Adult education directors' perceptions of performance indicators for adult education programs in the state of Florida

Current demands for accountability in education emphasize outcome-based program evaluation and tie program funding to individual student performance. As has been the case for elementary and secondary programs, demands for accountability have increased pressure on adult educators to show evidence of the benefits of their programs in order to justify their financial support. In Florida, recent legislation fundamentally changes the delivery of adult education in the state by establishing a performance-based funding system that is based on outcomes related to the retention, completion, and employment of program participants.^ A performance-based funding system requires an evaluation process that stresses outcome indicators over indicators that focus on program context or process. Although the state has adopted indicators of program quality to evaluate its adult education programs, these indicators focus mostly on program processes rather than student outcomes. In addition, the indicators are not specifically tied to workforce development outcomes, a priority to federal and local funding agents.^ Improving the accountability of adult education programs and defining the role of these programs in Florida's Workforce Development System has become a priority to policy makers across the state. Another priority has been to involve adult education practitioners in every step of this process.^ This study was conducted in order to determine what performance indicators, as judged by the directors and supervisors of adult education programs in the state of Florida, are important and feasible in measuring the quality and effectiveness of these programs. The results of the study indicated that, both statewide and by region, the respondents consistently gave the highest ratings on both importance and feasibility to the indicators of Program Context, which reflect the needs, composition, and structure of the programs, and to the indicators of Educational Gain, which reflect learner progress in the attainment of basic skills and competencies. In turn, the respondents gave the lowest ratings on both importance and feasibility to the indicators in the areas of Return on State's Investment, Efficiency, Retention, and Workforce Training. In general, the indicators that received high ratings for importance also received high ratings for feasibility. ^

Development of an instrument to measure high school students' global awareness and attitudes: Looking through the lens of social sciences

The purpose of this study was to develop an instrument to measure high school students’ perspectives on global awareness and attitudes toward social issues. The research questions that guided this study were: (a) Can acceptable validity and reliability estimates be established for an instrument developed to measure high schools students' global awareness? (b) Can acceptable validity and reliability estimates be established for an instrument developed to measure high schools students' attitudes towards global social issues? (c) What is the relationship between high school students’ GPA, race/ethnicity, gender, socio-economic status, parents’ education, getting the news, reading and listening habits, the number of classes taken in the social sciences, whether they speak a second language, and have experienced living in or visiting other countries, and their perception of global awareness and attitudes toward global social issues. ^ An ex post facto research design was used and the data were collected using a 4-part Likert-type survey. It was administered to 14 schools in the Miami-Dade County, Florida area to 704 students. A factor analysis with an orthogonal varimax rotation was vii used to select the factors that best represented the three constructs – global education, global citizenship, and global workforce. This was done to establish construct validity. Cronbach’s alpha was used to determine the reliability of the instrument. Descriptive statistics and a hierarchical multiple regression were used for the demographics to establish their relationship, if any, to the findings. ^ Key findings of the study were that reliable and valid estimates can be developed for the instrument. The multiple regression analysis for model 1 and 2 accounted for a variance of 3% and 5% for self-perceptions of global awareness (factor 1). The regression model also accounted for a 5% and 13% variance in the two models for attitudes toward global social issues (factor 2). The demographics that were statistically significant were: ethnicity, gender, SES, parents’ education, listening to music, getting the news, speaking a second language, GPA, classes taken in the social sciences, and visiting other countries. An important finding for the study was those attending public schools (as opposed to private schools) had more positive attitudes towards global social issues (factor 2) The statistics indicated that these students had taken history, economics, and social studies – a curriculum infused with global perspectives.^