Attending: Don Anderson (Workforce Central), Mary Coonan (Transition to Work), Bruce Dahlquist (Central Mass WIB), Charlie Herbert (SABES-West), Merle Jones Lindsay (United Way of Mass Bay), Rosemary Locher (DTA), Andre Mayer (Associated Industries of Massachusetts), Connie Nelson (MWER), Dawna Perez (Lawrence Literacy Works), Andrea Perrault (ACLS), Mina Reddy (SABES, World Ed), David Rosen (Newsome Associates), Brunir Shackleton (City of Boston/JCS), Laurie Sheridan (SABES/World Ed), Jude Travers (International Institute of Boston), Gloria Watanabe (Randolph Community Partnership), Beverly Wing (Management Consulting Services)

Announcements:

• DOE/ACLS ABE Director's Meeting Sept. 26-27: workforce development events.
• MCAE Network conference October 26-27: SABES workforce development workshops, roundtable workshops on Workplace Education. New MCAE Executive Director: Kenny Tamarkin, temporarily housed at World Education in Boston.
• October 6th: Manufacturing Summit/Jobs First Day via Central MA WIB.
• ACLS working with DWD: Bristol WIB will include ABE and is soliciting ideas.
• Field Notes issue on Workforce Development and Workplace Education will come out shortly.
• SMARTT intake: ACLS workforce development/workplace education planning committee is looking at how to add students' job industry into the information captured.
• We lost Paul Hyry! He left HALO to become a middle school principal in Holyoke this month, and has left this Advisory. It seems important to invite additional ABE/ESOL practitioners to join the Advisory.

ACLS Staff/Student Survey: Workforce Development Results
ACLS recently hired Noel-Levitz consumer satisfaction survey consultants in Denver, CO, to conduct a statewide survey of all DOE-funded programs, both students and staff. They received very impressive results - 4000 student responses and 600 staff responses. Ruth Sims of Noel Levitz will open at the ABE Director's Conference, make a full presentation about the survey results. It will be possible to show regional data and this will be available publicly soon, after ACLS is able to analyze data more fully (Andrea will send it to the WFD Advisory). Results related to workforce development were very striking. Survey highlights include:

• 37% out of job and looking.
• 27% have a job but want a better a job.
• (Total: 64%, or 2/3, need a job or a better job).
• 40% don't know where to find career information.
• Of those who want a job or better job, 67% want some training.
• Staff/teachers find it difficult to meet the interest of students to have more field trips or guest lecture visits (re WFD related).

Workplan Update
Question: Where do you think ABE is with Workforce Development? What interest is out there?

There is big interest in a small number of programs. Fear of workforce development in programs. Fear that funding sources are pushing programs to force students into dead-end jobs, etc. It is a slow process getting over this fear. At CWC's CEDAC training, a small number of ABE people were there (mostly directors) but there did seem to be a big interest. Difficulty of reaching teachers due to time constraints may be addressed through more distance learning professional development (regarding Workforce Development). Job readiness and employability skills workshops for teachers were helpful. Not sure fear is what's happening. ABE and Workforce Development staff seldom interact. Also workforce development staff doesn't get a lot of opportunities for professional development outside of what's required. Within education programs, a teacher may have no idea what the workforce development person in their own organization is doing.

ABE folks see themselves as part of workforce development, but not just part of workforce development. ABE has a role in sustaining the multiple goals of education (including family concerns, etc.). ABE folks may think that the current workforce development push is trying to get rid of these other goals and push everyone towards work. ABE folks fear being engulfed by workforce development. These are not just fears--there have been real past threats of educational funding streams moving into workforce development. There is an ideological contradiction between ABE and workforce development. There are also practical timing issues. A person may be ready for post-ABE training or a job but still be enrolled in an ABE class. Immigrants with a high school diploma are often devalued, need to learn quickly and get credentialed.

ABE doesn't work on the same "just in time" schedule and priority system. The work world wants it done "yesterday." For example, when workers are downsized due to NAFTA, etc., it's important to take care of those people immediately in terms of getting them into education or training programs. Meanwhile ABE moves at a "turtle's pace." Both sides need to recognize differences in timing/scheduling.

Many classes run 8-9 hours a week. Immersion programming may be a good option for those highly motivated learners, which are many. We shouldn't coddle the highly motivated ones. It's helpful to look at what workforce development and ABE have as common goals and emphasize those things. One of these is moving people into positions of self-sufficiency. In order to do that, we need to push for more transition to college programming, as research shows that higher education is the real key for landing self-sufficiency paying jobs. One idea for ABE staff is to have NCSALL based study circle around workforce development issue.

Workforce Development as a term is a "non-connector," unlike more easily understandable ones like employment and training. Don't use it when marketing to ABE. We could get programs to specialize within ABE, with some specializing in a "job track" or focusing on particular employment sectors. Also, there need to be more transparent tracks from ABE to training and employment programs. ABE should get details of the workforce development system down by focusing on one thing at a time and thus move incrementally forward. Be aware that small intensive classes would suffer from all issues that small classes have. For example, the multi-level dilemma. This might in the end discourage students. You could develop different tracks. Students' image of school casts it mostly as traditional education, not as workforce development. Ask students what they want. Have students take responsibility for the curriculum. Offer prep time, intensive services. Providers are currently overwhelmed by what the workforce needs, can incrementally move things along. We need to look at:

• Specialized classes
• Structural/policy barriers
• ABE serves the hard-to-serve

People need a job. Once they get a job, they leave ABE if they don't receive added support. Many work in the informal economy. Some need support in making the transition to higher education, required for most good jobs in the near future. ABE serves a variety of different populations, e.g., welfare to work, immigrants, etc. We need to differentiate these and learn how to meet their needs. For example, the MDRC study found that a combination of work and education works best for welfare recipients.

The real metacognitive needs of low level ABE learners may not be served well by the rush of the workforce development world/ intensive classes. The 'A' in ABE means we should treat them like adults--this is not third grade. It's important to note that ABE students often have to make a living as well. It's also good to remember that many students arrive in an ABE or ESOL classroom with preconceptions about education based on their K-12 experience - i.e., that they don't have a lot of agency in it.

ACLS is looking at its rate system to see if it can be tweaked to enable more programs to offer specialized workforce-related programming. Perhaps programs could receive additional funding to reflect the additional work involved in developing and implementing integrated programs (integrating job readiness/skills training/contextualized curriculum, with ABE programming).

DOE could encourage creation of communities of learners around different sets of goals (family or industry, etc.). Teachers/programs would need more prep time for this. 12% of funding moves from DOE through the workforce development system to encourage intersections. For example, in Bristol the money goes through the community college. They've set up an intensive GED program for career center customers. Intensive ABE/ESOL classes have been set up using WIA Title I money - worked with workforce development specialist to be certified as a training provider. Level-funding restricts the spread of this.

Given the new 5-year funding cycle for ABE programs, do programs need to wait five years to incorporate more specialized training?? Anne Serino says there is flexibility but extra money is needed. If the new economic stimulus bill passes could this money be used? Hopefully.

Why not press for a policy change along the lines of a European model where all immigrants are automatically enrolled in ESOL classes? Citizens fluent in English but having low literacy need classes as well. ABE Classes need to be flexible to support people when they get a new job, even if the job is just temporary. Career/ job search knowledge needs to get to the people. The Teaching Job Readiness workshop (by consultant Martha Oesch, which was offered in each SABES region) hit a good nerve in this respect. Transitions as model for SABES. Teaching culture of work.

Need to incorporate welfare to work research. To the question, what's more important, doing work or education first? the answer is both. 40% of people on welfare have learning disabilities. DTA is about to offer screening for learning disabilities that will trigger an assessment. During the assessment the testing the time-limits clock stops. Assessment issues (used by DTA): ACLS is not at its best with learning disabilities. Commonwealth Corporation's Reach Higher Initiative issued a series of helpful recommendations. These can be found at the CommCorp website: www.commcorp.org They recommend more Transitions programs and more funds for part-time higher ed students. Both of these have been addressed by ACLS. There's "no [actual whole] system" if some programs are not funded.

Summary: the hardest to serve are not being served. Is ACLS' goal to provide statewide programs? 20% of the MA working population is functionally illiterate. This will not change and the business world will not bail out this situation.

Laurie raised the possibility of having Advisory Committee members be available as speakers to ABE programs: to students in classrooms, graduations, etc. Adult learners and programs can learn about workforce development in this way. There was a lot of interest in this, and several Advisory members offered to be available to help with this.

Committee Formation
Committees will work more efficiently than large statewide meetings. The Advisory Committee decided to break into four new committees (and now, five):

1. Integrated or Specialized Programming. (Gloria Watanabe, Mina Reddy, Jude Travers)
2. Ideology Vision Identity (Andrea Perrault, Rosemary Locher, Dawna Perez)
3. Building Capacity of field (David Rosen, Connie Nelson, Beverly Wing)
4. Define universe of customer's needs (Brunir Shackleton, Merle Lindsay, Mary Coonan, Don Anderson)
5. Some not present have offered to be on an Employer Advisory Committee, focusing on building relationships with employers and identifying funding sources for ABE-employer partnerships.

Committees are to deepen background and to inform activities for SABES' upcoming workplan. They will make recommendations to the full Advisory Committee, which will meet again in January or February, 2006. The process of developing the SABES FY'06 workplan (July 2006 - June 2007) will begin in March, 2006. Committee discussions and recommendations will also shape current SABES activities within the parameters of the current (FY'05) workplan.

It might be helpful for committees to look at the different levels of change and eventually propose activities which explicitly address these levels:

1. Program level (e.g., intensive programming)
2. Curriculum level (e.g., virtual visits)
3. Teacher training (e.g., interest inventory or career passport)
4. Community

Each new committee met briefly, scheduled a first meeting, and developed a preliminary agenda for its discussion. Committees will meet once or twice and report back to the full Advisory Committee in February, in preparation for developing a new SABES workforce development workplan in March-April, 2006. See attached memo for dates, times and locations of committee meetings. Members of the Advisory Committee not present at this meeting will be asked to join a committee.