

From the interview, I learned that Lee did not want to learn how to write, she only wanted to learn to read.

Planning for instruction was challenging. The following excerpt from the diagnostic summary continues:

Instructional Direction [Lee's] literature background is very small. Reading to her might be an important part of her literacy program. Reading a number of brief paperback books will continue to make [Lee] feel like a good reader and will give her more experience with books and help her understand that she can be an independent reader. [Lee] is overly reliant on visual information but is starting to use meaning and structure cues to self-correct. For Lee, a lot of specific praise and support must be part of lessons, especially early on since she is so afraid of making mistakes. It will be important for [Lee] to understand how reading and writing support each other in the literacy learning process. [Lee] will need a non stress writing component for a while and the use of the cut-up sentence might help her appreciate 238

writing more. The use of magnetic letters will be important in [Lee's] instructional program to develop word analysis skills both in writing and reading. [Lee] needs to develop a larger repertoire of high-frequency words so writing becomes easier for her. Lee's strong resistance to writing was evident from the very beginning of our instruction. Her openness and attitude toward reading was just the opposite.

Observed Shifts in. Lee's Reading and Writing

Reading Shifts. Lee's early reading attempts were characterized by fear of getting something wrong. She

told me during the Word Test that “some of these [words]

I'm scared to say. It might be the wrong thing." Early

running records showed little evidence of self

correction or using multiple cue sources to solve

reading problems. Lee was a fast responder who saw

little value in reading a story once she had read it

through once.

Shifts in how and what Lee read occurred quickly.

When she said she "felt bad about looking at the

pictures" when she was reading, my field notes indicated

that 1 showed her what 1 did when 1 read:

1 said that [using pictures] was just another way to think about what was happening in the story. 1 got a book from Brenda's desk that was filled with text and charts and showed her how 1 kept referring to the chart while 1 read the explanation about it in the text. 239

When I asked Lee to show where she would be on a scaled chart where 1 was "reading is easy for me" and 10 was

"reading is hard for me", Lee circled the number 2 and told me that she would have circled the number 10 the previous week. When I asked why, she said she had changed and could now read. This interaction occurred during our fourth meeting together. She felt she was really reading and that a

change already occurred. You ain't getting the hardest book and making me read it. You're giving me something at my level. It encourages me.

Although we rapidly built a small library of books

Lee could read, she initially asked "why would I want to read that book again. I already read it." I explained that those books were just for easy practice. She began taking those books to her room and read them to anyone who would listen to her. New books to read, however, were extremely important to her. She asked almost daily what new books I had brought for her to read. Table 15 visually demonstrates how Lee read increasingly harder text as time passed. Interspersed are numbers of easier

text that I brought for her to try during our

interactions. During the last two weeks of instruction

Lee was consistently able to read higher level books

with more independence. 240

Two people, Lee's roommate/tutor and a prerelease teacher, commented that they thought Lee was memorizing the books. Lee's roommate later told me that "I thought she was memorizing everything — she has a good memory.

Now I can really tell she's really trying to sound out the words — each one." In our seventh session together, Lee re-read a book to me that she hadn't seen for about a week. Her reading was fluent and phrased, she had made a number of self-corrections, re-readings, and had appealed to me only once. Here is an excerpt from the dialogue that occurred after her reading this story:

Lee: You test me real good.

Darcy: Oh. I didn't want you to feel like I was testing you.

Lee: No. I like that. You had this book for a while and I showed myself I could still read it.

Darcy: Yes, you did. You weren't just remembering it, you were really reading it weren't you.

The larger Lee's reading library became, the more confidence she gained as a reader. During the two months Lee and I worked together, she progressed from a

Reading Recovery book reading level of 1 during the assessment phase to a reading level of 12 (i.e. from a preprimer level to a beginning grade 1 level). The more progress she made toward being an independent reader. 241

the less she relied on ne to tell her words or phrases, although I still got few neutral running records.

Although praise appeared to be very important to Lee, she began to praise herself in my language as she read.

For example, as Lee read I would comment appropriately after the action occurred:

I like the way you're reading that [story] like you talk to me.

I'm glad you noticed that word lovely has the word love in it. That was very smart of you.

That boy [in the story] didn't really scare his mother, did he.

Another example is shown in a dialogue Lee and I shared:

Darcy [after Lee had read the word "bowl" in the story and I heard a question in her voice}: Are you sure about that?

Lee: Yes, it's bowl. It has a "b" at the beginning.

Darcy: Yes. And there's a spot in the bowl in the picture, isn't there? I think I saw you look up there and check the first letter of the word. That's a good thing to do.

Lee began to direct problem-solving comments or praise to herself as she became a more proficient reader. For example as she read stories out loud, she would make comments like this:

That's not fish' cause fish would start with an 'f '.

It's 9 o'clock. [Mom] ought to be up. 242

This is the same thing back here {turns back to another page} like mom said. That's right. Now I've got it. Right on, [Lee]!

As Lee began verbalizing the processes and patting herself on the back for good problem solving, I offered fewer comments and less specific praise.

Other shifts occurred when I started reading to Lee as a daily part of our interactions. As I got to know

Lee, I felt that I knew some of her personal themes; hope, home, perseverance, family, and God were important to her. I brought a variety of picture books to our interactions for Lee's perusal and choice that I thought had some relevance to her own themes.

When I first started reading out loud to Lee, she wouldn't touch the books, even though I placed them directly in front of her as I read. Soon, however, she started turning the pages herself and made numerous comments about the illustrations or the story. She also told me that it made her feel calm when I read to her.

This field note entry and ensuing dialogue over Barbara

Cooney's Miss Rumohius (1982) provides the evidence:

Lee: Now read to me so I can settle back down.

Darcy: OK. I brought back the Maya Angelou book. I remember how you said you liked boxing so I thought you might like this story about Joe Louis winning the world heavyweight championship title. I also brought this book called Miss Rumohius. about a woman who loves flowers. 243

[Lee] thumbed through Miss Rumohius. Again it is with savoring that she looks at the picture books. She smiled and said that this was a beautiful looking book. Now when we read a picture book she is controlling the book; she turns the pages, she points out things in the picture. During this reading, I noticed that her eyes are flicking from picture to text constantly. During this book she says more than I've ever hear her say before.

During the reading, there was a running dialogue with

Lee about the furniture in this book. For example:

Lee {after I read page 5 . ..she is pointing to the chair that the grand-father and little Alice are sitting in): I like that kind of furniture. When I get out of here and I get a whole bunch of money. I'm going to buy me some furniture like that.

Darcy: What do you like about furniture like that?

Lee: I like antiques. You know that kind of sofa made like a camel-back {she draws a camel's hump with her hand} and it has brass feet....What kind of furniture people has tells you a lot about them.

Hear the end of the story, when Alice, the main character of the story, has become an old woman, Lee commented that she must have inherited all of her father's furniture and compared the furniture in the picture at the beginning of the book to one at the end

of the book. While she flipped back and forth from the

front of the book to the back, Lee detailed each piece

of furniture that had traveled with Alice through her

life. 244

Occasionally, if she thought the illustrations were particularly beautiful, she would stroke the pages with her hands as she discussed what she was seeing and hearing in the story. I fostered these comments and actions by making some of my own and/or asking her open- ended questions about the stories or illustrations as we read. Lee's stories about her life and her dreams started to weave around the stories from the books. For example, after reading Miss Rumohius. Lee told me about an antique bed she had owned once, described her collection of brass pieces, and told me what kind of furniture she was planning to buy when she had a lot of money.

I brought in Maya Angelou's adult novel The Heart af. a. Woman one day, and Lee realized, from a picture on the jacket, that she had seen Angelou on television.

During the last several weeks of interactions, Lee chose this book almost every day and told me about her first literary discussion with a staff person who knew and admired Maya Angelou. An observer's field notes from a day near the end of our interactions noted how Lee had mentioned several times how she participated in a literary conversation. Being able to participate in a conversation about an adult book by an important author 245

was a new experience for Lee. She found other books by

Maya Angelou in the prison library, checked then out, and brought then to our lessons.

In nid-Novenber I nade notes of all the reading strategies Lee had used during one of our lessons:

Reading behaviors observed [today]: nonitoring, self-correcting, re-reading for fluency and self- correcting, spelling out a known word before saying it, going back to check another page for infornation that night help solve a problen on a new page, talking herself through problens, [naking] nultiple attenpts to solve problens, checking pictures for help.

Lee had enlarged her repertoire of reading behaviors

fron the very first of our interactions.

Putting together the cut up sentence — a sentence generated by her own thoughts and written as a

collaborative effort — was one of the nost valuable

parts of the lesson for Lee. When putting together the

sentence she had to keep re-reading her message fluently

to determine what words came next, visually sort the

words to complete the task, and check herself to see if

she was right.

Lee evaluated her own progress from time to time.

She believes that she learned to read with me, although

she recognizes that she still can't read everything she

would like to read. During a recent telephone call she

said : 246

When you first started working with me, I couldn't read. I can read now. I pay more attention to words and things....! am able to read and not scared to pick up a book or something and try to figure it out.

Writing Shifts. Although Lee didn't want to write, she agreed to do it and writing appeared to become easier for her the longer we met. It continued to be difficult for Lee to hear sounds in words. If I articulated the word, she seemed able to hear more sounds. Through work with magnetic letters, fluent writing practice of words and letters, and using boxes for sound to letter analysis taken from the context of her reading and writing, Lee made some progress.

On the Writing Vocabulary test, Lee attempted to write 25 words on October 10 and received a score of 14.

Exactly two months later she made 29 attempts and scored

25. On the Dictation test, Lee originally scored 17 out of 37. Two months later, her score improved to 23.

Table 18 illustrates her progress.

After 21 interactions between Lee and me, Lee began to write me letters through the mail. I received four letters from Lee (three while she was incarcerated and one after she was released). She told me that she had never written a letter by herself, she always had dictated her letters to someone else. She was 247

TABLE 18

LEE'S PRE AND POSTTEST SCORES ON THREE LITERACY TASKS

Dictation Writing Vocabulary Text Level Reading

Pre 17 (37) 14/25 Level 1 @ 96%

Post 23 (37) 25/29 Level 12 @ 90%

resourceful in acquiring assistance and getting needed information for producing her short messages. He had this dialogue after 1 received her first message (see

Appendix D):

Darcy: ...Tell me about this letter. How did you do it?

Lee: I asked a girl to write a letter to you — she said no — your teacher would like one from you. You know 1 know "I" and "miss" and "you". She helped me with "very" and "much". "Happy" came from the Baby Jay book — you know, "Baby is happy. Baby is sad. ""

Darcy: I noticed the printing on the envelope looked different.

Lee: I was nervous because a girl was laughing at me and making fun. I cried and got all shook up...."very" I found in the word cards {the cut up sentences we put in envelopes}.

Twice Lee brought in lists of words she had written; and once she told me "you've been talking about writing so much 1 thought I should try to do more." The 248

first message Lee and I wrote together was "Bobby and

Johnny was twins." She wrote the B and the J. One of the last messages Lee and I wrote was "They made a kite ta catch the man." The underlined parts are parts that

Lee either analyzed in sound boxes or wrote herself.

Lee's struggles with and resistance to writing continued to reveal themselves in several ways. Lee's roommate observed us during a lesson at Lee's request.

When Lee was called away by a security guard to serve as a witness at an inmate trial, Lisa shared what she observed about Lee:

Lisa: [Lee] got upset with you about that [writing] test.

Darcy: Yes. I sensed that.

Lisa: ....She does say "I don't want to write — I want to learn to read. She doesn't write in the room, but she reads. She finds it fascinating. She does believe that she has to read first.

Later on in the month, Lee told me a story a woman from church who had shared with her about a boy who was having reading and writing problems. It seemed like an allegory for her struggles with writing:

The teacher [told the boy] to come to the blackboard and write for [her]. He had a hard time and it touched her. She realized he needed more help. She realized that he could read but he couldn't write and she thought he should start to write....So I do it {write with you}. I do it because I must. 249

He established a framework for reading and writing. I noticed that Lee began to tell me longer and more complex stories before generating a message to write. I began to wonder if she was using an elaborate avoidance technique.

When I Lee and I talked in December about her writing progress she put her thoughts together about

the writing parts of our interactions.

Lee: At first I didn't like writing, but now it's fun. I enjoy doing it now. You know, at first I didn't like it. I kept saying no and sometimes I would even get mad when it come to the point, but I'm doing really good now.

Darcy: Do you think it's important for people to know how to write?

Lee: Yeah. Because you don't know how to write, then you ain't going to be able to read.

Darcy: Is that a new thought that you had or have you always thought that?

Lee: No. I ain't always thought that. Sure, that's a new thought.

Lee viewed her writing progress by noticing that

she was enjoying writing more. I noted writing progress

in a different way; Lee could write more high frequency

words, could make more sound to letter analyses, could

write more independently, and was more willing to write. 250

SUMMARY

Data were gathered fron seven students' to explore their literacy knowledge. The data were gathered through informal assessments, interviews, instructional components, and from personnel who knew these students and existing records when available. To ensure reliability, the interview data were analyzed two ways: by aggregated responses based on the structured interview questions, and by emergent categories created by sorting and coding utterances. Member checks were used, when possible, to ensure reliability on the data that informed the instructional section of the analysis.

All of the subjects in the study had dropped out of school prior to high school graduation and all were parents. The students had participated in the past in a range of literacy experiences at home and/or at school.

All of the students expressed reading and writing goals and a belief that they could reach those goals. The students understood that to become better readers and writers, they must practice reading and writing. More of the students had express reading goals than writing goals.

The students were more interested in exploring reading than writing. Answers to questions and comments 251

about reading tended to elicit more complex and longer responses than those questions and comments regarding writing. Flexibility in reading tended to be more important to the students than flexibility in writing.

In fact, the students exhibited resistence to writing of any kind, and focused their writing efforts on neat penmanship and spelling.

The students responded favorably to the informal

Literacy Survey and produced a range of scores on each of the assessment components. No ceiling affects occurred on the assessment components. The Literacy

Survey revealed that all of the students had a body of usable reading and writing knowledge that would be beneficial in the instructional setting, even though each student's knowledge base was extensively varied.

The students perceived various bridges, barriers, and benefits to reading and writing. Perceived bridges involved utilizing human or computer literacy helpers, going to school, working and trying hard, and "sounding out" words when reading or writing. Perceived barriers revolved around having to master the functional aspects of language (e.g. grammar, spelling, penmanship) before becoming a good reader or writer, inappropriate previous schooling and/or upbringing, and physical or mental 252

handicaps. Perceived benefits focused on self- sufficiency in communication issues, and better quality life opportunities such as higher paying jobs, increased self-images, and being a "perfect" reader and writer.

One-to-one instruction based on information from the informal Literacy Survey and Literacy Interview were used to help two students make a range of reading and writing progress over time. One student. Candy, was tutored both inside and outside of prison, while the other, Lee, was only tutored while incarcerated. After

Candy was released from prison, the instructional program and focus shifted to Candy's family and survival problems. Candy became a more fluent reader and made no discernable writing progress. Lee had never read a book before and progressed one full reading grade level during instructional interactions, and could also write many more high frequency words fluently from when she started instruction.

Chapter Five presents a discussion and implications of the findings, answers the research questions and contains recommendations for further research. CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This chapter is organized around the four questions that framed and guided the study. For each question findings will be presented and discussed. Implications of the study are presented followed by suggestions for further research.

FUNDS OF KNOHLEDUE

QUESTION # 1: What funds of knowledge are reported by adult beginning readers and writers?

During the initial literacy interview, I asked questions about three different areas: the student's literacy history, the student's literacy goals, and the student's attitudes and beliefs about literacy.

Responses to the interview indicated that students brought funds of literacy knowledge from their experiences as children in school, as parents, as spouses, on the job and at home, and as adult learners.

These funds of knowledge translated into three categories of literacy learning: (1) perceived bridges to literacy; (2) perceived barriers to literacy; and

(3) perceived benefits of literacy.

-253- 254

Perceived bridges to literacy included both internal aiiid external factors. The students relied on various agents for literacy help. Family and friends, computers, educational opportunities, and using pictures to understand text were used by students in attempts to solve their reading and writing problems. Internal factors surrounding their bridges focused on practicing reading and writing, making an effort to learn, and using the decoding and encoding practices they thought were effective in becoming better readers and writers.

Students also perceived barriers to literacy. The

largest barrier category were the students' many references to their inability to be neat and accurate in writing and good word decoders in reading. But they cited other factors that they felt had influenced their perceived inability to read and write. External factors focused on poor health and other physical conditions

(e.g. not having glasses to wear when they were needed),

lack of or poor prior schooling, and difficult prior

home experiences. Students blamed themselves for their perceived lack of literacy knowledge which was revealed

in their comments about poor memory, short attention

spans, and their frustrations with learning in general. 255

The students believed that there were many benefits

to literacy and these surrounded issues of trust, issues

of communication, issues of opportunity, issues of self

esteem, and issues of perfection.

Bridges to Literacy

Fingeret (1984) and Moll (1991) discovered that beginning readers and writers have complex systems where

literacy agents in the form of family, friends and business associates are used when literacy assistance is needed. In this study, the students frequently made

references to their literacy agents but included

computers as agents, perhaps because the students

(unlike the majority of participants in Moll's and

Fingeret s studies) were all currently enrolled in some

educational setting where they had sought help on their

own and computers were readily available.

. Although the students looked to outside sources

(classes, family/friends, computers, pictures,

dictionaries) for literacy help, most of them told me

that no one had helped them learn to read and write;

whatever they knew, they had learned on their own. They

believed if they tried harder, studied more diligently,

and read and wrote more frequently they would become

better readers and writers. This view of learning to 256

read appears to be consistent with Smith's (1984) philosophy that good readers learn to read by reading.

How to accomplish that kind of successful reading was the problem. For instance, all of the students (except one) told me they sounded out words and I saw them use that strategy when they didn't know a word while reading, especially when reading at the frustration level. This practice frequently seemed to result in a loss of meaning. Both Lee and Candy (and other adult students I spoke with) were interested in buying the

"Hooked on Phonics" program, yet Candy and Lee told me several times that learning sounds for reading did not work for them. What students said about reading and writing did not always match what they did while reading and writing.

The students I studied were successful and independent in many ways: they knew how to get outside literacy help for their needs; they had families, income, jobs; they had some good ideas about how to help themselves become better readers and writers. Although they had many strengths, the students still did not know how to integrate the pieces of information they had about reading and writing to become independent readers and writers. Their ideas for how to improve their own 257

reading and writing were influenced by what they had experienced themselves in other schooling situations.

In some cases, students did not have any suggestions for what to do.

It was not surprising that students' views were

highly related to their experiences, which were not described as extensive as those experiences of

successful readers and writers. Since the students had

experienced little success with reading and writing practices, they were unsure about how to help others and

frequently how to help themselves. They seemed to base

their responses on the literacy activities in which they

had already observed or experienced. The students had more ideas about how a teacher might help a new literate

than how they might instruct someone themselves.

Although students were aware that becoming a better

reader and writer would mean reading and writing more

frequently they were not sure what processes and

practices would help them reach independence as readers

and writers. The lack of control the students felt over

their own reading and writing endeavors was tempered by

trust in their own abilities not only to survive (and to

have survived) their difficulties with literacy, but in

time, to learn to read and write well enough to meet 258

their needs.

Barriers to Literacy

All students appeared to be concerned with accuracy and "standard" English usage. They made frequent references to their inability to spell accurately, poor penmanship practices, and poor grammar usage. They felt that until they resolved those problems, they would not become better readers and writers. Accurate spelling, beautiful penmanship, and "good" grammar were seen as prerequisites to successful reading and writing. This view also appeared in the students' concerns over not being able to remember, making mistakes when reading, or not having enough help.

When children have difficulty learning to read and write, they are sometimes identified as "learning disabled." Instead, it may be that students are instructionally disabled (Lyons, 1989). Disabling instruction is instruction that exacerbates instead of untangles a learner's confusion. Through my observations and discussions with the students, I found that they had a great deal of knowledge about reading and writing but they did not always use what they knew about language to solve their own reading and writing problems. Not using language knowledge could be a 259

function of past instruction experienced in school.

Research (see Allington & Broikou, 1988) has demonstrated that low progress readers and writers received instruction qualitatively different from that of high progress readers and writers. Such instruction may have influenced the views of students interviewed in this study. The majority of students in this study may have previously received “disabling" instruction rather than the richer reading and writing experiences in which more successful readers and writers participated.

Benefits of Literacy

The students in this study expressed belief in what

Graff (1987) had termed the "literacy myth." Reading and writing better would mean they would not have to trust others for help; they would be free to communicate through letters; they would have better jobs; they would feel better about themselves; and they could join the ranks of a perceived literate perfection. These beliefs are supported by the popular press and government efforts.

One of the GED instructors told me that "when the economy is bad, ABE [enrollment] is good." Efforts are underway to require minimum competency reading levels before felons can be released from prison. Business' 260

entry into workplace literacy efforts has brought a new awareness of literacy learning to more people. Students are surrounded by the propaganda of literacy daily. It

is therefore not surprising that the students wanted to become more literate. Buchanan-Berrigan's study (1989) demonstrated that adult beginning readers and writers do want access to "mainstream" literacy.

SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF READING AND WRITING

QUESTION # 2: What do adult beginning readers and

writers know about reading and writing?

The informal literacy survey contained six tasks

designed to discover a student's reading and writing

knowledge. The six tasks included the following tests:

(1) Letter Identification; (2) Word Test; (3) Concepts

About Print; (4) Writing Vocabulary; (5) Dictation; and

(6) Text Reading Level.

Letter Id^jtLtjXLQ.ajfc.AoJi

Students identified upper and lower case letters of

the alphabet almost exclusively by the letter names.

Overall, the students demonstrated high knowledge of

letter names — the mean score was 4 7 . 8 out of a

possible ceiling of 54. Scores ranged 20 to 54. 261

Word Test

Students ranged in word recognition knowledge from a low of 0 to a high of 76. No one read an entire list of high frequency words with total accuracy.

Concepts About Print

Results of the CAP test indicated students had a

high level of knowledge about books and the nature of print. The mean score was 19 of a possible 24, with a

range of 8 to 23. All of the students demonstrated

awareness that print contains a message, that English

written language is read from left to right and top to

bottom, and that readers return to the left to read the

next line of print. They had greater difficulty with

details of print such as the name and use of punctuation

or the hierarchical concept of letters within words.

Writing Vocabulary

Each student had a lexicon of words s/he could

write and all could write their own first and last

names. Over 90% of the words they wrote were one

syllable words (excluding personal names). All students

required prompting at some point during the 10 minute

writing session. The mean score was 34.2 with a range

from 3 to 57. 262

Dictation

All students demonstrated a knowledge of sound to letter correspondences. Scores ranged from 4 to 61.

One student listed the words like a spelling test, all the rest of the students wrote horizontally across the page. The students also received an accuracy score. No one spelled all of the words accurately. Accuracy scores ranged from 0 to 16.

Text Level Reading

All students read at least 3 books or stories. Two of the students had never read a book before and they scored at preprimer or readiness levels. Three of the students scored at a fourth grade level, one at a sixth grade level, and one at the seventh grade level.

Analysis of error behavior at the frustration level of four of the five students who read above a preprimer level exhibited a heavy reliance on the use of visual cues. One of those five students was never tested to the frustration level because he stopped attending the class where I net with him.

Literacy Survey Summary

I had expected ceiling effects in using Clay's informal reading and writing assessments but students did not reach maximum levels. The assessments produced 263

valuable information about each student's knowledge and processing of reading and writing. Some adult literacy experts (Bowen, 1987; Weber, 1985) contend that material appropriate for children should not be used with adults but this study does not support that contention. To the contrary, students had a favorable response to the materials used although one student suggested

incorporating more adult-looking illustrations in some of the reading and testing materials. Books which were meant for children frequently had sophisticated themes

and/or also utilized humor. Perhaps the particular book

selection process (based on the teacher's knowledge of

individual students) crossed age barriers.

Two of the students in this study had not been given any kind of reading or writing assessment because

they identified themselves to program coordinators as

non-readers. It is not surprising that the coordinators

did not test the students because, as Jackson (1990)

pointed out, most tests of adult literacy require at

least a first grade reading level, and most are written

on a second grade level. The results of the Literacy

Survey indicate, however, that even so-called non

readers can read and write something. The testing

situation surrounding the Literacy Survey tended to have 264

some instructional effect on the two "non-reading" students. Although much is written about making adults students feel comfortable in the initial teacher/student contact (Knowles, 1990) little is written about how to make adult beginning readers and writers feel like readers and writers during initial assessment. Both Lee and Leonard (who were reading at the preprimer level) expressed pleasure at being able to read the books I brought for them to try during the assessment. Leonard asked to borrow two of the books so he could read them

to his family that night and Lee took the assessment books back to her room to read again. Jones (1981) and others have suggested the best way to assess an adult beginning reader is to find something the student can

read and something the student wants to be able to read,

and then to observe the reading behavior as the adult

reads.

I reported text level reading scores as grade level

scores for the convenience of the research consumer but

grade level scores were not nearly so meaningful to me

as information obtained from observing and recording

each student's production and process of reading and

writing. As Jones (1981) stated

we tend to test in a manner that renders scoring which is precise but may be misrepresentative in 265

terms of what it measures. Certainly in the adult student's case, the issue is not his grade level, or even how he compares with other students on particular reading subskills, but how he can be helped to read what he wants and needs in his daily life and work (p. 129).

For the students who had taken standardized reading tests, there was a tendency for the Text Level Reading scores to indicate a higher grade level than the scores on the standardized tests (see Table 8). This discrepancy may be a result of the interactive nature of the informal Literacy Survey. I introduced every story before the reading, and suggested looking at the pictures or skimming the text before reading the story aloud. Another important characteristic of the Literacy

Survey, may have been the absence of multiple choice questions that probed specific item knowledge and a formal spelling test. Instead, these assessments were designed to reveal what students know and to allow them to demonstrate that knowledge in a supportive environment.

Candy had heard the term assessment before and told me there was a big difference between assessments and tests. She explained that

assessments see where you are, see how much you know [but] tests — you have to do it to get a driver's license, in schools, in jobs. If I don't pass my test, I don't get no driver's license but if they assess me it doesn't matter what I know." 266

The students appeared to understand that I was interested in understanding their reading and writing processes and strategies.

Although the mean scores of the tests tended to be high, the range of scores was wide. Host of the students identified themselves as illiterate or non readers yet the variance of literacy knowledge in the group of seven students was substantial (see Table 6).

This variance is an indication of the diverse nature of an adult group of literacy learners and provides further evidence for the benefits of obtaining a detailed profile of each adult beginning reader and writer before and during instructional interactions.

Almost all words written by the students in the

Writing Vocabulary test were monosyllabic, an outcome that may indicate their focus on penmanship and spelling. It makes sense that shorter words are easier to write and there are fewer risks of error. Students were supported by a set of prompts that I used when they

could not think of words to write. For example, I might

say "Are there some words you write at home or on the job?" Supportive prompting helped remove the limitation

of the student's memory for words they could write but

the assessment continued to be constrained by words 267

students were sure they knew how to spell.

HOW ASSESSMENT CAN INFORM INSTRUCTION

QUESTION # 3: How did information from a literacy

interview and an informal literacy survey inform the

instruction of two adult beginning readers and writers?

To address this question, selected data from the

Literacy Survey and the Literacy Interview of Candy and

Lee was used. The informal literacy survey revealed

specific reading and writing information about each

student that included:

1. a lexicon of known words to use in writing;

2. a lexicon of known high frequency words to use in reading;

3. a knowledge of sound to letter analyses to assist in both reading and writing;

4. the use of cue systems in reading at the frustration, instructional, and easy text level;

5. the strategies controlled during reading and writing;

6. knowledge about the conventions of printed English; and

7. self-correction and accuracy rates based on the reading of connected text.

Knowledge generated from the literacy interview

provided the following information about each student:

1. background knowledge and previous experiences with literacy; 268

2. affective factors that might inhibit literacy learning;

3. general areas of interest;

4. current beliefs and attitudes about literacy; and

5. opportunity to compare each student's theories about reading and writing with his or her actual practice of reading and writing.

The combination of this knowledge enabled me to frame the instruction in these ways:

1. Select books for students to read based on student interests and instructional reading level.

2. Select books to read aloud to students based on their interests.

3. Select writing prompts, as needed, based on student interests.

4. Know which words to write for the students, which words to take to fluency, which words to help them analyze.

5. Enow what kinds of strategy questio.s to ask students during instruction.

6. Avoid instructional practices that had been unsuccessful for the students in the past.

7. Consider affective factors that might make learning difficult.

8. Make explicit for students that what they say about reading and writing might be different from what they do.

9. Make explicit for students what successful readers and writers do.

10. Notice and attend to, on an ongoing basis, what effective strategies students were applying 269

while reading and writing.

11. Help students develop awareness of their own strategies applied while reading and writing text.

Both Candy and Lee told me they were illiterate and that neither liked the term. Yet an analysis of their reading and writing behaviors showed they were different from each other. Candy had a larger lexicon of known words, and greater control of sound to letter correspondences. She was reading seven grade levels higher than was Lee. I selected different books for the two women based on their interests and reading levels.

Candy started instruction with an indefinite body of words that she could write, while Lee had 14. There was

little need to teach Candy to write high frequency words fluently because she already could. For Lee, however,

taking words to fluency would be beneficial because she

had control of so few.

Jones (1981) has described the delicate tension

that exists between the adult beginning reader and writer and the instructor. He stated that the adult

beginning reader "often....depends on [the] teacher to

establish reading purposes and goals, and thus tends to

adopt a passive role toward instruction" (p. 84).

Collaborative interaction was difficult for me to 270

establish with both Candy and Lee, perhaps because the paramilitary atmosphere in the prison was not in keeping with collaborative efforts, because we were trying something new, and/or because the length of the instructional period was not long enough.

Both Candy and Lee expressed resistance to writing, preferring instead to read. The production of print seemed to present a more difficult and daunting aspect of literacy than did the reading of print. In fact, all of the students in the study exhibited fear and resistance to writing. Evidence from interviews and ongoing comments suggests a consuming interest in neatness and accuracy inhibited these writers' production of print. Forester (1988) found that adult beginning writers develop writing in ways similar to children's patterns of development. Over time, adults go through a series of invented spelling stages until the production is accurate. First, however, they have to overcome their reluctance to engage in this challenging process. My information from interviews provided good insights about Lee's and Candy's attitudes toward writing. I talked to them about the value writing had in the reading process and supported their efforts to write. 271

Informal assessments and interviews reveal much useful information about adult new readers and writers.

After reviewing the trends and issues of adult literacy assessments, Metz (1990) concluded that:

Assessment of the adult learner can be conducted on an informal, nonthreatening basis. The cultural, physiological, psychological, and educational characteristics of the learner can be noted through a series of informal interviews over a period of several sessions. Learner interests and goals can be discussed on an ongoing basis by the tutor and the learner. Reading level can be determined through an informal reading inventory and the learner's miscue analysis. While these methods of assessment may take more time than a standardized test and formal intake interview, more appropriate information can be obtained. Rapport would be built between learner and tutor, the self-image of the learner would be enhanced as the program would be learner centered, and the goals and needs of the individual learner would be met. Success would be built into the program. Progress would be noted as each goal of the learner is reached and new goals would be established as part of an ongoing assessment program (p. 469).

The findings of my study are in keeping with the views expressed by Metz. I was able to use the information from both the Literacy Interview and the Literacy Survey

in ways that seemed to be productive for both Candy and

Lee.

PROGRESS OF INSTRUCTED STUDENTS

QUESTION # 4: What was the progress of two beginning adult readers and writers who participated in one-to-one

instruction based on information from an informal 272

literacy survey and literacy interview?

Over a two month period during which we met 28 times for an average of 1.5 hours per session, Lee progressed from reading at a preprimer stage to reading materials at a first grade level. Lee read 48 short paperback books from the Reading Recovery program during the instructional phase of the study, wrote 29 messages, and 3 letters. She told me she had never read books or written by herself before. She scored 17 on the

Dictation Pretest and 23 on the posttest. She wrote 14 words accurately on the Writing Vocabulary Pretest and

25 on the Posttest. Lee started to read with fluency and phrasing during initial instruction and continued to do so, even as the books became more difficult. She began to integrate meaning, language structure and visual cues in the last several weeks of instruction.

Over a three month period, during which we met 23 times for an average of 1.5 hours per session Candy read

7 novels and longer picture books and generated 7 messages and 2 letters. Candy progressed from reading

in a choppy monotone to reading with phrasing and fluency. Initially, she relied heavily on visual cues and did not self-correct as she read. As we continued to meet, she began to use meaning and syntactic cues 273

along with visual cues to self-correct. I noted no other progress in reading or writing. I did not give

Candy a posttest because her pretest scores were very high.

One observer of an instructional session with Lee commented that the parallels of progress between Lee and

a Reading Recovery program child were remarkably

similar. Lee exhibited more independence in both

reading and writing near the end of the instructional period than the beginning. She learned how to use a

repertoire of strategies to solve reading and writing

problems but never became a fully independent reader and

writer. Some literacy educators have suggested that

well over 100 hours of instruction are necessary to

effect progress in adult beginning readers and writers.

Lee had less than 50 hours of instruction.

It was difficult to get a neutral running record

from Lee because she frequently insisted that I tell her

words or read her a phrase or sentence if she could not

figure it out herself on the first try. As we worked

together, this behavior decreased. A roommate that Lee

read to made some observations about Lee's progress in a

letter to me:

I noticed [Lee] was very excited about reading, but got very nervous when she was getting ready to say 274

the wrong word. Towards the end [of instruction] she didn't seem quite so nervous about mistakes, but I could tell the feeling was still there. I noticed later that she didn't want me to correct her. Sometimes I would, without thinking, and she would seem upset that I didn't give her enough time to figure the word out.

It was apparent that Lee's early favored methods for solving reading problems were to spell out the word and ask me to tell her the words, methods I noticed other beginning readers and writers use as well. As Lee's reading and writing experiences increased, she developed strategies that were more like those of successful readers and writers.

Guthrie & Kirsch (1984) and others suggest that 100 hours or more of instruction are needed to achieve high levels of independent literacy functioning with beginning adult readers and writers. Although 42 hours of interactions (and an unknown number of hours Lee read to her roommate and others in the prerelease center) produced many changes in Lee's reading and writing habits, it was not enough for her to become a fully

independent reader and writer.

Because of the number of reading and writing activities in which Lee and I participated (e.g. shared reading, reading to, independent reading, writing a message, word analysis, cut up sentence), no single 275

instructional item can really be isolated as the most powerful method for helping Lee grow towards reading and writing independence. As Mooney (1988) stated

no single approach is sufficient for any [student], nor is any predetermined combination of approaches. Mixing and matching will occur within any one day and within any part of one day, according to the [student's] attitudes and abilities, the purpose of the reading, and the materials used (p.6).

Candy's progress was minimal. There are several possible reasons for this occurrence. While Candy was incarcerated, we met on a regular daily basis for the first 14 times. Once Candy was released from prison, our meetings were sporadic and included her eight year old son John. We met together only 11 more times after

Candy's release but there was no consistent interaction.

For instance, three of those times were discussions that centered around other aspects of Candy's life. Three more times centered around attendance at the ABE program. One time I worked alone with John. During the other four times we read books and wrote messages.

Perhaps there was not enough focused time on literacy learning, and other needs became more important.

From the beginning. Candy was also a more accomplished reader and writer than she gave herself credit for. The instructional procedures I used might not have been appropriate for her level of literacy 276

understanding. Since Candy was the first student I

assessed and instructed in the study, it is possible

that I had not yet gained enough flexibility with

procedures, methods, and an accurate understanding of

Candy's wants and needs to develop the most productive

and beneficial reading and writing activities with and

for her. Although the Literacy Survey and Literacy

Interview drew a revealing portrait of Candy, I was not

able to fully utilize the wealth of information they

revealed in my instruction.

Findings illustrate the complexities of working

with adults and the challenges to teachers of adults.

Different literacy levels may require different

procedures and techniques.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

Although the "Each One Teach One" philosophy of

literacy learning espoused by the majority of literacy

programs in the United States has face value, it

describes a process that may not be sufficient to help

adult beginning readers and writers become fully

literate members of society. Meek (1986) stated

As research makes available to us more evidence of the processes of reading and writing and of the ways in which the associations of literacy most powerfully penetrate the operations of our society, ignorance of these processes and functions becomes for teachers both a professional handicap and a 277

shirking of a social responsibility (p. 443).

Chisnan (1989) and two major government sponsored reports (America 2000 and High Skills or Low Wages) call for major changes to support literacy education but have ignored Mitchell's (1988) and Schorr's (1988) suggestions that include supporting literacy through housing, health, employment, and social consciousness.

The findings from this study have implications for both educators of adult beginning readers and writers and adult beginning readers and writers themselves.

Implications for adult literacy educators encompass the following:

1. Literacy educators need an understanding of literacy processes to help adult beginning readers and writers make rapid progress in learning to read and write.

2. Literacy educators need access and information about informal literacy assessments and their use.

3. Informal literacy assessments and interviews, both initial and ongoing, offer valuable information about adult beginning readers and writers as well as inform individual instruction.

4. Literacy educators need to develop in-depth profiles on adult literacy learners and use that knowledge appropriately to design instruction.

5. Instructional techniques and procedures from Reading Recovery may be more beneficial for those adult beginning readers and writers who are reading below first grade levels. 278

The findings for adult beginning readers and writers suggest that they need:

1. access to the same kinds of reading and writing experiences and materials that successful readers have.

2. instructors who know how to value and use each student's knowledge of literacy.

3. Literacy experiences that free them from the tyranny of accuracy and perfection while beginning to learn how to read and write.

4. Literacy assessments that allow students to demonstrate their current reading and writing strengths.

5. Enough time to learn how to read and write independently and to explore the personal values reading and writing have to offer.

6. Integrated help from multiple community and social agencies.

It is important that literacy learning does not become a scapegoat for the ills of society at large. If literacy is a social construction then the inverse must also be true. Illiteracy does not cause poverty, crime, and low level thinking. In fact, the literacy levels of newly incarcerated women risen by 10% over the last five years.

Literacy will never be the sole salvation of any individual or the United States. The literacy wants and needs of the state will never be achieved until the social and literacy wants and needs of the individual 279

are considered.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Many adult literacy educators have called for changes in assessment practices for the adult beginning reader and writer. With the current emphasis on literacy education for the large population of adult beginning readers and writers, research on literacy assessment is likely to become a major trend in the next decade.

There will not be enough tax dollars to support the educational reform that is being demanded by the current administration. The one-to-one instruction that many educators think is necessary to help most beginning adult readers and writers will be difficult to support financially.

Most literacy initiatives tend to focus on reading.

Writing processes and practices in adult beginning readers and writers is largely unexplored. Although researchers have established a supportive learning link between the processes of reading and writing, few adult literacy programs have made use of that link in either assessment or practice.

Based on my own learning and observations from this study, my recommendations for further research include: 280

1. Case studies of other informal literacy assessments and how they are used to inform instruction of adult beginning readers and writers.

2. Modification of the informal assessments used in this study and administration to a larger population of adult beginning readers and writers to establish validity and reliability.

3. A comparison of the effectiveness of one-to-one literacy instruction to the effectiveness of small group literacy instruction for adult beginning readers and writers.

4. Ethnographies and case studies that explore the reasons for the extreme resistance to writing exhibited by adult beginning readers and writers.

5. Studies of successful writing acquisition in adult beginning reading and writing instruction.

6. Studies of the use of computers in the assessment and instruction of adult beginning readers and writers.

7. Analyses of the discourse between teacher and the adult beginning reading and writing student during literacy assessment and instruction.

' 8. Studies of the value of picture books in helping adults learn how to read and write.

9. Comparative research on one-to-one versus group instruction of the adult beginning reader and writer.

The replication of this study with a larger population of students would be useful. Using and modifying the techniques and procedures with more students who were at preprimer levels would offer continuing insights into the emergent reading and 281

writing processes of the adult new literate. While there is undeniable evidence that adult beginning readers and writers have a body of literacy knowledge that is constructed from the context of their backgrounds, beliefs, culture, attitudes, and interests they do not always know how to use their acquired knowledge to achieve the kind of literacy they desire.

How those individual desires can be achieved deserves more in-depth reflection and exploration through both informal literacy assessments and instruction. APPENDIX A

LITERACY INTERVIEW

-282- 283

Part 1. READING AND WRITING HISTORY (rev. 9/13/90)

I'd like to ask you some questions about your reading and writing history. There are no right or wrong answers here; I'd just like to know what you remember and what you think.

1. Who helped you learn how to read? How did they help you?

2. Who helped you learn how to write? How did they help you?

3. Did anyone read to you in your past? Who? (School or home?) What do you remember about that experience?

4. Have you ever read to anyone else? Who? What are some of the things you remember about that experience?

5. Are you a parent? When do you think kids should learn how to read? How to write?

6. When you were growing up, what did people around you read? What other reading materials do you remember at home or at school?

7. When was the last time someone read to you?

8. When you were growing up, what did people around you write? What writing materials do you remember seeing at home or at school?

9. What do you remember most about being in school?

10. Any teachers that you really remember? Who? Why?

11. What was the last grade level you completed in school?

12. Is there anything else you want to tell me about your reading and writing history?

13. Any questions you'd like to ask me? 284

Part 2. READING AND WRITING GOALS (rev. 10/17/90)

Now I'd like to hear about some of your goals.

1. Why do (did) you come (go) to ______classes?

2. Have you gone to these classes before? How long? Tell me about that experience.

3. Do you have some reading goals? Tell me about them.

4. Do you have some writing goals? Tell me about them.

5. What do you think you need to do to be able to reach your reading goals?

6. What can a person who wants to help you reach your reading goals do?

7. What do you think you need to do to be able to reach your writing goals?

8. What can a person who wants to help you reach your writing goals do?

9. What do you read (or look at) now? (prompts if needed). Can you think of anything else?

Id. What do you like to read? Why?

11. What would you like to do better to be a better reader?

12. What do you write now? (prompts if needed). Can you think of anything else?

13. What do you like to write?

14. What would you like to do better to be a better writer?

15. After you have read something once, is there any value for you in reading it over again? Why?

16. After you have written something once, is there any value in reading it or rewriting it for you? Why? 285

17. What do you think would be different in your life if you could read better? What do you think would be different in your life if you could write better?

18. Is there anything else about your goals you want to tell me? Any questions for me now?

Part 3. RESPONSE TO TESTS (rev. 9/13/90)

(To be asked directly after administration of the Literacy Survey). I'd like to know your thoughts about taking these tests.

1. What did you think of these tests?

2. Was there any part of this test that you felt was silly/inappropriate/insulting? What part? Why? What would you do to improve this part?

3. Was there any part of this test that you feel was not necessary and could be eliminated in the future? If so, what part? Why?

4. Was any part of this test fun or enjoyable to you? Which part? Why? Can you suggest some improvements?

5. Was any part of this test interesting to you? Which part? Why? Improvements?

6. Have you taken any tests like this before? When? Where?

7. What other tests have you taken that you remember? Tell me about that experience?

8. Is there anything else you want to tell me about tests?

9. Any questions for me? 286

Part 4. READING AND WRITING BELIEFS (rev. 8/26/90)

(adapted from C.L. Burke, 1980).

Now I d like to ask you about some of your beliefs about reading and writing. 1. When you are reading and come to something you don't know, what do you do? Do you ever do anything else?

2. When you are writing and oome to something you don't know how to say or spell, what do you do? Anything else?

3. Who is a good reader you know? What makes ____ a good reader?

4. Do you think__ ever comes to something s/he doesn't know when s/he's reading?

5. If yes: When ____ comes to something s/he doesn't know while reading, what do you think s/he does about it?

6. If you knew someone was having difficulty reading, how would you help them?

7. What do you think a teacher would do to help that person?

8. Who is a good writer you know? What makes ____ a good writer?

9. Do you think__ ever comes to something s/he doesn't know when s/he's writing?

10. If yes: When comes to something that s/he didn't know while writing, what do you think s/he does about it?

11. If you knew someone was having difficulty writing, how would you help them?

12. What do you think a teacher would do to help that person?

13. What is reading? 287

14. What is writing?

15. On this scale, rate yourself as a reader (writer).

16. Is it important to be a good reader? Is it important to be a good writer? Why?

17. Anything else you want to say about your reading and writing beliefs? Any questions you'd like to ask me?

READING AND WRITING SCALES

Reading is Reading is easy for me hard for me

Writing is Writing is easy for me hard for me APPENDIX B

LITERACY SURVEY

- 2 8 8 - 289

K W

B H O U

Q M

D N

n 290

TASK #1 LETTER ID: Score: What do you call these? Tell me the ones you know. Notes:

TASK #4 WRITING VOCABULARY: Score:______I'd like you to write all the words you can think of in 10 minutes. Write your name first. Possible prompts: your address, family members' names, foods you like to eat. words you use on the job or at home, little words like I, am, a. is. it, was. be, you. him, he. she. etc. Notes:

TASK #5 DICTATION: Analysis score: ______Accuracy Score: ______I'm going to tell you a story. I'll say the story once, then I'll repeat the story slowly so that you can write it down. Three soldiers jumped 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 o V e r a 1 i t t 1 e 3 t r earn. T h 1516 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2425 28 27 28 w a t e r w a s V e r y c o Id a n d 2930 31 32 33 34 35 36 373839 404142 43 44 45 46 t h e i r f e e t g Q t d r i P P i n g 47 49 50 51 52 53 54 5556 57 565960 61 62 63 64 wet. 65 65 67 Notes: 291

the like or said of have what and an up to they its a which about in one into that you than is were them was her can he all only for she other it there new with would some as their could his we time on him these be been two at has may by when then I who do this will first had more any not no my are if now bat out such from so our 292

Stones

Marie Clay

The stone rolled down eth hill bumping thsi way and that. Would it tsop by the gaet ? Or go on to the bend ? 293

TEST#3 CONCEPTS ABOUT PRINT SCORE SHEET

TEST SCORE Date: ______S lo n e s:______Sand: — /24

Name: . School:

Recorder: ______Classroom Teacher: Use the script when administering this test. Scoring: ✓ (Checkmark) correct response. • (Dot) incorrect response. PAGESCORE ITEM COMMENT

Cover 1. Front of book

2/3 2. Print contains m essage

4/5 3. Where to start 4. Which way to go 5. Return sweep to left 6. Word by word matching

6 7. First and last concept

7 8. Bottom of picture

a/9 9. Begin The' (Sand) or T (Stones) bottom line, too OR turn book

10/11 10. Line order altered

12/13 11. Left page before right 12. One change in word order 13. One change in letter order

14/15 14. One change in letter order 15. Meaning of ?

16/17 16. Meaning of period/full stop 17. Meaning of comma 18. Meaning of quotation marks 19. LocateMmHh (Sand) OR Tl Bb (Stones)

ia'is 20. Revsrsibis 'words 'was, rro

20 21. One letter: two letters 22. One word: two words 23. First and last letter of word 24. Capital letter 294

Name Date __

Text Level _

Recorder Accuracy SC Rate

Observations :

page/pav'a^rciph SC sc APPENDIX C

RESEARCH PERMISSION

-295- 296

RESEARCH PERMISSION

I understand that I am part of a study to help find out more about how adults can become better readers and writers. 1 also understand that Darcy Bradley is trying to make up a better test to help find out what adults already know about reading and writing, in order to provide better reading and writing instruction for other adults.

1 understand that Darcy will take notes and/or tape record my responses during interviews and tests.

1 have been told that my real name will never be used in any writing and that a code name will be used for me in this study. 1 understand that Darcy Bradley will keep the original notes and tapes from this study but that she obligated to keep all personal information anonymous.

1 also understand that participation in this study is voluntary and that 1 can stop participating at any time.

1 have been promised a novel that I can keep for helping in this study.

Name.

Witness.

Date. APPENDIX D

LEE'S LETTER

-297- 298

l/e/y

[ L t Ê iY/n5 LIST OF REFERENCES

Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read : Thinking and learning about print. Bradford.

Adler, M.J. (1982). The paideia proposal : An educational manifesto. New York: Macmillan.

Allington, R.L. & Broikou, K.A. (1988). Development of shared knowledge: A new role for classroom and specialist teachers. The Reading Teacher (41). 8, pp. 806-811.

America 2000: An education strategy. (1991). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

America's choice: High skills or low wages. (1990). Executive summary. Rochester, NY: National Center on Education and the Economy.

American Psychological Association. (1984). Publication manual of the American psychological association. Washington, DC: APA.

Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A., & Wilkinson, I.A.G. (1984). Becoming a. nation of. readers Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education.

Anderson, R.E., & Darkenwald, G.G. (1979). Participation and persistence in American adult education. New York: College Entrance Examination Board. (ED181186).

Anderson, W. (1990). Read with me. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

A m o v e , R.F. & Graff, H.J. (1987). National literacy campaigns: Historical and comparative lessons. Phi Delta Kappan. (69) 5, pp. 202-208.

Balmuth, M. (1986). Essential characteristics of effective adult literacy programs : A review and analysis of the research. New York: The Adult Beginning Reader Project, Kingsborough Community College, CUNY. -299- 300

Barnes, R. (1986). Adult literacy estimates for states■ Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Bauer, E. (et.al) (1985). Outcome based curriculum development project including the areas of preliteracy, literacy, commuaitv/home coping skills. final report. Provo City School District: Utah. (ED29Ü000)

Bethancourt, T.E. (1990). Dear long lost Monica. Columbia, SC: Educational Developmental Laboratories.

Bhola, H.S. (1982). Campaigning for literacy: A critical analuysis of. some selected literacy campaigns of the 20th century. Paris: UNESCO/International Council for Adult Education (p. 211).

Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S. (1982). Qualitative research for, education : An. introduction tn theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Boraks, N. & Richardson, J. (1981). Teaching the adult beginning reader : Designing research based reading instructional strategies. Paper presented at the College Reading Association, Louisville, KY.

Bowen, F.F. (1987). Adult reading needs adult research models. Journal af. Reading (31). 3, pp. 208-212.

Brizius, J. & Foster, S. (1987). Enhancing adult literacy: A policy guide. Washington, D.C.: Council of State Planning and Policy Agencies.

Brookfield, S.D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers - San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, N.M. (1985). Elan. £ox tutoring a du l t , readers - Iowa: Drake University. (ED260198).

Buchanan-Berrigan, D.L. (1989). Using children's books w.i.th adults.:- Negotiating literacy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbus: The Ohio State University. 301

Butler, A. & Turbill, J. (1984). Towards a reading- writing classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Calkins, L.M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Campos, H.D. (1990). Reading the world. UNESCO Courier (nv) December, pp. 4-6.

Carroll, J.B. & Chall, J.S. (1975). Toward a literate society. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse : The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Chall, J.S. (1967). Learning to read : The great debate. New York: HcGraw Hill.

Chall, J.S. (1979). The great debate: Ten years later, with a modest proposal for reading stages, in L.B. Resnick & P.J. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chall, J.S. (1983). Stages of Reading Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Chall, J.S. (January 1984). New views on developing basic skills with adults. Paper presented at the National Conference on Adult Literacy.

Chall, J.S. (1987a). Developing literacy... in children and adults. In D. Wagner (Ed.), The Future of. Literacy in. the Changing World (pp. 65-80).

Chall, J.S. (1987b). Adult literacy: New and enduring problems. Phi Delta Kappan. pp. 190-196.

Chall, J.S. (March 1989). Learning to read: The great debate 20 years later. Phi Delta Kappan. pp. 521- 538.

Chall, J.S., Heron, E ., & Hilferty, A. (November 1987). Adult literacy: New and enduring problems. Phi Qfilia Kappan. pp. 190-196. 302

Chall, J.S. & Snow, C . (1982). Families and literacy : The contribution of out-of-school experiences to children s acquisition of literacy. National Institute of Education Final Report. Cambridge, MA: Graduate School of Education, Harvard University. (ED234345). Chisman, F.P. (1989). Jump start : The federal role in adult literacy. Southport, CT: The Southport Institute for Policy Analysis.

Clay, M.H. (1979). Reading : The patterning of complex behaviour. Portsmouth, NH; Heinemann.

Clay, H.M. (1982). Observing young readers. London: Heinemann.

Clay, M.H. (1979, 1985, 1988). The early detection of. reading difficulties. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clay, M.M. (1988). Sand. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clay, M.M. (1988). Stones. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clay, M.M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Colby, R. (1990). Caught short. Columbia, SC: Educational Development Laboratories.

Coles, G. (April 1977). Dick and Jane grow up. Urban Education (12), pp- 37-54.

Colvin, R.J. & Root, J.H. (1976). Tutor: Techniques used in. the, teaching of. read ing- Syracuse, NY : Literacy Volunteers of America.

Cook, W.D. (1977). Adult literacy education in. the United States. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Cornelius, J. (1983). "We slipped and learned to read": Slave accounts of the literacy process, 1830-1865. Phvlon Journal. 44. (3), 171-186.

Cornell, T. (April 1988). Characteristics of effective occupational programs. Journal of Reading (31), 7, pp. 654-656. 303

Cornman, L. (May, 1987). "No, you are not stupid." Christian Herald. (110). pp. 22-26.

Crocker, J. (June, 1989). Family literacy project pilots. Presented at Literacy: Enhancing the Quality of Life. Third Annual Statewide Literacy Conference of The Ohio Literacy Network.

Cross, K.P. (1981). Adults as learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Davidson, J.L. (1990). Holistic reading and writing assessment for adults. Monroe, NY: Trillium Press.

Davidson, J.L., Padak, N.D. & Padak, G.M. (nd). Reading. writing. thinking for life : Informational brochure. Monroe, NY: Trillium Press.

Darling, S. (June, 1989). The Kenan fund family literacy project. Presented at Literacy : Enhancing the Quality of. Life., Third Annual Statewide Literacy Conference of The Ohio Literacy Network, Columbus.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and. education. New York: The Free Press.

Diekhoff, G.M. (1988). An appraisal of adult literacy programs: Reading between the lines. Journal of. Reading (31) 7, pp. 624-630.

Doake, D.B. (1988). Reading begins at birth. Ontario, CAN : Scholastic TAB.

Durkin, D . (1966). Children who read earlv: Two longitudinal studies. New York: Teachers College Press.

Fenholt, J. (1987). Ready to read. Cincinnati, OH: South-western Publishing.

Ferreiro, E. & Teberosky, A. (1982). Literacy before schooling. Exeter, NH: Heinemann. 304

Fillmore, C.J. (March 1989). Real and ideal readers. Presentation to the Eminent Scholars Program, Martha L. King Language and Literacy Center, Columbus: Ohio State University.

Final report : The American performance level study. (1977). Washington, DC: US Office of Education, Deparment of Health, Education and Welfare.

Fingeret, A. (1984). Adult literacy education : Current and future directions. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ED2463G8).

Fingeret, A. (1987). Directions in ethnographic adult literacy research. Paper presented at the Thirty- second Annual Convention of the International Reading Association, Anaheim, CA.

Fingeret, A. (1988). The politics of adult literacy. Address presented to National Urban Literacy Conference. Washington, DC. ED292Ü53.

Flesch, R. (1955). Why .iohnny can " t read. New York: Harper & Row.

Flesch, R. (1981). Why .iohnnv still can ' t read. New York: Harper and Row.

Forester, Â.D. (April 1988). Learning to read and write at 26. Journal of. Read ing (30). 7, pp. 604-613.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Seabury Press.

Freire, P. (1978). Pedag ogy in. process: Letters, io Guinea-Bissau. New York, NY: Seabury Press.

Fronmer, S.H. (1990). Stop that woman. Syracuse, NY: New Readers Press.

Gadway, C . , & Wilson, H.A. (1976). Functional literacy: Basic reading performance. Denver, CO: Education Comiission of the States. ED112350.

Gee, J.P. (1988). The legacies of literacy: From Plato to Freire through Harvey Graff. Harvard Educational Review. (58) 2, 195-212. 305

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Goffstein, M.B. (1976). Fish for supper. New York: Dial Books for Young Readers.

Gombrich, E.H. (1951). The story af. art. New York: Phaidon.

Goodman, K.S. (Ed.) (1968, 1973). The psycholinguistic nature of the reading process. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

Goodman, K.S. (1986). What's whole in whole language? New York: Heinemann.

Graff, H.J. (1987). The labyrinths of literacy: Reflections on literacy past and present. Philadelphia: The Palmer Press.

Graves, D.H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Exeter, N H : Heinemann.

Gray, W.S. (1948, 1960). On. their own in reading: How ta. give children independence in analyzing new words. Glenview, IL : Scott, Foresman.

Green, J.L. & Smith, D.C. (1983). Teaching and learning as linguistic processes: The emerging picture. In B.A. Hutson (Ed.) Advances in Reading/Language Research. 2., Greenwich, CT : JAI Press.

Guthrie, J.T. & Kirsch, I.S. (1984). The emergent perspective on literacy. Phi Delta Kappan (65) 5, pp. 351-355.

Harmon, D. (1987). Illiteracy: A. national dilemma.. New York: Cambridge Book Company.

Harris, L ., & Associates. (1970). Survival literacy study. Washington, DC: National Reading Council. (ED068813).

Harris, L ., & Associates. (1971). The 1971 national reading difficulty index: A sludz o L £.mic_t.ig-oa.l reading ability in the United States. Washington, DC: National Reading Council. 306

Harste, J., Woodward, V. & Burke, C. (1984). Language stories & literacy lessons. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Hawkins, C. (1984). Teaching reading through oral histories. Lutheran Social Mission Society. Philadelphia: Lutheran Settlement House.(ED26G277).

Henk, W.A. (1987). Reading assessments of the future: Toward precision diagnoses. The Reading Teacher (40). pp. 860-873.

Hillyer, V.M. (1951). A child s history of the world. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Heath, S.B. (1983). Ways with words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hirsch, E.D. (1987). Cultural literacy: What eyery American needs to know. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Holmes, B.J. (1987). Solutions in progress: Results of a suryey of. literacy programs and. actiyities. Denyer: Education Commission of the States Distribution Center. (ED305442).

Huck, C.S., Hepler, S. & Hickman, J. (1987). Children's literature in. the elementary school. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Hunter, C. & Harmon, D. (1979). Adult illiteracy in. the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hunter, C. & Harmon, D. (1985). Adult literacy in. the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Jackson, G.B. (1990). Measures for adult literacy. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearninghouse on Tests, Measurement, and Evaluation.

Johnston, P.H. (May 1985). Understanding reading disability: A case study approach. Harvard Educational R s x i s n ^ . C.5.5.), 2, pp. 153-177.

Johnston, P. (April 1987). Teachers as evaluation experts. The. Reading Teacher ( ), pp. 744-748. 307

Jones, E.V. (1981). Reading instruction for the adult illiterate. Chicago: American Library Association.

Karnes, F.A., Ginn, C.N. & Maddox, B.B. (1980). Issues and trends in adult basic education : Focus on reading. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi.

Kammerer, P.B. (1990). Strategies for improving adult reading performance. Special demonstration project, Marion City Schools, Project Number 044339ABSD90.

Razemek, F.E. & Rigg, P. (1984). Adult literacv: An annotated bibliography. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Razemek, F.E. & Rigg, P. (1985). Adult illiteracy — America's phoenix problem. Tucson: University of Arizona.

Relier, R. (1979). Two for the road. Syracuse, NY: New Readers Press.

Rinney, M.A. & Harry, A.L. (1991). An informal inventory for adolescents that assesses the reader, the text, and the task. Journal q £ Reading (34). 8, pp. 843-647.

Rirsch, I.S. (1990). Measuring adult literacy. In R. Venezky, D. Wagner, & B . Ciliberti (Eds.) Toward ■ defining literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Rirsch, I.S. & Jungeblut, A. (1986). Literacy: Profiles of. America's you n g , adults. Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Services.

Knowles, M.S. (1980). The modern practice of. adult education : From pedagogy to andragogy. Chicago: Association Press/Follett.

Rozol, J. (1980). Prisoners of silence : Breaking the bonds of adult illiteracy. New York: Continuum.

Rozol, J. (1985). Illiterate america. New York: Doubleday. 308

Lather, P. (October 1990). body, my text : Counter- practices of authority in the discourse of liberatory education. Paper presented at Bergamo Curriculum Theorizing Conference.

Laubach, F.C. (1970). Forty years with the silent billion : Adventure in. literacy. Old Tappan, NJ: F.H. Revel1.

Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Lyons, C.A. (1989). Reading recovery: A preventative for mislabeling young "at-risk" learners. Urban Education. (24). 2, pp. 125-139.

Lytle, S.L. (1988). From the inside out: Reinventing assessment. Focus on Basics. (2) 1, pp. 2-5.

Lytle, S.L. (1990). Living literacy: Rethinking development in adulthood. Paper presentation at American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Boston, HA.

Maguire, P. (1987). Doing participatory research: A. feminist approach. Amherst, MA: Center for International Education.

Meek, M. (May 1989). On. being literate. Presentation to the Eminent Scholars Program, The Martha L. King Language and Literacy Center, Columbus: Ohio State University.

Meek (Spencer), M. (1986). Emergent literacies: A site for analysis. Language Arts (63) 5, pp. 4 4 2 - 453.

Metz. E. (1990). Issues in adult literacy assessment. Journal of Reading (33) 6, pp. 468-469.

Meyer, V. & Keefe, D. (1988). The Laubach way to reading: A review. L i f.e.l.P.ng Learning: An. Ojnn.lbilg. q £_ Practice and. Bg.s.eargJi ( 12) 1> pp- 8-10.

Mikulecky, L.J. & Ehlinger, J. (1986). The influence of metacognitive aspects of literacy on job performance of electronics technicians. Journal of Reading Behavior (18). 1, pp. 41-62. 309

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.

Mitchell, B. (November, 1988). Emergent literacy: A policy agenda. Presentation to The Eminent Scholars Program, The Martha L. King Language and Literacy Center, Columbus: Ohio State University.

Moll, L. (April 1991). Living knowledge : Comparing household and classroom resources. Presentation to the Eminent Scholars Program, The Martha L. King Language and Literacy Center, Columbus: Ohio State University.

Mooney, M. • (1988). Developing life-long readers. New Zealand: Department of Education, School Publications Branch.

Murphy, R.T. (1975). Assessment of adult reading competence. In D.H. Nielson & H.F. Hjelm (Eds.), Reading and Career Education (pp. 50-61). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Nickse, R.S., Speicher, A.M. & Buchek, P.C. An intergenerational adult literacy project: A family intervention/prevention model. Journal of Reading (31) 7, pp. 634-642.

Ninio, A. & Bruner, J. (1976). The achievement and antecedents of labelling. Journal of Children s Language (5), pp. 1-5.

Newman, A.P. & Beverstock, C. (1990). Adult literacy: Contexts and challenges. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Nodelman, P. (1988). Words about pictures. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press.

O'Brien, J.A. (1926). Reading: Its psychology and pedagogy The Century Company.

Padak, N.D., Davidson, J.L., & Padak, G.M. (1990). Exploring reading with adult readers. Journal of Reading (34) l, pp. 26-29. 310

Patton, M.Q.(199Ü). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. 2nd Edition. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

Pattison, R. (1982). Ori literacy : The politics of the word from Homer to the age of rock. New York: Oxford University Press. Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity — One's own. Educational Researcher. October, pp. 17-21.

Philippi, J.H. (1987). BSEP/CSEP reading evaluation: A study of. the effectiveness of. the US. army Europe ' s basic skills job-specific reading program. A report to the Army Continuing Education Services. (ED296285).

Philippi, J.H. (1988). Matching literacy to job training: Some applications from military programs. Journal of Reading (311 7, pp. 658-666.

Piaget, J. (1952). The, origins af. intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.

Pinnell, G.S. (May 1991). Helping children in. failure- oriented systems. Presentation to The Eminent Scholars Program, The Martha L. King Language and Literacy Center, Columbus: Ohio State University.

Pinnell, G.S.; DeFord, D.E. & Lyons, C.A. (1988). Reading Recovery: Early Intervention for At-Risk First Graders. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.

Polyson, J .; Levinson, M .; & Miller, H. (1982). Writing styles: L survey of pgychd.lQÆZ. joimial editors. American Psychologist, 37, 335-338.

Popkewitz, T.S. (1984). Paradigm and. ideology in. educational research: The social functions of. the intellectual. London & New York: The Falmer Press.

Reinharz, Shulamit. (1979). On becoming a social scientist. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Reynolds, B.A. & Reynolds, H . A. (November 1988). The Siskiyou county READ project: A success story in rural adult literacy. Library Journal. (113), P P - 43-45. 311

Roy-Singh, R. (1990). The mind transformed. UNESCO Courier. July, pp. 21-23.

Schorr, L.B. (1988). Within our reach. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

Shanahan, T. & Lomax, R.G. (1988). A developmental comparison of three theoretical models of the reading-writing relationship. Research in the Teaching of English (22) 2, pp. 196-212.

Shannon, P. (1989). Broken promises. Granby, MA: Bergin and Garvey.

Shavit, Z. (1986). The poetics of children's literature. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press.

Slavin, R.E. & Madden, N.A. (1989). What works for students at risk: A research synthesis. Educational Leadership. pp. 4-13.

Smith, F. (1971, 1978, 1982). Understanding Reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Smith, F. (1978). Read ing without nonsense. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Smith, F . (1988). Joining the literacy club. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Smith-Burke, M.T., Parker, M. & Deegan, D. (1987). Starting Over : Characteristics of Adult Literacy Learners. Technical Report, Literacy Assistance Center, New York.

Soifer, R.; Irwin, M.E.; et.al. (1990). The complete theorv-to-practice handbook of adult literacy. New York: Teachers' College Press.

Spradley, J.P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Stake, R.E. (1978). The case study method in social inquiry. Educational Researcher (2) 7, pp. 5-8. 312

Stake, R.E. (1988). Case study methods in educational research: Seeking sweet water. In R.M. Jaeger (Editor) Complementary Methods For Research in Education. Washington, DC: AERA.

Stedman, L.C. and Kaestle, C.F. (1987). Literacy and reading performance in the United States from 1880 to the present. Reading Research Quarterly. Winter, 1987.

Sticht, T.G. (1983). Literacy and human resources development at work : Investing in the education of adults to improve the educability of children. Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization.

Sticht, T.G. & Hooke, L.R. (1982). Instructional systems design for the army's on-duty education program, t a s k I I I Handbook f.o.r.. education service. officers on the armv developmental education program for performance and training. Alexandria, VA: Human Resources and Research Organization.

Strickland, D. (1983). The development of language and literacy: Essential knowledge for effective teaching and learning, in D.C. Smith (Ed.), Essential knowledge for effective teaching and learning. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

Teale, W.H. (1987). Home background and young children's literacy development. Chapter from W.H. ■ Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.) Emergent Literacy. Norwood N J : Ablex.

Teale, W.H. & Sulzby, E. (Eds.). (1986). Emergent literacy: Writing and reading. Norwood, N J : Ablex.

Thistlewaite, L.L. (1986). The adult beginning reader: Assessment/discussion/instruction. Lifelong Learning (10) pp. 4-7.

Tierney, R.J. & Pearson, P.D. (May 1983). Toward a composing model of reading. Language Arts C6.Q.) 5, pp. 568-580. 313

Tierney, R.J. & Shanahan, T. (in press). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson (Editors) Handbook of Reading Research. Volume II. New York: Longman.

Turner, T.C. (April 1988). Using the computer for adult literacy instruction. Journal of Reading (30), 7, pp. 643-647.

Turner, T.C. (1984). Tutors and computers. In M.A. Lane (Ed.) Handbook for volunteer reading aides. Philadelphia: Lutheran Church Women.

Venezky, R.L.; Kaestle, C.F. & Sum, A.M. (1987). The subtle danger. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Venezky, R.L.; Wagner, D.A. & Ciliberti, B.S. (Eds.) (1990). Toward defining literacy. Newark, DE: IRA.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Weaver, C.S. (1988). Reading process and practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.

Weber, R.M. (1975). Adult illiteracy in the United States, in J.B. Carroll & J.S. Chall (Eds.). Toward a literate society. NY: McGraw-Hill.

Webster's ninth new collegiate dictionary. (1988). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

Weisel, L.P. (1977). The London procedure: Adult learning problems. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University.

Wells, G. (1986). The meaning makers: Children learning language and using language to learn. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Wolcott, H.F. (1990). Writing up qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications. 314

Yin, R.K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Yorinks, A. & Egielski, R. (1980). Louis the fish. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

Yorinks, A. & Egielski, R . (1986). Hev. Ai- New York; Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

Young, I. & Irwin, M. (1988). Integrating computers into adult literacy programs. Journal of Reading 1301, 7, pp. 648-651.