This program was conducted by WEC at a downtown branch of a major corporate
bank in a large midwestern U.S. city. The bank has 17,000 employees working in
an estimated 100 locations across the country. The branch is one of eight such
locations in the city and is part of the corporate banking division
specifically dealing with remittance banking. Checks that come to this
location are addressed directly to the bank, usually in self-addressed
business-reply envelopes containing the destination bank's zip code and a box
number that identifies its corporate client. The box into which the checks are
deposited in such a service is called a "lockbox." Each corporate client that
uses this service provides the bank with written instructions outlining how to
handle its checks. Employees at the lockbox division needed to be able to read
these instructions and enter data into computers according to the client's
instructions. This data entry process became a focal point of attention
because of frequent errors. These errors added to the bank's expense because
systems had to be put in place to catch them. One such system involved having
each check amount entered both in numeric and verbal form, numeric by one
worker, verbal by another. If the two did not match, the software would
indicate an entry error.
This system of data entry not only increased the workload, it also required
that employees improve their skills in speed of entry of written numbers. This
is a skill that involves reading the amounts in words on each check and
translating the words into numerals for keyboard entry. In addition, the
employees in question needed to be able to read the written instructions
provided by clients regarding how their account was to be managed. The bank
decided that workplace literacy training was required for its nonexempt
employees, that is, employees who are paid hourly. Such employees comprised
85% of the establishment; the other 15% are salaried. WEC was engaged as
provider for the training program, which was titled Non-Exempt Education and
Training (NEET).
The bank has traditionally provided for the training needs of its salaried
employees. This training, which sometimes leads to a formal degree, is
approved by the bank's training coordinator. According to the training
coordinator, 85% of the training dollars are typically spent on the top 15% of
the corporation's employees. Most of their training consists of enrolling in
formal education courses for which the bank pays. NEET was for workers who
were deficient in skills needed for their work but who did not receive training
through other programs. The banking services program which will be described
here was administered by WEC in close partnership with the bank's training
coordinator as a part of NEET.
The NEET program began in 1991 with employees of the lockbox section. In 1992, employees in the remittance section were included. Three classes totaling twenty-nine people completed the training. Classes were scheduled to coincide with the end or start of the employees' work shifts for minimum disruption of the organization's work schedule. This case is based on observation of a training program involving employees of the bank's remittance section.
The planning of this program was carried out by WEC in close cooperation with
the NEET coordinator from the bank. It followed the pattern of other programs
run by WEC with the advantage that NEET had its own full-time coordinator from
the bank who initiated contact with WEC. As usual, an informal needs
assessment was done to determine program viability and to collect preliminary
data to be used as a basis for proposal writing. Subsequently, the proposal
received state funding from the Secretary of State Workplace Literacy Grant
Program. A literacy audit to determine the skills required for the nonexempt
employees was performed, followed by a formal employee skills assessment using
the TABE as a pretest and a screening tool. The TABE is one of the recommended
standardized tests for the state-mandated pre-/posttesting. The assessment was
on a voluntary basis. Those employees who scored at the 8th grade or below
were asked to join the new program although they were not told about their
grade level test scores.
The program designers had to promote this program internally, taking into
account the sensitivities of workers regarding their being targeted for
literacy training.
The literacy audit was performed using the WEC model previously described.
Management was consulted to determine the bank's short-term and long-term goals
that the program would need to integrate into its course objectives.
Interviews with supervisors were conducted to obtain a description of the
employees' jobs and to identify competencies that were required for
satisfactory work performance. Workplace materials were collected, including
forms, manuals, and instruction sheets. The audit yielded an initial pilot
curriculum that was to be used as a prototype to gauge the ability of employees
to overcome their fear of returning to the classroom, in some cases after many
years.
The coordinator's comments indicated that needs assessment had another agenda
apart from determining what competencies the employees needed. It also served
to formulate strategies for convincing higher management of the need for such a
program--a program which interrupted employees' work in order to allow them to
go to class on paid release time. Indeed, some management found it difficult
to link training with data entry errors and needed to be convinced.
Employee skill assessment followed WEC's pattern. The NEET program coordinator provided the following account:
There are about 250 nonexempt people at the [Jackson] Street location. These were initially told about the intended program and asked for voluntary assessment. One hundred and sixty employees took this assessment based on the TABE (Test of Adult Basic Education). This was privately scored, and those who scored eighth grade or below were asked to join the program. The grading was not mentioned to the employees. They were only told about their strengths and weaknesses.
As indicated earlier, the employees were not told about their grade-level scores which, it was felt, would be interpreted negatively by them. Instead they were told only about their strengths and weaknesses and how joining the program would help build their strengths and address their individual weaknesses. At the time of our observations, twenty-nine employees had moved beyond the assessment process.
The literacy audit resulted in a customized course dealing with a number of
skills which were designed to improve (1) speed and accuracy in transcription
of numbers; (2) math skills such as working with decimals and round numerals,
and for work on time cards, time zones, and military time-telling; (3) reading
skills such as skimming and scanning documents; and (4) problem solving. The
course we observed had four modules, as follows:
Module One: Vital Number Skills
Module Two: Math Refresher (decimals and percentages)
Module Three: Reading and Writing
Module Four: Problem Solving
Classes observed were on the vital number skills and problem-solving modules.
As was usual for WEC programs, the courses consisted of nine weeks of
instruction for a total of thirty-six contact hours. The curriculum was, for
the most part, workplace-relevant, though applications from outside of the job
were entertained, especially in the problem-solving class. Examples from life
outside of the bank were frequently used, but the focus was on improving
job-related skills.
The following three categories of training materials were observed: (1)
custom-made materials designed for this specific program by the trainer; (2)
materials adapted from printed commercial sources; and (3) job-related
materials such as memos, forms, and manuals. The trainer relied heavily on
worksheets and exercises she had designed. In addition to the formal
curriculum, she repeatedly provoked trainees to be more proactive and
aggressive in pursuing their ambitions. Adopting a Freirean stance, the
trainer seemed to be concerned about the impact of the program not just on the
immediate work situation, but on the lives of the workers as well, showing
workplace education as a tool to further oneself in life.
The trainees brought to class actual examples of problems from their jobs so
that the trainer could use them to teach work-related problem-solving
techniques. Alternative solutions and approaches to problems were sought. In
a class exercise, for example, the trainer provided a list of problems and
separate solutions and had the trainees link each given problem with a suitable
solution. The problems were categorized as personal, practical,
communication, or value conflict. Participants were then asked
to identify problems occurring at work and then to identify the categories into
which they fit.
Part of the problem-solving training involved teaching participants to enquire
(i.e., to ask questions or write memos asking questions) so that they could
clarify issues at work. This was especially so for the materials used on the
job such as the report forms that employees regularly filled out. These forms
contained many cryptic abbreviations which had meanings even the supervisors
did not always know. The instructor got trainees to find out what each
abbreviation meant. Examples of how to construct a memo to solve problems were
given. Steps on how to do so were taught to the participants as follows:
The trainees were also trained to anticipate problems and have contingency plans. Practical life problems were used as references. For example, if an employee's babysitter failed to turn up, then he or she should have a "plan B" in the form of a back-up babysitter. Other examples of contingency plans were (1) keeping emergency phone numbers handy, (2) keeping spare cash handy for unpredictable emergencies (e.g., having no paycheck at the end of the month), or (3) always having coins to use in a pay-phone if one got stranded.
In this module, literacy and numeracy were taught within the context of their
application to tasks that were part of employees' jobs. For instance, in one
session we attended, the focus of instruction was on reading and writing whole
numbers, especially with regard to writing checks. Additionally, common errors
in spelling words such as forty (often misspelled fourty) were
discussed.
In one exercise, the instructor read numbers aloud to trainees, who wrote each
number down first numerically and then in words, ensuring the correct spelling
and use of hyphens and commas. The numbers were 48; 8306; 99; 1907; 1612; 777;
206001; 10909; 2808498; and 433805. The last number, for example, would be
433,805. In words, it would be written as "four hundred thirty-three thousand,
eight hundred five." On completion, the instructor went over the exercise with
the students, who made necessary corrections. Finally, the rules governing the
writing of numbers were reviewed and stressed.
In another exercise, rules for writing a check were taught. The following are
examples:
The class sizes were small. In the problem-solving session we attended, there
were four participants; while in the math refresher class, there were five.
The instructor said she had no way of telling how many participants out of the
total enrollment would turn up for a given session. There was no evidence that
poor attendance bothered the management. But if poor attendance was not a
bother, then how much faith did the management really have in the training in
the first place? And if they were indifferent to poor attendance, what message
would that carry to workers about the relevance of the training? And what
would be the rationale, then, for the state to invest in such a project?
Still, an advantage of the small number of participants was that all were able
to receive individual attention. Although the workers were actively engaged in
the class and shared examples from their work or home settings, their
enthusiasm appeared to be low.
A feature of this session was that the trainer placed much emphasis on
self-improvement in areas beyond the work context. For example, she encouraged
participants to use NovaNet (formerly known as PLATO), the computer-assisted
learning system, during their spare time in order to improve their skills and
knowledge. NovaNet was available at the bank, and a tutor was available three
times a week to assist employees, particularly those seeking to upgrade skills
such as math. The courseware available on NovaNet was generic--not specific to
the bank. The instructor also encouraged participants to pursue courses at a
nearby community college in order to gain credit towards future promotion.
Employees in the NEET program consisted of clerical staff, mail room staff, and drivers. Those observed were clerical staff. We were informed by the trainer that a high school diploma was a requirement for employment on the clerical staff, so all trainees had been through high school, even if test results indicated that their actual skill levels were at eighth grade or lower.
Evaluation of the NEET program was implemented at three levels: (1) learner reaction, (2) learning, and (3) transfer of learning to the job. Trainees were asked to complete reaction questionnaires at the end of the course. Learning was measured using a customized test designed for this specific program by WEC. A posttest was performed using the TABE in order to satisfy state requirements. During the course of the training, the program coordinators talked to the trainees' supervisors to try to determine the extent to which trainees used their newly acquired skills on the job.
This trainer had a liberal arts degree and brought to the WEC team experience in the banking industry and in computer applications. She strongly believed that work skills could not be separated from life skills. Her teaching indicated that she viewed the learning process as an empowerment process. As Gowen (1992) points out, the philosophy and disposition of trainers have much to do with the nature of the workplace literacy curriculum. The natural tendency in such programs, consistent with the functional context paradigm, is to assume the point of view of the employer. When the stance is from the point of view of the worker, as in the case being described, the emphases change. The curriculum becomes subversive. Workers are sensitized to their standing and to their possibilities. The disposition of this particular WEC trainer can be gleaned from the following anecdote she related:
Earlier during the literacy audit, we noted that there were forms that employees had to fill out regularly, on which there were several abbreviations. When we tried to find out what these abbreviations meant, we found that supervisors did not know! When the course started I got them [trainees] to find out what these abbreviations mean. Now they know. When others [those not in the program] need to know what these things mean, they know who to ask.
The trainer repeatedly emphasized to the trainees that if they had any ambitions of advancing on the job, they would be well advised to learn all and every job detail such as those abbreviations because, according to her, they would need the knowledge if they were to be able to train their own people when they became supervisors themselves (implying that this should be their objective). To this trainer, knowledge is acquired in order to confer power upon the worker. As discussed above, some of these ideas became interwoven into her teaching, within the framework of worker empowerment.
Evident from the above description is that WEC embarked upon a course of action in the NEET project that in its outlines did not appear to differ materially from that offered either by Redwood Technical College (Case 1) or North Oaks Technical College (Case 2). This provider had learned how to collaborate with industry and had mastered the technology of the literacy audit (e.g., on-site visitations, job-shadowing, task analysis, testing, and functional context curriculum). To be resolved, then, is whether such a provider poses a serious challenge to claims of uniqueness or of comparative advantage that can be advanced by vocational institutions. At a minimum, the answer here will have to take into account the important factor of cost effectiveness. Furthermore, much will depend on resolution of the issue as to whether technical training should be factored into the workplace literacy equation.