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 Copyright ©1991 by Bradley, Darcy Hepler. All rights reserved. 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 By 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