Adult Learning in Focus

Adult Learning in Focus NCSL Boulder, CO August 4, 2009 Peter Ewell and Patrick Kelly National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) 1

Adult Learning in Focus: National and State-by-State Data November 11, 2008 CAEL in partnership with NCHEMS Funded by Lumina Foundation for Education Adult Learning in Focus

Rationale for the Report Need for Compelling, Easily-Understood Presentations of the Case for, and the Condition of, Adult Learning in the U.S. Proven Track Record of State Report Cards to Garner Policy Attention Little Systematic Data About Adult Learners Currently Available Need to Highlight the Need for Additional Data as Well as What Existing Data Tells Us

Contents of the Report Case Statement on the Untapped Potential of the Adult Population Describe the National Landscape: Providers, Who Participates, and How Provide State-by-State Comparisons in as Many Areas as Possible Show Best Practice Data in Some States to Illustrate What Can be Done Describe What Data are Missing

Additional Project Components State Profiles Guide to Policymakers Downloadable Data Files Annotated Bibliography Links to Other Important Publications

Presentation Overview Part I The Presenting Problem Benefits of Greater Educational Attainment and the Importance of Tapping Adults The Size of the Target Population Part II Addressing the Problem National and State Pictures of Adult Participation Barriers to Adult Participation and Policies to Address Them

The Benefits of Raising Attainment Levels - Opportunities for Citizens - Economic Vitality

Opportunities for Citizens No Dead-End Jobs Social and Geographic Mobility Public Voice Collective Quality of Life

Economic Vitality Worker Productivity Re-tooling Human Capital Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Average Personal Income of 25 to 64 Year Olds by Level of Education Completed, 2005 No school completed 1st-4th grade 5th-8th grade 9th grade 10th grade If these residents were to complete an associates degree, and the additional earnings associated it, the U.S. would experience a $848 billion increase in personal income 11th grade 12th grade, no diploma High school graduate, or GED Some college, no degree Associate degree $34,644 $37,716 Bachelors degree $54,532 Masters degree $66,919 Professional degree $107,353 Doctorate degree $91,797 $0 $30,000 $60,000 $90,000 $120,000 Source: US Census Bureau, 2005 American Community Survey

Relationship Between Educational Attainment, Personal Income, and Economic Strength $30,000 High Income, Low Educational Attainment High Income, High Educational Attainment State New Economy Index (2002) Top Tier Middle Tier Low Tier NJ CT $25,000 MD MA Personal Income Per Capita, 2000 $20,000 $15,000 WV AR MS NV KY LA AL IN TN SC OK NC AZ MO IA ME WY TX AK DE MI FL US WI OH GA PA OR ID SD NM ND Low Income, Low Educational Attainment MT CA NE UT Percent of Adults Age 25-64 with a Bachelor s Degree or Higher IL HI RI KS NH VA NYMN WA 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% VT CO Low Income, High Educational Attainment

Difference in Median Earnings Between a High School Diploma and a Bachelor s Degree, 2006 16,983 17,066 17,066 17,184 17,266 17,275 17,408 17,470 17,514 17,678 18,044 18,044 18,081 18,310 18,349 18,356 18,892 19,106 19,106 20,167 20,314 20,849 21,063 21,228 21,229 21,229 21,329 21,743 22,216 23,352 23,352 23,361 24,413 27,597 $30,000 $20,000 10,379 11,090 12,188 12,188 12,820 13,204 13,336 14,329 15,032 15,235 15,235 15,235 16,050 16,050 16,122 16,252 16,622 $10,000 $0 South Dakota North Dakota Montana Iowa West Virginia Wyoming Maine Vermont Oklahoma Wisconsin Mississippi Louisiana Nebraska Kentucky Utah Hawaii Indiana New Hampshire Tennessee South Carolina Florida Missouri Arkansas Pennsylvania North Carolina Kansas Nevada Idaho Rhode Island New Mexico Colorado Delaware Minnesota Oregon Massachusetts Ohio Alabama New York Alaska Illinois United States Michigan Maryland Arizona Washington Georgia Connecticut Texas New Jersey Virginia California Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS

The Importance of the Re-Entry Pipeline for the U.S. to Remain Globally Competitive with Respect to Degree Attainment

60 40 20 0 Differences in College Attainment (Associate & Higher) U.S. & OECD Countries, 2006 25 to 34 45 to 54 Finland Australia Sweden Spain United States Denmark France Norway Belgium Ireland New Zealand Korea Japan Canada Italy Mexico Austria Portugal Hungary Germany Greece Poland Iceland Switzerland Luxembourg Netherlands United Kingdom Turkey Czech Republic Slovak Republic Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2008 slide 15

Current Educational Attainment, Educational Attainment in 2025 with Current Degree Production, and the Best Performing Countries in 2025 80% (United States) 60% 55.0% 40% 37.4% 41.9% 45.9% 20% 0% Current Percentage of Adults 25 to 64 with College Degrees (2005) Projected Percentage in 2025 with Current Annual Degree Production Projected Percentage in 2025 with Current Annual Degree Production and Net Migration Percentage Needed to Reach Best-Performing Countries by 2025

How Can the U.S. Reach International Competitiveness? Current Degree Production Combined with Population Growth and Migration, and Best Performance* on the Student Transition and Completion Measures Degrees Produced from 2005 to 2025 with Current Rate of Production 40,605,747 Additional Degrees from Population Growth 1,255,167 Additional Degrees from Net Migration of College- Educated Residents 7,045,932 Reaching Best Performance In High School Graduation Rates by 2025 Reaching Best Performance In College-Going Rates by 2025 Reaching Best Performance In Rates of Degree Production Per FTE Student 1,265,118 3,270,900 7,347,209 Performance Measures Are Cumulative and Are Based on Traditional College-Age Students Total Degrees Produced from 2005 to 2025 If All of the Above 60,790,073 Degrees Needed to Meet Best Performance (55%) 63,127,642 * Best performance is the average of the top three states. 0 20 40 60 80 Millions

Even Best Performance with Traditional College-Aged Students at Each Stage of the Educational Pipeline Will Leave Gaps in More than 30 States Texas Florida California New Jersey Tennessee Nevada Louisiana Arkansas Kentucky North Carolina Arizona Mississippi Ohio South Carolina Alabama West Virginia Alaska Oklahoma Oregon Michigan New Mexico Wisconsin Maine Idaho Montana Hawaii Georgia Wyoming Maryland Connecticut Missouri Indiana 320,720 307,956 287,565 204,814 186,640 159,765 132,748 122,061 115,120 114,375 112,681 110,495 74,752 65,853 62,332 53,995 53,574 47,420 44,757 39,436 37,706 34,547 28,659 25,326 24,741 23,542 10,875 8,898 2,788 560,688 893,504 In order to reach international competitiveness by 2025, the U.S. and 32 states can t close the gap with even best performance with traditional college students. They must rely on the re-entry pipeline getting older adults back into the education system and on track to attaining college degrees. 1,333,645 0 300,000 600,000 900,000 1,200,000 1,500,000

Traditional Education Pipeline Two Educational Pipelines Enter High School Graduate from High School Enter Postsecondary Study Complete Postsecondary Study Do Not Complete High School Delay Entry to Postsecondary Study Drop Out of Postsecondary Study Re-Enter Postsecondary Study Complete Postsecondary Study Enter Postsecondary Study Complete Postsecondary Study GED Literacy Challenged Language Challenged ABE ESL Adult Re-Entry Pipeline

Adults Age 18-64 in the U.S. with No College Education, 2006 No High School Diploma 26,455,554 No College Education, Earning Less than a Living Wage 32,001,250 10,251,827 10,223,176 16,497,519 3,843,745 2,136,806 No College Education, Speak Little or No English 8,622,791 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 ACS 1,205,430 1,436,810 Total Target Population = 45,595,313 (24.2% of Adults Age 18-64)

Adults Age 25-64 with Less than a High School Diploma, 2006 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.3 13.6 14.2 14.8 15.0 15.0 15.1 15.1 15.2 15.5 15.8 15.9 16.0 17.1 18.3 18.6 19.4 20 15 9.6 9.7 9.7 10.0 10.4 10.7 10.7 10.9 11.0 11.4 11.6 11.6 12.1 12.3 6.5 7.1 7.1 7.4 7.4 7.5 7.7 7.8 8.0 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 9.2 9.2 9.6 10 5.7 5 0 North Dakota Minnesota Hawaii Vermont Montana Wyoming New Hampshire Maine South Dakota Iowa Nebraska Wisconsin Alaska Connecticut Utah Massachusetts Kansas Pennsylvania Washington Michigan Maryland Ohio New Jersey Colorado Idaho Oregon Virginia Delaware Missouri Indiana Illinois Oklahoma Florida New York United States Rhode Island West Virginia North Carolina Tennessee Georgia Nevada Arizona South Carolina Arkansas Kentucky Alabama New Mexico Louisiana Mississippi California Texas Puerto Rico 26.5 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS

Adults Age 25-64 with Only a High School Diploma but No College, 2006 50 43.5 22.7 23.3 24.2 24.7 25.1 25.8 26.0 26.2 26.3 26.7 26.9 27.1 27.5 27.6 28.2 28.2 28.3 28.4 28.6 28.7 28.7 29.1 29.1 29.2 29.4 29.7 30.2 30.2 30.4 31.0 31.2 31.8 31.8 32.5 32.5 32.6 32.7 32.9 33.0 33.0 33.3 33.5 34.9 35.4 35.5 35.6 35.9 36.3 36.7 37.5 40 30 20 10 0 California Colorado Washington Utah Oregon Arizona Maryland Massachusetts Minnesota Virginia Texas Illinois Nebraska New Mexico Rhode Island Hawaii New York Kansas Connecticut Alaska New Jersey Idaho North Dakota United States North Carolina New Hampshire Florida Georgia Montana Michigan Nevada Wyoming Vermont Alabama Mississippi Missouri Iowa South Dakota Wisconsin South Carolina Delaware Oklahoma Tennessee Kentucky Louisiana Indiana Ohio Maine Arkansas Pennsylvania West Virginia Puerto Rico 27.0 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS

Adults Age 25-64 with Some College But No Degree, 2006 30 15.5 15.7 16.0 17.0 17.1 17.2 17.6 18.1 18.2 18.6 19.0 19.1 19.4 19.5 19.6 19.6 20.2 20.2 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.5 20.6 20.6 20.8 20.8 20.9 20.9 21.0 21.1 21.4 21.4 21.7 21.8 21.9 22.2 22.4 22.6 23.1 23.2 23.7 23.8 23.9 23.9 24.3 24.7 25.9 26.1 26.7 26.7 27.5 20 10 0 Massachusetts New York Pennsylvania New Jersey Vermont West Virginia Rhode Island Delaware Connecticut New Hampshire Maine South Carolina Virginia Georgia Maryland Kentucky North Carolina Florida United States Ohio Tennessee California Indiana Louisiana South Dakota Wisconsin Mississippi Illinois Texas Alabama Hawaii Iowa Arkansas Colorado Missouri New Mexico North Dakota Oklahoma Minnesota Kansas Montana Nebraska Washington Michigan Arizona Nevada Idaho Oregon Utah Wyoming Alaska Puerto Rico 13.6 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS

Adults Age 18-64 Who Speak English Poorly or Not at All, 2006 13.3 9.5 9.9 10 8.9 8 7.4 7.5 6.8 5.4 5.4 5.6 5.9 6.1 6 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.7 4 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.2 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.5 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 2 0 West Virginia Montana Vermont North Dakota Maine Ohio Wyoming Mississippi Kentucky Missouri Louisiana New Hampshire Alabama South Dakota Wisconsin Tennessee Michigan Pennsylvania South Carolina Indiana Iowa Alaska Minnesota Arkansas Oklahoma Idaho Delaware Kansas Virginia Maryland Connecticut Nebraska North Carolina Hawaii Georgia Utah Washington Oregon Massachusetts Colorado Rhode Island United States New Mexico Illinois New Jersey Florida New York Nevada Arizona Texas California Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS

Adults with a High School Diploma or Less in Families Not Earning a Living Wage, 2006 25 12.0 12.4 12.5 12.7 12.9 13.3 13.3 13.4 13.8 13.8 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.3 14.5 14.8 14.8 15.4 16.0 16.0 16.0 17.0 17.5 17.9 18.1 18.1 18.2 18.6 18.8 19.1 20.0 20.2 20 15 9.3 9.6 9.6 9.8 9.9 10.4 10.5 10.8 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.5 11.7 11.8 11.9 10 8.4 5 0 New Hampshire Connecticut Minnesota Maryland North Dakota Massachusetts Hawaii New Jersey Utah Vermont Virginia Alaska Rhode Island Wisconsin Iowa Wyoming Washington Colorado Nebraska Delaware Kansas Illinois Michigan Pennsylvania Oregon Nevada Maine New York Idaho South Dakota Indiana Ohio Montana United States Florida Missouri California Georgia Arizona North Carolina South Carolina Oklahoma Tennessee Alabama Kentucky New Mexico Texas Arkansas Louisiana West Virginia Mississippi Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS

Forms of Participation for Adults Credit-Bearing Courses Work-Related or Apprenticeship Training State-Supported Adult Education Programs Adult Basic Education and Literacy Training ESL Training GED Training Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Training

Basic Descriptors: Credit-Bearing Participation 25 25 years and over 14-24 years old 20 Millionss 15 10 5 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 (projected) 2014 (projected) Source: 2004 Digest of Education Statistics, Table 173

Basic Descriptors: Type of Institution Attended Private For-prof it Tw o- year or Less Private For-prof it Fouryear Under 25 years old 25 years old and over Private Not-f or-prof it Tw o-year or Less Public Tw o-year or Less Private Not-f or-prof it Four-year Public Four-year 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 Millions Not e: "Not Assigned" and specialt y cat egories omit t ed f rom chart. Source: IPEDS, Fall 2004

Participation of Adults Age 25-49 per 1,000 Adults Age 25-49 with Only a High School Diploma by Sector, 2005 401.0 250 Two-Year Four-Year 200 143.1 150 100 75.4 50 0 Louisiana Pennsylvania New Hampshire West Virginia Vermont Tennessee South Carolina Connecticut Maine Delaware New Jersey Mississippi Massachusetts Ohio Arkansas Georgia Indiana Montana New York Alabama Rhode Island Kentucky Wisconsin Hawaii Virginia Missouri Nevada Florida North Carolina Wyoming South Dakota United States Texas Oklahoma Michigan Idaho Alaska Maryland Kansas Minnesota Nebraska Oregon Iowa North Dakota Washington Illinois Colorado New Mexico California Utah Arizona Source: NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey 2005-06; U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 ACS

Enrollment in State-Administered Adult Education Programs per 1,000 U.S. Residents with Less than a High School Diploma by Age Group, 2005 300 278 250 200 150 100 107 50 22 0 Age 16-24* Age 25-44 Age 45 and Older *Population age 16-24 with no high school diploma or equivalent, not enrolled Source: U.S. Department of Education

GEDs Awarded per 1,000 U.S. Adults with Less than a High School Diploma or Equivalent by Age Group, 2005 90 84.5 60 30 14.9 0 Age 16-24* Age 25-34 Age 35-49 Age 50 and Older 4.7 0.5 *Population age 16-24 with no high school diploma or equivalent, not enrolled Source: GED Testing Service, U.S. Census Bureau 2005 ACS

Barriers to Adult Participation Affordability Accessibility and Availability Aspiration

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Public Four-Year Undergraduate Tuition and Fees as a Percent of Median Family Income by Age-Group and Income-Level (2005-06) Median Income of Adults 25 to 44 Median Income of Adults 45 to 64 Poorest 40% of Adults 25 to 44 Poorest 40% of Adults 45 to 64 Nevada Hawaii Wyoming Florida Utah Alaska Georgia Louisiana California North Carolina Colorado Idaho Arizona Oklahoma New Mexico New York West Virginia Kansas Washington Texas North Dakota Alabama Mississippi Nebraska South Dakota Connecticut United States Maryland Tennessee Virginia Wisconsin Arkansas Iowa Rhode Island Montana Oregon Indiana Kentucky Massachusetts Minnesota Missouri Maine Delaware Illinois New Jersey New Hampshire Michigan South Carolina Ohio Pennsylvania Vermont Sources: U.S. census Bureau, 2006 ACS; NCES, IPEDS 2005-06 Institutional Characteristics File

Private Four-Year Undergraduate Tuition and Fees as a Percent of Median Family Income by Age-Group and Income-Level (2005-06) 100 90 80 Median Income of Adults 25 to 44 Median Income of Adults 45 to 64 70 60 Poorest 40% of Adults 25 to 44 Poorest 40% of Adults 45 to 64 50 40 30 20 10 0 Utah Idaho Hawaii Wyoming North Dakota Delaware Arizona Nevada Alaska Michigan Alabama Mississippi South Dakota Arkansas Montana Virginia Kentucky Kansas Missouri Nebraska Iowa West Virginia New Mexico Oklahoma New Jersey Colorado South Carolina Illinois Minnesota Florida Texas Wisconsin New Hampshire Tennessee Washington Georgia United States Maryland California Ohio Indiana Connecticut Rhode Island North Carolina Vermont Oregon New York Louisiana Massachusetts Maine Pennsylvania Sources: U.S. census Bureau, 2006 ACS; NCES, IPEDS 2005-06 Institutional Characteristics File

Basic Descriptors: Sources of Support Types of employer support (%) Age (years) # of adults (thousands) Financial support (tuition, books, materials) Program offered at workplace Program taken during regular work hours Participation in college or university degree or certificate programs (only part-time) Salary paid during time of training 16-24 6380 11 10 29 11 25-34 4013 35 10 26 15 35-44 2302 43 13 12 17 45-54 1103 34 12 22 17 55-64 282 41 28** 33** 23** 65+ Too few cases to report. Total 14095 26 11 25 14 **Interpret data with caution; coefficient of variation is 33 percent or more Adapted from Tables 6, 7, 9, O Donnell, 2005, p. 22-34

Policies for Addressing Affordability Public Sector Aid (Pell, State Aid) Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Employer Support Labor Union Support Other Financing Mechanisms (e.g. LiLAs)

Proportion of Need-Based Aid Distributed to Part-Time Students 2004-05 41.4 25.0 26.0 28.8 30.0 Reported that aid was available for Part-Time Students, but could not identify how much 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.1 8.0 9.0 11.0 11.0 11.7 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.8 21.5 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Wisconsin North Carolina Iowa Alabama West Virginia Utah Texas South Dakota Ohio North Dakota Nevada Mississippi Louisiana Kansas Idaho Georgia Delaware Oregon Arkansas New York New Jersey Missouri Indiana Tennessee Maryland Pennsylvania Montana Maine South Carolina Hawaii Connecticut Alaska Oklahoma Virginia Massachusetts Vermont Colorado New Hampshire Washington Rhode Island Michigan Florida Kentucky California Arizona Wyoming Illinois Nebraska New Mexico Minnesota Source: NCHEMS Student Financial Aid Survey 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Non-zero

Total Expenditures on State-Financed Customized Training per Employee, 2006 42.48 23.01 24.64 $25 16.93 19.32 $20 11.60 12.43 13.14 $15 2.74 2.75 2.76 2.97 3.05 3.05 3.17 3.50 3.54 3.65 4.10 4.35 4.44 4.56 5.11 5.27 5.35 5.72 5.94 6.27 6.32 6.54 7.04 9.04 9.54 $10 $5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.53 0.65 1.10 1.21 1.47 2.02 2.05 2.09 2.17 2.25 2.28 2.48 $0 Oregon New Hampshire Connecticut New York Nevada Washington Florida Wisconsin Colorado Maryland Hawaii Arkansas Texas North Carolina Virginia Michigan Minnesota Utah Delaware South Carolina Illinois Montana Kentucky Ohio Oklahoma California Alabama Maine West Virginia South Dakota Arizona Indiana Pennsylvania North Dakota Georgia Vermont Tennessee Idaho Massachusetts New Jersey Wyoming Nebraska Missouri New Mexico Kansas Rhode Island Alaska Louisiana Mississippi Iowa Source: Workforce Alliance

Adult Education and Family Literacy Funding Per Adult Age 18-64 with No High School Diploma, 2004 43.9 $35 19.3 19.4 19.4 19.5 19.5 19.6 19.7 19.8 19.9 20.0 20.2 20.5 20.5 20.8 20.8 21.1 21.2 21.9 22.1 22.1 22.3 23.8 23.9 24.0 24.1 24.3 24.5 24.7 24.9 25.2 25.5 27.4 29.7 29.8 30.7 30.9 32.0 $30 $25 13.8 15.2 15.4 15.5 16.7 17.1 17.1 18.0 18.1 18.2 18.4 19.0 19.3 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 Wisconsin New Mexico Alabama Rhode Island Colorado Georgia Virginia Mississippi Nebraska Maine Pennsylvania Florida Wyoming Idaho Connecticut West Virginia Washington Arizona North Dakota Arkansas North Carolina Oregon New Jersey Ohio Montana United States Tennessee Kansas Nevada Delaware New Hampshire Iowa Missouri Louisiana Maryland South Carolina California Massachusetts Kentucky Oklahoma Vermont New York Texas Hawaii Michigan Alaska South Dakota Illinois Minnesota Utah Indiana Source: Workforce Alliance

South Carolina Profile of Adult Learners 2008 In South Carolina: Working-age residents with college degrees are 45 percent more likely to participate in the workforce than those with less than a high school diploma. And their earnings over a lifetime are twice as much a substantial personal benefit as well as a benefit to the state with respect to more taxable resources, fewer health problems, lower rates of crime, and greater levels of civic engagement. How Does Education Pay Off for South Carolina? Participation in the Workforce Education Lifetime Earnings (By Age 65) 84.1% 82.0% 84.5% 74.1% 78.0% 56.6% Less than High School High School Some College Associates Degree Bachelor s Degree Graduate/Prof. Degree 962,971 1,173,075 1,361,532 1,577,398 2,028,228 2,229,703 How Does South Carolina Measure Up? 100% 75% 50% $0 $2,500,000 South Carolina s Young Adults Compared to the U.S. and Best Performing Countries (Age 25 to 34) Sout h Carolina United States Top 5 States M ost Educated Countries Sout h Carolina United States Top 5 States M ost Educated Countries % Completed High School 33.2 37.1 47.9 52.8 84.9 85.9 94.0 93.5 % Completed College (Associate s or Higher) In South Carolina: A lower percentage of young adults have completed high school than the U.S. average, and much lower than the top states and the most educated countries. A lower percentage of young adults have earned college degrees than the U.S. average, and much lower than the top states and the most educated countries. Note: The most educated countries in 2005 include Korea, Japan and Canada. The Challenge: South Carolina s Working-Age Adults (18 to 64) with No College Degree 1,933,487 have not completed college (associate s degrees or higher) 70.9 percent of all working-age adults in South Carolina. Of these: Of 2,728,528 Working-Age Adults... 431,470 have not completed high school (or equivalent) 918,489 have completed just a high school diploma but have not entered college 583,528 have completed some college but no degree 44,182 speak little or no English 560,466 are living in families whose combined incomes are less than a living wage (twice the level of poverty)

Addressing Basic Skills in South Carolina: State-administered adult education programs serve adults without a high school diploma at a higher rate than the U.S. average, along with other top performing states. ESL programs serve the adult population lacking English proficiency at a higher rate than the U.S. average, but at a lower rate than the top performing states. South Carolina Profile of Adult Learners 2008 How Well Does South Carolina Serve Adult Learners? Adults Served per 1,000 Adults Age 18-64: Enrolled in State-Administered Adult Education Programs with Less than a High School Diploma South Carolina U.S. Top 5 States 101.7 161.6 207.3 0 50 100 150 200 250 Enrolled in English as a Second Language Programs with Little or No English Proficiency GEDs Awarded per 1,000 Adults: 18 to 24 Years Old with No High School Diploma South Carolina U.S. Top 5 States South Carolina U.S. Top 5 States 6.8 8.7 35.7 43.1 19.4 80.8 0 20 40 60 80 100 25 to 44 Years Old with No High School Diploma 0 10 20 30 Pursuing Higher Level Skills in South Carolina: Postsecondary institutions serve young adults (25 to 39 year olds who only have a high school diploma) at a lower rate than the U.S. average. Institutions serve older adults (40 to 64 year olds with only a high school diploma) at a lower rate than the U.S. average. South Carolina U.S. Top 5 States Helping High School Dropouts in South Carolina: Adult education providers award GEDs to young adults without a high school diploma at a lower rate than the U.S. average, and at a much lower rate than the top performing states. Compared with the younger age group, GEDs are awarded to older adults without a high school diploma at a much lower rate. State performance is also lower compared with the U.S. average for older adults. South Carolina U.S. Top 5 States South Carolina U.S. Top 5 States 28.3 131.0 113.8 127.1 47.1 190.8 317.5 103.1 319.4 College Participation per 1,000 Adults: Age 25-39 with Only a High School Diploma 0 100 200 300 400 Age 40-64 with Only a High School Diploma 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 2

State Action Plan Needs [CAEL/SREB] Systematic Inventory of Adult Programs Documented Examples of Best Practice Regular Evaluations of Program Effectiveness Regular Assessments of Adult Learning Needs Additional Funding Mechanisms for Adults Marketing Initiatives to Raise Adult Awareness Advisory/Policy Groups to Represent Stakeholder Views

Conclusion Knowing where we are raises awareness. Knowing where we want to go provides motivation. Real change will come from state leaders who understand the need, see adult learning as an essential aspect of addressing the need, and act accordingly. [Adult Learning in Focus, p.74]