This study examines the literacies taught and valued by three major stakeholder groups within an innovative welfare-to-work/adult basic education (ABE) program in the northeastern United States. The program, which I call Women for Change, is examined from the perspective of the program participants (a group of eight women on TANF who are mandated to attend), program staff (four social workers affiliated with a local university and one veteran adult basic educator), and the organization that provides funding for the program. Using data collected from one-on-one interviews, participant observation, and primary documentation used within the program, this case study reveals substantive conflict in the primary literacy-learning goals held by each of the stakeholder groups: The program funders want participants to find paid work; participants desire to complete their GED certification and hope to meet additional interpersonal goals, such as learning to communicate more effectively; and program staff want to help participants develop self-esteem and meet other emotional goals. These disparate goals—and each stakeholder group’s dedication to its particular objectives—create conflict within the class sessions, producing a program that wasn't as efficient at meeting any particular goal. Based on these data, the present study makes three overarching arguments. First, literacy-learning programs—particularly those that work with adults—should solicit and aim to incorporate at least some of the goals and learning objectives sought and valued bylearners. Second, adult literacy educators, especially those who work with ABE and college-level writing students, must be prepared to help writers cope with the emotional components of the literacy learning process, particularly by connecting them with counseling professionals when appropriate. Finally, the connection between writing/literacy learning and emotion suggests that a more capacious understanding of literacy is necessary. James Paul Gee’s notion of Discourse helps us begin to theorize this broader understanding, but ultimately I argue that we must go farther than Discourse to develop an “integrative literacies” model that more robustly accounts for the relationship between literacy, identity, and histories of trauma. / English
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TEMPLE/oai:scholarshare.temple.edu:20.500.12613/3840 |
| Date | January 2017 |
| Creators | Witt, Ryan Patrick |
| Contributors | Goldblatt, Eli, Wells, Susan, 1947-, Brooks, Wanda M., 1969-, Estrem, Heidi |
| Publisher | Temple University. Libraries |
| Source Sets | Temple University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis/Dissertation, Text |
| Format | 246 pages |
| Rights | IN COPYRIGHT- This Rights Statement can be used for an Item that is in copyright. Using this statement implies that the organization making this Item available has determined that the Item is in copyright and either is the rights-holder, has obtained permission from the rights-holder(s) to make their Work(s) available, or makes the Item available under an exception or limitation to copyright (including Fair Use) that entitles it to make the Item available., http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
| Relation | http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/3822, Theses and Dissertations |
Page generated in 0.2047 seconds