Reading and writing are necessary but not sufficient conditions for literacy. Reading and writing both involve the construction of meaning via print and prior knowledge. Literacy entails both attitude and action with respect to reading and writing and is influenced by social, economic, political, and cultural conditions.

Adult Basic Education and literacy are two significant constructs for adult learners who have not completed high school and who choose to increase their level of school achievement, possibly leading to a high school certificate. The purpose of this paper is to try and understand the relationship between literacy and adult basic education as educational experiences for the attainment of this goal.

Literacy programs have a long history in Newfoundland including the Opportunity Schools of the 1930's. These entailed six permanently employed teachers who travelled from community to community assisting people with their reading skills. The work of Dr. Florence O'Neill continued this tradition in the 1940's. In the 1950's and 1960's the approach to literacy (called reading then) was much more traditional and any adult programs tended to use reading materials from elementary schools.

Adult Basic Education was initiated in 1968 when the first Basic Training and Skills Development (BTSD) program (a federally funded program) was established in the province at Stephenville. For students who were unable to cope with the academic demands of this program, a pre-BTSD literacy component was developed. By 1970, the Literacy portion of the BTSD program "had become clearly established as a program in its own right and the Adult Education section of the Department of Education undertook to put a curriculum in place" (p. iv). The Educational Development Laboratories (EDL), a United States program formed the basis of literacy instruction in the province for the next eight years. The BTSD program had a pre-employment orientation. Initially there were courses offered in mathematics, communication skills, science, and social studies; the latter was dropped from the curriculum as it was not a prerequisite to any trade. The BTSD program was a mastery based, individualized program patterned after the Saskatchewan Newstart Program. In 1973 the BTSD program was revised and three basic streams were developed: technical, biological, and commercial. The Generic Skills Research conducted by the Occupational and Career Analysis Development Branch of the Canada Employment and Immigration Commission was used to determine which parts of the program would be prerequisites for entering different occupational training programs. As part of this revision, a life skills course was added. The Department began issuing certificates for the BTSD program based on the completion of courses in three areas: mathematics, communication skills, and science. Students who received certificates were eligible for admission to trade and technical programs in vocational schools.

With a downsizing of Federal support for the BTSD program, the Division of Adult and Continuing Education established a Provincial Literacy Committee in 1978, the mandate of which was to develop a Literacy program for the province, suitable for full-time and part-time delivery. The Literacy program introduced in 1978 was very similar to the EDL program - a self paced literacy skills instructional program. In the 1980's with the restructuring of the high school program by level, the ABE program was revised to parallel this approach. In 1985, ABE certification was accepted for entrance into Memorial University.

In June 1988, the Department of Career Development and Advanced Studies established a committee to examine the Literacy Program, the ABE Program, the BTSD program, and the Academic Support (Concurrent Training) Program. In March 1989, the committee recommended that the Department "create one provincial program consisting of Levels I, II, and III, to encompass and integrate the Literacy, ABE, and BTSD Programs" (ABE Level I Program Guide, 1995, p. i). A 1990 revision to the ABE Level I (Literacy) program marked a significant shift in the approach to literacy programs. Instead of basing the program on a set of resources, such as EDL, it was based on general learning objectives. The manner in which the program was to be executed was not specified so that the onus lay on the instructors. In 1993, the ABE Monitoring Committee was established to continue to examine and evaluate the program; this committee evolved into the ABE Standing Committee in 1994.

Literacy preceded ABE as an area of study. Quigley (1997) points out that the origins of ABE must be understood within a human capital model. In 1962 the first bill to promote literacy education in the United States House of Representatives did not get beyond the Rules Committee. It was then considered more "politically and economically correct" to have adults enroll in ABE programs which would tie their educational experiences more closely to the labour market. Literacy as expertise in , and critical use of language (reading and writing) was perceived as too general for this purpose. This was an unfortunate turn of events as the basis for the development of critical reading and writing skills transferable to a wide range of contexts was minimized. The focus on the relationship between ABE programs and entry into the workforce is characteristic of the Newfoundland and Labrador ABE program.

According to the ABE Level II/III Instructors' Handbook (1995), the ABE program was "designed with the intent of providing adults who have not completed high school with the opportunity of acquiring a solid, high quality educational background to allow them to function in society, and to access avenues to further education, training, employment, and personal enrichment" (p.10). The ABE Level I Program Guide (1995) delineates this goal somewhat by specifying that learners enter the ABE program for a variety of reasons. While some may aspire to obtaining a certificate, others may use this as a stepping stone to further education, or trade skills instruction, while others may attend to assist their families, or for their own personal goals. However, there appears to be a discrepancy between the stated goal of the program and the content. As indicated above, social studies was dropped from the ABE curriculum, not because it did not contribute to a "solid, high quality, educational background" but because it was not a prerequisite to any trade. The prominence of the work orientation is evidenced by such statements as "Prevalent education and training theory . . . stresses the importance of providing more rounded basic educational opportunities to prepare people to cope with the pressures of information technology and a fluid labour market" (ABE Levels II/II Instructors' Handbook, 1995. p. 10). The Handbook authors also quote from Carnevale, Gainer, and Meltzer (1990, p. 2), "Today's workplace demands not only a good command of the three R's but more. Employers want a new kind of worker with a broad set of workplace skills - or at least a strong foundation in the basics that will facilitate learning on the job". The Handbook authors continue that "Confidence and independence, and the ability to seek and use many learning resources are desirable attributes to foster in adult learners" (p. 11).

Regardless of the focus on preparation for the workforce, there is provision for literacy instruction within ABE. Literacy at the three ABE levels is briefly distinguished by describing Level I as being synonymous with literacy, Level II as constituting a transition between literacy and high school, and Level III as being synonymous with high school. In more detail, Level I is described as "designed to enable adults to achieve the fluency in reading and writing, to acquire the knowledge, and to develop the skills required to participate fully in their day to day lives as citizens, workers, parents, consumers, and students (ABE Level I Instructors' Handbook, 1995, p. vii). The encompassing objective of ABE Level I "is that at the time the adults leave the program their facility in reading, writing, and critical thinking, and their ability to transfer knowledge to the development of life coping skills will be enhanced" (ABE Level I Program Guide, 1995, p. x). "Level II is meant to provide the transition between the literacy skills adults need to function in our society and those that are associated with high school completion" (ABE Level II Program Guide, 1995, p. xi).

Literacy components/courses are addressed within the Communication Skills section of the ABE Program. ABE Level I also contains a content area section, the overall objective of which "is the development of functional literacy" (p. 43).

Following are a list of required courses with a literacy component at the three ABE levels:

Reading

Writing

Oral Communication

Mathematics

Science

General Knowledge

Communication Skills, including:

Reading

Writing

Spelling

Oral Communications

Mathematics

Science

General Options (Level III Credits)

Minimum of 6 Communication Skills

Minimum of 6 Mathematics

Minimum of 6 Science

Minimum of 4 Employability Skills

Maximum of 10 General Options (may include equivalency and maturity credits)

The suggested time for the completion of one course is seven weeks or one-half semester, part-time at 3 hours a week. Full-time day attendance would allow a learner to complete the course in 2 weeks.

Level II would take a year to complete on a part-time basis, or 6 to 8 weeks on a full time basis. Completing Level I would depend on how quickly the learner completed the general learning objectives specified for that Level. The ABE Level I Program Guide states that "Students whose reading skills are already fairly advanced usually need a few months to brush up on their skills and get used to being in an educational program before going on to Level II" (p. 5). It is recommended that "About three weeks after the initial assessment, a student who has attended classes regularly could be introduced to the reading and writing evaluation charts" (p. 173) which are given in the Handbook.

The ABE Level II/III Handbook states that full-time students who are HRDC funded are often under pressure to complete the program in 65 weeks. Another statement indicates that "Those who enter at a low level usually take a long time to complete, at least three years" (p. 53). It is not clear if this reference is to students in Levels II and III or one or the other.

The experiences which adult learners have in ABE/Literacy Programs depend on a number of factors or issues. Because of space, a few of these which are under the control of program developers will be addressed here. These include: nature of literacy, nature of instruction, and instructor preparation/support.

There is no single definition of literacy so one must abstract its meaning from the proposed content and intent of the Program. There is no doubt that literacy is the main function of Level I for the Program Guide states that "While it can be argued that basic math skills are a part of functional literacy, the ability to read and understand and communicate in print are more central to what it means to be literate" (p. 32).

Literacy for ABE Level I is addressed in 25 general objectives. Some are prefaced by a condition, such as: "Given a text of appropriate difficulty, relevant to personal interest or program content areas . . ."; also each general objective may have sub-objectives. The main objectives are:

1. Paraphrase to demonstrate clear understanding of author's message.

2. Identify author's purpose and audience.

3. Distinguish between fiction and non-fiction.

4. Distinguish between fact and opinion.

5. Identify major ideas and supporting detail that is explicitly stated.

6. Identify unwritten meanings.

7. Evaluate for personal significance.

8. Scan to locate specific information.

9. Skim to choose a book or item or (a) interest, or (b) relevance to the purpose.

10. Locate, interpret, and apply information.

11. Classify and categorize information.

1. Identify ways in which reading is used.

2. Identify different forms of printed information.

3. Select appropriate reading or print material for the location of required information.

4. Identify situations in which printed materials may be presented orally.

5. Use appropriate study skills.

1. Present personal information orally and in writing.

2. Present personal experience orally and in writing.

3. Express personal opinion orally and in writing.

4. Write a narrative paragraph.

5. Write a descriptive paragraph.

6. Extend the principles of paragraph writing to a short composition of 3 or 4 paragraphs.

7. Perform practical writing exercises using the appropriate format.

8. Perform handwriting exercises with reasonable speed and legibility.

9. Read orally with expression and a reasonable degree of fluency.

In addition to these general objectives there are 126 Skill Areas, and 7 Pre-Reading Skills listed. The relationship between these skills and literacy is explained at various points. ABE Level I Program Guide states that "While the attainment of the general learning objectives assumes full literacy (my emphasis), the skill areas refer to very basic steps in the development of literacy" (p. xvii). This point is made elsewhere in the Program Guide that the simple acquisition of the skills required to read cannot be equated with literacy. The Skill Areas appear to be prerequisites for literacy. The assumption appears to be that if the Skill Areas and Pre-Reading Skills are developed, they are done so separately, or in addition to these exercises which would be used for the general literacy objectives.

It is not expected that students will attain the full literacy implied by the general objectives at Level I. The ABE Level II Program Guide states: "Because most adults entering Level II will have underdeveloped reading skills, it is imperative that every instructor encourage students to read as often as possible, and as widely as possible" (p. 1). There is no similar admonition with respect to writing. There is a shift in philosophy and emphasis on the nature of literacy in Level II. Rather than being guided by general objectives, there are three specific courses plus one in literature. The three courses directly dealing with instruction in literacy are:

IC 2012: Vocabulary

IC 2013: Reading Comprehension

IC 2015 Writing Skills

(IC 2013: Literature)

There is also IC 2011: Study and Research Skills, which includes topics related to literacy development. There seem to be more commonalties between the suggested reading course at Level II and the Skill Areas in Level I, than with the General Literacy Objectives at Level I. The writing course for Level II contains much more content on the mechanics of writing (Grammar, Punctuation and Capitalization) than is implied by the General Literacy Objectives at Level I. The sequence of literacy development appears to move from a more general to a more narrow perspective across Levels I, II, and III.

Level III continues the philosophy guiding the nature of literacy at Level II. A rationale is provided: "Writing, reading, speaking, listening, viewing, study, and all communication skills are crucial to learning in all content areas. Development of these skills must continue throughout all Levels of the ABE program, in all content areas" (ABE Level II Program Guide, p.1). Apart from four literature focussed courses, there are 7 courses devoted to the development of literacy. These are:

IC 3211: Basic Grammar

IC 3112: Writing Skills

IC 3113: Evaluative Comprehension

IC 3214: Oral Communications

IC 3215: Research Writing

IC 3116: Business Communications

IC 3117: Vocational English

There is some overlap between the Oral and Written Communications General Objectives at Level I and the related Skill Areas, and the Writing Skills, and Oral Communications courses at Level III. The courses relating to literacy at Level II appear to be isolated from the literacy activities that a learner would encounter in her/his environment. Business Communications is a written language course; the first section, Basic Skills Review appears to be a review of the Vocabulary and Writing Skills courses from Level II. Vocational English, with the exception of a section on "Technical Writing" is very much a "job search" course.

The graduation requirements for Level III (Program Guide, p. 275) specify the following required courses from Communication Skills.

IC 3211: Basic Grammar IC 3116: Business Communications

IC 3112: Writing Skills plus one of: IC 3215: Research Writing

IC 3221: Optional Literature

No course in reading is required for graduation at Level III.

Overall, the literacy program may be described within an autonomous model of literacy (Street, 1984). The objectives are based on content/skills to be mastered rather than arising from the personal/social/political/economic needs of the learners . The focus in on text (the nature or structure of the written passages) rather than on task (the event or occasion when literacy may be used) (Purves, 1991). A writing stage framework (Graves, 1991, 1978) does not guide the writing courses. For example, rather than being addressed as significant to the "editing" stage of writing, grammar, spelling, and punctuation are studied in isolated courses. The literature courses tend to be focussed within Rosenblatt's (1978) efferent model as opposed to the aesthetic model, and there appears to be minimal emphasis on "response to literature" (Langer, 1995).

Language is perhaps one's worst enemy in trying to delineate or explicate a particular construct, such as nature of instruction, because there are often so many meanings of the same words. For the purpose of consistency in meaning, the following terms often occurring in discussion on instruction will be defined as indicated:

A rationale for stating general objectives of literacy at ABE Level I is that there will be flexibility in how the program is delivered, how learners are organized, what methodology is selected, and how integration may take place. This places a major responsibility on the instructors. There are many suggestions throughout the ABE Handbooks that instruction should be learner-centered; however, the definition of this concept is not always clear. The ABE Level II/III Handbook states that "the instructor creates an educational environment in which learning can occur. A variety of instructional techniques can be used. Learners are expected to assume ever increasing responsibility for specific content determination and acquisition" (p. 57). However, this suggestion is not compatible with a program in which course content is specified. It does not appear that learner-centered necessarily means individuals engaged solo in activities. In fact, there are many supportive points for group instruction and interaction. The following are taken from the ABE Level II/III Handbook. Individual instruction "emphasizes individual responsibility for efforts in performance" (p. 58). However, individual does not mean isolation, and individual responsibility could be promoted in a group situation. "An investment of time is required to build a community of learners" (p. 61). "Interactive teaching methods and materials allow adults to actively use the information they are seeking to learn" (p. 89). "Group support is important for effective learning" and "social and personal development are important facets of the learning experience" (p.89). However, in contrast to this emphasis on group learning and interaction, there is also strong support for particular computer instructional programs.

A difficulty with the use of computer instructional programs as a means for delivering communication skills is that they are limited to providing reading and writing skills. Literacy, involving attitude and action in response to reading and writing in current, everyday activities cannot be easily developed via computers. It is very difficult to provide for the insert of new material (such as today's newspaper) or to engage in spontaneous interaction between learner and instructor over an issue initiated by either of them.

While the concept of integration is promoted in the ABE Handbooks, the focus is on content: "What the integration means, rather, is that the major focus of the program in terms of resources should be on material relating to the program content are as" (p. 37). An examination of the balance between focus on content and methodology in the Program Content section of ABE Level I indicates that the emphasis appears to be on mastering content rather than on developing effective reading and writing strategies for mastering content.

When many decisions on delivery, organization, methodology, integration, and selection of content for literacy development are left to the instructor, it puts a significant responsibility on the instructor's professional preparation/support, time, and experiences, and further responsibility for provision for support and professional development experiences. Several references are made in the Handbooks regarding this responsibility: "Although the majority of ABE teachers may not have specific training in the teaching of adults, many will be familiar with some of the literature on adult education" (ABE Level I, p. 8). "Teachers should have a basic knowledge of word processing before attempting to use it as a teaching tool" (ABE Level I, p.143 ). "Most instructors in ABE arrive there indirectly. Many have experience in secondary or even elementary systems. Consequently they bring many routine practices which served them well or were required in dealing with children and adolescents" (ABE Level II/III, p. 35). The focus appears to be on having instructors understand reading and writing skills rather than on understanding literacy and what it means to be literate. And even the requirements to understand reading and writing skills necessitates a broad background of knowledge by the instructor. For example, at Level I, an instructor would have to be knowledgeable of 126 Skill Areas and 7 Pre-Reading Skills and know when these are pertinent to one of the 25 general literacy objectives and know how to best develop them so that they enhance the attainment of the general literacy objectives. The "andragogical principles" promoted by Knowles are addressed and compared to "pedagogical principles". While the andragogical principles still apply to working with adults, one must be cautious in the nature of the comparisons, for with the introduction of "whole language" in schools, the pedagogical principles suggested by Knowles are long outdated.

There are no suggestions as to the literacy knowledge and experience that literacy instructors should have. It is assumed that the instructors understand "literacy", "skill areas", "pre-reading skills", and how these relate. The International Reading Association, the largest professional reading organization in the world, provides standards of knowledge of reading for different educational personnel. For adult literacy instructors, 102 knowledge goals are suggested under the following headings.

Philosophy of Reading Instruction

Language Development, Cognition and Learning

Knowledge of the Reading Process

Creating a Literate Environment

Organizing and Planning for Effective Instruction

Knowledge of Instructional Strategies

Demonstrating Knowledge of Assessment Principles and Techniques

Communicating Information about Reading

Planning and Enhancing Programs

The relationship between instructor support interacts with the generality-specificity of the program objectives. When objectives are stated generally or globally, and there is considerable flexibility in how these are implemented, there is a much greater responsibility on the part of instructors to have a comprehensive understanding of the discipline and to make many decisions; on the contrary, when objectives are specified, and the delivery is controlled, such as by computer, there is little responsibility on the instructor for decision making about program implementation.

There is no doubt that literacy is a major part of the Newfoundland and Labrador ABE Program. It encompasses almost all of Level I, much of Level II, and six credits within Level III. The sequential relationship across Levels, however, is not that clear. "Full literacy" appears to be a goal of Level I and is guided by a number of general objectives and specific skill areas and pre-reading skills. Courses with specific literacy related content occur at Levels II and III, sometimes with overlap of the Level I program.

The literacy program is traditional in nature and may not be conceptualized within reading/writing, literacy theories of such educators/researchers as Street, Graves, Rosenblatt, or Langer, or within the nature of literacy by such writers as Courts , Lankshear, Meek, Mitchell and Weiler, Morris and Tchudi, Shannon, and Taylor. However, there is an expressed need for literacy development to be meaningful for the learners. "A program which reserves meaningful material until a student has achieved a certain reading level, will in all likelihood lose the majority of the beginning level students before they ever significantly increase their reading level" (ABE Level I Handbook, p. 39). While, there is suggested flexibility in the nature of the del ivery, organization, methodology, and integration of the literacy program, the effectiveness of any such decisions is dependent on the support given instructors and on the opportunities for professional development. The instructor is a key factor in the success or otherwise of the program.

In order to get a better view of how the literacy components of the ABE program meet the needs of learners and of society, an evaluation checklist could be drawn up covering both theory and practice against which the current program could be rated.

Adult Basic Education Instructors' Handbook (Levels I, II/III). (1995). St. John's, NF: Department of Education and Training.

Adult Basic Education Program Guide (Levels I, II, and II). (1995). St. John's, NF: Department of Education and Training.

Canadian Institute for Research on Regional Development. (1995). Economic adjustment in selected coastal communities (No source of publishing given).

Carnevale, A. P., Gainer, L. J., & Meltzer, A. S. (1990). Workplace basics: The essential skills employers want. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Courts, P. L. (1991). Literacy and empowerment. New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Fagan, W. T. (1992). A framework for literacy development. Montreal: Les Editions de la Chenelière.

Graves, D. (1978). Balance the basics: Let them write. New York: Ford Foundation.

Graves, D. (1991). Build a literate classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Langer, J.A. (1995). Envisioning literature: Literary understanding and literature instruction. New York: Teachers' College, Columbia University.

Lankshear, C. (1997). Changing literacies. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Meek, M. (1991). On being literate. London: The Bodley Head.

Mitchell, C., & Weiler, K. (1991). Rewriting literacy. New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Morris, P. J., & Tchudi, S. (1996). The new literacy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bassey.

Purves, A. C. (1991). The textual contract: Literacy as common knowledge and conventional wisdom. In E. M. Jennings & A. C. Purves, (Eds.), Literate systems and individual lives. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Quigley, B. A. (1997). Rethinking literacy education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Shannon, P. (1992). Becoming political: Readings and writings in the politics of literacy education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Street, B. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, D. (1996). Toxic literacies. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.