document resume ce 055 775 author porter, dennis title … · ed 323 380 ce 055 775 author porter,...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 323 380 CE 055 775

AUTHOR Porter, DennisTITLE EduCard. Adult Education Access Card. Policy Option

Paper on Strategic Recommendation 4. FirstEdition.

INSTITUTION Adult Education Inst. for Research and Planning,Sacramento, CA.; Pacific Management and ResearchAssociates, Sacramento, CA.

SPONS AGENCY California Community Colleges, Sacramento. Office ofthe Chancellor.; California State Dept. if Education,Sacramento. Youth, Adult and Alternative EducationalServices Div.

PUB DATE 17 Aug 90

NOTE 569.; For related documents, see CE 055 768-779.PUB TYPE Viewpoints (120)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Access to Education; *Adult Education; Confidential

Records; *Databases; Educational Opportunities;Lifelong Learning; *Management Information Systems;Prior Learning; Privacy; Statewide Planning; StudentEvaluation; *Student Records

IDENTIFIERS 353 Project; *California; *EduCard; StrategicPlanning

ABSTRACTOne recommendation of the 1989 California Strategic

Plan for Adult Education is the use of EduCard. EduCard, the AdultEducation Access Card, is a means of giving learners access toinformation about educational opportunities and providingadministrators with machine-readable information on learners' prioreducation and traiing. Three models are: (1) magnetic strip cards;(2) integrated circuit chips or "smart cards"; and (3) optical memorycards. An existing example, the Michigan Opportunity Card, is used byparticipants for skills assessment, jot placement assistance, storageand retrieval of resumes, and informatiln on training and educationalservices. Use of EduCard could develop into an integrated adulteducation data system that provides interagency information ondemographics and learning outcomes and performance. Issues andrecommendations regarding EduCard use are: (1) establishment ofEduCard as a multiagency statewide program; (2) protection of learnerpLivacy; (3) selection of one type of technology (integrated circuitcards are preferred for their low cost and security); (4) volunt-xyrather than mandatory use by participants; (5) involvement of allstakeholders in determining liability and financial policies andprocedures; and (6) adoption of a uniform, comparable careerassessment model for evaluating learner data in the system. (SK)

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

I

10II EduCardTM1 Adult EducationI Access CardI Policy Option Paper on

Strategic Recommendation 4I

I

I00

Submitted to:

Adult Education Unit

IYouth, Adult and AlternativeEducational Services DivisionCalifornia Department of Education

ISacramento, California 95814(916) 322-2175

I Chancellor's OfficeCalifornia Community CollegesSacramento, California

I (916) 322-6880

Prepared by:

IDennis PorterConsulting Specialist

I Adult Education Institutefor Research and Planning

rIli 429 J Street, Suite 400Sacramento, California 95814

I(916) 448-9063

I3

First EditionAugust 17, 1990

Policy Option Paper on the EducardTM Page i

Letter of Transmittal

The Education Access Card (EduCard,..) is one of fourteen recommendations setforth in the Adult Education for the 21st Centwy: Strategic Plan to Meet California'sLong-Term Needs. It addresses the utility of using a learner "owned" information card thatgives him or her immediate access to learning services. The card will utilize an informationstorage medium that a computer can read and write to, permitting learner information to beupdated as needed. Access to levels of learner data will be strictly controlled on a "need toknow" basis.

This policy options paper discusses (1) the recommendation, (2) related research andmodels which help elaborate on the EduCard, design, (3) initial policy issues and optionsand (4) our proposals.

Based on this discussion, the Interim Steering Committee Members, its sub-committees, and leaders in the adult education programs and other interested persons canhelp us elaborate on and refine the proposals.

FIRST EDITION August 1990

Dennis PorterPresidert, Micro MethodsConsulting SpecialistAdult Education Institutefor Research and Planning

4

II.I

1

1

1

1

1

1

10I

1

I

I

1

1

I.1

Policy Option Paper on the Edward,. Page ii

STEERING COMMITTEE AND PROJECT STAFF

Interim Steering CommitteePAUL BELOMYPnncipel

GAR! BROWNINGCATESOL Representative

CHARLES CARLSONDean of Inoniction

LANI DaYINCENTISDean et Noncredit Education

Santa Clara Adult School Costa Mesa Bakersfield College Glendale Conummity CollegeSanta Clara BakersfieM Glendale

JAMES FIGUEROA JEROME FINNIGAN RONALD GRISTOCK SANDRA HAMILTONAssistant Superintendent EAucation and Training Vice Ptas'llost Executive DirectorAdult/Occupational Education Y ercu Corporation Community Attain Southeast Los Angeles CannyLos Angeles USD LI Segundo Wells Forgo Bank Private Industry Canna Inc.Los Angeles San Francisco Cerritos

NOREEN HANNA GREGORY HEARN AUGUST HUESCA THOMAS JOHNSONChair, ACSA Superintendent Provost, Adult Confirming Ed Menton SuperintendentAdult Education Committee San Benito High School District North 3mnge County Ccmmunity Adult & Alternative Edna**Napa Hollister College District, Merton Hacienda La hate USD

La Nene

PERCY JULIEN DARLENE LAVAL JERRY LEW HAZEL MAHONEDirector, Adult Education Board of Education Regional Training Coordinator SuperintendemOakland UniFed School Freano Unifnd School District Kaiser Pennmente Grant Joint Union High SchoolDistrict, Oakland Fresno Regional HRD Disttict, Sacramento

Oakland

ANITA MARTINEZ SUZANNE MCCORMICK DANIEL MCQUILLEN CONSUELO NIETORepresentative, AcademicSenate for Calif Community

Vice Presidott, CalifotniaManufacturers Association

DirectorKern County Regional Occupaticoal

ProfessorGraduals School ot Education

Colleges, San Francisco Service Corporation, Sacramento Program, Office of Kern County CSU, Long BeechCommunity College Superintendent el School, Mojave

BONNIE OLIVER HENRY PAGE J. CORINNE PRICE WALTER POPKINDirector, Special Projects Principal Director President, California CouncilKCET-TV Educational Palo Alto Adult School Salinas Adult School for Adult EducationEnterprise Dr. Ace Palo Alto Salinas MontebelloLos Angeles

DICK RANES JOE RICHEY LEONARD RIVERA FRANCES RUIZUnit Manager Executive Vice President Principal ESL TeacherIBM Industry Education Council Whittier Adult School Coeona-Noeco Adt& School

Costa Mesa of California, Woodland Whittier Corms

PRANY SANANDC ONE ADRIANA SANCHEVALDANA ROD SMITH JUANITA STANLEYAssistant Director, United ESUAnmesty Resource Teacher Provost, Educational Cultural ExeCilths DirectorCambodian Community, Inc. SwOUV/Ster Tinian Complex, Son Diego Community California Literacy, I=Long Beach High School District, Del Rey College District, San Diego San Gabriel

Adult Center, (3tula Vista

GARY E. STRONG WILLIAM WENRICHState Librarian ChancellorCalifornia State Lawny Sao Diego Community CollegeSacramento District, San Diego

DOUG BURRISDeputy ChancellorChancellor's OfficeCalifornia Community Colleges

State Education StaffRITA CEPEDADean, Education Standards &Evaluation, Chancellor's OfficeCalifornia Community Colleges

NORMA MORRISAnalyst, Noncredit & CommunityServices Chancellor's OfficeCalifornia Canmunity Colleges

GERALD KILBERTState DirectorAdult EducationCalifornia Dept of Educarion

KATHY WARRINERAnalyst, Basic Skills & LiteracyChancellor's OfficeCalifornia Community Colleges

Institute StaffFRED BEST, Executive DirectorBERNADETTE DAWSON, AssociateERIC MARGOLIS, AssociateJIM McDONALD, Publications & Public InformaticoCUBA MILLER, Senior Associate

AEU

RAY EBERHARDProgram ManilaAdult Education UnitCalifornia Dept et Education

LYNDA SMITHProject MonitorAdult Education UnitCalifomia Dept of Educatico

ANAN NUGGIHALLI, Computer SystemsDENNIS PORTER, Ccosulting SpecialistABIGAIL SLAYTON, ConsultantVAN WOOLLEY, Senior Consultant

Adult Education Institute for Research and PlanningSacramento, California

I 5

Policy Option Paper on the Edward,

Acknowledgements

Page

This paper was prepared with advice and information from many people. AdultEducation Institute for Research and Planning (AEI) appreciates the assistance provided sogenerously from the following persons.

The contents of this paper do not necessarily reflect the views or the followingpersons or institutions they represent:

David Bell, Director, Computing Services. RiversideCommunity College District. Riverside,California

Dr. Fred Best, Director, Adult Education Inatitute.Sacramento, California

Harold Chan*, Senior Consultant. Micro Methods.Berkeley, Cu Mania

Dr. Ray Eberhard. Program Administrator, AdultEducation Unit. Stass Department of Education.Sacramento, California

Allen Gandy, Coordinator, Special Projects andServices, Kalamazoo Valley CommunityCollege, Kalamazoo, Michigan

William Hanve, Associate Vice Chance lice%Management Information Services, CaliforniaCommunity Colleges, Sacramento, California

Ed Kissmn, Senior Associate, Micro Methods.Berkaby, California

Bruce Liggett. Aston. Dapatiment of EconomicSecurity, Phoenix, Minna

Norma Morns, Chinni loes Office, CaliforniaComenmity Collages, Seannamito. California

Lynda Smith. Adult Education Unit. CaliforniaDepartment al Mention

Dorothy Monks Ward. Management InformationServices, California Community Colleges,Sacramento, California

Kathy Warrimr, Chamallor's Office, CaliforniaCommunity Collages. Sacramento. California

Van M. Woolley, Camer/Vocationg AllossmentConsultant, Sacramsnio. Califonis

FIRST EDITION August 1990 6

1

I.I

1

1

1

1

1

I

101

1

1

II

1

II

Policy Option Paper on the Educardn, Page iv

ContentsLetter of Transmittal iSteering Committee and Project Staff iiAcknowledgements iiiExecutive Summary vi

I. Introduction and Overview 1

Overview of Recommendation 3History of the EduCardrm Recommendation 5Objectives of Recommendation 8

II. Review of Literature and Information 9

General Literature and Background 9Planning Issues 19New Developments and Considerations 27Key Findings of Literature Review 29

III. Proposals to Implement Designand Testing of EduCardr. 30

Criteria for Evaluating Proposals 30The Pros and Cons of Proposals 31Advisory Recommendations 41

IV. Conclusions and Future Actions 44


Policy Option Paper on the Educard., Page v

This paper has been prepared under Contract 7147 from the AdultEducation Unit of the Youth, Adult and Alternative Educational ServicesDivision of the California State Department of Education.

Pacific Management and Research Associates

429 J Street, Suite 400Sacramento, California 95814

(916) 448-9038

This paper has been prepared to summarize background information andoutline possible policy decisions. The contents of this paper do not necessarilyreflect the policies of the State Department of Education, Community Colleges,Interim Adult Education Steering Committee, or other institutions.


1

1

1

1

1

1

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardni (Executive Surnnuay) Page vi

Executive SummaryThe EduCardi recommendation combines a bold approach to capturing

the adult learner's attention with the practical needs of maintaining detailed andcurrent information on adult learners.

This paper outlines the goals and priorities associated with the AdultEducation Access Card (EduCtutilu) strategic recommendation. It is firstof three working papers designed to guide and permit the continued analysisand examination of issues associated with its design and implementation.

The Recommendation

The EduCardni is the symbol and the tea 10 facilitate the lifelonglearning concept. Learners entering participatiqg programs or (eventually)graduating from cr leaving high school may be issued an Eduard,*Information encoded on the card will tell the learner and the provider theperson's educational record, eligibility for akernadve programs, andcertification of demonstrated *ills. This encoded information which can beupdated as appropriate will (1) simplify paperwork, (2) reduceadministrative costs, and (3) make more sensitive korner, service, and labormarket information available. It will expedite linking private funds withpublic resources.

Most importantly it will contain a record of a person's current and priorlearning and training accomplislunents and status in their present learningendeavon. This facilitates the use of independent study, computer basedinstruction and workplace instruction which can be competency andperformance based, stressing learning outcomes rather than seat time. Italso will reduce unnecessary testing and the filling of forms.

Two companion papers on the Integtuted Adult &taxation DataSystem and the Community Adult Education Information SerWces arebeing researched and produced. These three papers combine to define theinformation system to be used in implementing the Adult EducationStrategic Plan.

FIRST EDITION - August 1990 9

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardTm (Executive Summary) Page vii

fMIftObjectives of the EduCardn, Recommendation

The objectives of the Edm Cardn, are twofold. From the learner'sperspective die card facilitates access to and information about relevantlearning services and epeeds referral and enrollment. From the providersviewpoint, the card enables rspid machine readable informstion pertinent tothe learner's prior and CWTOlit education and gaining skills to be input,stored and retrieved. Access to this information, demographic and lemmingoriented, would be protected on a "need to know" basis with the full recordavailable to the learner at his or her request.

How the EduC ardr. Process Works

The EduCardn, operates within tomorrow's adult education process.The process begins with a potential learner or group of learners (s.g. abusiness or public agency may also refer persons to pursue literacy, job skillor other types of learning):

Individual learners go to a Community Adult EducationInformation Service Center.

Upon arrival at the center, learners present their EduCardym.If they do not have a card, the intake is initiated.

This card is used to access individual educationl records andprogram eligibility status from an Integrated Data System.

Existing educational records would provide information on thelearner's skill attainment and educational needs in terms ofstandard Performance Measures used by all participatinginstructional providers as well as other assessment tools.

If initial or further assessment is needed, the learner can request furthertests and counseling with resources available through the EduCardnv Newagsessment records and assessment costs are interactively entered into anIntegrated Data System.

Once assessments determine the needs of the learner, a combination ofcounseling and interactive information technology is used to provide animpartial overview of programs that meet the learner's needs.

Once educationsl options are presented and discussed, the individualselects the program that best meets his or her learning goals. A quick checkis made to insure that the program has an opening and the learner is referredto the program.

Upon checking in, the learner submits his or her EduCardnd, which isused like a credit card to begin a billing process for services in accord witha system of funding policies and procedures designed to encourage programimprovement, responsiveness, innovation and alternatives.

FIRST EDITION - August 1990

1 0

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardrks (Executive Summary) Page viii

There are three basic models of the EduCardn, technology: (I) themagnetic strip type card employed by automated teller machines (AM)and credit cards, (2) the integrased circuit chip or "smart* card, and (3) dieoptical memory card. Within each model there are variations in designfeatures. Each card has a medium upon which information can be writtenand stored and aubsequeotly read by a machine linked so a computer. Usertransactions, hosed on a imique identifier, can be identified and stored,usually in the computer's fixed memory, and linked to the user's accamt.

Current development work in Michigan will peovide substantialguidance in the rermement of the EduCardni model. Central to thehechigan system are (1) the integration of human service deliveryprograms, (2) a statewide information services system, and (3) an MISwhich features the use of a learner's individual smart credit card (theOpportunity Card) to maintain his or her service information.

In the Michigan model participating provider organizations operateunder the concept of a franchise. 'They take on specified respcesibilities aspartners in the Michigan oppormity card and human investment system.The stakeholder concept in the California adult education service deliverynetwork will draw on features of the franchise model.IPolicy Options Discussed

The research has identified five options for initial policy and designanalysis. They are:

1. Learner Privacy2. Which Type of Technology to Pursue3. EduCardn, Use4. Liability and Financial IssuesS. Standards for Assessment

These policy options address key EduCardn, design concerns.

The pros and cons of the options are discussed. They are also assessedusing a common set of evaluation criteria. The criteria used are the samefor the related data system options papers. These criteria are:

1. Improve Learner Access2. Stakeholder Acceptability3. Ease of Use4. Maintain Learner PrivacyS. Cost Effectiveness6. Improve Accountability

Using these criteria, an initial evaluation of each option's positive andnegative impacts is made.

FIRST EDITION August 1990 11_ -,

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardn, (Executive Summary) Page ix

Policy Proposals

Our staff and Data and Information Subcommittee analysis hasidentified five proposals which begin to defme the EduCardn, model.Readers are encouraged to identified other issues and options for continuinganalysis. The proposals are:

1. Establish the EduCardn, as a multi-agency access cardmaintained at the state level with the possibility of localaugmentation.

2. Pay strict attention to learner privacy and rights in theEduCardiu design.

3. Use the integrated cinuit technology.

4. Make Ede Cantu, use optional.

S. Involve stakeholders in liability and financial policiesand procedures.

The further development and analysis of the recommended EduCardn,options will be performed by the Adult Education Institute for Research midPlanning under the guidance of the Interim Stetting Committee and itssubcommittees. The five proposals presented in this papet will bereviewed, revised and analyzed further during the feasibility analysis togain clarity, acceptance to basic skills agencies, the business community,learners' groups and other stakeholders.

The policy proposals of the Interim Steering Committee will need to bereviewed by State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Bill Honig, andCalifornia Community College Chancellor, David Mertes, as well as headsof other participating agencies.

1 2


,

Policy Option Paper on the EduCard, Page 1

Chapter 1

Introduction and OverviewThe Adult Education Access Card (EduCardnd is a bold approach to

capturing the attention of the adult learner and facilitating access to thepotential range of educational and basic skill training services in CalVornia.

with the Adult Education Access Card (EduCardj strategicThis paper outlines the goals and priorities associated

recommendation. It is first of thzee working papers designed toguide and permit the continued analysis and examination ofissues associated with its design and implementation. Thepaper is organized into four sections as follows:

I. Introduction and Overview of RecommendationReview of Literature and InformationProposals to Implement Recommendation

11.Conclusions and Future Actions

Two companion papers on the "Integrated Adult EducationData System" and the "Community Adult EducationInformation Services" are being researched and produced.These three papers combine to define the information systemto be used in implementing the Adult Education StrategicPlan. They also serve as the descriptive metaphor for theevolving collaborative adult education and basic skills trainingdelivery syrem.

Overview of Recommendation

The demands and opportunities for the adult learner overthe next several decades will be more diveise. Learning in alllikelihood will continue to spread out from the classroomsetting and training facility to a wider range of environmentsincluding learning labs, libraries, the workplace, the home, andcommunity centers. We are entering an era of ifelonglearning. California has an opportunity to take leadership increating an environment to promote 111

1 Adult EdreaSion in She 210 Combo,: Steele& Plan So Meet Calgonsia's Long-Tenn Adak Educe:fag Needs.1919 Edition,Aduh Education 2000 Project, 1988-1989 Adult Education Advisory Committee.



The EduCarcin,will be expectedto empower userswith greateraccess toeducationalprograms.

To make reasoned choices about which adult educationservices will be the most beneficial for the individual learner,several conditions are desirable, (1) there must be a range ofadult education choices to address specific needs, (2) amtinformation and assessment must be available for the learner tomake reasonable choices, (3) time consuming paperworkshould be automated, and (4) the learner when making choicesshould be aware of the performance of the learning providers.

To address these concerns, the Adult Education for the21st Century strategic plan has recommended three integratedinformation management strategies:

The Community Adult Education InformationServices (provider information and assessmentcentered)

The EduCard, (learner centered)

The Integrated Adult Education Data System(provider and learner centered)

The EduCard., is the subject of this option paper. It willbe expected to empower users with greater access toeducational programs. While it stands alone for the discussionof policy options, its use cannot be sepwated from the othertwo components of the adult education managementinformation and performance system.

The EduCardn, operates within tomorrow's adult educationprocess. The process begins with a potential learner or groupof learners (e.g. a business or public agency may also referpersons to pursue literacy, job skill or other types of /earning):

Individual learners go to a Community AdultEducction Information Service Center.

Upon arrival at the center, learners present theirEduCard.. If they do not have a card, the intakeis initiated.

This card is used to access individual educationalrecords and program eligibility status from anIntegrated Data System.

Existing educational records would provideinformation on the learner's skill attainment andeducational needs in terms of standardPerformance Measures used by all participatinginstructional providers as well as other assessmenttools.

1 4


Policy Option Paper on the EduCard., Page 3

The AdultEducation AccessCard (EduCardn,)is the symbol andthe tool tofacilitate dz.?lifelong learningconcept. It willcontain a record ofa person's currentand prior learningand trainingaccomplishmentsand status in theirpresent learningendeavors.

If initial or further assessment is needed, the learner canrequest fimher tests and counseling with resources omailablethrough the EduCardfm. New assessment records andassessment costs are interactively entered into an IntegratedData System (See Exhibit 1).

Once assessments determine the needs of the learner, acombination of counseling and interactive informationtechnology is used to provide an impartial overview ofprograms that meet the learner's needs. This will includeinformation such as the educational objectives of the programs,cost to the individual participant (if any), duration andscheduling, location, special features, assessments ofperformance, satisfaction of prior participants, and certificationstatus in accord with state and regional program QualityStandards. Once educational options are presented anddiscussed, the individual selects the program that best meetshis or her learning goals. A quick check is made to insure thatthe program has an opening and the learner is referred to theprogram (See Exhibit 1).

The learner "checks in" with the program of choice(e.g. appears at locations, downloads through a modem linkedto a home computer, rents a portable interactive instructionalmodule, or meets a tutor). Upon checking in, the learnersubmits his or her EduCardn which is used like a credit cardto begin a billing process for services in accord with a systemof funding policies and procedures designed to encourageprogram improvement, responsiveness, innovation andalternatives.

The AduL Education Access Card (EduCard,u) is thesymbol and the tool to facilitate the lifelong learningLearners entering participating programs or (even y)graduating from or leaving high school will be issued anEduCardm. Information encoded on the card will tell thelearner and the provider the person's educational record,eligibility for alternative programs, and certification ofdemonstrated skills. This er.,:oded information which can beupdated as appropriate will (1) simplify paperwork, (2) reduceadministrative costs, and (3) make more sensitive learner,service, and labor market information available. It willexpedite linldng private funds with public resounms.

1 5


Policy Option Paper on the EduCardn, Page 4

Exhibit 1HOW ADULT LEARNERS RECEIVE SERVICES

a 1

VnIndividualSelf-ReferredLearners

Learners Referred byOther Schools and IMMO Retorted

Programs by Employees

ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL NEEDSLearners tue Community Adak Education Information ServiceCenter lo Recall Existing Educational Achievement RecordsElectronically through His or Her EduCard (Adak MacedonAccess Card) and Obtains Further Assessmat u Neededto Desermine Lesrning Goals and Eligibilky for Programs.

+REVIEW AND SWIM PROCRAM

Learner uses Community Adak Macedon Information ServiceCam so Oet Overview of Alternative Edocational Programsand Selects Programs that Best Meet Individual Goals andDelivaxy Needs.

..

PARTICIPATION IN PROGRAMLearners use EduCaids (Adult Education Access Card) toEnroll in One or More Program:.

tkidiP 41iCoencouter Interactive T.V. Courses

Assisted VideoIDSMICtiOnt

CluvoomInstruction Training

+[COMPLETION AND PAYMENT FOR PROGRAM

Learners Pay for Instruction with the EduCard (AdakEdutadon Access Card) and Documentadon of Participation is

L.

Entered into the Educational Records that are Accessibleby the Card.

,

16

Poucy Option Paeer on the EduCard. Page 5

The proposedEduCardrm isintended to becombined withrecommendationsto develop anIntegrated AdultEducation DataSystem and ancommunityinformationservices system toform the core of a"collaborativeinfrastructure."

Most importantly it will contain a record of a person'scurrent and prior learning and training accomplishments andstatus in their present learning Weavers. Thic greatlyfacilitates the use of independent study, computer basedinstruction and workplace instiuction which can becompetency and performance based, stressing learningoutcomes rather than seat time. It also will reduceunnecessary testing and the filling of forms.

History of the EduCary4,4 Recommendation

The recommendation for EduCartin, comes from a long-term planning process initiated in October 1988 by the AdultEducation Unit of the Youth, Adult and AlternaciveEducational Services (YAAES) Division of the CaliforniaDepartment of Education (CDE). It was developed under theguidance2 of a twenty-six member Adult Education DivisionCommittee appointed by State Superintendent of PublicInstruction Bill Honig. Their charge was to develop a long-term vision of adult education in the 21st century.

The proposed EduCardn, are intended to be combined withrecommendations to develop an Integated Adult EducationData System and an community information services systemto form the core of a "collaborative infrastructure." Its conceptand design has been influenced substantially by the State ofMichigan's Human Investment System.3

It is next to impossible to maintain a history of a person'slearning accomplishments. The practical result is that there iscontinual assessment, testing and enrollment in formal,informal, short and long term education and basic skillstraining which is sometimes redundant and usually timeconsuming.

2 Guidance refers to the process of sssiseng lumen in undentanding and making decidcas regarding program optima. Theguidance proceu is facilitated by the program, labor market, and other infarmation avulable in the ocomunity information servicessystem.

3 me idea for a Community Adult Education Informadon Services system was in pet, modeled ger the Human bivesunenSystem currently under development in the State of Michigan. Under leadenhip trum the Governor. Michigan had crewed a CabinetCame ot Human Investment to knplement edemand drimn" investment at human resource development system in response toresearch indicating that the state was facing serious pieblmns in providing an educased end tabled workforce.

An Adult Literacy Task Force had frond a main d propane and resources with di:faring intake polices. eliplility policies andoutcome criteria. It recommended polices to mordinate services and enable the learner to make choices on how and whin to obtainbasic skills training and ester:dim. Central to the Michisan system are (1) the integration d Wren service delivery programs. (2).astatewide infonnanon services system. and (3) an integrated data system which features the use of a turner's individual man creditcard to maintain his or her service information.

One of the early products has been a diream of :job training and related services that identifies state and local, by county.agencies and programs that have official responailities with the some 60 job training programs in the state. Panicipuit categories areidentified by icons for quick recognition (Cresting Mama Investment System: Report to the Governor. Michigan Job TrainingCoordinating Council. Mardi 19119 The hlkhisen llama Investment Fund and the Michigan Opportunity Card, State at

FIRST EDITION August 1990 1 7

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardm Page 6

INIMMIEW

Recommendation 4EixiCatan,

(ADULT EDUCATION ACCESS CARD)

Adults should be issued a credit card-like device whichuses local and statewide computers in order to:

Empower individuals as educational consumers toaccess all available educational opportunities.

Facilitate access and store individual educationalrecords (e.g. assessment test scores, certifications,etc.).

Reduce duplication of training and assessment

Ease process of determining individual eligibility forprograms.

Use a common format to report individualeducational records from multiple programs.

Provide an efficient means of matching privatedonations with public education funds.

The EduCard would also dramatize the availability ofeducational services and facilitate storage and access ofindividual educational records.

Often this education and skills training is not credited arrecognized. The EduCardm presumption of keeping anaccurate record, subject to the learner's check and correction,enabling the learner and his or her counselors to make choicesabout his or her options. Making this record the property of thelearner and facilitating his or her shopping for appropriateservices is most attractive.

The idea for the EduCard was first popularized when theProgram Administrator of the Adult Education Unit, Dr. RayEberhard, Strategic Plan Advisory Committee members andStrategic Plan researchers visited the State of Michigan todiscuss the Michigan Human Investment Fund and its HumanInvestment System.

Under leadership from the Governor, Michigan had createda Cabinet Council on Human Investment to implement a"demand driven" investment of human resource developmentfunds in response to research indicating that the state wasfacing serious problems in providing an educated and trainedworkforce.

Michigan, January 1989; and Invnting ix People: A Direciory of Michigan's Job Traisling and Regaled Service; Governor's Officefor Job Training, Vol. 4, 1988).


Policy Option Paper on the EduCardiw Page 7

An Adultliteracy TaskForce had found amaze of programsand resource.: withdiffering intakepolices, eligibilitypolicies andoutcome criteria.

An Adult Literacy Tuk Force had found a maze ofprograms and resources with differing intake polices, eligibilitypolicies and outcome criteria. It recommended pohces tocoordinate services and enable the learner to make choices onhow and when to obtain basic skills training and education.4

Central to the Michigan system are (1) the integration ofhuman service delivery programs, (2) a statewide informationservices system, and ( ) an integrated data system whichfeatures the use of a learner's individual smart credit card tomaintain his or her service information.

This Michigan Opportunity Cant when fully implementedis expected to enable every Michigan adult to obtain, at nocost, assistance to improve his or her basic education andtraining skills. Designed like a credit card, it can bold keyinformation on the cardholder and prior education and trainingexperiences in a computer chip implanted in the card. This"smart" card will provide access to the following services:5

Assessment of cardholder skills and eligibility forexisting education and training programs

Inventory of basic skills education and trainingprograms available in the cardholder's community

Personal Action Plan to upgrade the cardholder'sskills and education

Referral to the appropriate training and educationservices

Job Placement Assistance

A Basic Skills Account and Other Accounts tohelp persons obtain general or specific skillsnecessary for the current workplace

Upon reflection, the California strategic plan advisors andplanners concluded that this approach would be very useful increating a "marketplace" for education and training servicesand would provide a means for improving data quality andstreamlining the data collection in these programs. Thisopportunity was endorsed by the Strategic Plan AdvisoryC.ommittee who also identified measures to recognize thesuccess of the EduCardn, and challenges which must beaddressed in its development.'

4 The Michigan Human Inrestatent Fared and Ow Mkhigaa Opportunity Card, State of Michigan, January 1989.

5 Ibid. "Smarr leers to the ability to mad and write information directly to the card. permitting anent transaction infotmation tobe stored pennanendy on the card. acceued via computer and revised.

6 ot July 1989 Advisory Committee Meeting and Project Review," Adult Education Institute for Research and Planning.

OctobSerg,111789. At its final meeting, the California Adult Education Strategic Plan Advisory Committee was divided into several



Objectives of Recommendation

The objectives of the EduCardm are twofold. From thelesmer's perspective the card facilitates access to andinfonnation about relevant learning seivices and speedsreferral and enrollment. From the providers viewpoint, thecard enables rapid machine readable infonnation . tothe learner's prior and current education and skills tobe input, stored and retrieved. Access to this " " "demographic and learning oriented, would be protected on a"need to know" basis with the full record available to thelearner at his or her rattiest Exhibit 2 organizes theseobjectives into four categories.

The parameters for the design and use of the EduCardn, arethe subject of this paper. In the process the objectives can bereexamined and the policy issues associated with its design andtesting refined.

Exhibit 2OBJECTIVES OF RECOMMENDATION

FACHATATE LEARNER CHOICEEasy Access to Relevant ServicesRecord of Prior Education and TrainingSpeed Assessment and Referral

IMPROVE DATA MANAGEMENTCard Easy to

UCard Providesestent Data and Avoids Unnecessary FormsCard Avoids Unnecessary Assessment and Testing

PROMOTE MARKETPLACE FOR SERVICESEasy to Sh for ServicesSimplifies ibility DeterminationMatches older's Needs with Provider's Services

PROMOTE LIFELONG LEARNINGRecognized Need for RetrainingFacilitates Public-Private TVaining CollaborationCard Represents a Skills Account Which Can Be Used asNeeded

work groups to idenify success factors and challenges. The "Acceu to Usen" subcommittee identified these indicason for thesuccess of the Ethrawd. Specifically. it would (I) reduce administrative conk (2) efficient use of staff time; (3) ue card forconfidentiality. (4) design the card bermd us cermet needs. and (3) make it an entitknosne type card; avoid frequent enbancemen

Mtrarwg du card.

falenses idnmfied to the use of the development of the Eduard woe: (I) anpsct possible high costs. (2) develop a slidingscale if the user pays. (3) avoid using the card to limit the ability of a person to meet Wuntft goals; and frequent mthencementsrequire reissuing

20FIRST EDITION August 1990

Policy Option Paper on the Eda Catdm Page 9

i.Chapter 2

Review Of Literatureand Information

The EduCardrAf combines current and near future technology withthe need for the Learner to more effective41 make informed learning choices,and the Provider to measure progress and goal attainment.

IThe literature review and background research look

I further at the intent and likely applications of the AdultEducation Access Card (EduCani.,), current public sectoruses, and the nature of the technology. This literature reviewand background research will carry on into the next

Idevelopmental paper.

I. General Literature and Background

The EduCardr4 technology has several features of interestin setting the stage for examining policy issues associated withits design and use. These features include (1) the nature of thecard technology, (2) its current uses, and (3) its projected uses.The use of the card as the symbol for life long learning and theability to shop for appropriate education and training servicesis implied in the several models being tested currently.

THOW THE EDUCARDmECHNOLOGY WORKS

There are three basic models of the EduCard technology:(1) the magnetic strip type card employed by automated tellermachines (ATM) and credit cards, (2) the integrated circuitchip or "smart" card, and (3) the optical memory card. Withineach model there are variations in design features. Each cardhas a medium upon which information can be written andstored and subsequently read by a machine linked to acomputer. User transactions, based on a unique identifies, canbe identified and stored, usually in the computer's Endmemory, and linked to the user's account.


Policy Option Paper on the &Warily Page 10

We are aware oftwo major publicpolicy experimentsusing the "smartcard" technology.

CURRENT USES OF THE SMART CARDTECHNOLOGY

As of this writing, we are aware of two major public policyexperiments using the "smart card" technology. The MichiganOpportunity Card model is the moat mum aud will bediscussed further. A dues state U.S. Departmtet ofAgriculture project is testing the use of electronic benefitstransfer (EBT), also called electronic fords transfer (EFT). Inaddition the USDA is initiating a feadbilicy study into the useof the smart cent technology. The army level tests of theEDT approach are ocartrke in Minnuota, Pennsylvania, andMryland using electronic benefits hosed of tbe coupons in itsfood stamp program, and electronic hinds transfer to a debitcard rather than checks payments.

The state welfare agencies have joined with the U.S.of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Health

Human Services to test the use of an electronicbenefits/electronic fund transfers (EST/EFT) with the foodstem peogram. The objective is to demonstrate that an ESTprogram can work effsctively and is acceptable to participantsat costs less than those associated with the current couponsystem. This cost effectiveness objective assumes that theEBT program will have no future utility without havingreduced costs.7

1

1 III --,1

Secondary objectives of the demonstrations are to:

(1) Improve service delivery and program account-ability.

Increase state personnel productivity.

Reduce administrative costs.

Enhance compliance with federal guidelines.

Streamline operations by reducing paperprocesses.

Reduce the stigma associated with being a wel-fare recipient.

While Adult Education Institute researchers have not seenthese programs, the model is along the following lines.Eligible welfare recipients receives a benefits card with thebenefit type and benefit amounts on a credit type card. Eachapplicant receives a personal identification number (PIN)encoded on the card. Upon receipt of the card, the user will begiven an audiovisual presentation on the use of the card.

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

7 Timmons. Williem J.. "Arians EST ProWet." 11117 todey. April 1919. pap 17. Arizona's Newsman of Economic Securitypwticipawd in the feasibitity shwa of the USDA EBT/EPT experiments and decided not to centime. The project required substantialsystem &sir and computer cows, which conflicted with other DB3 priorities.


Policy Option Paper on the Eduardo, Page 11

The cardholder can use the debit card to access Aid toFamilies with Dependent Children (AFDC) cuh benefits atarea ATMs and point of sale machines in grocery stores thatelect to distribute cash. The AFDC cash benefits uses standardATM procedures.

The cardholder can use the same card to access food stampbeiefits at point of sale machines sod day care benefits atparticipating day care miters end day care homes.

At the grocery checkout lane, the electronic benefits card isrun through the terminel reader, the clerk enters the transactionvalue for cash or food on the keyboard and the cardholderenters the PIN marker on a bey*. A transaction completedmessage is displayed on the teminal, the receipts are printedand the cardholder's account is debited. If the transactioncannot be completed, the reason (e.g. lack of funds, invalidPIN) is displayed on the screen.

Manual backup procedures to be used when there is systemfailure are par of the plan. Cardholders will not be able tocharge unauthorized items (liquor, tobacco, non-food items)with the food stamp benefits. Point of sale equipment will beprovided to the retailer at no cost.

An implications for California is the fact that a welfarerecipients are perceived as living in a cash economy rather thanin a credit card one. We should be able to obtain evaluativeevidence of how well the welfare cardholders understand aridmake use of the new technology. This is a concern expressedby some adult educators and state adult education staffregarding the F4uCard.5

Riverside Community College

The Riverside Community College District hasexperimented briefly with the smart card in its studentinformation system permitting the card to store and read thestudent's academic history with either a smart phone or apersonal computer using attached smart card reader. Theexperiment was halted after the initial design and testingphase.'

"Summory ci July 1989 Advisory Conunines Meeting and Project Raview," Op. CIL, pap

9 Bell. David J., Dinsctor. Compsirn Services, Integrating New Technologies with Matriculation Efforts Using SmartTechnology," Connect No. 87-0736, Riverside Community Collage District. June 30. 1989. and pitons discussion with Mr. Bell,project Manager.


Policy Option Paper on the EdaCardn, Pa 12

The multi-function featuresof a smart cardwith substantialread only andread-write memoryand a visualdisplay suggeststhat smart cardscan become thesource ofinformation formany unrelatedpurposes frombank accounts, topoint of nurchaseuses, to gibrary,medical andeducationalactivities.

Generic Uses

The major gvneric experiment wkh the smart cud is inFrance where Cane Blase ordered twelve malice smelt cardsin 1985 of which about one maxi wen delivered by late1988. Another article places the number of amen cards inFrance at 70 million.* In the U.S., Mama Card has beenconducting an 18 month lest program in Maryland and Floridausing over 30,000 cads. In Japan, Visa International is usingthe "superman" aid with keyboard and display in prom*with Toshiba. In Norway, a bank consortium is said to haveordend a half million smart cards..0

The smart card, usually bued on a nuignetic strip, is findingniches primarily u debk cards for telephone, parking,photocopy, and mus-transk fans. In his Mingle Awakenreview of the status of the mart card, Paul Wallich notes thatthe major issue regarding the futtue of the smart card iswhether smart cards provide a more cost effective form oftransaction management than current "dumb" (magnetic) cards.This essentially has to do with the amount of infonnation thatmust be carried on a card in a decentralized manner rather thancoded information which permits the user to access centralcomputers for designated transactions.

FUTURE USES OF SMART CARDTECHNOLOGY

The smart card's primary long term use appears to be in theelectronic banking arena.0 Terms like "electronic purse" and"intelligent token" are being used in the literature to describethe high end, multifunction uses under analysis. Cards thathave embedded calculators can be used in various economictransactions and bill paying activities with the infonnationbeing updated at banks and on the user's card.

The multifunction features of a smart card with substantialread only and read-write memory and a visual display suggeststhat smart cods can become the source of information formany unrelated purposes from bank accounts, to point ofpurchue uses, to library, medical and educational activities.These unrelated activities can be stored, encrypted and usedfrom the same card. For example, in the case of the USDAEBT tests, other entitlements like the Women, Infants andChildren (WIC), Unemployment Insurance, Medicaid and

10 "Marketing a New Technology". iteritedist meargemost, July 19$8. per 38.

11 Wallick Peel. "Not in dr Cada? Tie smart erd revolution is still waiting to happen." SeitatVic Amerisea. lorry 1919.page 101.

12 maims, op. ci.. par_ 4: and Hardy rnhanor. Boar Asbo sod Geed= McCoy. "Visa SH-Stasit Card Applications andTechsiolosy." in Sater*ardMOO: Ike Fats". of IC Cards, D. amun and 1. Sehaentaller-Bield (E&). North Hasn't 1919.

FIRST EDMON August 1990

2 4

Policy Option Paper on the &Ward,. Page 13

There is nointegrated datasystem inCalifornia foradult educationnor is there a datasystem thatcombines datafrom adult andvocationaleducation withtraining andemploymentprograms.

child support could be added to the benefits listings on the

card.0

The attractiveness to finsncial institutions is that thecardholder pays at the point of purchase and the limitation getsthe use of the money until the transaction clears. ki the pigmentcredit card system the cardholder gets the advantage of the"float.-14

NEED FOR AN INTEGRATED MANAGEMENTINFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS)

The objective of the adult education integrated data systemis to provide current, accurate and appropriate information onthe delivery of adult education Keynes to citizens ofCalifornia. Learner data from propams him MCA, GAIN andJTPA are available, although cross agency comparisons cannotbe model. These data, especially program performance andlearner characteristics data, ate for tha most part currently notavailable, making it difficult to deertmine the success ofcurrent interventions, and making it more difficult to preparefor the new knowledge and skills that adults will need as weapproach the 21st century.

There is no integrated data system in California for adulteducation nor is there a data aystem that combines data fromadult and vocational education with training and employmentprograms. Likewiee there is no learner catered data systemfor adult education which maintains detailed information onpersons enrolling and completing adult education.

Adult education programs report numbers of students servedby the ten authorized areas. They aze not required to reportmuch information "about categories, courses, or students tothe California Department of Education.0 The data are oftennoncomparable among providers. Consequently, local andstate level administrators and policy makers lack accurate andtimely information on:

learner needslearner demographics

- learner diagnostics- learner achievements

services delivered- service definitions

13 Timmons, Op.Cit. page 13.

14 Wankb. Op. Cit. psp 101.

13 "Meet* California's Adak Education Needs: Recomnuedadons to the Legislature in Response to Su LAnly le in

the 1967 Sadist Act; California Postsecondary lidecasion Commission. October 191111. especially pages 23-1117Themal


Policy Option Paper on the EditCeram Page 14

cost effectivenessprovider characteristics

Moreover, the need for and benefit from adult education israrely evaluated or assessed." Therefore, limited data exits onthe COSS and benefits of alternetive instructional strategies,working with high risk learners, and setting instructionalpriorities.

The corollary argument is that reporting requiretnests, dossystems and program pluming and evaluation are expensiveand their introduction will increase the costs of adult education.

Other trablits and employment preparation programespecially those fedaally funded are required to msintam andreport more detailed user and provider infamation. Theirrepteing requirements and data definitiors must be taken intoconsideration in the design of an adult education and basic*ills integrated data system.

INVENTORYOF ELIGIBLE PROGRAMS

It is expected that the EduCardm and the integratededucation and training system will address Icemen'development goals. These goals will include:

GED completion / AttainmentEmployability skills trainingWorlcforce literacySmall business / Self employedEmploymentOccupational trainingParenting skillsEnhanced employabilityABE / ESL completionCareer advancementEconomic self sufficiencyLife management skills

Building an integrated data system over time presumes thatthere will be a range of stakeholders and collaboratingprograms. Those programs and agencies lilcely to considerparticipation include:

16 Ibid.

(1) Providers:Adult schoolsCommunity collegesRegional Occupational Programs (ROPs)


26

Policy Option Paper on the EduCerdn, Par 15

The "Californiamodel" stresses theinteraction andlinkage amonghuman service andinformationmanagementtransactions.

Continuation scboolsLibrariesCommtmityobragio2t AtiOns

Prricarint=conections facilitiesCalifornia Commotion CorpsDepartment of RehabilitaionEmployers

(2) Programs:English as a second language (ESL)Elementszy basic skilbOlder adultsQuzenshipHi school diploma (GED)Su tially handicappedHome economicsParent educationHealth and safetyVocational educationEmployment Training Panel (ETP)Carl Perldns Vocational Education Act (VEA)Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA)Greater Avenues for Indvendence (GAIN)Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)ApprenticeshipVocational rehabilitationBilingual Education Act

Participants in the integated data system will evolve overtime. Initially, the ten adult education program azus, ESLprograms and possibly the ETP are expected to be the core ofthe data system.

ls

P I

EMERGING CALIFORNIA MODEL

The interaction between the learner's component(EduCard,,,), community information services component, andthe provider's component is displayed in Exhibit 3. In thissense the model minors a learner's progress through an optimaladult education assessment and learning process.

This overview forms the basis of what we call the"California model" of the integrated adult education servicesmanagement services information system. This model,descriptive in nature, stresses the interaction and linkageamong human service and information managementtransactions. At the moment, it stresses the process ofinformation development and the relationship between thethree database comronents (community information system),provider information component, learner information(EduCardm).


Policy Option Paper on the Elks Card. Par 16

Exhibk 3OVERVIEW OF COLLABORATIVE INFRASTRUCTURE FUNCTIONS

yr=and Placement area g IVraasseard Ma le Daleribbig

=ationCleocks

Sank=smadientMEW 11, bigiartRaked by On or MaksRaid tom &mid Poem

4Interview Loner andCollect In-take Information:

Dos as Vie (DO% aw=.0.owl PawnsUllarao

Os* ad Ram far VI*lassolarl IladtpaumfAteartIldemiaml Ashlar

Conduct, Update or ReviewAmeasment Skills andAptitude=

Wow Pas Biacesional antra sadTam 3camsCameo Nes Amessmit (Da& Ea.VociK Other)

Review sad Select Program:Spacity liduastiml GoalsSpas* Lamm/ Cemisairslintanam awe. IAM4011,Malbad, Om Sapp an Swim)DuesbIij far hamarsad &MonDataamkar Paws OpamiepReview ..1 IvAcusa OptimaWm the Ina Apprapaisse flownfar Lamm

4Referral and Pre-Registradoa:

Refold *harm (Bthamien sodThiel% Asssmaa.Social Swim. Bociajassea)Eloceasia Prolasisuatian

4

Diskilmis EduCardsnieelSelected Laiwne. Groups

12=Ts' altjaigratedDad Boma

Swim Ilimodsol Ramis bumPaws arl MOWNino Updomili ithaoriahos Iminkrania.

lip

die= astitiZatedData Bass

iimoemi Ambows efLowsatAMMONS LOOS (Teat balmCannalig)

Fmk, Information aboutPrograms sad Opdoes:

Plasm Calk TVs andDasaipiinPlasm Load as PanaquisiossPawn MAW, (Timp.Locasio. Wised. cam.Swport Swims)Pawn Mamma MotelsOwes Ilwalhost Opoisp

INParr elk Demlpika

z Paws Wild at PagerilllaApia OWN= (71mRs" Mead. CeOhliPmefortiss)Owes lirsiaso Opair

111'41Update EduCard andIntegrated Data Base: h.*.meemes af Ammeist sad

Camallse&Aral atagnak Dos)

km ItidAspE Diurita

Evalsateiri Programa

AcPnrinvemiertikiPati" andUpdate EduCard andIntegrated Data Base:

Plow= Partialpstioa fEnvolkasaa. d--s. kw. Paelaipain (Buolhners.Aisolooe, Campissiaa) Markt," Cmplriost)Addsvamost (adua, Teat Scans) Aabiavelawa (Oradea, Tea Scares)Lamm Satisfaction Lamar Twoldadion

Splaid Samar

Post-Program Activities: Update EdoCard andCammaelias god Amerman itaa Integrated Data Base: iPIFaleasion and ToilingEmploymeat and lamas

Peat-Popass 0 Mama-dam It Takla& Amman aCamelia& Employmea, Imams)Special bathos

sad Addevesminprialtacted"Use at Program

Meet ibis and MartiCompliance Neals,rainoEvaluate and Pka

lip

Use at Post-Program Follow-verlatimmeet-State and

tetarre :lit al:IPS:wow

28

Policy Option Paper on the Edu Canine Page 17

In this model several sets of learner activities areconsidered the domain of the EduCardng. They include:

(1) Assessment and Placement of Learners

(a) Learner checks into information service(b) Interview learner and collect intake

information(c) Conduct, update or review assessment of

skills and aptitude(d) Review and select pug=(e) Referral and pre-registration

To implement and refine the evolving "Californiainfrastructure model," the Michigan experience is useful. Theyhave established an inter-agency framework for theirOpportunity Card and are in the stage of testing its use inselected regions.

MICHIGAN OPPORTUNITY CARD

Current efforts in the State of Michigan offer the best guideto a major statewide effort to invigorate and create a humanresource investment system. Research showed that the statewas faced with serious labor force problems.n With pressureand initiative from the private sector and the leadership of theGovernor, Michigan has embarked on an extensive campaignto create an "efficient, coherent and user friendly job trainingsystem."15

In 1988, the Governor's Council on Human Investment'sAdult Literacy Task Force recommended an action plan toaddress the skills gap crisis. The new skills developmentsystem is based on five principles. The training and educationsystem must:13

be learner driven and learner sensitiveemphasize shared responsibility of the stakeholdersempower individuals to invest in themselvesbe learner-friendlybe accountable

17 Countdown 2000: Mkhigon's Action Plan for Competitive Workforce, Governor's Council on Human Investment, AdultLiteracy Task Force, Mardi 1988, page v.

13 Cresting a Mew Investment Sydow Report to dee Governor, lob Training Coordinating Council, March 1989, transminalletter.

17 Countdown 2000,0p. Cit., defmes Michigan's labor force needs by the year 2000 and recommendations to meet them.

FIRST EDITION August 1990 PS

Policy Option Paper on the Edu Contr. Page 18

In the Michiganmodel partici-pating providerorganizationsoperate under theconcept of afranchise. Theytake on specifiedresponsibilities aspartners in theMichigan oppor-tunity card andhuman investmentsystem.

From these piinciples came eight reconmiendadons ofwhich two are especially important to this paper.*

(1) Simplify access to all adult training andoducadonal services, focusing on a commonsystem so that all citizens can participate in thedevelopment and management of their own rid!'enhancement plan.

(2) Develop a sldlls assessment tool for measuringMichigan's work readiness goal and definition touse with each participant in all training andeducational . "" The assessment will beused in de .g incoming skill levels (and themix of services required), progress towardcompletion, and in measuring effectiveness ofprograms.

Central to the Michigan system are (1) the " " ofhuman service delivery progxams, (2) a statewideservices system, and (3) an MIS which features the use of alearner's individual smart credit card (the Opportunity Card) tomaintain his or her service information.

In the Michigan model participating pmida organizationsoperate under the concept of a franchise. They take onspecified responsibilities as partnen in theopportunity card and human investmentstakeholder concept in the California adult servicedelivery network will draw on features of the franchise model.

The Opportunity Card will be used by participants toaccomplish the following:

assess their skillsdevelop a personal skill enhancement planlearn about training and education services,including job trends and salariesreceive .0b placement assistancestore and hold a resume on their card for easyaccess and updatesreceive tuition assistance

Targeted users of the card include graduating high schoolseniors, Michigan Youth Corps participants, and workers wholose their jobs due to plant closures and layoffs.22

"ibid., pages v-vi.

21 "Franchise Standards - Issues and Options: A Woritgroup Report to the Michigan Human Investment Fund Board,"October 1988, especially pages 9-16.

22 "Michigan °maturity Card," Governor lames I. Blanchard's 1989 State of the State Message, February 7. / 989.

FIRST EDITION August IWO

Policy Option Paper on the EdaCw.da, Paie 19

The model has been developed and tested using a prototypecard. Its implementation will begin at the two county beta testsites in Kalamazoo and St. Joseph counties in the spring of1990, with the actual testing to begin in the fain

The Opportunity Card will use the integrated circuit cardtechnology. Information will be input to and read from thecard via card readers serving as peripheral devices to the localmicrocomputen.based information system. The integratedcircuit chip being used will hold about 2000 characters ofinformation. Its current cost is about $12.00.34

Planning Issues

The EduCardn, is viewed as one component in anintegrated data wstem. Its purpose is to facilitate data entryand accuracy aM to entitle the user to shop for education andtraining services in a local region or statewide. Thisempowerment and the creation of a cross agency data systemhave major implications for California's design and delivery ofbasic skills education and training services.

Information from the adult education and basic skills cardwill be stored in a learner database. This database can bedistributed among community information services and localproviders as well as being centralized, probably with the AdultEducation Institute during the design phase. This masterdatabase will provide the means to monitor service deliveryand begin to set realistic standards for performancemeasurement.

It is expected that the learner based information willinclude:25

the unique identifieruprevious educational recordsrelevant assessment informationdemographic and program eligibility informationreferral and learner goals (plan) informationeducation, training, and employment servicesreceivedsupportive services received

23 Phan converution with Allen Gandy, Coordinator, Special nujects and Services, Kalamazoo Valley Community College,Kalamazoo, Michigan.

24nis25 These data elemenu are considered as prototype to be termed in law design stages.

26 The near future use of a completely unique identifier like a signature or fingerprint is optimal because then one does not hsve torely on a social security nurnber or number code which can be forgouen or accessed by other usets.


Policy Option Paper on the pluCardn, Page 20

There is asubstantial history,learning and set ofpolicies regardingaccess to studentinformation.There are stan-dard procedures tocontrol levels ofaccess to computerbased information.

cirnan: posa=pation testing information

a resume of learning related accomplishments

In order to begin the design and testing of the EduCardu, anumber of policy decisions must be considezed to guide theprocess. These policy decision mess include:

(1) Protection of Personal Privacy(2) Selection of Technology(3) Participations of Learners(4) Liability Issues(5) Standards for Learner Plans

This section identifies the central issues as options anddiscusses them.

Statutory, ethical and practical requirements dictate thatlearner privacy be insured by conutilhn4 access to personalinformation, making the information available to the lamerupon request and using the cards encryption features. Theseprivacy issues need to be addressed.

The smart card concept presupposes the creation of anintegrated adult education and basic sidlb training system. Itwill enable easy access to services and the tracking of servicesdelivered and their outcomes. It presupposes an aggressiveoutreach commitment to reduce illiteracy and the lack of basicskills. In this context the EduCardn, recommendation is arecommendation to begin to build a comprehensive adulteducation and basic *ills training system that crosses programand sponsoring agency boundaries.

Before addressing other policy and design issues, theInterim Steering Committee should pay particular attention toissues related to mandating precise and detailed policies andprocedures protecting the privacy of learner information.

While this technically is not necessary, the fact that theEduCard,,, is a bold departure from current access andinformation management approaches strongly suggests thatthere should be a continued scrutiny to the protection of learnerprivacy.

There is a substantial history, learning and set of policiesregarding access to student information. There are standardprocedures to control levels of access to computer basedinformation. Finally the features of the EduCardn, itself makeprivacy and security easier.

The EduCardm addresses the program integration,information management, and performance measurementconcerns which hinder the delivery of adult education and


3 2

I

1

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardn, Pase 21

basic skills training programs. However, it has marginal utilityunless it addresses more than the adult education and non-credit education services of the California Depanment ofEducation and Chancellor's Office of the CaliforniaCommunity Colleges.

The range of stakeholders and collaborating plograms isexpected to increase maldng the EduCardrm very useful, andeventually indispensable to the conduct of collaborativeservices.

This anticipated multi-agency environment can complicatelearner privacy and information security if procedures andpolicies are not anticipated from the very start.

It is the future prospects of the EduCardn, which excitesthe possibility of its use. The premise is that it offers thelearner a friendly, cost effective approach to adult educationprogram marketing and data management of learnerinformation. As the list of stakeholders and collaboratingprograms grows, the value of the EduCardru will also.

The built in security features of the EduCardn, willimprove. Personal identifiers will be easily built into the card,making its misuse less likely.

Access to learner information is an information systemconcern. Common sense and substantial experience with theprotection of student, financial and intelligence informationcan guide these safeguards.

SELECTION OF TECILNOLOGY

Several smart card technologies are being used or justcoming on the market. It will be helpful to decide early in thedesign process which to use. The decision must address howto facilitate feasibility analysis, encourage cost analysis, andbegin to show how it works.

Initial research indicates three types of individualinformation card technology: (1) the magnetic card, (2) thesmart card, and the (3) optical magnetic card.

Magnetic Strip Card

The magnetic strip card is limited by a minimal recordingcapacity (576 to 1200 bits, or about 120 to 240 characters ofinformation), and limited security features. Current credit

3 3



The integratedcircuit (IC) cardranges from asimple memoryaccess card to amicrocomputersmart card.

cards fit this model as do AIM and =sit fare cants. Thereare about 220 million magnetic strip cards in use."'

The Integrated Circuitor "Smart" Card

The integrated circuit (IC) card ranges from a lememory access card to a microcomputer smart card.distinfuishing feature of the higher end smart card is that itacts like a coniputer, making . .,*ns based on . andprogramming regarding data. This makes the in itsadvanced form more than a portable infonnfition storagecard.), It may be subject to physical problems like warping orstatic electricity.

The smart card contains a microchip (IC) that turis it into aminiature computer. The card's memory can store che holdeessignature, picture and other pertinent Information which cannotbe changed.), Other parts of the chip can record and modify,by itself, information in its own non-volatile memory. Itmaintains security and data integrity by controlling read andwrite access authority.),

This is an infant technology and as such there will be majoradvances in the amount of information the smart card can use.Presently about 2,000 to 8,000 characters of information can bestored on a smart card. This is more than sufficient for theinitial design and testing activities.

Optical Memory Card

The optical memory card features an optical recordingmedium embedded on a plastic credit type card. This card canread alphanumeric, audio, photographs, fingerpiints andsignature. It can store far more information presently than theIC cot However, information can be written to it once only;therefore it cannot be updated. Card readers are quiteexpensive. This is likely to make the optical memory cardimpractichl for EduCardni uses.

The use of card technology comes from banking and debitaccount activities like transit fare cards. It has been used tofacilitate economic transactions making it easier to purchasegoods or use services.

Inforrnation Card Comparison. Canon Optkal Card Project, Canon U.S.A., Ind).

29 Ligon, Michel, "Sman card - Pruent and Future," Smarieard 2000. Op. CIL. paps 4-6.

29 Macaulay. David, The Way Thins Work, Houghton Mifflin Company, 19U, page 352.

39 Ugon, Op. Cit.. pages 6-9.

4


Policy Option Paper on the &hi Card. Palte 23

Several policyissues revolvearou. id the matterof learnerparticipation.What happens topersons who donot want to use theEduCard,?

There are two iseues linked to the uses of this technologysecurity and information needs. Cost consideradotis are also afactor bet are complicated by the scale of use of thetechnology. The magnedc and smart cards are moreexpensive, but the read-write devices are less expensive thanwith the optical magnetic card.

Both the smart IC card and the optical , cards geextremely sec= in that they can use encry identifiers andeventually user recognition techniques like voice, sipatz-",photo, fmgerprint or possibly eye scan identification.

The smart card approach suggests information demands inexcess of that available to the current magnetic cudtechnology. The suggested list of EduCardn, data *menus'probably could require upwards of 500 characters ofinformation with the list likely to increase over time.

The use of a general identity card, like a smart driver'slicense or a card that combines a range of public service andcommercial functions has many attractive features. It istechnically feasible for public service entitlements and userdemographics and identification information to be merged withgeneral purpose banking or financial institution type cards.Likewise medical inforination, next of kin, and similar healthand safety information can be combined onto a general purposecard. These considerations, which presently may betechnically difficult and objectionable for policy, ethical orpersonal reasons, should not dominate the discussions.

PARTICIPATION OF LEARNERS

A policy decision should be made on whether learnerparticipation is mandatory or voluntary.

The utility of the EduCardn, is seizing the attention ofadult learners and removing barriers to ptcAtt.ion inavailable education and basic skills re of theagency or funding source. Users mirs't°fIe'realngat cum'ard.° has animportant value (real and symbolic) and that its use gives thema kind of special status or benefit.

Several ?olicy issues revolve around the matter of learnerparticipation. What happens to persons who do not want to usethe EduCardni? Will they still receive services? How will theservices differ? These concerns also have system designimplications.

31 The policy option paper on the Integrated Adult Education Data System" suggests prototype data eiemenu u a guide to futureplanning and design.


Policy Option Paper on the Edu Caring Pas. 24

Liability andfinancial issues forservice providersare inherent in theuse of theEduCareln, and theintegration ofservice programs.

The use of the EduCarda must be voluntary. Proceduresfor assigning unique learner ID codes should be the same forall participating learners and the options made clear at the pointof issuing the card.

Entitlement to receive services is determined by economicand other need-based aheria. An individual cannot be denieda service because be or she does not want to use a card whichmay present real fears (immigrants) or symbolic (big brother)concerns whether founded or beseless.

Learners must be encouraged to utilize the EduCardagralhaving the bencfits u pat of themarketing strategy. A which makes the cadfree, but charges the leamer cost of the card plus data inputcosts if he or she later on wants to use the card, seemsreasonable.

The access policy should not change over time. Policieswhich decide whether to grandfather in (do not charge) learnerswho initially did not select to use the EduCardni or similarconsiderations can be established later.

LIABILITY ISSUES

Early attention should be paid to the likely liability andfinancial issues raised by the Etheard and the data system.

Liability and financial issues for service providers areinherent in the use of the EduCardTm and the integration ofservice programs. Chief among them are:

eligibility determination and disallowed costsservice payments and reimbursementsEduCardn, ownership and costsupdating card informationlearner's responsibilities

Other financial and liability concerns will be identified in thecourse of implementing the integrated system.32

Organizational arrangements in human service deliveryhave been made on the basis of program, contractual or referralbasis. An integrated delivery system with an implicit set offree core services poses new cost sharing, allocation, and risksassociated with the learner transition through the deliverysystem.

32 We have the benefit of a substantial mount of wott pesfonned on these issues by a Mithigan study group on liability andfmancial standards. See "liability Issues and OF. ions," a Workgroup Repon of the Michipn Human Investment Fund Bomd,October 198S.


Policy Option Paper on the Edu Caring Pate 25

Central tothe EduCard,,,concept is thecreation of auniform servicedelivery planbased uponassessment andcounselingoutcomes.

The potential liability issues should continue to be refinedduring the design and tesdng phase (1990-1M). Dying thetestinp phase, we expect that some Ichd ofworking group of stak4den will study these concerns. Thislocal perspective will be the most beneficial in resolving theassociated hsues.

The liability and financial issues will be largely identifiedand addressed during the EduCardym testing phase. Tbey areadministrative in nature. The stakeholders should haveconsiderable say in how these issues are resolved, =Vyingthat the resultant policies will have to be uniform statewide.

STANDARDS FOR LEARNER PLANS

For the EduCardm to be effecdve, common intake andassessment information should be developed on all learners.This requires a set of standards for learner plans which have adefmed process, includes assessmen: tools that are comparable,and are broad enough to serve all the prospective learners.

Central to the EduCareln, concept is the creation of aunifolm service delivery plan based upon assessment andcounseling outcomes. This presumes stakeholder agreementon the criteria for plan development. The policy issue is whenand how to develop these standards.

An essential part of reducing barriers to participation inadult education and basic skills training is to standardize theassessment and testing approaches. This gives all learnersequal access to the range of learning choices. This may notmean that all stakeholders will use the same instruments andmethods, but that (1) the generst: criteria and steps are similar,and (2) that there is a crewalk (comparability) among theassessment tools.

It may be very prudent to adopt a common assessmentprocess which will be used by all stakeholders and by allcommunity adult education infotmation centers. Probably themost common model is the three stage vocational assessmentprocess for disadvantaged students.= This process consists ofa set of formal and informal vocational assessment proceduresto (1) identify personal-social traits and needs; (2) comparecurrent competencies and skill levels; and (3) recommendlearning options, based on assessment results, matching skilllevels, learning program options and job requirements.

"A Vocational Assessment Model for Students Served by Edueadoul end Joh Train* Agenties.Woit Group ao VocationslAssessman, Specialized Programs Brandt, California Department of Education, April 1986. This model is refined mWoolley. Vanand Janice Lune, "Developing An Occupational Curriculum for Seconder)! Level Educationally Handicapped Youth Through theVocational Assessment Process," a Vocational Education Act Title 11 Grant, July 1, 198L

!I 7


Policy Option Paper on the EduCard. Page 26

It is standard for many education and training serviceproviders to use diffetent planning and assessment proceduresand tools to Ode leaner development. These tools may bemandated (CMAS, TABE, GATB) or self selected.

The effort to develop a standard career/vocationalassessment approach was the outipowth of a CaliforniaDepartment of Education goal so provide students enteeing theworkforce after high school with the basic educational and0 CCUI) WWI d COMpe tei I IC kW for meaningfid employment orpostsecondary education.34 'Their approach was to defineassessment as the information needed to help create anindividual learning plan based on ranges of clientcharacteristics and the provider's delivery system.

This work group, formed in 1985, developed a"comprehensive" assessment model for learners served byeducation and job training agencies. Referred to as the"ctuter/vocational" model, it provides the framework forlearner assessment and the latitude to utilize a range of actualtesting and assessment tools.

The standardization of the staged appmach to termingassessment is a important outcome. The emphasis is as muchon the process of assessment as it is on the tools.

Adopting a standardized assessment approach is veryimportant to removing barriers to learner participation In thefull range of adult education and basic sltills training offerings.Refinement of this process model over time and the actualinstruments, tools and methods used are very important.

A separate options paper addressing "Quality Standardsand Performance Measures" covers the actual commonlydefined and agreed upon criteria for determining learner andprogram performance. Our role is to propose that thecareer/vocational assessment model be the organizing contextfor inclusion of actual performance measures. Our interest isbeginning to adopt a flexible standard.

The movement towards more performance basedassessment is due in part to the introduction of computer based,multimedia and other forms of nontraditional instruction whichare not wholly amendable to ADA type =awes. Over timewe can expect to have far better data on learner performanceamong the types of interventions as well as among theprovid.ers. This presupposes that the assessment tools andstrategies are reasonably consistent and that we can comparelearner's skills and abilities among the assessment devicesused.

34 Ibid, page iv.

!I 8


Policy Option Paper on the &is Card,,, Page 27

New technologieswill impact andmake easier theimplementation ofthe EduCardrm.

35 Smart card 2000, Op. Cit.

likewise, with the advent of an integrated data system wecan develop better data on learning styles, norms fa learningexpectations, and nonns for learner and provider performance.

The role of the Edst Cantos is to pennit these learner plansand assessment data to easily move with the learner anywherewithin the state, and not necessarily require retesting andassessment in the proem However, thisstandardization of the process andassessment tools.

the

New Developments and Considerations

The increased public policy interest in using private sectorapproaches to aspects of human resource development and amore marketplace method of promoting user involvement hasstimulated ideas like the EduCardm.

NEW TECHNOLOGIES

The new technologies which will impact and make easierthe implementation of the EduCardni and an integrated datasystem are aspects of computer and integrated circuit chiptechnology. Specifically they include computers, smart cards,and software:

Computer hardware will be a key element in the EduCardsystem. Key developments concerning computers are:

Improved speed and graphics capability

Ability to access and use digital images

Improved capacities to store informationinexpensively

The ability to use voice commands in machinecommunications

The emerging integrated circuit chip technologies aredescribed in this paper. Their evolution will lead to:

Low cost improvements in integrated circuit cardmemory

Wider acceptance of magnetic and integratedcircuit card type technology35


Policy Option Paper on the EduCardn, Par 2a

The EduCardn, will be driven by software that can read,write and utilize the learner information in a telmionaldatabase. Changes which appear eminent are:

The increased use of object oriented programmingmaking software modification less expensive

The increased use of graphic interfaces, reducingtraining time and simplifying data entry, editingand queries

Artificial intelligence advances, especially insYstem" software will make it very to

make machine based judgments

Mgreligibilityand entitlements. This

paraprofessional personnel to serve as theintake persons and check eligibility. Routineeligibility checking, subject to verification, can behandled by the expert system software, and thenon-routine cases can be certified by professionalpersonnel.%

CHANGING SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC NEEDS

The transition to a lifelong learning society, driven byeconomic need and technological advances, is chronicled in theprevious research leading to the "Strategic Plan for AdultEducation". This analysis stresses the need to ovavome agrowing "skill gap":

Economic and technological change is increasingthe skill requirements of work and daily life.

California faces serious skills deficiencies in anincreasingly global economy.

The changing workforce with at least one estimatethat 15 percent (3 1 million persons) of theCalifornia population hes literacy performancedeficiencies.

Combine the skills gap problems, the level of schooldropouts, and the changing demographics in California, and wehave the need to seriously strengthen the delivery of adulteducation and basic skills training.37

36 Coursey, David, "New tech not just acronyms; offer competitive advaraaps", MIS Week, November 13, 1989, page SS.

37 These data and trends are dearly set foch in the Ca4forosta Sisk Max fer Adak Bask Edaealion, Adult Education Unk,Division of Youth, Adult, and Alternative Educational Savioes, California Dvimnent of &Motion, hum 9, 1989.



An overall datasystem that linkscollaboratingprograms, withoutimposing undueburdens onproviders, isneeded.

Key Findings of Literature Review

The literature review at..1 background research examines(1) the models for the EduCard. (2) the noun of the cardtechnology, (3) current uses and projected uses.

EduCwdrif Models. There are several experiments whichwill give guidana for the EduCardw with the MichiganOpportunity Card serving as the initial model. Its developmentin California is likely to take a different approach, but will relyconsiderably on their experienceslind learnings.

How the Card Works. The smart card technology hasthree variations which are discussed. The integrated circuitsmart type card receives the most attention.

°went and Future Uses. Current and future uses of thesmart card technology are based on demands for being able toread and write more information to and from a mobile credit ordebit type card. The USDA experiments which enable foodstamp and other welfare recipients to access cash or foodentitlements directly and their recently smart card feasibilityinterest should be watched with interem as should the MichiganOpportunity Card development.

The current adult education data system needs to beupgraded to reflect persons served, actual learning outcomesand performance, and learner demographics. Presently there isno inter-agency data system, other than those that are programspecific. An overall data system that links collaboratingprograms, without imposing undue burdens on providers, isnef ded if the broader concept of learner access to services isimplemented. The likely programs and stakeholder agenciesare identified.

41


I.

1

1

I.

IS

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardm Page 30

Chapter 3

Proposals toImplement Design and Testingof EduCardm,

Five proposed policy options drive the initial design of the EduCart4and set the stage for refining its use.

This chapter identifies proposals for initial planningdecisions. These sals should be evaluated againstcommon criteria that prrge°ct their likely usefulness and value tothe evolving adult education and basic skills delivery system.This section outlines the criteria to evaluate the proposals andexamines each proposal against the descriptive criteria. Eachproposal is examined in terms of its likely positive andnegative impacts.

Criteria for Evaluation of Proposals

The criteria for evaluating the options are the same fordata system related options papers. These criteria are:

(1) Improve Learaer Access(2) Stakeholder Acceptability(3) Ease of Use(4) Maintain Learner Privacy(5) Cost Effectiveness(6) Improve Accountability

While f is some implied overlap among the criterion,they represe,., .ne critical features that begin to determine theexact nature of the EduCard,,,, and its uses. Exhibit 4 outlinesthe criterion and their basic features.


Policy Option Paper on the EduCard,. Page 31

Exhibit 4CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING THE

PROPOSALS

IMPROVE LEARNER ACCESSEase Auesunent and ReferralReduce PaperworkIncrease Program Choices

STAKEHOLDER ACCEPTABILITYMinimize Administrative BurdenReduce PaperworkImprove Performance Measurement

EASE OF USEMinimal Staff Training and RetrainingAutomated Electronic ReportingBuilt-In Security

COST EFFECTIVENESSMinimize Information System and Data Collection CostsMinimize Hardware and Software Costs

IMPROVE ACCOUNTABILITYImprove Performance MeasurementStandardize Data CollectionReduce Analysis Costs

These five criterion will guide the development of i-ndanalysis of initial planning proposals.

The Pros and Cons of Proposals

This section discusses the pros and cons of five proposals.These proposals deal with the following issues:

(1) Learner Privacy

(2) Which Type of Technology to Pursue

(3) EduCarclim Use

(4) Liability and Financial Issues

(5) Standards for Assessment

The previous chapter identified these five basic issues.They will drive the continued design and testing of theEduCardTm.

4 3

FAR ST EDITION August 1990

1

I.1

1

II1

I1

10II1

I

1

I

I.I

1


Learner privacyis a paramountissue. P isrecommended thatsignificantcommitment begiven to ensuringthat personalinformation not bemisused.

PROTECT LEARNER PRIVACY

Learner privacy is a paramount issue. It is recommendedthat significant commitment be given to ensuring that personalinformation not be misused.

,

Nature and Value of Positive Impacts

The value of the EduCardn, as a symbol for consumesdriven service delivery and as an inexpensive tool for initiatingand maintaining learner information has been discussed. Asdescribed in Exhibit 3, the learner is tApected to go through aseries of decision steps and activitits in the course of receivinglearning services. At each important point information will becollected. This information collection can be substantiallyautomated, with the exception of new information beingwritten to the EduCardm,. These decision points, dependingupon the collaborating stakeholder agencies, are likely toinclude:

outreachinitial intakeassessmententitlement eligibilityspecial *.esting, if requiredreferralplanreceipt of supportive servicesadult education and basic skills servicespre and post services testing

4 4


Policy Option Paper on the EduCardr. Page 33

employment preparationjob placementtraining and retraining

Having the capacity to readily collect and store informationat each step will provide significant advances in our ability todesign strategies to recruit and retain the hard to serve, and todevelop a reliable database of expected performance levelsgiven variations in types of programs, modes of instruction,and support service demands.

It will minimize repetitive administrative data collectionand can be utilized for attendance as well as performanceinformation. It will streamline program audit and compliancerecord keeping and reduce administrative burdens, whileyielding organized, quality information on the learners beingserved, and (logically) therefore those not being served. Thesedata for adult education are difficult to obtain routinely.

The EduCarclm, will facilitate identifying program repeatersand program cheaters. While this is not a primary function,depending on the unique identifiers used, the learner who isineligible for particular program services can be identified.

The need for personal and summary learner information isprimarily at the aggregate or characteristic (sex, age, race)level. Assigning a personal identification number (PIN) as asurrogate for the person is the best protection. Access to PINidentities can be controlled. For example if a program staffperson can only access an individual by name, they can berestricted to only a limited range of learner information. TheCalifornia Community Colleges use the social security numberas the PIN. New technologies offer some exciting alternatives.

Costs of Operation and Negative Impacts

The costs associated with the EduCardn, and learnersecurity are:

1. The card distribution and its replacement

2. Access to card readers and of the learner database

3. Privacy features as a part of software anddevelopmental costs

5. Data transmission

6. nata entry and management

Very rough calculations suggest that these costs per learnerover three years38 will be no more than $20 with the cost

38 Three years is used as the length of um to amortize the costs of hardware, software and trauung.

4 5


1

I.1

1

1

1

1

I.

1

I.


Of the learnerowned access andstorage media nowavailable, theintegrated circuitcard appears tobe the mostpromising.

decreasing as the cost of the EduCardTh drops from around$12.00 to $3.00.39 Policies regarding EduCardn, replacementwhen lost can change this.

The privacy requirements will not change these costs to anydegree. They should be considered as part of the designspecifications and calculations of these more automated costscompared with more traditional data collection should bemade.

Minor negative privacy impacts revolve around the extentand manner to which the learner will use the card over time.As in any experimental or demonstration setting, these impactsmay decrease as the approach to data management becomesmore accepted. However, there is a slight possibility of themisuse of the cards. Again newer personal identifiertechnologies like signatures, fingerprint, eye scans may not beunthinkable in the near future.

USE CIRCUIT CARD TECHNOLOGY

Of the learner owned access and storage media nowavailable, the integrated circuit card appears to be the mostpromising.


The costs, utility and security of using integrated circuitcards are as follows:

Cost. The IC card is the most versatile of the threememory card technologies we have identified. Over time thecosts per character of information will fall and the amount of

39 The costs of these cards, depending on the technological advances, will decrease with increased volume. This plus the rapidincrease in available memory makes it hard to estimate their cost. Current costs, according to Allen Gandy, are about S12 for 16K bus(2000 characters) of available memory.


AC


Use of theEduCardTM shouldbe a right andopportunity, not arequirement.

useable information will grow. The cost of the peripheral cardreader is currently reasonable and will decrease in cost.

Utility. The IC card is still not in widespread use.However, its potential memory capacity, the add on featureslike the calculator and multifunction possibilities makes it themost useful of the three alternatives.

Security. The encryption features and emerging userrecognition abilities makes the IC card more sect= thancurrent ATM type cards.

Nature and Value of Negative Impacts

The nature and imponance of negative impacts associatedwith integrated circuit cards are as follows:

Accidental Damage. One resource suggests that the ICcards are vulnerable to accidental static electricity damage andwarping. These are matters for further research.

Accidental Loss. All cards, regardless of their memoryfeatures and capacities, are subject to loss. The most importantthing is that the card replacement, regardless of who bears thecost, is not expensive. Likewise, the ability to access and inputreplacement and new learner information must bn simple andpossible from remote locations. Again this is not a function ofcard type but of system design.

OPTIONAL PARTICIPATION

Use of the EduCardn, should be a right and opportunity,not a requirement. The EduCardn should be readily available,but its use should be voluntary.

ZI 7


I.1

10

1

I.1

Policy Option Paper on the EduCarA Page 36

Involvement oflocal stakeholdersis critical to thesuccessful designof the EduCardTM.


Individuals cannot be excluded from a program servicebecause they will not use the EduCarA. They can be giveninducements to use it, and can reaionably be expected to pay iflater on they determine the advantages and wish one. Themajor positive impact is to indicate that the card is a usefultool; but that because it is not required, it is a tool that will notbe misused. Its use should be treated matter of factly with theunderstanding the many learners have entitlements to basicskills learning and that their dislike or distrust of theEduCarA cannot preclude access.


Making use of the EduCard, optional increases datacollection costs and will result in the likely loss of somelearner data.

The learner and the provider will share in the additionalburden of two data collection measures. It will add to theadministrative burden, but may be less, than if there was noEduCarA.

INVOLVE STAKEHOLDERS


The introduction of the EduCarA and other strategicrecommendations does not happen in a vacuum. Legislative,policy and program changes will continue to occur. Theparticipation of the stakeholders, especially in the 1990-1993design and testing phase is important to determining realisticresponses to liability and financial issues associated with theuse of the EduCardm.

4 8



The EduCardm,should be designedto function withina comprehensiveand explicitassessment andplacement process.

It will be difficult, in spite of the Michigan experiences, toidentify the policy and procedural issues. Further, theparticipating stakeholders should not be presented with policyfait accompli without their considered advice.


It is less time consuming to propose policies andprocedures and allow time for providers and other interestedparties to reply.

ADOPT CAREER ASSESSMENT MODEL

The EduCardn, should be designed to function within acomprehensive and explicit assessment and placement process.

Recommendation 7 , Quality Standards and PerformanceMeasures, seeks to produce a uniform, comparable approach tolearner assessment and learner achievement. It will permit theEduCardm and th e. community information services to provideprospective learner and the providers with quantitativeinformation on provider services and achievements withdifferent types of learners.

This paper does not specify this assessment model.However, it does recommend the shell or process within whichthese measures, in part, can fit (See Exhibit 5).

The term "career" addresses assessments focused on thelearner's career development process. The first stage ispreliminary screening using primarily career and vocationalinterest inventories and paper-pencil aptitude tests.


II.1

1

1

1

I1

1

101

1

1

I1

II.1

I

Policy Option Paper on the EduCardi. Page 38

Exhibit 5PROPOSED EDUCARDT.

THREE STAGE PROCESS

Stage 1: Prtliminary Screening

Stage 2: Initial Agency Screening

Part A Prevocational Assessment

Part B - Basic Vocational Aptitude

State 3: Vocational Exploration and Work Sampling

Stage I screening can be integrated into career guidanceclasses or workshops. The information helps learners in careerdecision making with counselors or advisors helping examinethe realism of these decisions. An ideal plan includes locallabor market implications, education and training options and aproposed sequence of learning needed to reach designatedgoals.

Stage II addresses formal and informal assessmenttechniques used to screen learners into job training orplacement programs like vocational education, ROP, JTPA,and GAIN. The targeted learners are persons identified inStage I as not being ready for enrollment or placement. Theseassessments include interviews, structured observations,interest inventories and problem solving vocational aptitudetests.

Stage Ill is work sampling and vocational exploration forpersons who are still shown to be not ready for enrollment orplacement in learning or employment. These assessments aremore rigorous job task and work performance in nature.s


The use of EduCardr. presumes cross agency standards inassessment and terminology. Cross agency data must beamenable to comparison, though them is no need for norpossibility of completely uniform procedures.

The three stage career assessment model is generallyaccepted by the potential range of education and basic skillsstakeholders. It provides a process and structure for vocationalassessment and plan preparation, but leaves room for theinclusion of new and more refined assessment and qualitystandards.




Adopting a broadly defined process can be said to precludethe adoption of more rigorous assessment and testingstandards.

CROSS-MATRIX ANALYSIS ANDDISCUSSION

There are five initial policy planning proposals. They are:

Pay Strict Attention to Learner Privacy

Use the Integrated Circuit Technology

Make Use EduCardffi Voluntary

Involve Stakeholders in Liability and FinancialPolicy Decisions

Standardize the Assessment and Testing ProcessUsing the Career Assessment Model

It is expected that this paper will effect other key policyissues to be included in preparation for the next document.The dynamic link between the integrated adult education datasystem, the community information services, and theEduCardn,, cannot be stressed enough.

Exhibit 6 compares the recommended options against thesix evaluation criteria. Readers are urged to reassess theserecommended in light of the evaluation criteria or identifyother useful criteria.


10

1

1

I.

10

1


Exhibit 6

R.LUSTRATIVE CROSS-MATRIX COMPARLSON OFRECOMMENDED OPTIONS VIA COMMON CRITERIA

Criteria: Options:Improve !baker lisoe of Mem& Cat WealsIonise bok _ ma: korner orieciive: somas.wow weep miter abolity:

(1) Ensure Learner Privacy

(2) Utilize the IntegratedCircuit (IC) Card Technology

(3) Have EduCardn, Use Be Voluntuy

(4) Involve Stakeholders in Liabilityand Finance Decisions

(5) Use Career Assessment. Model forCross-Agency Standards

11111 111111 11111

111111

11111 NM

Degree of Impact; HiSh 1111 Medium Low

NOTE: Assessments within each criteria should also include negative impacts (e.g. moderatenegative impact and strong negative impact).

5 2


Policy Option Paper on the EduCardm, Page 41

Mi 41IAdvisory Recommendations

The preceding proposals have been reviewed by the Dataand Information Subcommitux of the Interim SteeringCommittee.0 Based on this review, a number of additions,clarifications and changes have been made to staff proposals.One proposal has been added and one proposal has beenmoved to another policy options paper. The following are thestaff and subcommittee recommendations.

ACTION ON PROPOSAL 1(New Proposal)

Adopt New Proposal 1. This new proposal identifies theEduCard r. as serving multiple agencies across the state withthe possibility of local additions to the contents of the card.

"!s:s4

se

t4.

:

k.:1?

S' k'

40 Members of this subcommiuee in alphalmical order are: Charles Carlson, Dean of Instniction, Bakersfield College; RonaldGristock, Vice President, Community Affairs, Wells Fargo Bank, San Francisco; Thomas Johnson, Assistant Superintendent,Hacienda La Puente Unified School District, La Puente; Henry Page, Principal, Palo Alto Adult School; Dick Ranes, Unit Manager,IBM, Costa Mesa; Frances Ruiz, ESL Teacher, Corona-Norco Adult School; Prany Sananikone, Assistant Director, United CambodianCommunity, Inc., Long Beach; and Gary, Strong, State Libranan, California State Library, Sacramento.


Policy Option Paper on the EduCard,, Page 42

ACTION ON PRCnOSAL 2(Originally Proposal 1)

Accept Proposal 2 (as revised). Revise Proposal 2 to read asfollows:

ACTION ON PROPOSAL 3(Originally Proposal 2)

Accept Proposal 3 (with minor revisions as indicated inbrackets) for short term. Based on subsequent feasibilitystudies, specific pros and cons and technical capabilities of"smart card technology," especially privacy ali: securitycapabilities, should be added to the propvsal.

5 4


A '`'.:kr Z: \ :' ',":-.,,,',Mt. ,, -4- - z ,..' ---. s -'e - ' .*:,,:-,, .-4, ,,,,:,ckk. N, , 5, ,,,,,%; .S., ,. ", .. , *A-a ......i - \s` ,,,.: ' Ac`A,..'":....,,.\..,',.tt .,:;., \ ::`,, ..., , 1 / I I ' ' ' '*,' s '''' usik"''} ',, \

..` 's . \:44tric(1.1iii e 6''. i,'. 1::, is >s.,1 ..5's 0),V q t 49k, r A >

':-:...z,," ... V,...1.. ',..."; '

'''''t ::,* : ,.400.....,

-.,P I .:*ir''''s '; '':, .;,`, :. ....

.t. ,,e\ 4 ,

,,t,,, .01. -,, ,-,' )1 :N-,z.v., ,

- .AVe;,;';';',.:',.. ..,,, :, t,, --,,1/1, ,:. ,z.5,,l ,5,'

,t r ' '`

..;'i ,

.. eirt,....., 4e tot,. `4,c's.' ,)::a'. a' , ,,i .4aa; 4.1.0"sss,..,4,,,,,, a .

.f.x. I e I'. ,c...k,' ' ' ' s''''. '

`,. , ia.4,t1,..,,a"' ....

. t .

1 I S

I.

I

.atttcaL.,,V4:'40,x11, t,L4."

"I

;2." 1W$,"

"01tk S:

' 46 \rtrA):,ii,?;T',,,

:::314

T.

t

A

I \\*4A.WA T'IV44 NY7'xtct ..4\44.2 k."1..... * I 411

s'Ale,"qt,

1 t, 1 141I f 44.:41 f ',to . t

tj 1,f4 tes:: Ye .1 a c t

I I, .\ tan et.'s.

. ' S. ' . 6

..

II 555 .

0 0

Policy Option Paper on the EduCard., Page 44

110

Chapter 4

Conclusions and Future ActionsThese policy proposals and the upcoming feasibility analysis will

enhance the development of the EduCard r. and elaborate the links oftomorrow's adult education information infrastructure.

This paper addresses fundamental policy issues that willguide the development of the EduCardTm model. The processfor developing, reviewing and enacting-tice strategies and shortterm policies will have four reoccurring steps in which policyoptions and proposals are developed, reviewed by agencyheads for their acceptability, and then adjusted until they areacceptable to the heads of collaborating agencies.

The further development and analysis of the recommendedEduCardn, issues and options will be performed by the AdultEducation Institute for Research and Planning under theguidance of the Interim Steering Committee and itssubcommiuees. The five proposals presented in this paper willbe reviewed, revised and analyzed furthcr during the feasibilityanalysis to gain clarity, acceptance to basic skills agencies, thebusiness community, learners' groups and other stakeholder.).

Any policy recommendations of the Interim SteeringCommittee will need to be reviewed by State Superintendent ofPublic Instruction, Bill Honig, and California CommunityCollege Chancellor, David Mertes, as well as heads of otherparticipating agencies. The Institute staff and consultants willwork under the guidance of the Interim Steering Committee toreconcile the requirements, concerns and differences ofparticipating agencies.

This review and discussion process is designed as aprogressive cycle of public comment and dialogue amongagency heads, Steering Committee Members and Institutepersonnel.

The time period for this feasibility analysis is about fourmonths. The pace quickens--but crucial decisions are made.


document resume ce 055 775 author porter, dennis title … · ed 323 380 ce 055 775 author porter,...

Documents