Even Anchors Need Lifelines. Public Libraries in Adult Literacy.

469 Pages·2012·8.14 MB·English

DOCUMENT RESUME
CE 073 587
ED 406 519
Spangenberg, Gail
AUTHOR
Even Anchors Need Lifelines. Public Libraries in Adult
TITLE
Literacy.
Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Center for the Book.
SPONS AGENCY
Aug 96
PUB DATE
469p.
NOTE
Research
Numerical/Quantitative Data (110)
Reports
PUB TYPE
(143)
MF01/PC19 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Adult Basic Education; *Adult Literacy; Educational
DESCRIPTORS
Research; Educational Technology; Futures (of Society);
Librarian Attitudes; Library Administrators; Library
Planning; Library Policy; *Library Role; *Library Services;
*Literacy Education; *Public Libraries; State Federal Aid;
Technological Advancement
*State Literacy Resource Centers
IDENTIFIERS
ABSTRACT
This report, in two volumes, is a study of the role and
future of public libraries in adult literacy that involved a survey of 200
professionals--state librarians, state library literacy contacts, heads of
state literacy resource centers (SLRCs), and local library literacy program
heads. The first volume describes the study findings in seven sections:
mission and role of public libraries in adult literacy provision; use and
limits of technology; the planning context of library literacy programs;
financial and funding questions; state-level data collection issues; local
program issues; and lifeblood issues and leadership. Section 8 presents
conclusions and recommendations, including the following: 70% of state
respondents believe adult literacy should be a major public library mission;
only 50% of state libraries have major adult literacy involvement; lack of
funding is the major obstacle to technology use; SLRCs have been largely
underfunded; permanent loss of federal funding for library literacy would
close many programs; bold state and national leadership is essential; and the
single most urgent issue is funds and funding stability. A participant list
is appended. Volume II is a data book organized into the eight topical
sections of the survey. The contents page for each section indicates the
questions as well as the survey groups to which particular questions were
addressed. Data are presented in tables or as free response answers.
(YLB)
********************************************************************************
*
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
*
*
from the original document.
*
********************************************************************************
A Study by Gail Spangenberg
Spangenberg Learning Resources
New York City
August 1996
or
EDUCATKIN
U.S. DEPARTMENT
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
Once Cl Educatonal Research one improvamem
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL
E pti
CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
CENTER (ERIC)
aS
0 TMs document haS been reproduced
received from the person or organtzabon
Sco,,i3t,,os.,
ong.nating II
Mtn°r changes have been made to Improve
reproduction rurality.
Pants of vale or opt mon s melee m that POCU
ment do not necessarily represent °Moat
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
OERI positron or policy.
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
Sponsored by
The Center for the Book
in The Library of Congress
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
1)
PREFACE
The Center for the Book in the Library of Congress is pleased to make this
study, Even Anchors Need Guidelines: Public Libraries in Adult Literary, available to a
wide public.
The Center for the Book was established by law in 1977 to stimulate public
interest in books, reading, and libraries. A small, catalytic office that depends on funds
from outside the Library of Congress for its program and publications, it is pleased to
acknowledge support for this project from the National Institute for Literacy, Harold W.
McGraw, Jr., McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., and the American Library Association.
For advice and support, thanks also go to members of the center's reading promotion
network of affiliated state centers and national educational and civic organizations.
Even Anchors Need Guidelines is an important study. The Center for the Book
looks forward to continuing the discussions it will provoke.
John Y. Cole
Director
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The research underlying Even Anchors Need Lifelines makes one fact crystal
clear: Though too little recognized and appreciated, public library adult literacy services
are a vital part of the national adult literacy system, serving hundreds of thousands of
adult Americans in thousands of programs across the country.
It also underscores a bizarre irony: Just as they have become an established
force in literacy, public library literacy programs find themselves poised at the edge
of a financial precipice. Earmarked federal funding for them has been cut. And there
are very grave doubts that they will be able to compete for education or literacy funds
provided through state block grants.
This report thus begins and ends on an uncertain note. It can turn out to be
the postmortem for a major part of the public library adult literacy field. Or it can be
the spark that ignites the imagination and action so urgently needed to preserve that
field and lay a base for developing its future role. Which it will be depends on what
state librarians, public libraries and library associations, adult literacy groups, public
and private funding agencies, and political leaders decide to do about the main findings
and recommendations. In particular, it depends on what they are prepared to do
immediately about the funding crisis that confronts the public libraries.
This report is organized into seven sections, each focused on a single area
of research, and an eighth section (beginning on page 116) which contains the main
conclusions and 19 priority recommendations.
Two recommendations in Section 8 address the most urgent funding need.
One calls for the prompt restoration of earmarked funding for library literacy
programmingat the federal level, in state block grants, or both. The other challenges
the philanthropic community to help meet the short-term funding need so that
professionals and programs in the field can maintain their balance while planning
for the future.
Gail Spangenberg
3
Since 1993, through Spangenberg Learning Resources, Gail Spangenberg has directed a
variety of studies and organizational planning and development projects. Her clients have
included such diverse groups as Chemical Bank, U.S. Basics, The DeWitt Wallace-Reader's
Digest Fund, the British Broadcasting Corporation, the Hewlett Foundation, New York
Theatre Ballet, and the U.S. Department of Education. In 1994, for the Library's new
President, she conducted a study of the New York Public Library's adult literacy program.
In the early 1980s, Ms. Spangenberg helped establish the Business Council for Effective
Literacy and as its Vice President and Operating Head from 1983 to 1993 she was responsible
for development and management of BCEL's policies, publications, and other adult literacy
programs and services.
Before that she was Program Officer and Consultant to the Ford Foundation and Senior
Consultant to Carnegie Corporation and the Russell Sage Foundation. At Ford, she had
responsibility for grant programs in nontraditional and urban higher education, adult
education and literacy, and educational technology. She developed the Ford Foundation
project which produced McGraw-Hill's book Adult Illiteracy In America, by Carmen St. John
Hunter and David Harman. She also spearheaded Ford's involvement in the BBC's
pioneering national adult literacy campaign in the United Kingdom.
In the early 1980s she developed a major paper on adult literacy for the Carnegie
Corporation, and for the Russell Sage Foundation she developed and implemented a range of
management and computer systems, including that organization's social science research
library and information services.
Ms. Spangenberg has served on many state and national literacy task forces, planning
committees, and advisory boards, including the Definition Committee of the National Adult
Literacy Survey conducted by the Educational Testing Service and the U.S. Department of
Education, the ESL Adult Literacy Clearinghouse of the Center for Applied Linguistics, the
U.S. Office of Technology Assessment's 1990 study titled Worker Training: Competing in the
New International Economy, and numerous studies of workplace literacy for the Southport
Institute for Policy Analysis. In her position at BCEL, she commissioned the Southport
Institute study which led to creation of the National Literacy Act.
Spangenberg Learning Resources can be reached at 440 East 23rd Street, Ste. 11C, New
York, NY 10010. Phone: [phone]. E-mail: [email protected].
4
INTRODUCTION
best interest of public
never before. So is
Americans and the well-
THE CONTEXT
libraries, the general
openness to forging new
being of America.
public they serve, and
liaisons, developing new
After more than a
adult basic education
The current climate
voices, and finding
decade of solid advances
for adult literacy services
opportunity in established
makes it hard, in some
in policy development,
to be a central part of their
avenues of service whose
ways impossible, to plan
research, and service
mission. Indeed, in
full potential has not yet
effectively for the future
outreach, the movement
announcing this study,
of adult literacy. And
been used.
against adult functional
the executive director of
matters are made even
illiteracy in the U.S.
the American Library
WHY THIS STUDY?
worse by government
appears to be in retreat.
Association declared that
down-sizing and ideo-
This library literacy
this educational service
School-to-work tran-
logical warfare on the
study stems from a belief
role "adds to the richness
political front. The result
sition efforts and family
that the community-based
and relevance of libraries
literacy have been the
is that a growing number
public libraries are one
in communities
steady focus of the present
of adult literacy programs
of the strongest anchors
throughout America."
long used to inadequate
administration, but other
for literacy education the
fundingare limping
components on the adult
nation could possibly
But it would be folly to
literacy spectrum have along as never before
have.
advocate a stronger adult
faded from attention.
toward financial
disasterand adult
literacy role for public
Public libraries have an
libraries without better
Furthermore, federal
literacy professionals
organic presence in nearly
understanding what they
literacy funding for many
are increasingly frus-
every American town and
are already doing, what
strands of adult literacy trated and discouraged.
city, ranking right up there
they think about that, and
(homeless programs,
with the local post office
what factors will shape
workplace literacy part-
It would be natural
and the community col-
their current and future
nerships, and state lit-
in the current hostile
lege. They are deeply
role.
eracy resource centers) atmosphere for literacy
imbedded in the general
has evaporated almost planners and practitioners
public consciousness and
How do state and local
overnight, and more
to take a wait-and-see
have a permanence that
public libraries currently
approach. But that would
setbacks are likely,
many other organizations
view the role of their
especially if state block
guarantee even more
don't have.
institutions in adult basic
grants are implemented.
losses, and there is simply
education and literacy?
too much at stake for that
Furthermore, it isn't
The retreat is alarming
What connections and
to be acceptable. Indeed,
hard to see that their
and philosophically hard
understandings exist
the very forces that make
reading and information
between public libraries
to justify, for regardless of
it hard to stand and fight
services increasingly
and state and national
the political lens through
make it imperative to do
require a literate
which one looks, an exten- planning groups, especially
just that.
community of users.
the state literacy resource
sive accumulation of evi-
In fact, it has been argued
centers legislated to have
dence attests to a powerful
Determination, re-
since the turn of the
connection between the a central role in setting the
dedication, and boldness
statewide context? What
century that it is in the
basic skills proficiency of
of vision are needed as
5
1
tion of this study unfolded
ment in state planning,
American Library
does actual public library
in a series of four discrete and various funding and
Association ($5,000).
involvement consist of
phasesinterspersed with
Center for the Book
financial matters.
now? What problems do
costs were somewhere in
meetings, tracking of
state libraries and local
the vicinity of $15,000
The questionnaire for
legislation, interviews,
public library literacy
excluding publication
state library agency
and other activities.
programs face as they look
expenses. Spangenberg
literacy professionals
to the future? How well
Learning Resources
Phase 1- questionnaire
(Q2, ten pages) included
positioned are public
donated major staff and
the same five pages sent to
design and mailing list
libraries to take a stronger
material resources to the
development. In Sep-
the state librarians plus
role in adult literacy
undertaking.
five more. This was done
tember and October,
service provision? What
questionnaires of varying
to elicit more deeply
can be done to help them
Many people from
detailed information and
length were designed,
across the country
do this, assuming enough
to learn whether state
sent out for review, and
contributed their time
people agree that the goal
customized for four
library agencies collect
and thinking to this report.
is worthy?
different target groups: meaningful program data
There is hardly anything in
it that is not theirs. They
about local public library
chief officers of state
Even Anchors Need
are acknowledged in
literacy programs.
library agencies (state
Lifelines does not pretend
Appendices A-C.
librarians)...designated
to have complete answers
In the main, Q1
literacy contacts in those
to these questions. In fact,
General acknowledg-
and Q2 aimed to assess
same state library agencies
it will probably raise more
ments are presented in
whether these important
...heads of state literacy
questions than it answers.
Appendix A. Appendix B
state agencies are pro-
resource centers...and
But the hope is that it
lists the people who served
viding significant leader-
will spark a new and more
local library literacy
in various project advisory
realistic appreciation of
ship and support to local
programs.
roles. Many wrote
what the possibilities are
library literacy programs,
memoranda to assist with
and what work needs to be
and whether they could be
Name and address
data analysis, and their
done to develop the public
a source of strong, new
lists were obtained from
thinking will be evident
library role.
leadership as federal
several sources as were
throughout the report.
funding and power shifts
nominations for local
Appendix C lists the
to the states.
programs. The lists were
names and addresses of
SPONSORS & ADVISORS
the nearly 200 profes-
found to be largely out of
State Literacy Resource
sionals who provided the
date, requiring extensive
This study was spon-
raw material for this study
Centers were included as a
up-front telephone work
sored by The Center for
by filling out question-
third study strand (Q3, ten
the Book in The Library
to verify names, titles,
naires. To facilitate
pages) because they were
of Congress. It took place
and addresses.
networking, phone and fax
during a nine-month
presumed to be the cen-
numbers as well as e-mail
period between Septem-
trally important state level
The questionnaire
addresses are given for
ber 1995 and May 1996.
planning and resource
for state librarians (Q1)
Appendix B and C
entities envisioned in the
consisted of five pages of
contributors.
Grant support was
National Literacy Act of
general questions to probe
provided by the National
1991. As such, it was
their present thinking
THE WORK PLAN
Institute for Literacy
reasoned, they would have
about the role of public
($11,000), Harold W.
a key role in shaping the
libraries in adult literacy,
Following an initial
McGraw, Jr. ($11,000),
context in which public
and about matters of
definition period, the
McGraw-Hill Companies
library literacy programs
technology use, involve-
survey and analysis por-
Inc. ($9,500), and the
2
rateand it didexten-
valuable accumulation of
operate, a role that should
PRESENTATION &
be understood better.
insights.
sive telephone follow-up
OUTCOMES
occurred during Decem-
Some questions
They were either
ber and January. Ques-
An immense amount
designed for SLRCs
nominated by national
tionnaire returns were
of information was
had to do with their
or state leadership orga-
sorted and given preli-
collected in this project.
perceptions about the
nizations or selected by
minary review. Duplicate
Over 2,000 pages of raw
status of public libraries
Spangenberg Learning
questionnaires were pro-
material were generated.
as part of the statewide
Resources from three
vided as necessary and
That was boiled down to
system for delivering adult
sources: research reports
clarifying consulations
a data book of nearly 321
literacy services. Others
found in the ERIC data-
were held with many
pages, which in turn was
sought to examine the
base, the large pool of
respondents.
reduced to the 51 tables
current and potential role
programs that have had
seen in this report. Every
and health of the SLRCs
Phase 4 - data
multiple-year funding
question asked in the
themselves.
synthesis and analysis.
from the Office of
survey is covered here,
From February to May,
Education Research &
along with a parallel
In the fourth question-
data organization and
Improvement of the U.S.
discussion and analysis
naire for local library lit-
analyses were done. In
Department of Education,
of the responses.
eracy programs (Q4, eight
March, the data were
and programs reported on
pages), some questions
prepared and sent to a
in various newsletters of
were the same as those
The report is dense
panel of project advisors
the Business Council for
asked of the first three
and too much to digest in
for review.
Effective Literacy.
groups while others were
a single reading. But it
devoted to the specific
has been written to be
In addition, tele-
An effort was made
purposes, features, and
phone interviews and read as easily as possible.
to have geographic dis-
problems of the programs
informational calls were
Each section is self-
tribution and to include
themselves. The primary
contained and can be read
made to several national
both small and large
apart from all the others,
goal was to discover the
organizations: the
population areas.
depending on the reader's
concerns and hopes of
National Commission on
interest. It can also be
those who actually
Libraries and Information
Phase 2 - questionnaire
provide the services.
navigated with little
Science, the American
production and mailing.
attention to the tables or
Library Association, the
During October and
Questionnaires were
examined in a deeply
U.S. Department of
November, reproduction
sent to 82 local public
Education, the National
studied way.
and color-coding of the
library literacy programs
Institute for Literacy,
questionnaires took place,
in 32 states. The 63
The reader can also
the Center for Applied
letters of transmittal were
responding programs are
begin at the end, with the
Linguistics, the Public
written, and mailings went
not a national sampling,
Conclusions and Recom-
out. Additional literature
Library Data Service of
but their experiences
mendations section
the ALA, the National
was reviewed and tele-
and circumstances are
starting on page 116.
Clearinghouse for Adult
phone consultations were
especially relevant
The main findings for
Literacy/ESL Education,
made.
because they are long
each section are
the National Center for
established (9.9 years
Phase 3 - telephone
summarized there.
Family Literacy, Laubach
on average), are known
follow-up and other
Literacy Action, and
to have solid track
communications activities.
Sections 1-6 deal
Literacy Volunteers of
records, and have a
To improve the response
in turn with the broad
America.
3
7
themes of the survey.
Section 7 gives direct
69% (35) of the state librarians themselves sent in completed returns...:
voice to the respondents
24% (12) said that their agency's designated.literacy contactspeaks for them
themselves. It recaps and
(CA, CO, LA, MA, MO, NY, OK, SC, VT VA, WA, and WY).
8% (4Y did not want to participate (AK, AZ, CT, NC).
reinforces the analysis and
findings discussed in 1-6.
85% (44) of state library agency literacy contacts responded.
Q2
As noted, the main
14% (.7) :did not respond (AL, AZ, DC, NC, NV, RI, .UT):
findings are presented
Q3
78% (40) of state literacy resource center heads (or their equivalents)Tesponded.
in Section 8, along with
22% (11) did.not respond (AR, DC, GA, ID, MA, ME, NV, OR, RI, TX; WY).
conclusions and recom-
Q4
77% (63).of the 82 nominated local public libraryliteracy programs responded.,
mendations.
23% (19) did not respond (one arrived too late: to be included).
The report sections
are as follows:
is possible and would be
workforce literacy and
1. The Public Library's Role
useful and even necessary
family literacy (where
(p. 6)
for some purposes.
the focus of instruction
'
2. The Use & Limits Of
111
is on parents). The
Technology
.
.
.
-
(p. 18)
For those who want
definition is consistent
.
to undertake deeper
with that of the National
3. Planning
analyses of the findings,
Literacy Act.
(P. 35)
"
the complete study data
4. Finance & Funding
will be published as a
(P. 48)
.
-
The four groups
.
supplement to the report
5. State Level Program
questioned in the 50
I.
Data
called Even Anchors Need
states and the District of
(p. 61)
Lifelines: The Background
.
Columbiachief officers
Data.
6. Local Programs: The
:
of state library agencies,
Heart Of The Matter
(p. 72)
key literacy contacts in
In addition, the Center
state libraries, heads of
7. Lifeblood Issues
for the Book may even-
& Leadership
state literacy resource
tually issue some targeted
(p. 89)
centers, and directors of
resource publications for
8. Conclusions &
local library literacy
the field that draw on
Recommendations
programs are referred
(p. 116)
material in this report.
to either by those desig-
Appendices
nations or 01, Q2, Q3,
II
(p. 126)
and Q4. This short-hand
-
SETTING THE STAGE
.:6
device was used in the full
It should be noted that
data book and is retained
S.
For this study, adult
severe budget constraints
here to faciliate cross-
45
literacy is defined as
placed major limits on
referencing.
basic reading, writing,
this project. Detailed
4:-
math, and ESL needed
state-by-state compari-
As the table above
by adults to function
sons, for instance, could
shows, the study achieved
not be performed
in various contexts.
an extraordinarily high
Included are workplace/
although such analysis
4
forgotten. Yet several
response rateespecially
people contacted during
from the state library
follow-up were grateful to
personnel. That is an
be reminded because they
important finding in itself,
genuinely wanted to
indicating a deep interest
participate.
in the topic under study.
It is worthy of note,
Although it took
too, that if the response
extensive staff work to
rate for state literacy
produce such a strong
resource centers actually
response, the rate is
seems low given their
nonetheless remarkable.
presumed rolewhy not a
These are very busy
100% response rate here,
people in the best of
asked one data reviewer
economic times, and when
one of the most shocking
this survey reached their
things learned in the study
desks they were unusually
is that at the time the data
concerned about their
were being gathered,
institutions and programs
many SLRCs had already
and still arebecause of
been forced by federal
federal and state cutbacks.
funding cuts to close or
drastically curtail
Moreover, it was a real
operations. The
eye-opener to discover the
circumstances of most
extent to which project
SLRCs remain very bleak.
questionnaires had to
It is a story that needs
compete with literally
attention in its own right.
dozens of questionnaires
from other sources
almost a public policy
issue in itself.
The recipients in all
groups are deluged with
survey forms, day in and
day out, from every
imaginable source for
purposes that range from
the grand to the frivolous.
Most are trashed on
arrival, and those kept
for later attention are
routinely relegated to the
bottom of the work pile
where they are apt to be
9
5
1: THE PUBLIC LIBRARY'S ROLE
The basic purpose
RI:
Should the provision of literacy services be a major mission of public libraries?
behind the questions of
[Asked of groups 01-04]
this first section of the
Yes
Not Sure
No
study was to probe facts
9%
66%
26%
State Librarians (35 of 35)
Q1
and attitudes about the
State Library Literacy Contacts (37 of 44)
Q2
81 8
11
mission and the current
State Literacy Resource Center Heads (38 of 40)
74
Q3
16
11
and future role of public
Local Library Literacy Program Heads (63 of 63)
Q4
6 3
91
libraries in adult literacy
service provision.
Are public library literacy programs a major component of your state's literacy-
R2:
providing network now?
[Q3-Q4]
The section looks at
Yes
Not Sure
No
what is on the minds of
state and local public
53% 42%
SLRC Heads (38 of 40) 5%
Q3
Local Program Heads (63 of 63)
Q4
62
25
13
library professionals with
respect to mission and role
and also at what state
Is the development of library-based adult literacy programs a major mission of
R3:
literacy resource center
the state library agency now? [Q1-04]
Yes
Not Sure
No
heads think about these
matters.
43%
01
51%
6%
State Librarians (35 of 35)
State Library Literacy Contacts (36 of 44)
Q2
44
50 6
SLRC Heads (38 of 40)
It also probes some of
Q3
29
55 16
Local Program Heads (63 of 63)
46
Q4
33 21
the forces that affect the
extent and nature of
public library involvement
in adult literacysuch as
Responses to questions a difference between what
While this is highly en-
funding and state and
many of them say and
R2-R3 are somewhat at
couraging news, it is also
national understanding.
what they do.
odds with the findings of
significant that one-fourth
And it seeks to draw
Rl. Although two-thirds
of the state librarians do
attention to the benefits
Beyond this, the high
not think so, despite of the library personnel
of library literacy progam-
negative response rate to
decades of advocacy by say they consider literacy a
ming to the country in
R3 by state library people
both library and educa-
major public library
general and to public
was thought by one of this
mission, half indicate that
tion leaders. Moreover,
libraries in particular.
project's data reviewers
development of library-
about 10% of the Q1 -Q3
respondents are not sure
"to be most detrimental to
based adult literacy
MAJOR MISSION?
local library literacy
programs are not presently
so that on balance, about
programs that feel strongly
A CAUTIOUS YES
one-third of the respon-
a major mission of the
about their role in their
dees are still unconvinced
state agency. This
respective communities."
about the appropriate-
Clearly, in R1, the
indicates that while library
majority in all respondent
ness and importance of
professionals generally
However, responses to
categories think the
embrace the provision of
literacy service. Several
question R3a suggest that
provision of literacy
study advisors were
literacy services as a
lack of funding at the
services should be a major quite alarmed by this
legitimate and central role
state and federal level is
mission of public libraries.
for public libraries, there is
discovery.
10
6