|
|
Last
Updated:
04/06/2005
TALKING POINTS
2006 Budget for Adult Education
-
The Administration’s 2006 Budget cuts Adult Education by $369 million, a
66% reduction. The proposal endorses the concept of leaving no child
behind at the same time it leaves millions of adults behind, including
parents. No American should be left behind when it comes to access to
education.
-
The Title of the press release accompanying the budget is entitled,
“President’s FY 2006 Budget Focuses Resources on Students Who need them
the Most.” But the budget proposal ignores the needs of dropouts and
individuals with low levels of literacy that cannot access the K-12 system
and have families who depend on them for support. Among these
under-educated and limited English proficient adults are tens of thousands
of young adults who have just recently found themselves unable to meet new
high standards for graduation
-
The 2006 Budget proposal does not acknowledge the 30-year old factory
worker with low levels of literacy and no high school diploma whose job
has been abolished and who needs to improve his/her academic skills in
order to get a new job.
- A
statement was made at the budget briefing that the new high school
initiative, community colleges and Pell grants were programs that could
address the needs currently met by adult education.
The High School Initiative is a positive step towards
addressing the needs of current students but is no comfort to those who have
dropped out of school over the past 15-20 years, are unemployed or
underemployed and are seeking to obtain a high school diploma or its
alternative.
Students without a high school diploma or its alternative
cannot access Pell Grants or regular community college programs so we are
puzzled as to how they could replace the current adult education system.
-
At the Budget briefing it was stated that adult education may not be the
best way to meet the needs of program participants. The budget document
itself states there is little or no evidence of effectiveness’. Yet adult
education programs have met their performance standards and there is NO
evidence the new high school initiative proposal will work. Why
abandon a program which has successfully met the needs of participants for
one with no track record.
- A
statement was made at the budget brief that we need to assess what, if
any, is the federal role in providing adult education. The federal
program was originally created because states were not meeting the needs
of high school dropouts, welfare participants, immigrants and other
individuals with low levels of literacy without a high school diploma or
its equivalent. States currently contribute $3 for every $1 provided
through the federal adult education program.
-
The statement regarding the federal role does not address the fact that
many participants are immigrants in need of English language skills.
Meeting the needs of our nation’s immigrants is a federal responsibility.
-
There is no other system built to meet the many varying needs of adult
education students and the public policy priorities that are served when
their needs are met, for example; a more highly trained and competitive
workforce; intergenerational literacy and increased success of education
reform efforts; increased voting and other forms of civic participation,
decreased recidivism and more successful preventive health.
-
Current federal, state, and local efforts can only meet the needs of 2.7
million individuals a year. Under the President's budget figure the number
of students served in a year would drop to 2.25 million. (states can put
in their own numbers). The effect of the cut would be much greater in
those states where the state contribution to adult education is very low.
-
To keep our economy strong, we must meet the needs of today’s workforce at
the same time we are preparing tomorrow’s workers in the K-12 system. To
stay strong, we cannot leave these adults behind. Public schools
provide only two percent of our nations’ workforce annually. Most of
the workforce is already there as are their needs for adult education.
-
We cannot continue to outsource jobs because we do not have skilled
individuals to fill vacant positions.
-
To keep our nation strong, we must no only have a strong defense, but a
strong economy base on our investment in education each and every
individual to the highest level possible.
-
The President’s Budget Analysis indicates that adult education programs
have “little or no evidence of effectiveness”. In fact in 1998 Congress
set performance indicators for adult education programs, each year the US
Department of Education has negotiated performance levels on these
indicators with the states and each year a vast majority of the states
have met or exceeded these levels. (States can put in their own data)
-
The Office of Budget and Management rated programs based on measures that
adult education does not use. OMB established common measures for
workforce programs, then applied them to adult education programs. Adult
education programs do not have the legislative authority to collect data
on some of the common measures established by OMB. The result is that
adult education programs are determined to have “little or no evidence of
effectiveness” on measures about which they have no authority to collect
data.
-
Nationwide 94,000,000 adults have basic skill deficiencies, 3,000,000 were
enrolled in adult education programs in 2004, 900,000 would be able to
enroll in 2006 under the President’s budget proposal (States can add their
own data)
-
During the budget briefing officials justified reducing federal funds for
adult education services because “education is a state issue” not a
federal issue. Currently states and local governments contribute $3 for
every $1 the federal government provides. Furthermore a significant number
of adult education students served with state grant funds not associated
with ESL-Civics funding are limited English proficient. Immigration is a
federal, not a state issue. The federal government does have a
responsibility for helping with these costs.
|
