P--

ED 324 458

TITLE

INSTITUTIONSPONS AGENCY

PUB DATENOTEPUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDEXTIFIERS

-DOCUMENT RESUn

CE 055 977

POWER for Progress: A Model for Partnerships inWorkplace Literacy.Triton Coll., River Grove, Ill.Office of Vocational and Adult Education (ED),Washington, DC. Div. of Adult Education andLiteracy.9043p.

Reports - Descriptive (141)

MF01/PCO2 Plus Postale.Adult Basic Education; *Adult Literacy; CollegePrograms; Cooperati're Programs; Education workRelationship; Emploe'r Employee Relationship; HighSchool Equivalency Programs; *Inplant Programs;Institutional Cooperation; *Literacy Education; *Onthe Job Training; Outcomes of Education; ProgramEffectiveness; *Program Implementation; SchoolBusiness Relationshipic7riton College IL; *Workplace Literacy

ABITRACTProject POWER is an educational program developed

jo:mtly by Triton College, River Grove, Illinois, and the LaborManagement Center of the Mid-Metro Economie; Development Group, foremployees of local companies who are interested in improving basicskills in English, reading, mathematics, and writing, as well as foremployees who want to prepare for the General Educational Developmenttest.POWER is an acronym for Partnerships for On-site WorkplaceEducation and Retraining and the objectives of the program, whichofficially began in October 1988 and ended in March 1990, wereestablished to meet regional training requirements. The objectiveswere: (1) to increase existing coordination between education,business, and labor; (2) to increase the nuaber of companies and,subsequently, the number of eaployess who participate in workplaceliteracy programs; and (3) to increase work-related literacy skillsof employees to officially establish performance levels needed forthe job. The classes were planned cooperatively by Triton College andthe companies. They were held within the company, meeting twice per

_week for 2 hours per session, for 10-15 weeks. Classes are workrelated, use work-release time, are free, provide child care andtranSportation assistance as needod, offer academic and personalcounseling and tutors, and provide confidential assessaent results.Benefits to participants include improved communication on mnd offtBe job, better job options and opportunities, increasedpremotabillty, preparation for technological advances at work, andimproved confidence. COmpanies participating in Project POWER includeAllied Die Casting, Album Graphics Inc., American Rivet Company,IBC., Borg Warner Automotive, Carbide International, Jacobs SuchardInc., X & X/XARS, and Navistar International. (Appendixes list thathree program ol)jectives with activities, staff evaluation, andtimelines; provide graphics illustrating program statistics; andinclude the project brochure in English and Spanish.) (KC)

P 0 W I for Proves:is:

A Model for Partnershiv in Work21ace Literacz

U DEPARTMENT OF IDUCAMON0Mte a Educahonel Research and improvoment

EDUCATiONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

na document has 1344n reptoducod ssreceived from Om porson of orosnIzationwidowing it

0 Minor change* Mv bolo', made to improveNOroduction twenty

Ponds of Vow or oosniontstitd to this doc krmint do not rtceurolY FOOreslit °SimiOEM position or POtiCy

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS

MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONALRESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)"

2 .

-

P OVER for Progress:

A Model for Partnerships in Workplac Literacy

ThePOWER in Triton College's Project POWERis anacronym based on words to be taken literally: Partnershipsfor On-site Workplace Education and Retraining.

The project, created jointly by Triton College and the LaborManagement Center of the Mid-Metro Economic Development Group,was partially funded by the Office of Vocational and AdultEducation of the U.S. Department of Education. A key elementin the development of this model program has been cooperation.The planning, implementation, and evaluation of training thattaken place at participating worksites have depended on theteamwork of Triton College with the business community, labor,and government agencies. The process of these partnerships--thechallenges presented and the approachLs tried--is the subjectof this report. The following pages describe the objectivesestablished for the program, the planning process, implementa-tion, and evaluation of results.

BACKGROUND

ProjectPONERwas developed in response to local as wellas national needs for strategies to counteract the problemof illiteracy.

In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to theproblem of reading and writing incompetency among adultsthroughout the United States. One estimate suggested thatmore than 27 million Americans over the age of 17 cannot readand write well enoygh to order from a catalogue or fill out

job application. Studies by the Business Council forEffective Literacy reported that 11 percent of professionalnd r.agagerial workers, as well as 30 percent of semiskilledand unskilled workers, are functionally illiterate. The economicimplications of these figures are staggering. TheSeptember 28, 1987 Wall Street Journal reported "thatproductivity losres caused by poorly educated workers, togetherwith the price of remedial training costs business about $25billion a year. However, business is even more concernedis jobs requiring more than most basic reading, writing andcomputational skills become the fastest growing sector ofthe labor market."

I

3

Local statistics have been no less disconcerting. ApproximdtelyOne-third of adults in the city cf Chicago and its surroundingsuburbs were counted as high school dropouts. Approximately100,000 of the 458,000 bilingual Hispanics in the area indicatedhaving substantial difficulty with English.

Narrowing the area still further to District #504, thesixty-three-square-mile multi7ethnic area immediately surroundingTriton Collese in River Grove, highlights a district in whichthe high school dropout rate is the second highest in thestate of IllinoSs. Viewed in this context it ii not surprisingthat the demand for adult literacy classes at Triton, includingEnglish as a Second Language (ES4) and GED, rose by nearly50 percent within a single year.'

The increase in demand for a responsive curriculum weighedheavily on Triton's already established programs. Havingalready begun to reach out to those in need of help, plannersat Triton now began reaching out to those who could contributehelp.

The partnership between Triton College and the Labor ManagementCenter was designed to meet recommendations made by the U.S.Department of Labor and supported by data collected from theAmerican Society for Training and Development (ASTD). Thecooperation' established a significant step for the rapidlychanging job market where "a partnership approach--one thatinvolves business and industry, labor, schools, government,community organizations, and3workers themselves-=is essentialif we are to be successful."

THE COOPERATING ORGANIZATIONS

Founded in 1964, Triton College is a comprehensive communitycollege serving approximately 21,000 students per semester.The district in which Triton is located has 350,000 residentsand more than 5,000 businesses; it has the highest manufacturincidensity in Illinois. Triton programs include regular communitycollege courses with classes to strengthen basic skills inreading, writing, and mathematics, Adult Basic Education,English as a Second Language, and GED preparation. In response,to the increasing interest and training needs of local businessesand government agencies, Triton expanded its services to includethe Volunteers for Literacy Project and the Employee DevelopmentInstitute (EDI). One of the first and the largest of employeetraining operations, EDI was established in 1972 to work withcommerce, industry, professional organizations, andmunicipalities. EDI has offered training to over 20,000 personsin more than 1,200 programs.

To meet still increasing demands, Triton sought a parlershipthat could help share expertise and resources, incro_se impact,and improve productivity and cost-effective management. The

- 2 -

Mir4

Labor Management Center (LMC) became the cosponsor to planand implement a demonstration project to teach literacy skillsin the workplace throughout the Chicagoland area.

The Labor Management Center was established in 1987 from fundingmade available by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.LMC includes a membership of over 25 business, labor, andgovernment representatives. Included on the LMC Board ofDirectors are representatives from the International Brotherhoodof Teamsters, General Electric Company, Chicago Federationof Labor, and United Auto Workers. The goal of LMC is "...toenhance the economic development potential of the west CookCounty area through programs which focus attention on thecooperative actions between labor and management." To helpattain this goal, LMC has set up a four-phase plan which includesinformation/data gathering conimunication seminars betweenlabor and management, public relations campaign, and interventionon behalf of employees and employers who seek training andretraining.

Together, Triton Col,ege and the Labor Management Center inletter of agreement eotablished the Triton College LiteracyPartnership Committee iTCLPC) to serve as the organizing andworking body of their alliance.

TCLPC membership has included a Project Director, an Industryand Educational Liaison Specialist, and Educational ServicesManager, Directors of GED, ESL and Literacy Programs, anEducation Counselor, a Curriculum Specialist, company 0n-siteCoordinators, Labor and Management Representatives, and aPrivate Industry Council Representative.

The cosponsorship model established by the alliance hasrepresented an exciting alternative to the usual isolatedemployee development programs implemented by individualinstitutions. The partnership allowed what was expected tobe a cost-effective use of financial support and expertisefrom both government and private sources. Small firms unableto afford employee training could join with larger companies,and pool employees, experience, and other resources.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT

One of the first tasks of the Triton College Literacy PartnershipCommittee was to establish criteria on which companies weredeemed eligible for participation in Project P 0 V E R. Criteriaincluded the need to upgrade skills; a minimum number ofpotential employee perticipants; commitment of a company tocooperate in promoting the.program and to encourage voluntaryattendance; provision of at least one hour of paid leave allowinga worker to attend programs; accommodation with convenientScheduling; and opportunity for rewarding participants withjob promotions, further training, salary increases, and

- 3 -

5

in-company program administration.

In October and November of 1988, the first months of itsexistence, TCLPC curriculum specialists set about designingprocedures and materials for a "literacy audit" of companiesinterested in participating in the program. In addition toselecting assessment instruments and procedures, the specialistscollected comprehensive sampling of materials relevant towork performance, interviewed employees, supervisors, andpersonnel department staff, and observed employees in theirjob settings. Through this early assessment, TCLPC was settingthe first stages for a clearer understanding and ability tomeet its objectives.

ARTICULATED GOALS

Pursuant to Public Law 100-202, the following objectives wereestablished and recognized by the TCLPC to meet regional trainingrequirements:

1. To increase existing coordination between education,business, and labor, thereby encouraging greaterparticipation in workplace literacy efforts;

2. To increase the number of companies and, subsequently,the number of employees who participate in workplaceliteracy programs; and

3. To increase work-related literacy skills of employeesto performance levels needed for the job as establishedby participating companies, curriculum specialists,and workers.

These three objectives were viewed as mirrors for the intentof provisions of section 317 of the Adult Education Act whichincludes establishment of an exemplary partnership includingrepresentation from commerce, industry, labor, education,and Private Industry Council; the roles and responsibilitiesof partnership members; evidence of a member's ability toprovide literacy services; and assurances that funds willsupplement, not supplant, existing programs.

PLANNING AND PROMOTING THE PROGRAM

In order to meet the three objectives of the TCLPC, the prcjectdirector and principal staff developed a timeline which detailedplanned activities (see Appendix). Included in this schedulewre procedures to be followed for literacy audits ofpart;cipating companies; profiles for individual jobs; andassessments of the skills of individual employees. For eachactivity the responsible staff members were designated, andtarget dates were suggested.

4

6

Initial stages for meeting the first objective of increasingcooperation and encouraging greater participation were largelythe responsibility of the Project Director.

As the program moved towards meeting its second objectiveto increase the number of on-site programs from 5 to 60 peryear, additional staff were to become more actively involved.An Industry Education Liaison Specialist (IELS) was to assistin promoting the programs on-site. The IELS, an EducationCounselor, and Instructors were expected to help recruit andregister program participants. The IELS and representativesfrom the client company were expected to monitor programarrangements and make modifications when necessary. Guidelineswere carefully set to consider the limitations of each situation:scheduling constraints; location and features of teachingfacilities; availability of an on-site coordinator providedby the company; the ability of a company to commit to an averageof 45 hours of training; and the extent of management commitment--theoretical, practical, and financial--to the project.The concept of cosponsorship involving two companies, whenone alone might not be able to support a program, was encouraged.

Special attention was paid to planning promotional steps forrecruitment: working with the client companies to establishincentives for perticipants such as referral bonuses, attendancebonuses, skill-bind pay or promotional opportunities, andwork schedule modification; and providing "in-person"registration with the program's Education Counselor, and possiblythe Instructors, available to answer questions and counselemployees on features of the program. The monitoring andadapting of these steps were considered from the very startto be ongoing "maintenance" efforts for successfully meetingthe second objective.

A timeline was also planned to meet the third and final objectiveof the program: to have a minimum of 80 percent of participatingemployees achieve performance levels established by the LiteracySkills Profile. In this phase of the program, the EducationalServices Manager (ESM) was to be responsible for managingand coordinating the actual educational dctivities. Alongwith Curriculum Specialists, the ESM would investigate levelsof workplace literacy, identify levels of reading, writing,and computational skills for each job, and encourage individualemployees to take advantage of the program. The CurriculumSpecialists, with the assistance of the Directors of Triton'sGED, ESL, and Literacy programs would then design classesintended to bridge the gap between employee's current skilllev*ls and work-related performance levels determined by theLiteracy Skill Profile.

For each of these objectives, a timeline table was providedlisting specific activities, participating staff, evaluationprocedures, and targeted completion dates.

- 5 -

7

still another timeline was issued indicating the steps tobe followwd in actual contact and communication with interestedCompanies (see Appendix). This timeline allowed from oneto three weeks for initial meeting, follow-up discussions,tours, preliminary planning sessions, promotion, employeerecruitment, and gathering of work samples. From one to threedays was targeted for registration and assessment of the employeeparticipants. From two to three weeks were allowed fordevelopment of curriculum, scheduling of classes, and theintroduction of instructors. Finally, twelve to fifteen weekswere allotted to classes with evaluations planned midway andat the end of the scheduled sessions.

From the very beginning, promotion of ProjectPOWERwasconsidered a crucial element in implementing the program.In addition to designing and distributing attractive andinformative brochures in English and Spanish (see Appendix)and providing news releases and interviews, coordinators ofthe program conducted presentations to company representatives.Person-to-person contact with both the company's sponsorsfor the program and with employee participants was viewedas crucial step for the cooperation on which the educationalpartnership was based.

Articles on the project appeared in Employment and TrainingReporter, January, 31, 1990 as well as in several localpublications (including the January 3, 1990 business sectionof the Elmhurst Press Publications and the 1989 spring, summer,and fall issues of Triton Training). Six public presentationswere made by project staff members at a variety of educationalconferences in Champaign, Illinois (October, 1989), Rosemont,Illinois (November, 1989), Washington, D.C. (January, 1990),Boston (March, 1990), and Chicago (April and May, 1990).

Integral in plans for implementation were constant assessmentof employee progress and flexibility for adaptation. TheEducation Counselor was expected to meet with employees ona weekly basis and, when appropriate, recommend tutorial orother assistance. Plans also included final assessment atthe end-of the program by means of a customized assessmentbattery given to all employees, as well as follow-up observationof employees' applications of skills in their job settings.

IMPLEMENTATION

The 15-month ProjectPOWERprogram officially began inOctober, 1988 and ended in March, 1990. The entire projecthad originally been scheduled for twelve months, but receivc4a three-month, no-cost extension.

Eleven participating companies became partners in the effortto enhance employee skills:

- 6

Three food manufacturers

Entenmann's BakeryJacobs Suchard Inc.MIM/MARS

Two automotive/heavy parts manufacters

Borg Warner AutomotiveNavistar International

Two tool and die manufacturers

Aallied Die CastingCrafts Precision

Two small metal parts manufacturers

American Rivet company, Inc.Handy Button Machine Co.

One graphic/printing company

A.G.I., Inc.

One robotic parts manufacturer

U.S. Robotics, Inc.

According to statistics compiled in June, 1990the total number of employees enrolled at the start of allclasses was 744; the number of those completing classes was665 (providing a completion rate of 89%). According tostatisticu issued at the end of 1989, the total number ofemployees served in the assessment process was 1,149; thelargest group of participants was between ages 25 and 44;the next largest between 45 and 59; and the smallest groupwas equally divided between those over 60 and those betweenthe ages of 16 to 24. The ethnic representation of participantswas as follows: Hispanic 38.8%; Caucasian 30.5%; AfricanAmerican 25.6%; Asian 4.4%; and American Indian .6%. 65.3%of participants were male and 34.7% female. (See appendixfor graphic profiles.)

Quarterly reports on the progress of students indicated anaverage of from 8 to 13.5 as the average number of hours perweek 0f workplace literacy training. The average number ofhours per week for each learner was four hours: two of theseboors were paid as work time; two were donated by each employee.In addition, each participating company agreed to pay Tritona fee covering Wpercent of the cost of instruction. Amongthe types of training funded were English as a Second Language;

- 7 -

9

k

Mathematics; Reading/Writing; and GED Preparation. Almosttwo-thirds (or 63 percent) of enrollments were in ESL classes.All classes given were held at the work site.

Progress of the program reported in the quarterly reportsincluded the following information and serve well in illustratingprogram development and concerns of the administrators:

....Classes have begun at two companies and assess:printshave been conducted at an additional fourcompanivi Additionally we are negotiating with tenmore companies....We are accelerating our marketingefforts.

Workplace literacy staff have attended severalworkshops focusing on workplace literacy andbusiness/industry training issues....Despite the start up delays the program has been generally

well received."....it has been more difficult than anticipated to

recruit employees for participation....We hay! spentmuch more time on recruitment and marketing than originallyplanned. It appears that this will continue to be truefor many of the companies we work with.Additionally, many companies have unrealistic

expectations. They assume that literacy training canquickly result in significantly improved production.As a result the workplace literacy staff have spent alarge portion of their time meeting with companyrepresentatives on the development of realistic goals.

(Also). .it has been difficult to recruit experiencedinstructors for the ESL classes....Consequently, we mayneed to hire and train instructors who do not have industryexperience. This will increase both the time spend andassociated costs beyond the original expectations. (FirstQuarter)

(669 employees were assessed. Of the 334 employees)who were assessed, but did not participate...(there were)the following reasons:...due to company policy change,(temporary employees) were not permitted to attendclasses....due to shift changes many employees were unableto attend classes....(at another company) not enoughinterested employees to set up class....

(183 participants successlully completed classes andare eligible for advancement. Of the 151 participants)who did not successfully complete classes: 141...(w)ithdrew...for different reasons (i.e. retirement, scheduleconflicts, health, parental leave, met personal objectives,lost interest in program). 11...(c)ompleted classes,but did not show adequate improvement to advance to ahigher level. (Second Quarter)

At the end of each set of classes, students and instructorscompleted evaluation questionnaires, and attempts were made

- 8-

10

to obtain ratings from supervisors. These evaluations, alongwith interviews of employers and administrating staff, andconsideration of pre- and post-testing methods and resultswere part of a formal review of procedures conducted for Tritonby the Center on Education and Training for Employment (CETE)of The Ohio State University.

EVALUATIOF PROCEDURES

A report issued by CETE in March of 1990 assesses evaluationtechniques used throughout the planning and implementationof Project P 0 W E R. The report summarizes the findings,interprets the implications, and suggests the limitationsof information culled from evaluation forms filled out bystudents and instructors, interviews with company personnel,and the results of pre- and post-testing conducted by theproject's administrative staff. An overall comparison wasmade of ProjectPOWERpractices to those generallyrecommended for workplace literacy programs.

Evaluation forms for the students were available in both Englishand Spanish. Almost all students rated all aspects of thecourses good, very good, or excellent, with most of the ratingsin the two highest categories. Instructors responses wereslightly less positive: their ratings 4.f overall progressof students clustered in the "good" to "very good" categories.

Unfortunately, few of the questionnaires distributed amongparticipants' supervisors were returned, and those that werereturned had variable ratings insufficient for drawingconclusions. Part of the difficulty may have been that questionsreferred to workers as a group without accounting for therange of individual difference among employees.

Interviews with two employer representatives by the CETEevaluator indicated an assessment factor not otherwiserepresented by conventional measuring instruments. Both setsof employers interviewed volunteered the view that classesled to a more positive attitude of employees toward theircompanies.

While gains reported in the average increase from pre- topost-tests appeared consistent with the number of hours theStudents received, CETE cited concerns about the appropriatenessof standardized reading tests for workplace literacy programs:Since workplace literacy stresses material immediately relevantto jobs, instruction may not address some of the kinds ofknOWledge measured by standardized tests. The CETE reportStated that "If a test based on the actual content taughtwere availible, the lains would probably be larger than thosereported."'

- 9-

11

te

EVALUATION RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Using the most accepted guides for workplace literacy programs,5

MEE concluded that ProjectPOMERfollowed practicesgenerally accepted as the best available in the design andconduct of workplace literacy programs. The CETE report stated,

....The project requires a commitment on the part ofthe employer, i.e., paying for part of the instructionalcosts as well as paying employees for half their class

time. Project staff conduct literary audits of the basic

skills needed on the job in individual companies. Materialsspecific to each company that require reading, writing,and computation are incorporated into the instructionfor that company's employees. The course outlines areapproved by the Illinois Community College Board.Testing and individual interviews are conducted with

potential students to assess existing skill levels andto identify any concerns or problems that might interferewith their performance in the Iourses. The project canprovide day care and transportation allowances i"! studentsneed such assistance to attend classes. Efforts aremade to obtain instructors who have experience teachingadults in workplace settings. Much of the instructionis individualized with the teacher acting more as a coach

or tutor than as a lecturer.

In assessing the three principal objectives of the project,CETE found varying rates of success, but concluded overall

achievement.

Regarding the first objective to increase coordination effortsand encourage greater participation, the report cited regularadministrative meetings, requirements for significant financialcommitment from participating firms, and the general satisfaction

of the firms. However, the report suggested that while theproject appeared to be serving a few firms well, many more

could benefit.

Regarding the second objective to increase the number of on-site workplace programs from an average of 5 to 60 per year,the report anticipated completion of 68 courses. Here, Project

P OMERsignificantly exceeded its objective. Insufficientstatistics on financial factors in workplace literacy programsprecluded determin-tion of a cost-efficiency comparison withProject P 0 V E R.

Evaluating attainment of the third objective proved somewhat

problematical. This objective was to increase work-relatedperformance of employees to 80 percent of performance levelsestablished by the Literacy Skills Profile. Quantitativecriteria for these profiles were not developed, and measurementOf student progress had to rely on available test results.vt was noted that these results were positive and indicated

- 10-

4 4

corrielsted with hours of instruction provided.ting the most completely represented available data,

lculated an approximate 76 percent of students withscores.

A mrlor factor that served as botll a plus and a minus in thepettmership concept underlying ProjectIPOWERis themoiroment for management support. ProjectPONERsoughtte ensure management commitment through half-time paymentfor workers° time in the program and the 15 percent fee forinstructional costs. This requirement guaranteed managementempport, but also resulted in fewer companies served andcomsequent higher concentration of federal subsidy to trainingfor these companies.

ThL recommendations made by CETE included eliminating thespecification of literacy skill profiles originally citedin the project's main objectives and rep1acin3 Clese profileswith other more measurable criteria and in^reasing effortsto recruit a wider number of employers, perhaps by locatingfirms willing to cooperate in offering courses.

Overall, the report found Project P 0 1 E R "to be a wellconducted program that is filling a substantial training needin its service area."

13

=MOTES

1Cited by John Blalock ih the Midwest Review, and quoted

in the report for fiscal year 1988 of PrO ect Power.

2These statistics are based on those presented in a

talk on "Shaping Chicago's Future," given by the demographer.Dr. S. Bodgkinson and were cited in the fiscal report mentionedabove.

3U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of

Labor. yhe Bottom Line: Basic Skills in the Workplace.Washington, DC: Authors, 1988.

4Center on Education and Training for Employment, The

Ohio State University. Review of Evaluation Procedures UsedAn Project Power. Colum.us, Ohiot March 1990.

Guides containing recommended practices for workplaceliteracy programs include the following: Business Councilfor Effective Literacy, Job-Related Basic Skills. A Guidefor 1 nners of Em loyees Prof.rams, BCEL Bulletin Issue No. 2,

ut re 7* Larry inulecky, Literacy for theace, Bloomington, /ndiana: /ndiana University, 188:t y Rush and other, Occupational Literacy Education,

Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association,41986;U.S. Deportment of "Jucation, U.S. Department of Labor, Thelotom Line: Basic Skills in the Workplace, Washington, DC:Authors, 1988.

12

14

...

i

Appendix

15

OSSUCTIVII I: To increase existing coordination between education, business, and labor,thereby encouraging greater participation in workplace literacy effort.

1) Maintain & expand existingpastmerships via a cooperativeagrOmmemt with the LiborMamagssent Center (LW) ofChicago.

2) The Triton Literacy Partner-shipemmmittee will insurecuordication uf all activitiesundertaken to implement Project.

3) Seek Recommendations fromCessittee establishing criterionfor selection of companies toparticipate (not limited to LMCmembership).

4) Qualify companies as eligible Projectfor participation in the project.

5) Establish the criteria which Projectwill determine the prerequisitefinancial contribution to bemad by the company.

6) LNC will monitor results and Projectwvalsationn of pitch romplytedlt fining pi mit am.

7) Develop a manual titled°Pewee for Progress whichwill highlight the procedures

1 8 mired in creating and impte-01010Deneful workplace

STAFF

Project Director

Project Director

Project Director

Director

Director

Director

Project Director

EVALUATION TIMM I NE

Signed letter of June 15, 1988agreement.

Implementation of On-goingreview procedures.

Establishedcriteria.

Oct 88 - Dec 80

Number of contacts Oct 88 - Sept 89devC.oped.

Establishedcriteria.

Analysis andevaluation reports1elivelp4 to 1.W.

Publication ofmanual

Oct. 88

Oct 88 - Sept 89

DeC. 89

17

1

011010IVE II: To increase theper yea r.

ACHVITIE8

1. Market program tobusleess, design, distribtiteipreatetional information:contact. int.:mooted on-file

_2. complete program evntractarrangements (facilities,seheduling in-kindoentrihution, transportation,child care, tc).

3. Establish co-sponsorhiprelationships:hen required:negotiate mutual arrangementsof 2 or more supportingCompanies.

4. AssisL in internal on-rilemarketing of prOfIres (i.e..fliers. posters, presence atOMpiOyee Meeting, Open-houseregistration, etc).

5. Recruit and select programparticipants.

number of on-site workplace literacy programs from 5 to 60

STAFF

IELS*

IELS*.CurriculumSpecialist,Client

IIILS*.

CurriculumSpecialist,Client

1EL,S*,

/ELS*,EducationCounselor/instructor

EVALUATION

Area businessesand on-fileinterestedcompaniesreceiveinformation onProject MIR

No less than 20contracts willbe acquired andwill becompleted withprogram details

Two or morequalifyingcompaniesmutuallycontract for aprogram

All employeesare informed ofProject POWIRdetails

interestedemployees arecouneled aboutprogram:qualifying

TIMELIER

October, 1900

October, 1988

October, 1980

October, 1988

October, 1988

18 19

participantsregistered

6. Monitor program IELS*, Client Modifications Ongoingarrangements and modify asare made asrequired.requirements/conditionschangeIndustry and Educational

Liaison Specialist

2021

amracern III: To increase the work-related literacy skillsAiNlintmum of 80 percent of the employees achieve performanceLiterary Ukills Profile.

ACTIVITISS

1. Develop procedures andmaterials for literacy auditof companies, including:

a. procedures for readabilitymesaurement of materials

b. election of assessmentinetruments

C. development of instrumentsfor structured workplaceinetruments andobservations

2. Conduct audit of workplaceliteracy needs bys

a. gathering all writtenmaterials relevant to workperformance

b. interviewing employees,supervisors and personneldepaztment staff

c. observing employees intheir job settings

3. Develop Literacy SkillProfile for each job based oninformation collected through:

a. conducting readabilitystudy on written materialsutilising the Degrees ofReading Power Test

STAFF

EducationalServicesManager:CurriculumSpecialists:Directors GSD,ESL, Literacy

CurriculumSpecialists

CurriculumSpecialists

of employes in order to havelevels staLlished by the

!VALUATION

Proceduresmanual,interview andobservationinstruments

Completedaudit:materialscollected,completedinterview andobservationforms

Literacy SkillProfiles

TIMELINE

October. 1988

Oct-Nov, 19881as needed after

Nov

Oct-N0v, 19881as needed afterDec

23

developed by the CollegeBoardp

b. identifying, defining andcategorising LiteracyTooke required forffective workperformanct

c, identifying reeding,writing, computational andproblem solvingprof iciency levels.

4. Assess and interpretemployee skill levels

a. distribute Employee Dat-eSheets in order to gatherinformation on previouseducation, languagebackground and otherrelevant information

b. adMinister Degrees ofNeeding Power Test todetermine employee readinglevel

c, kOlistic scoring ofwriting which replicates,writing activitiesperformed on the job

S. Discuss assessment resultwith each employee

a. acquaint employee withliteracy skills needed toperform his/her job

b. link basic skillstmprovement to jobperformance in order tomottvate employee

CurriculumSpecialists

CurriculumSpecialists,Director. GED,ESL, Literacy

Literacy SkillProfiles

Course outlinesand materials,class schedale

Oct-Nov, 19001as needed afterJan

Nov 1908, asneeded afterNov

?5

c. assist employee inovercoming personalobstaeles-which infringeom -employee performanceend success in the Project

6. Anmlyse aseessment resultsand ilitorview records in order1St Await* a customisedcastioululm that awesees*ONts from current skilllevel* to those needed foreifecttve job performance.

a. provide for multiple classlevels if neededb*___VEOvide for esparate butcOmOorrent language andcOmpitational skills classeserSOMised around job-related-thematio-units-a. provide **pirate languagedevolOpment classes for nativeand nom-native Englishspeakers when appropriated* provide for OBD testpreparation classes whenappropriatee. schedule intensive classesmmaiino minimum ur two houratwice a week

7. Hire and train inssk.tructors

?6

CurriculumSpecialists;Directors GED,ESL, Literacy

EducationalServicesManagersDirectors GED,ESL, Literacy

Course outlinesand materials,class schedule

Personnelrecords

Nov 1988, asneeded afterNov

As needed

77

S. Assess employee progress,coordinate class activitiesandissita any necessaryadjustments

AseeseimaGayee progressin meeting e!lass objectives;send Progreso reports tocounselor

10. Diocese employee progressand reCOmmend additionaleSeistance as needed

11. Refer employees requiringadditional assistance totutors

12. Administer assessmentbattery (including DRP,targeted writing exerci,es,modified mathematics test, toample/roes

13. Refer employees notachieving performance levelsto indiviAualised or grouptutorial sessions

14. Conduct esti taint/twoswith employees and supervisorsto determine change inperception of skillsproficiency level

PS

CurriculumSpecialists,Instructors,Directors GED,ESL, Literacy

Instructors,EducationCounselor

EducationCounselor

Instructors,EducationCounselor

Instructors

Instructors,EducationCounselor

cutrlculumSpecialists

Minutes ofmeetings

Progressreports;IndividualEmployeeProgram Files;ProgressReports

IndividualEmployeeProgram Fils

TutorialRefferal Forms

Test Scores;SO% ofeutployeesachieve work-relatedperformancelevels

Tutorialrecords

intervlswrecords;improvedperception of

weekly

Monthly

Si-meekly

Monthly

As needed

Upon on-siteprogramcompletion

June-July, 190

Jul y- Veit' 19119

99

13. Observe employees intheir job settings to assessOsage in performance ofskills

30

CurriculumSpecialists

proficiencylevels byinterviewees

Observati6nrecords;observedimprovement inapplication ofskills to job

Aug-Sept, 1989

31

,

Project POWER 1989Participants by Sex

32

Mr^

500

400

300

200

101)

0

Project POWER 1989Participants by Age Groups

IS TO 24 25 TO 44 45 TO 59

AGE RANGES

33

OVER 60

Project POWER 1389PARTICIPANTS BY ETHNIC BRCKCROUND

White (30.5X)

Asian (4.4X)

Afr ican Amer ican (25.6X

limerican Indian (XX)

34

Hispanic (38,8%)

200-

P 180

A 160.

140.

1 120.

100.

80.

60

I 40

20

Project POWER 1989Participants by Years of Company Service

Oto 1 l to 5 6 to 10 II to 15 IS to 20 over 20YEARS OF SERVICE

35

,

I

*Improved communication on and offthe jobBetter job options and opportunitiest

1--1ncreased promotability!Preparation for technological advances

in your organization,r *Improved confidence

,

For more information contact:Your supervisor

=-PROJECT POWER-:Workplace Literacy

Leslie BezzazESL Curriculum Specialist

Betty KappelLiteracy, GED Curriculum Specialist

Ann MooreAssessment Specialist/Counselor

456-0300, ext. 239, 511, 629

BOARD OF TRUSTEESMerrill M. Becker, CilaimanPat Payini, Vice ChairmanSam Reda, SecretaryRobert M. CollinsJane GaroppoloDon E. GillinghamJames V. LorenzoEric Rodriguez, Student Trustee

PRESIDENTJames L. Catanzaro, Ph.D

Triton College200C Fifth AvenueRiver Grove, IL 60171

What's in itfor me?

PROJECT POWER-

Educational Training ProgramsDesigned to Improve Basic Skills

37

- PROJECT POWER

What is project POWER?

Educational Programs for- Employees interested in improving basic

skills in the following areas:English MathematicsReading Writing

- Employees who want to prepare for theGED test

What does it cost?- The classes are free to eligible employees- Employees may be required to donate

two hours per week before or after work.

How does the program work?- Classes are held at the company.

Skills are assessed; results are confidential- Employees attend classes taught by

qualified, caring Triton College instruc tors- Classes meet twice per week for two

hours per session.Classes last for ten to fifteen weeks

Tr' .101.111

PROJECT POWER

What classes are available?

READING AND WRITINGReview basic skills.Improve vocabularyLearn new skills to helpcommunication at work.Improve listening skills.

G.E.D. TEST PREPARATIONPrepare for the high schoolequivalency test.

MATH + XReview addition, subtraction, multipli-cation and division of whole numbersLearn problem solving.Review computations involving fractions,decimals and percents.Learn about pre-spc computationsinvolving averages and ranges.Study estimation/approximation.Improve measurement.Learn to read, interpret and constructtables, charts and graphs.

ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE (ESL)Learn to read, write and speak morewnfidently in English.

enlarge vocabularyimprove pronunciationdevelop reading/writing skillsgain confidence in use of English

Improve communication at work.

PROJECT POWER

Program H ighlights

Class held at workWork-related classesWork-release timeFree classesTriton College instructorsChild care assistanceTransportation assistanceAcademic and personal counsehngTutorsConfidential assessment results

Companies Participating inProject PowerAalhed Die Casting

,A:oum Graphics Inc.

American Rivet Company, Inc

Borg Warner Automotive

Carbide International

Jacobs Suchard Inc

M & M MARS

Navistar International

39

3eneficios

4(1

PROJECT POWTIRAlfabetizaciOn en el Trabajo

Leshe Beira/

Bett, Kappel!I

Ann Moorc

436-0_100, ext. 219, 511, 624

BOARD OF IR1IS-1 I s

inton CoHege

r ur,,vc t

ZQue significa

para

NOIR T POWER

Lduta(ionalMejorar las Habilidades Bask as

41

PROJECT POWER

i.,Que es "Project POWER"?

Programas educacionales paraF upI C

hahilidady,

high-,tutd H,

'

i,Cuanto cuesta?LISt

,(Itt

1)111 ,t 11

i,Como se desarrollael programa?

1,3

PROJECT POWER PROJECT POWER

6CuAles son las clasesque ofrecen?t [(JURA Y ESCRI1

r'k

PREPAR-1( ION P\RN II I\ Vv1I NDE (AD

IMA Il( ') f

IT

( t )1{( (1 ii t1( )11/41k

Aspectos Principalesdel P;-ograrna

onlpanias participando enoject Power