Abstract
Adult literacy and English as an Additional Language (EAL) programs are often challenged to find suitable and authentic reading texts and instructional materials for their students. Newsela PRO, an entirely online resource, provides high-interest fiction, timely news articles, and other nonfiction texts in both English and Spanish that focus on developing reading and critical thinking skills by providing students with five levels of reading difficulty. Although originally designed for younger learners, the use of Newsela PRO has recently expanded into adult literacy programs. This convergent mixed-methods study investigated the usability and instructional use of this educational technology in an intensive, precollege EAL program in a community college in the northeastern United States. This case study found that instructors felt the detailed reports provided by Newsela PRO enhanced their instruction and feedback and enabled them to differentiate instruction more effectively. Regardless of language-proficiency level, students found Newsela “easy to very-easy-to-use.” They were motivated to read more extensively and developed more confidence in their academic skills and English-language proficiency. These preliminary findings justify the additional cost of Newsela PRO as well as exploring its expanded use in other adult education, EAL, and literacy programs, especially Spanish-language literacy programs, both in the United States and internationally. As many adult and higher education programs were mandated to transition to distance learning exclusively during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the effective instructional use of educational technology has become critical.
“Two components from adult learning theory, pragmatic/learning connected to goals and daily lives and autonomy/control over learning, were the predominant subthemes.”
Finding suitable and authentic reading texts and instructional materials for adult literacy and English as an Additional Language (EAL) programs can be challenging, but improvements in educational technology have made this challenge less daunting. For example, Newsela (https://newsela.com/) is an entirely online resource that provides teachers with an engaging and user-friendly way to adapt and supplement content to varying reading levels so students can “access content and participate fully” (Roy, 2018, p. 103) in classroom instruction. Given the range of reading proficiency levels in any EAL or adult literacy class, Newsela allows instructors to assign texts that every student can access without making this differentiation obvious. Other students simply see their classmates reading on a computer monitor or mobile phone and engaging in classroom discussion based on the text’s content. In this way, Newsela removes any “shame” related to not having the same reading proficiency as others in the class. The site consistently expands its offerings and currently provides high-interest and timely news articles and other nonfiction texts in various content areas as well as fiction (e.g., folktales and myths). By focusing on reading and critical thinking skills, students can progress through five levels of reading difficulty.
The “Educator Center” provides resources for instructors new to Newsela to “get started” and customize the site to accommodate their instructional needs. There are external links to videos and discussion boards that encourage collaboration with other educators, and the Newsela staff is also available for guidance and support. Similarly, there are videos under the “Teach with Newsela” tab that familiarize students with the different functions and activities on the site and highlight reading strategies. These videos are critical for those new to instructional technology, especially less tech-savvy students.
At an additional cost, the PRO feature enables instructors to view student progress with easy-to-read reports (“binders”) sorted by class, individual student, or article. Students can also challenge themselves by going to the next level of difficulty and reverting back to lower levels to verify comprehension (Rosen, 2016). As the suffix, ela, implies, this resource was originally designed for students in English Language Arts (ELA) classes in middle and high schools. More recently, the use of this educational technology has expanded into adult literacy, including high school equivalency (HSE) and EAL, programs. This case study focused on its instructional use in an intensive precollege EAL program in the northeastern United States.
Context
The college’s long-standing policy of open admissions allows any applicant with a high school diploma or its equivalent, including foreign credentials, to be accepted. Students without a state-certified diploma or certain cutoff scores on standardized tests like the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT, 2020) or the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL, 2020) must take entrance examinations in reading, writing, and mathematics. 1 These examinations ascertain if accepted students have college-level skills in these foundational discipline areas. Upward of 75% of accepted students in community colleges in this university system have historically required one or more remedial classes before beginning college-level coursework (CUNY Task Force on Developmental Education, 2016). To address the language acquisition and academic preparation needs of adult emergent bi/multilingual learners (EBLs), the Intensive Language Program in English (ILPE) was first piloted in 1995 and provided 25 hr per week of content-based, English-language instruction for EBLs who failed the university’s assessment test in writing (CUNY Assessment Testing in Writing, 2019). The success of the pilot prompted the program’s implementation on nine campuses in total. The ILPE program under study specifically serves EBLs who have a writing placement that is too low to enter the English as a Second Language (ESL) courses offered in the college. After studying in the program for upward of one calendar year, ILPE students retake the university entrance examinations and typically make enough progress to matriculate into college coursework.
Recently, there has been a push from the university’s central administration to assist students in transitioning out of remedial coursework as quickly as possible because research has shown that students are more likely to persist and graduate if they earn credits as soon as possible after matriculation (Belfield et al., 2016). With the goal of enhancing students’ college readiness, all ILPE instructors started using Newsela PRO (PRO) consistently in the Fall 2015 term. Since PRO’s implementation, administrators noticed that more of the program’s “graduates” were making noteworthy gains or passing both the university’s reading and writing examinations. This trend inspired the focus and purpose of this study: To investigate exactly how instructors and students use PRO in ILPE. The study’s findings and implications could justify its additional cost as well as its expanded use in other adult education programs.
Research Questions
The following research questions (RQs) guided this exploratory investigation of how instructors use this educational technology to foster their students’ academic growth and autonomy and how adult EBLs in the ILPE program use PRO:
Literature Review and Theoretical Framework
As the theoretical framework used in this study was not only a lens through which the data were analyzed and interpreted but also as an integral component of the literature review, the literature review and theoretical framework sections have been combined.
Literature Review
Evaluations of instructional practices in adult EAL programs in the United States, including any educational technology used, were not abundant in the recent extant research literature. Evaluations of adult literacy programs were more common (Dillon-Marable & Valentine, 2006; Jaffe, 2001; Wells, 2014) but slightly dated and either experimental (August, 2018) or conducted in an international context (Durgunoglu et al., 2003).
Studies regarding the evaluation of computer-related technologies, however, were more common. Germane to PRO, both Sox and Rubenstein-Ávila (2009) and Fletcher et al. (2011) argued that a technology-based instrument must meet the specific needs of adult literacy students to be successful. Jaffe (2001) and Fletcher et al. (2011) posited that the incorporation of educational technology into adult literacy programs would enhance student retention and give students access to educational materials outside traditional classroom settings. Such access became the norm when adult and higher education programs had to shift abruptly to distance learning during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. These studies also have relevance to investigating the use of PRO in the ILPE.
Related to this study and context, Fairbairn (2007) showed that students scored better on language assessments when they are familiar with the testing format. As the university reading test has a similar format to PRO (i.e., computer-based with multiple-choice questions), students feel better prepared. With ILPE instructors’ guidance and feedback, the annotation features in PRO also encourage students to engage with text, create their own meaning, and foster their inference skills. As reading and writing skills are connected (Bridges, 2015), adult EBLs in ILPE are exposed to academic writing syntax, structure, development, and mechanics through PRO as well as to the rhetorical style of the university. Similarly, they can practice summarizing and paraphrasing, which are required skills for the university writing examination and subsequent coursework.
Theoretical Framework
Given the complexity of academic English-language acquisition among adult EBLs, multiple theoretical lenses were used to analyze the data collected. These theoretical lenses (Figure 1) are adult learning theory; additional language acquisition, including fostering reading proficiency in a new language; and the influence of instructor feedback on learner autonomy, language acquisition, and academic skills development.
Theoretical framework for investigating the influence of using Newsela PRO.
Adult learning theory
As students in the ILPE program are adult learners, the tenets of adult learning theory are particularly relevant. Knowles et al. (2015) asserted that adults are typically more pragmatic than children and are more intrinsically motivated to learn. Adults’ need for “immediacy of application” (Hanstock, 2004, p. 81) focuses learning on what will help them cope more effectively with real-life situations. As more self-directed learners, adults thrive with inquiry-based activities where they can determine the pace and style of their own learning, with their instructors acting as guides and facilitators. As adults typically juggle multiple responsibilities (Day et al., 2011), instruction should be flexible and include the use of digital texts and internet technologies (Noor et al., 2011). PRO provides an ideal format for adults to become autonomous learners who apply previous informal learning (Hanstock, 2004) and formal instruction to their daily lives. They are also encouraged to explore content, challenge themselves academically, enhance their reading proficiency, and monitor and regulate their own learning.
Additional language acquisition
A good language learner constantly looks for patterns and is unafraid to make mistakes. They practice as often as possible, monitor their performance, develop solid academic skills, and ultimately cultivate self-confidence (Naiman et al., 1995). The accessibility of PRO enables students to read extensively, which fosters these qualities for success. The accompanying quizzes provide immediate feedback regarding reading comprehension. The availability of different Lexile levels encourages EBLs to challenge themselves academically and to learn from their mistakes. They can guide their own learning and track their progress. PRO also allows ILPE instructors to provide targeted feedback to students to promote their language acquisition.
Krashen’s Input Hypothesis (1985) emphasized the importance of comprehensible input and lowering EBLs’ affective filter. Comprehensible input is slightly advanced language (i + 1) that, with enhanced exposure, enables EBLs to identify regularities and patterns. The frequency and consistency of comprehensible input is also critical, so their language acquisition is enhanced by increased exposure to English. By using PRO regularly, ILPE students become better acquainted with the vocabulary and rhetorical style of the university. Similarly, the range of Lexile levels embedded in PRO brings the concept of comprehensible input to life. Its accessibility via computers, tablets, and mobile phones encourages consistent exposure to the language that fosters pattern recognition and syntactical awareness. The content of the articles and text sets also deepen their background knowledge and cultural awareness (Singhal, 2006).
The most prominent attribute of the affective filter is anxiety, so managing anxiety and bolstering self-confidence are crucial to additional language acquisition. Affirming what adult EBLs know and expanding their existing knowledge base and cultural competence can promote additional language acquisition by lowering anxiety and boosting confidence. Thus, the components and functionality of PRO align closely with Krashen’s Input Hypothesis (1985).
To nurture EBLs’ reading proficiency and comprehension, Singhal (2006) asserted that developing their background knowledge (content schema) is essential. For EBLs in the United States, gaining American cultural competence is fundamental. Native speakers of American English are typically unconscious of the cultural and historical references and idiomatic expressions that permeate all texts, including news articles. The content and format of PRO provide adult EBLs with the opportunity to develop this schema and, in turn, enhance their reading proficiency and language usage.
Similarly, Gebhard (2006) stressed that EBLs need to make judgments about what they read. He was a strong advocate for the use of authentic materials, especially for adult EBLs, and felt that using computer-based technology was imperative. The annotation feature on PRO allows adult EBLs to interact with text and make more informed judgments about the author’s perspective and intended audience. The ever-expanding range of articles and other texts on PRO are timely, content-rich, and authentic. Because technology is now ubiquitous and familiar to adult EBLs, their use of sites like PRO feels intuitive, which lowers their affective filters.
Learner autonomy with instructor feedback
Pellet’s (2012) study of the use of wikis for building content knowledge among adult EBLs mirrored the use of PRO in the ILPE. Beyond creating an authentic language-learning experience, she found that technology-assisted language learning transformed the traditional classroom setting. With the instructor acting as facilitator and guide, using technology to promote learner autonomy “rests on frequent instructor feedback analyzing students’ output and participation in the learning process” (p. 242). Instructor feedback in computer-based learning should be timely and targeted to motivate adult students to become “self-regulated learners” (Eom et al., 2006, p. 229). Embedded online quizzes with instructor monitoring and feedback to promote academic skills and language acquisition are hallmarks of PRO.
In sum, using these theoretical principles in combination provided a comprehensive lens from which to analyze the data collected and fortified the review of the research literature.
Positionality
The lead author is a White cisgender male who has worked with adult EBLs in postsecondary settings for 20 years and currently works in the program under study. This professional experience, training in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), and commitment to supporting adult EBLs and their instructors prompted the focus and RQs of this study. The second author is a White, cisgender female who works as an adjunct lecturer in a large university in the Northeast and has a master’s degree in Educational Psychology. Both are native speakers of English and proficient in other languages (Spanish and Armenian, respectively). Their combined knowledge and experience in qualitative and quantitative research were well suited to the convergent mixed-methods research design (Creswell, 2015) of this study.
The term, emergent bi/multilingual learner, is inspired by the work of Otheguy et al. (2015) and Colombo et al. (2019) and is intended to acknowledge students’ full linguistic repertoires, challenges the hegemony of English, and counters the pervasive deficit models surrounding adults learning EAL in the United States. Similarly, using the terminology additional versus second language acknowledges that many adults acquiring English are already bi- or multilingual.
Method
This convergent mixed-methods research design (Creswell, 2015) was informed by the extant literature and the authors’ quest to investigate how user-friendly educational tools can enhance instruction in adult EAL classrooms. The study had two components: (a) administering an online survey instrument to student volunteers in the ILPE program for quantitative analysis and (b) sending open-ended survey questions via email to instructor volunteers for qualitative analysis.
Participants
Volunteer participants were 140 students enrolled in the ILPE program in the Spring 2019 term and eight of their instructors. To determine if language-proficiency levels influence the use of PRO, stratified sampling was used. As class sizes are approximately equal, the 11 classes were divided as follows: The three lowest proficiency (“beginner”) classes were Group 1 (27.3%), the five mid-level (“high beginner”) classes were Group 2 (45.4%), and the three highest proficiency (“intermediate”) classes were Group 3 (27.3%).
As expected from the stratified sampling, 44.9% of the respondents were from the “high beginner” classes (N = 31) with 34.8% from the “intermediate” (N = 24) and 20.3% from the “beginner” classes (N = 14). The sample consisted of 62.3% female (N = 43) and 37.7% male (N = 26) with a mean age of 25.2 years (SD = 7.17). Respondents’ native languages were Spanish (53.7%); Arabic (15.9%); Bengali (13.0%); Chinese (8.7%); languages not listed, including Nepalese, Punjabi, Uzbek, and Yoruba (5.8%); and Russian (2.9%). This sample approximated the gender (63.9% female and 36.1% male), age range (55.7% of the students are 26 years or younger and 44.3% are 27 years or older), and rank distribution of home languages (Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Bengali, Other, and Russian) of students enrolled for the term under study.
The instructors were six female (75%) and two male (25%), with seven identifying as White (87.5%) and one as Asian American (12.5%) This sample mirrors the demographics of the EAL teaching population in the United States, which is majority White and female. Seven were native speakers of English, and six are bi/multilingual or at least proficient in a language other than English.
Instrumentation
Adapted from Chen (2016), a survey instrument was developed to gather students’ self-reflections and perceptions related to feedback, usability, content, and customization when using PRO. Input from instructors regarding their use of PRO, including feedback provided to students, also informed the development of survey items. The researchers were mindful of participants’ English-language proficiency and potential unfamiliarity with online survey instruments when constructing the survey, especially its items and format.
During the development phase, cognitive interviews (Beatty & Willis, 2007; Ryan et al., 2012; Willis, 2004) were conducted with students, primarily those with lower-level language proficiency from different language and cultural backgrounds, to determine if the language used was accessible and items were answered in a way that collected the type of data sought. The rationale was that, if lower-level EBLs from different backgrounds understood the questions and answered appropriately, then diverse higher-level EBLs could, too. Similarly, ILPE instructors were asked to confirm that the survey items accurately reflected their use of PRO. This cognitive interviewing and subsequent modification of items were intended to enhance the validity of the survey. Once modified, the survey was implemented for pilot testing, and modified as needed before its implementation for data collection purposes in Spring 2019. Ultimately, the survey contained 22 items, two of which only appeared when specific responses were selected. There were five Likert-type, three yes/no, and 14 select one and fill-in items.
Data Collection
The online survey was completed by ILPE student volunteers while in computer labs from May 8 through May 15, 2019. They were sent an email in which they gave informed consent with a link to the survey on Qualtrics. The researchers and the students’ classroom instructors were available to answer comprehension questions about any of the survey items. Participants could also translate any unknown words or phrases by using online applications like Google Translate.
Data Analysis
The data analyses involved doing descriptive statistical analyses of the survey data and coding the answers to the open-ended questions provided by ILPE instructors.
Quantitative data analysis
As the purpose of the survey instrument was to explore ILPE students’ use of PRO, only descriptive statistical analyses were conducted to provide information on response patterns. Completed surveys were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) method for removing missing cases before descriptive statistics were calculated for each item and any component parts.
Qualitative data analysis
Using the qualitative data analysis suggested by Patton (2015) and Saldaña (2016), responses provided by ILPE instructors were analyzed using a priori codes rooted in the study’s theoretical framework and guided by the study’s RQs. Following multiple rounds of coding, initial codes were collapsed into major themes and subthemes. In the hopes of enhancing the trustworthiness of the findings, the draft manuscript was shared with research participants who endorsed the presentation of the findings, including their interpretation and implications, as representative and accurate.
Findings
Quantitative Findings
The purpose of the survey instrument was to investigate the functionality of PRO, how feedback from both teachers and PRO influences future use, and, to a lesser extent, self-perceptions of changes in their English-language proficiency from using the site. One-hundred-forty ILPE students completed the survey, but SPSS revealed that only 69 respondents completed every item. Only the data from these 69 completed surveys were used for analysis.
Despite having the option of reading all articles in Spanish, 91.9% (N = 34) of native Spanish speakers reported reading articles in English while 2.7% would read in Spanish and 5.4% in both languages. Respondents said they “sometimes” changed things on the site, with 65.2% changing Lexile level, 58.0% changing content area, and 47.8% changing format (e.g., font size). Although they do not have the option of reading texts in their first languages on the site, students from other language backgrounds stated that the articles and text sets on PRO helped with their language learning (81.3%), which is comparable with native Spanish speakers (89.2%). However, more Spanish (59.5%) and Arabic (57.1) speakers reported that their English is a lot better after using PRO compared with Russian and speakers of other languages not listed (50.0% each), Bengali (44.4%), and Chinese (16.7%) speakers. Russian speakers were the only participants who unanimously stated that PRO helped with their schoolwork while speakers of all other languages were more likely to report that PRO “sometimes” helped with their schoolwork.
Approximately one third of respondents (32.6%) reported that they “always” used feedback from PRO and instructors to change the Lexile levels of articles. Nearly half (47.1%) “sometimes” used feedback to read more articles each week. Almost half (44.6%) used feedback to read different kinds of articles while 43.8% used feedback to find main ideas in articles. Again, almost half (44.9%) felt slightly more confident in their English after using PRO.
Based on these findings, students overall found PRO easy to navigate and use (92.8%), “sometimes” or “always” used feedback from PRO and instructors, and were “slightly more confident” in their English after using PRO. Proficiency level did not appear to influence the use of PRO. The overall findings, including demographic characteristics, were consistent with those from the pilot study and with the assertations made by Pellet (2012) regarding instructor feedback and Naiman et al. (1995) about how monitoring their own progress can bolster language-learners’ confidence.
Qualitative Findings
The coded data from the survey questions were collapsed into the following a priori themes, with subthemes in each: adult learners, additional language acquisition, and learner autonomy with feedback.
Adult learners
Two components from adult learning theory, pragmatic/learning connected to goals and daily lives and autonomy/control over learning, were the predominant subthemes.
Pragmatic/learning connected to goals and daily lives
The portability of PRO enables students to read articles on their phones outside of class and was a compelling “motivating factor” for doing extensive reading. Similarly, developing academic skills, like annotating articles to identify “who, what, where, when, and how for writing summaries” and expanding their background content knowledge, were cited as connecting their ILPE coursework to their goal of entering university studies. These findings are consistent with Gebhard (2006) around reading critically and Singhal (2006) around developing cultural background knowledge. One instructor asserted that “performance on PRO quizzes is a “good” predicator of performance on the [university] reading test,” which echoes Fairbairn (2007) regarding how familiarity with testing formats enhances positive outcomes.
Autonomy/control over learning
This subtheme is best summarized as “students as workers, instructors as facilitators” because adult learners seek a sense of control over their own learning (Knowles et al., 2015). Aligned with autonomy, teachers found that having students lead class presentations (“students as teachers”) on “writing thesis statements” derived from the “main or controversial ideas” or posting group assignments based on articles read on PRO made students more accountable for their own learning. Adapting Lexile level and choosing articles for free reading allows students to learn at their own pace and explore individual interests. One instructor mentioned that “students often lowered their typical Lexile level when the contents of an article were unfamiliar,” while another instructor claimed “students are good at monitoring and tracking their own progress,” which affirmed the importance of learner self-regulation as asserted by Eom et al. (2006).
Additional language acquisition
Additional language acquisition is comprised of multiple attributes, but three evidenced as subthemes included comprehensible input; extensive reading to develop other language skills; and instructional uses of PRO to promote academic language acquisition.
Comprehensible input
Having consistent and challenging exposure to English is the essence of comprehensible input (Krashen, 1985) and is what PRO provides ILPE students. Some instructors designate a specific Lexile level for assigned readings to challenge students (i + 1) but allow them freedom to select their own Lexile level when free reading. One instructor argued that higher Lexile level articles might be easier to comprehend due to the “repetition of details in dense articles.” Other instructors use the annotation feature to heighten their students’ awareness of grammatical or syntactical structures, including “identifying conditionals or the passive voice.”
Extensive reading to develop other language skills
All ILPE instructors stressed the importance of extensive reading for language acquisition and assign free reading as homework for this purpose. Students are encouraged to read a variety of articles, which instructors monitor via PRO. Reading extensively not only enhances students’ reading proficiency and comprehension but also develops their cultural competence (Singhal, 2006). With PRO, eight different reading skills from the quizzes are itemized for instructors. These skills range from basic comprehension to identifying the writer’s point of view. With these metrics, instructors can identify skills where students are struggling, like “finding main ideas or understanding “power words” (challenging vocabulary),” and individualize instruction accordingly, which highlights the importance of instructor feedback (Pellet, 2012).
Instructional uses of PRO to promote academic language acquisition
Many instructors base their lessons and scaffold activities around the articles and features on PRO. For example, students read articles to “write summaries” or “do paraphrasing activities” and for background content knowledge “before watching a film or going on field trips.” Students are also encouraged to use content and citations from texts to fortify their weekly essays, reading response journals, and in-class presentations.
Instructors develop or assign text sets on PRO to bolster students’ content and cultural background knowledge related to course content (Singhal, 2006). With PRO, instructors can give guiding questions to prompt students to interact with text by “annotating, summarizing, and paraphrasing” to enhance their academic writing, which affirms the connection between reading and writing made by Bridges (2015).
Learner autonomy with feedback
Subthemes within learner autonomy with feedback included PRO feedback directly to students and instructor feedback from PRO to students.
PRO feedback directly to students
From their binders on PRO, ILPE students can see graphs of their own progress over time based on Lexile levels and performance on quizzes. This “visual feedback” proves “motivating and affirming” for adult EBLs because acquiring an additional language can feel painstakingly slow. Promoting such learner self-regulation is consistent with Eom et al. (2006). Some ILPE instructors enroll as students in their own classes to gain a “student’s perspective” of PRO and to “enhance their understanding of the feedback given directly to students.”
Instructor feedback from PRO to students
With PRO, instructors monitor “the number and type of articles read, scores on quizzes, time spent on articles, reading skills practiced and mastered, and use of power words for vocabulary development.” Based on the graphics from student binders, instructors can encourage them to move their Lexile level up or down or “read fewer articles two or three times” to enhance comprehension. If students do poorly on a quiz, some instructors encourage them to “move down a Lexile level, re-read the article, then retake the quiz,” as advocated in Rosen (2016). Because the title of the article changes based on Lexile level, the instructor can monitor if students are acting on their recommendations. PRO provides a summary for each student through “easy-to-read, colorful graphics,” which enables ILPE instructors to provide targeted feedback as well as differentiate instruction more readily.
Discussion and Implications
The findings from this exploratory study echoed those in the cited literature around the use of educational technology with adult EBLs and affirmed the continued use of Newsela in the ILPE and exploring its use in other adult educational contexts. PRO motivated students to do more extensive reading, become more autonomous learners, and to nurture academic skills. Similarly, ILPE instructors avowed that the reports and metrics available only with the PRO feature enabled them to monitor each student more closely, provide more constructive feedback, and differentiate instruction more effectively. Instructors in other adult learning settings should build on the pedagogical ingenuity evidenced in the ILPE by devising innovative ways to incorporate the features available on PRO into their daily instruction and to fortify independent homework assignments. Given the recent transition to distance learning in many adult education contexts, instructors should leverage PRO’s usability and effectiveness to enhance their pedagogy and their students’ language and content acquisition. As with any pedagogical shift, instructors must be prepared to assist students who are not digital natives and address any barriers (lack of WiFi, data limitations on mobile phone plans, complicated living situations) that could obstruct their students’ access to PRO and to remote instruction.
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Study
Social desirability is always a concern with any self-report measure, but this concern is exacerbated when the lead researcher works in the program under study. Undoubtedly, his bias, even with member checking and an external researcher, impacted the data collected, their analysis, and the findings presented. Although he does not directly supervise the instructor participants, his employment in the program might have made them more inclined to put PRO in a favorable light. Another limitation was not examining and analyzing the data from the incomplete surveys more closely to see if there was any systematic pattern to the missing data and how this pattern compared with the data from the completed surveys.
This study should be replicated in other adult education and EAL programs outside of higher education settings to see if the results regarding PRO’s use and effectiveness in the ILPE are generalizable among other adult students, ideally in different contexts and geographical locations, including internationally. Although ILPE students routinely complete online evaluations of their instructors, the format of the survey instrument and any language or cultural barriers might explain why some surveys were incomplete, which, in turn, could have compromised the overall validity and reliability of the data collected. Consequently, the online survey instrument and other elements of the research design will likely need to be adapted to the unique needs of each replication site.
Conclusion
Given the challenges in finding suitable and authentic texts for adults who are beginning readers or who have limited English-language proficiency, PRO is an invaluable resource for instructors and students in adult literacy and EAL programs. This dearth of appropriate instructional materials is particularly acute for Spanish-language literacy and HSE programs, and PRO provides access to appropriate texts. Given PRO’s additional cost, the findings of this case study related to its use, effectiveness, and instructional versatility provide a preliminary justification for its expense (Eom et al., 2006). From our perspectives, anything that enables adult students, especially EBLs, to become autonomous, lifelong learners and acquire the academic English-language skills to reach their fullest educational and vocational potentials should be deemed a worthwhile investment on both a humanitarian and societal level.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
