Theodore Lewis
University of Minnesota
Mildred Griggs
University of Illinois
assisted by
Stephan Flister
Amadou Konare
University of
Minnesota
Jason M. Githeko
Norah C. Chemengen
University of Illinois
National Center for Research in Vocational Education
University of
California at Berkeley
2030 Addison Street, Suite 500
Berkeley, CA
94704-1058
Supported by
The Office of Vocational and Adult Education
U.S.
Department of Education
July, 1995
FUNDING INFORMATION
| Project Title: | National Center for Research in Vocational Education |
|---|---|
| Grant Number: | V051A30003-95A/V051A30004-95A |
| Act under which Funds Administered: | Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act P.L. 98-524 |
| Source of Grant: | Office of Vocational and Adult Education U.S. Department of Education Washington, DC 20202 |
| Grantee: | The Regents of the University of California c/o National Center for Research in Vocational Education 2030 Addison Street, Suite 500 Berkeley, CA 94704 |
| Director: | David Stern |
| Percent of Total Grant Financed by Federal Money: | 100% |
| Dollar Amount of Federal Funds for Grant: | $6,000,000 |
| Disclaimer: | This publication was prepared pursuant to a grant with the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education. Grantees undertaking such projects under government sponsorship are encouraged to express freely their judgement in professional and technical matters. Points of view or opinions do not, therefore, necessarily represent official U.S. Department of Education position or policy. |
| Discrimination: | Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states: "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance." Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance." Therefore, the National Center for Research in Vocational Education project, like every program or activity receiving financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education, must be operated in compliance with these laws. |
This report examines five case studies of workplace literacy initiatives.
Except for the Twin Cities Opportunities Industrialization Center (TCOIC),
which is the actual name of that institution, pseudonyms are used throughout
when referring to people and institutions. Broadly defined, workplace
literacy in this study refers to the several kinds of capabilities and
dispositions (such as the three Rs, learning how to learn, teamwork,
problem-solving skills, and communication skills) that are now thought to
comprise the necessary possessions one needs in order to function competently
in today's workplace.
In the first case, Redwood Technical College, a two-year postsecondary
vocational institution, collaborated with the Union Educational Bureau to
deliver a basic skills program to housekeepers and food service workers at four
hospitals under the terms of a federal grant. In the second case, North Oaks
Technical College, also a two-year postsecondary vocational institution,
executed a workplace literacy project on contract for a high-tech manufacturing
company. In the third case, a private provider, the Workplace Education Center
(WEC), delivered a basic skills program to nonsalaried workers at the branch of
a large bank. In the fourth case, this same provider delivered an English as a
Second Language (ESL) program to immigrant service workers at the branch of a
large chain of hotels. The fifth and final case describes the approach of the
TCOIC, a nontraditional vocational institution that focuses on marginalized
populations, and which places heavy emphasis on basic skills even as it offers
technical skills.
The problem was to understand better what transpires within workplace literacy
programs--what are their premises and claims, their curricular stances, and
their approach to teaching and learning--with the intent of resolving the basic
question of whether vocational institutions can claim uniqueness or a
comparative advantage over other providers in the workplace literacy
enterprise.
Case methodology allowed detailed examination of the five initiatives. The
inquiry took the form of formal and informal interviews, document examination,
and on-site observation.
Based on a review of literature, a set of premises or hypotheses was set forth
to provide a framework against which each case could be interrogated. These
premises/hypotheses were that vocational education institutions would have a
comparative advantage in the extent to which they (1) had long traditions of
collaborating with industry to derive workplace-based curricula, (2) catered to
diverse and marginalized populations among whom could be found enclaves of
illiteracy, (3) provided both initial and upgraded training geared to lifelong
learning, and (4) offered basic skills in the functional context of technical
skills. These premises/hypotheses were loosely set as criteria that helped to
resolve the question of uniqueness and comparative advantage.
Taken together, the cases unearthed some critical features which, if present,
seemed to strengthen the case for a vocational institution claiming uniqueness
or comparative advantage over other providers in the workplace literacy
enterprise. Among these features were the following:
A primary conclusion of the study was that to lay claim to uniqueness or to comparative advantage, a requirement was that vocational institutions should play to their strengths, which include a tradition of hands-on learning, and keeping basic skills and theory tightly connected with technical skills, either in applied instruction (e.g., welding math, business English) or in physical proximity to allow literacy classes to act as a vocational hook.
We thank the cooperating staffs and workers of the two technical colleges, the union, the hospitals, the high-tech manufacturing company, the private literacy provider, the bank, and the hotel that are anonymously represented here for their generosity. We thank the staff of the Twin Cities Opportunities Industrialization Center (TCOIC) for allowing us the full run of their school. Rosemarie Park, project consultant, is thanked for her insights and suggestions. We thank Jerome Moss for reading a draft of the report and offering insightful suggestions.
This report describes five case studies of workplace literacy initiatives.
They include (1) a study of the role of a two-year postsecondary technical
college as a partner and provider in a federally funded workplace literacy
project (other partners being a union and four hospitals); (2) a study of the
role of a two-year postsecondary technical college on contract with a high-tech
manufacturing company to deliver a program of basic skills for a cross section
of its workers; (3) a study of a basic skills program for hourly paid employees
at a large urban bank; (4) a study of a hotel services' English as a Second
Language (ESL) program that was designed to improve the basic skills of
immigrant employees; and (5) a study of the operations of an accredited
alternative vocational institution that specializes in serving the poor and the
educationally and socially marginal, along with remedial and workplace literacy
programming. In all cases, the researchers spent extensive periods of time
observing and collecting data via formal and informal interviews of individuals
and small groups. In addition, artifacts at the sites were examined.
The problem of the study was that what is known about workplace
literacy is still sparse. There was a need to try to answer the basic
question, "What do workplace literacy programs look like, and what can we learn
from them that would be instructive for vocational education policy and
practice?" The purpose was to try to resolve the defining question, "Can
vocational education institutions lay claim to a comparative advantage over
other providers in the workplace literacy enterprise?" From this basic
question sprung several related questions that helped to give form to the logic
of the inquiry. These included the following:
Although workplace literacy programs, being education for work, are clearly in
the realm of vocational education, they are not necessarily perceived as such
even within the field. Because they focus not on technical skills, but largely
on decontextualized basic skills that can conceivably be taught away from
traditional vocational education laboratory environments, they have become the
province of an array of providers (e.g., public schools, community colleges,
and unions), all of which are legitimate claimants to a niche in the workplace
literacy enterprise. A central premise underlying the study, then, was that
vocational education institutions will increasingly be called upon to assume
leadership and collaborative roles in fashioning and executing workplace
literacy initiatives. Many are currently involved in such roles as partners in
the National Workplace Literacy program. These new roles will compel
institutions to reconsider and, perhaps, reconceptualize their approaches to
curriculum, and to program planning and delivery. To respond competently to
new demands engendered by the problem of workplace literacy requires a
knowledge-base upon which to draw--a knowledge-base which, in the context of
vocational education research, is still in its nascent stages. The more
prominent studies (e.g., Gowen, 1992; Hull, 1991, 1992, 1993; Kalman &
Fraser, 1992; Schultz, 1992) have alerted us to ideological and other
contentions that attend workplace literacy programs--contentions such as the
functional/critical literacy debate, along with the relationship between
socioeconomic status (SES), ethnicity, and basic skills. Insights from these
studies have helped fashion the conceptual framework that is to be detailed
next. However, studies to date have not addressed the question of whether
vocational education institutions can lay claim to a unique niche, or to a
comparative advantage, in the workplace literacy enterprise--a status that
would set it apart from other entities as a provider of workplace literacy
programming.
To set the stage for the inquiry, it was necessary to fashion a conceptual
framework (discussed earlier) based upon a review of literature. The purpose
of this framework was to help define the parameters that would guide our probe,
and to highlight issues and contentions about which we needed to be aware as
the work progressed and as we tried to give meaning to our observations. From
a practical standpoint, the review served the functional purpose of helping to
set forth criteria for the selection of cases and guidelines for the framing of
questions for interview protocols. An outline of the framework follows.