Integrative Review of the Literature on Adults With Limited Education and Skills and the Implications for Human Resource Development

Abstract

Adults with limited education and skills—those who lack the education and skills needed for full participation in U.S. culture and economy—are increasing in numbers. However, the knowledge base addressing this population and their educational needs is fragmented across the literature of several disciplines. A comprehensive review and critique of the literature on adults with limited education and skills have not been done. This study fills this void by reviewing literature from five streams of research that address this population and synthesizing it into a framework that offers an integrated perspective on the topic. Implications for human resource development and an agenda for further research are discussed.

Keywords

adults with limited education and skills working poor families academically underprepared adults low-skilled adults integrative literature review

This article examines the existing literature on adults with limited education and skills. These are people older than 25 years with literacy levels (i.e., reading, writing, math) lower than eighth grade and who have limited job skills, and they are a large and diverse segment of the U.S. population (Osborne, Marks, & Turner, 2004). An estimated 41.8% of all working-age adults lack the academic preparation and job skills needed to succeed in college and the workplace. This population is more than two and one-half times larger than the number of the nation’s traditional (18- to 24-year-old) college-age youth population (Comings, Reder, & Sum, 2001). This population, lacking both academic preparation and valued job skills, is composed of Whites, Hispanics, African Americans, and Native Americans, other minorities, and many who are immigrants, single parents, high school dropouts, individuals with disabilities, prisoners, and dislocated workers from all ethnic groups in the United States. Immigrants made up almost half of limited-skilled workers and more than one-fifth of low-wage workers in the United States in 2005 (Capps, Fortuny, & Fix, 2007). Many immigrants arrive in this country with substantial skills and impressive credentials but end up in low-skilled, low-wage jobs due to language barriers or because their skills and credentials are not recognized in the United States.

Adults with limited education and skills, using eighth-grade literacy as a gauge, are those who, sadly, receive scores on standardized college placement tests that are too low to be admitted to postsecondary education or most job training programs. This population is referred to in the United States by several terms including academically underprepared adults (Torraco & Dirkx, 2008), low-skilled adults (Jobs for the Future, 2004; Women Employed Institute, 2005), and adults with limited education and skills. We use the term limited education and skills to refer to those who lack both adequate academic preparation and specific job skills. We acknowledge the problem of using skill levels to characterize this population. Rose (2004) and Kusterer (1978) both cited the inappropriate application of terms like low-skilled and unskilled to knowledgeable American workers and lamented the denigration of their work that the use of these terms implies. As Kusterer stated,

The problem with these labels is that the use of the “unskilled” label has led to a gross underestimation of the amount of working knowledge actually necessary in these jobs. There is no such thing as unskilled work. The term demeans the workers involved, and it misleads all who seek to understand the nature of their work. (p. 179)

The positive relationship between having limited skills and low-income status is, of course, the unfortunate end of the education–earnings continuum that also shows a positive correlation between high levels of education and high earnings (College Board, 2006). The relationship between socioeconomic status, education level, and limited job skills is complex but, in general, they appear to be interrelated. Without making claims about causal attribution, low-income levels, limited job skills, and low educational achievement seem to go together.

The Appleseed Foundation cited approximately 20 million adults as members of “working poor” families who earn less than $25,000 per year; they often work in multiple jobs yet remain beneath the income level needed to get ahead, 200% of the federal poverty level (Appleseed Foundation, 2009). The continued expansion of such a large and growing segment of the U.S. population relegated to working poverty has enormous social and economic implications for our society as a whole. The seeds are being sown for a future tainted by a growing economic divide between adults with and without the education and skills needed for full participation in U.S. society (Stiglitz, 2012). This is a human resource development (HRD) problem.

Purpose

Despite the value placed on education in the United States and the growing shortfall of skilled workers in this country, large numbers of adults lack the literacy and numeracy skills needed to fully participate in an increasingly competitive economy. However, the scant knowledge base addressing this population and their educational needs is fragmented across the literature of the disciplines of adult education, career and technical education, labor economics, social work and social psychology, and public human service administration. For example, the perspectives of labor economists, who address the dynamics of labor and industry needs, appear in economic literature, whereas the perspectives of social psychologists, who address individual adaptation to social milieu, appear in the psychology literature. Despite the contributions of these disciplines to the knowledge base for adults with limited education and skills, a comprehensive review and critique of the literature on this population have not been done. This study fills this void by reviewing literature from five streams of research that address adults with limited education and skills and synthesizing it into a framework that offers an integrated perspective on the topic. The study will address the following research questions:

Research Question 1: What are the characteristics of the limited education and skills adult population and what distinctive barriers to educational and career advancement do they face?

Research Question 2: What is known about factors that enable adults with limited education and skills to succeed in college and in their careers?

Theoretical Framework

Among the factors identified that can potentially shape why and how academically underprepared adults learn are cognitive and learning styles, personality type, gender, race, socioeconomic status, culture, prior educational experiences, and intellectual ability (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007). Often, factors within each of these categories of difference overlap and interact with one another. For example, individuals who are academically underprepared are often poor, they have been academically marginalized, and they are overrepresented by persons of color. Adults with limited education and skills (less than eighth-grade literacy levels) make up a large and diverse segment of the U.S. population, which includes Whites, Hispanics, African Americans, and Native Americans, other minorities, and many who are immigrants, single parents, high school dropouts, individuals with disabilities, prisoners, and dislocated workers.

Consequently, educational programs intended to help a diverse adult population develop adequate basic skills and job skills should be developed in ways that take into account individual differences in how adults learn (Merriam et al., 2007) or learning styles (Kolb, 1984). This theory is based on the premise that adults bring diverse backgrounds and experiences to the learning environment and that adults use discretion in choosing what and how they learn (Brookfield, 1986). Above all, they seek meaning and relevance (Knowles, 1990). Adults’ experiences are a rich resource for learning. Since adults rely on prior knowledge and experience, they question things before they are willing to accept them as part of their own understandings. They apply new ideas to their own situations, and if new knowledge doesn’t fit with what they already know, adults are unlikely to accept it (Zemke & Zemke, 1995). Adults are discretionary learners who continuously evaluate new ideas against their own unique experiences and knowledge (Mezirow, 2000). Since individual differences are strong determinants of why and how academically underprepared adults learn, educational programs for adults with limited education and skills should be grounded in adult learning theory.

Method

Research to date has not addressed the literature on adults with limited education and skills and their distinctive educational needs in a holistic way. Parts of the literature have been reviewed one at a time in existing studies of the characteristics of the limited-skilled adult population (Torraco & Dirkx, 2008), barriers to educational and career advancement (Lumina Foundation for Education, 2007), barriers to employment (Martinson & Holcomb, 2007), and instructional innovations to help adults with limited education and skills (Kazis & Liebowitz, 2003). However, the literature has not been addressed in an integrative way.

This problem is addressed by providing an integrative review of these related streams of literature. The integrative literature review is a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated (Torraco, 2005). This methodology is particularly appropriate when existing research is scattered across disparate areas and has not been systematically analyzed and integrated. Such is the case with the literature on adults with limited education and skills. An integrative literature review is an appropriate method for addressing this problem because the topic would benefit from a holistic conceptualization and synthesis of the literature to date. The literature on this population will be reviewed and synthesized into a framework that offers an integrated perspective on the topic. This is consistent with the purpose of the article to examine the literature as a way of providing educators with new ways of thinking about this topic.

To review programs that help adults with limited education and skills, a literature search was conducted in several stages. First, four databases were searched (ERIC, PsycINFO, Academic Search Premier, and Google Scholar) to identify major categories of literature that address adults with limited education and skills. This involved the use of key subject terms to identify relevant literature on this population. The following key subject terms were used to identify potential literature sources: (a) limited-skilled adult, (b) academically underprepared adult, (c) low-income adult, (d) adult learner, (e) disadvantaged adult, (f) immigrant, (g) refugee, (h) displaced worker, (i) low-wage worker, (j) English language learner, and (k) unemployed adult. Each of the key subject terms then was paired to yield a total of 55 paired terms. Each individual term and each pair of terms (e.g., low-income adult and immigrant) then were used to search the literature.

The second stage of the review explored the literature that emerged from the first stage for literature on adults with limited education and skills. Three selection criteria were used to retain or discard literature for the review. First, the literature source had to address one or more subgroups of the population of adults with limited education and skills (i.e., Whites, Hispanics, African Americans, Native Americans, other minorities, immigrants, single parents, high school dropouts, individuals with disabilities, prisoners, and dislocated workers).

The second criterion for selecting literature was that the literature source had to address one of the transition points in the education system that pose barriers to the progress of adults with limited education and skills. The educational pipeline is the series of transitions from entering high school, to high school graduation, enrollment in college, returning for the 2nd year of college, completion of a postsecondary degree, and entering the workforce. Many, including an increasing number of limited-skilled adults, are lost from the educational system at each of these transitions (Ewell, Jones, & Kelly, 2003). Literature selected for the review had to address one of these transition points in the education system that pose barriers to the progress of adults with limited education and skills.

Finally, the literature had to focus on those who have at least one of the following factors that are considered defining characteristics of the limited-skilled adult population (Jobs for the Future, 2004; Torraco & Dirkx, 2008): (a) low-income, (b) newcomer to the United States (i.e., immigrant status), (c) high school dropout with no diploma or GED, (d) have dependent children, (e) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipient, (f) part-time student, (g) work at least part-time, and/or (h) non-English speaking.

A majority of the literature searched was from refereed scholarly journals. Since this topic has been examined by independent research centers, private foundations, non-profit organizations, and federal agencies, the review also included research reports, technical reports, and other formal publications from these sources that provide analysis of the problem supported by empirical evidence or citations of other research. A list of 67 websites reviewed for literature relevant to this study is available from the authors upon request. Literature was examined using a staged review (i.e., abstracts, then main body of each literature source). Critical analysis of the literature deconstructed pieces of literature into their basic elements. The strengths and weaknesses of each literature source were examined. In total, 48 literature sources on adults with limited education and skills were reviewed.

Categories of the Literature Reviewed

In the final stage of the review, the literature was sorted into major categories by determining the main contribution of the literature source to what is known about adults with limited education and skills. Five categories were created to encompass the literature reviewed. The five categories and the rationale for sorting the literature into each category are discussed next.

Adults with limited education and skills—population characteristics and subgroups

The literature in this category describes the characteristics that are typically present across many of the subgroups of this population such as inadequate basic skills and low-level job skills, as well as characteristics that are specific to subgroups. Characteristics that are specific to subgroups include limited ability to speak English (e.g., Hispanics and other immigrants), low-income status (e.g., single parents and working poor families), limited job training and work experience (e.g., TANF recipients), employer aversion to hiring (e.g., ex-offenders), limited education and work experience (e.g., high school dropouts), and inadequate training for a new occupation or industry (e.g., dislocated workers).

Barriers to educational success

Literature in this category describes deficiencies in one or more basic skills (i.e., reading, writing, math), limited ability to speak English, and lack of a high school diploma or GED. Other literature sources addressed the barriers to educational access that make it difficult for adults to attend classes and that distract their attention from studying such as working at least part-time, child care and family responsibilities, low-income status, unstable housing, and poor physical and/or mental/emotional health. Another significant barrier is prevailing academic policy for community colleges that requires students to complete remedial courses as a prerequisite to beginning their college-level courses (Kazis & Liebowitz, 2003). Since the literature that addresses learning barriers and the literature that addresses barriers to educational access both examine conditions that pose barriers to the educational advancement of adults with limited education and skills, these literature streams were combined into the category “barriers to educational success.”

Barriers to employment

Some of the literature reviewed addresses the relationship between education level and employability and describes barriers to employment such as lack of educational credentials. This literature also addresses non-education employment liabilities (e.g., poor health, welfare disincentives); limited work experience; barriers associated with finding jobs such as job searching, job applications, and interviews; and, for those who have been incarcerated, employer aversion to hiring ex-offenders. The unavailability of jobs that pay family-supporting wages is another formidable employment barrier addressed in this literature (Martinson & Holcomb, 2007). Since all of these issues converge on the category of employability, the term used for the literature in this category is “barriers to employment.”

Instructional innovations to help adults with limited education and skills

Literature in this category describes instructional innovations developed for adults with limited education and skills. It discusses new developments in instruction for this population including the effects of accelerated learning on student achievement (Brancard, Baker, & Jensen, 2006); the integration of basic academic skills with job skills so that adult students learn reading, writing, and/or math in the context of acquiring skills in a specific job or occupation (Jobs for the Future, 2004); instruction focused on programs with high demand in the labor market (Roder, Clymer, & Wyckoff, 2008); the relationship of student support and academic success; and developing comprehensive programs by combining two or more of these innovative strategies. Innovative transitions from non-credit courses to college courses and modularized courses are also addressed by the literature in this category. All of these topics address “instructional innovations to help adults with limited education and skills,” so this expression was used as another category for the literature reviewed.

Research reports—multiple topics

Because there are research reports that address more than one of these categories, the category “research reports—multiple topics” was created for this literature. This literature cuts across the four categories above by addressing at least two of the four topics in one research report (i.e., limited-skilled adult characteristics, education barriers, employment barriers, and instructional innovations). Each of the research reports in this category brings together at least two of the four topics in the other categories for a more comprehensive examination of the opportunities and challenges facing this population. For example, some research reports address three of the topics by examining education barriers, employment barriers, and instructional innovations that address both of these areas (Holzer, 2009; Jenkins, Zeidenberg, & Kienzl, 2009; Perin & Hare, 2010).

Evidence From the Literature

This section presents a framework that offers an integrated perspective on the topic. The framework is the result of critical analysis of the literature in the five categories described above. Critical analysis of the literature involved deconstructing each piece of literature into its basic elements (shown in Table 1). For example, the Bridges to Careers report (Women Employed Institute, 2005) was critically analyzed and deconstructed into its main components. The Bridges to Careers report provides a comprehensive guide for developing career pathway and bridge programs for adults with limited education and skills, including guidance for designing the program, building a bridge partnership, building and sustaining employer relationships, developing a program curriculum, bridge program costs and funding, and program implementation and evaluation. The Bridges to Careers report is based on a systematic survey of 11 exemplary career pathway and bridge programs nationwide (Type of Study or Research Design) and identifies the major program components needed by workforce practitioners for comprehensive program development (Main Findings and Outcomes). Its strengths (each section of the report is based on recent research and includes templates and examples for use in program development) and weaknesses (it separates coverage of career pathways from bridge programs even though most programs combine elements of both) were examined. Each literature source was reviewed and critically analyzed in this way. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Comparison and Critical Analysis of Literature on Adults With Limited Education and Skills.

Literature Source	Topic Addressed	Type of Study or Research Design	Main Findings and Outcomes	Strengths and Advantages	Weaknesses and Limitations	Implications for Learning and Education
Group 1: Limited-Skilled Adult Population—Characteristics and Subgroups
Acs and Loprest (2007)	Examined whether families who left Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) amid “welfare reform” are any better off than those still on welfare	Comparison of characteristics of TANF recipients vs. leavers over the period 1996–2005 using three national-level data sets	Serious barriers to work are more prevalent among TANF recipients than leavers. On average, the incomes of TANF leavers are higher than for recipients.	Overcomes the weaknesses of prior studies of the effects of “welfare reform” by using longitudinal design and comparable data from three national data sets	Provides inconclusive findings on the main question of whether most low-income families are better after welfare reform	Participants of programs in which TANF services and education and job training are integrated are more likely to attain employment and self-sufficiency.
Berker, Horn, and Carroll (2003)	Comparison of undergraduates who identified themselves as “employees who study” vs. those who considered themselves “students who work”	Analyzed data from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000) for undergraduates 24 years or older	Approximately 2/3 of working adult undergraduates consider themselves “employees who study”; 1/3 consider themselves “students who work.”	First national study to identify key distinctions between these groups. “Students who work” have fewer risk factors for dropout and remediation.	Analysis included only undergraduates enrolled for the first time. Consequently, returning students (disproportionately adults) were not included in the study.	“Employees who study” were older, worked more, attended school less, and had more family responsibility—factors that affect their educational need.
Capps, Fortuny, and Fix (2007)	Demographic profile of the low-wage immigrant workforce	Analysis of 2005 Current Population Survey–Annual Social and Economic Supplements data	Immigrants make up 45% of all limited-skilled workers (2005). Most are unauthorized men and legal women.	All profile data distinguish among native born, legal, and unauthorized immigrants.	Educational and labor force participation rates are estimated for unauthorized immigrants.	The proportion of working-age males without high school diplomas is growing (54% in 2005).
Torraco and Dirkx (2008)	Examination of subgroups that constitute the academically underprepared adult population	Integrative review, critique, and synthesis of the literature	Identified distinctive educational needs of low-income working adults immigrants ex-offenders Hispanics TANF recipients dislocated workers	Provides a comprehensive review, critique, and synthesis of existing literature on adults with limited education and skills and their educational needs	Analysis and critique are limited to research literature published about the topic. Data from primary sources (interviews, observations) were not included.	Emphasized diversity as a strength of educational programs for adults with limited education and skills. All subgroups of this population face multiple barriers to success that are different from those of traditional students.
Working Poor Families Project (2004)	Profiles working poor families in the U.S. and presents recommendations for strengthening federal and state policies	Profiles are based on analyses of national and state data, research reports, media coverage, and surveys of 15 state non-profit agencies	Of all children in working families, 1/3 are in low-income working families. Public investments for working families vary significantly by state.	Provides a comprehensive economic analysis of the relationships among job requirements, wages, and poverty level	States are ranked on need-based financial aid, adult education, and job training, but recommendations for individual states are not provided.	The percentage of jobs that pay family supporting income has declined, whereas correlation between education level and earnings has increased.
Zedlewski, Chaudry, and Simms (2008)	Socioeconomic analysis of low-income working families in the U.S.	Analysis of 2007 Current Population Survey	49% of low-income families have at least one parent who works full-time. Low-income families have low rates of health insurance coverage and difficulty acquiring affordable housing.	Analyzed work status, marital status, educational level, earnings/income, health insurance, and housing status among low-income working families in the U.S.	The report offers broad policy recommendations only, since most low-income working families face multiple barriers and disadvantages.	73% of heads of low-income families have at least a high school diploma, which underscores the need for postsecondary education to earn family-supporting income.
Zedlewski, Holcomb, and Loprest (2007)	Demographic profile of “hard-to-employ” parents and programs designed to serve their needs	Review of federal and state statutes on TANF eligibility, work requirements, training/workforce development, vocational rehabilitation, and disability services	Many poor and hard-to-employ families do not participate in welfare, due to complex rules and requirements for participation that require detailed documentation.	Demonstrates that most hard-to-employ parents face multiple barriers to finding work and identifies ways to overcome the barriers.	Programs for poor and hard-to-employ families exist in multiple departments (Department of Labor [DOL], Department of Education [DOE], Department of Health & Human Services, and Social Security Administration). The study emphasizes the lack of coordination among departments but does not address a way to bridge “silos.”	Adults getting public assistance are not getting the education and training needed for employment. The U.S. fails to offer an integrated system of supports in this area, especially for the hard-to-employ.
Group 2: Barriers to Educational Success
Kazis and Liebowitz (2003)	Provides a framework for understanding barriers to learning and innovative instructional methods to overcome barriers	Examined 15 new programs at community colleges offering innovative instruction for low-income students	Successful programs include modularized courses, integration of basic skills and job skills, and outcomes linked to labor market	Analyzed three key student groups: working adults not ready for college, college ready adults, and high school dropouts.	The cross-sectional design of the study did not allow follow-up to assess long-term learning and employment outcomes.	Educational pathways should be designed to serve students with at least an eighth-grade basic skills level.
Kurlaender (2006)	Barriers and enablers of college access for Hispanic students	A statistical analysis of four factors related to college choice using data from the 1988 National Education Longitudinal Study	High enrollments of Latinos in community colleges are not adequately explained by low test scores, finances, and goals.	Directly assesses the college enrollments of Latino students with comparable samples of White and African American peers	Other possible factors affecting choice (flexible scheduling, proximity from home, part-time programs) were not studied.	Latinos are more likely than those from other ethnic groups to begin postsecondary education at a community college.
Lumina Foundation for Education (2007)	Access and success in postsecondary education for adults with limited education and skills	Integrative review of research-based evidence on factors related to student access and success in postsecondary education	Study divides research into four categories of factors related to preparation, awareness, financial issues, & institutional responsibility.	Main findings are presented in 31 statements under five general axioms—each supported by research evidence.	Findings and conclusions are based on synthesis from existing studies, not new empirical data.	Those with the least access and success are students of low-income, first generation college students, racial and ethnic minorities, and working adults.
Terenzini, Cabrera, and Bernal (2001)	Participation of poor and low-income students in higher education	Analysis of four databases (NELS-1988, NSSL, NLS-72, and BPS) and review of literature on access, achievement, finances of higher education	Socioeconomic status is strong predictor of high school-to-college transition, course and degree completion rates, participation in student organizations	A longitudinal examination of how students with underprivileged backgrounds fare before, during, and after attending college	The national databases analyzed are dated and do not include figures for private, not-for-profit educational institutions.	The educational and career status of low-income students cannot be advanced in the absence of social, economic, and cultural considerations.
Bolden (2006)	Experiences of low-income women in GED programs questioning the value of such instruction	Qualitative study using narrative and storytelling in participant’s own voice	There are many barriers to attaining a GED and in this study little future advancement for completers due to those same barriers.	The participant’s own voice highlighted the many barriers that were still present after GED completion, making little impact on future lives.	Very small number of female participants in one local setting	Study questions if human capital theory alone has the ability to explain poverty when existing barriers go unchanged.
Group 3: Barriers to Employment
Acs, Loprest, and Ratcliffe (2010)	Factors related to the progress to self-sufficiency of low-wage workers	Analysis of the 2001 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) over 3 years	Self-sufficiency was lower among those receiving work supports.	Provided data on self-sufficiency for three subgroups: unmarried mothers, limited-skilled Black males, and low-income families	Limitations precluded determining the relationships between transportation assistance, the earned income tax credit, and self-sufficiency.	Data demonstrated a direct correlation between education and self-sufficiency: no high school diploma, some college, degree.
Hauan and Douglas (2004)	Employment liabilities among TANF recipients	Survey of 111,893 TANF recipients in six states (CO, DC, IL, MD, MO, SC)	Three measures of education, three health-related liabilities, and four logistical/situational liabilities are more common in TANF recipients than others.	Measures of employment liabilities included education and skill levels, personal and family liabilities, and logistic situational challenges.	Participating states were selected by competitive grants, not selected to be nationally representative.	Of the 16 liability variables, education level and work experience had the highest association with retaining work.
Heinrich and Holzer (2010)	Barriers to employment among young men and evaluation of common strategies for overcoming employment barriers	Comprehensive review of programs for young men in school and out of school, and public employment for hard-to-employ men	Career academy was most effective in preventing high school dropout for males at risk. Programs funded by DOE and DOL are isolated.	Reviewed evaluations of common programs: Tech-Prep, Job Corps, YouthBuild, Career Academies, Opening Doors, ChalleNGe, and career pathways	More empirical research is needed on the long-term costs and benefits of alternative employment interventions.	Education should be integrated within a system of regional partners. Evaluation is needed of outcome measures and moving programs to scale.
Holzer, Raphael, and Stoll (2003)	Factors affecting the employment of ex-offenders	Phone interview surveys with hiring officials of 619 employers	Employers were reluctant to hire ex-offenders. Their willingness to hire varied with the severity of the crime.	The analysis used multiple indicators of employer assessment: criminal background checks, stated intention to hire, and actual hiring.	Data were collected on blue-collar occupations in Los Angeles only. There was no way to measure whether ex-offenders were actually hired.	Level of education and work skills contributed less to hiring decision than severity of the crime for which the offender was incarcerated.
Martinson and Holcomb (2007)	Strategies for job searching, employment, and career advancement for low-income families	Analyzed 51 programs for design, operational maturity, scale, and evidence of positive outcomes	Four most effective approaches: service-focused employment, work experience, skill development, and income supports	The study evaluated untested interventions that have the potential for adoption in other states and localities.	As a cross-sectional study, outcomes were not monitored for long-term hard-to-employ individuals.	Low-income families acquire jobs through education that target specific skills and have strong involvement from the private sector.
Group 4: Instructional Innovations to Help Adults With Limited Education and Skills
Brancard, Baker, and Jensen (2006)	Effects of accelerated learning on the achievement of students in developmental education	Compared one intervention group with two comparison groups to examine the effects of accelerated learning on retention, course completion, and GPA	The intervention group had higher retention and course completion rates, but there was no difference among groups in students’ GPAs.	Accelerated advancement from remedial classes to career pathways was demonstrated using intervention and comparison groups.	Limitations of the study were the small size of the intervention group and the limited period for follow-up of participants (three semesters).	This was the first quasi-experimental study to demonstrate the beneficial effects of accelerated learning among adults with limited education and skills.
Brock and LeBlanc (2005)	Description of the “Opening Doors” national demonstration project for adults with limited education and skills	Survey of programmatic innovations at the six community colleges participating in the national project	Enhanced developmental education improved experimental group performance in both reading and writing.	The first random assignment study of innovations for adults with limited education and skills in community colleges	One institution excluded English as a second language students and another used full-time students only.	Increased retention and completion of remedial education was most related to students advancing to college level courses.
Jobs for the Future (2004)	Describes the educational strategies used in the “Breaking Through” national demonstration project at community colleges for adults with limited education and skills	Analyzed the institutional structures and programs for adults with limited education and skills at 32 “Breaking Through” community colleges nationwide	All “Breaking Through” institutions focus on adults with limited education and skills but each program has differences in design and implementation that affect student outcomes.	Identified four lessons learned that apply across programs: the importance of peer learning, the high leverage strategies, the development of pathways, and focus on student outcomes	The study presented nationwide data for 32 programs but did not offer comprehensive assessments of individual programs.	Demonstrated the importance of four “high leverage” strategies for such programs: integrated curriculum, accelerated learning, students’ support, and labor market payoffs.
Roder, Clymer, and Wyckoff (2008)	Sectoral employment initiatives (SEI) as a strategy for meeting both employee and industry needs	Qualitative and quantitative data collected from nine organizations over 5 years to assess employment-related outcomes	SEI participants had increased wages and reduced poverty. Sites experienced challenges recruiting sufficient trainees and organizations.	A comprehensive, final report of SEI outcomes for both low-income participants and employers	Does not include data from three additional sites (MA, NY, WI) that used a random assignment research design	Systemic educational change will not occur as long as agencies provide their own adult basic education. Emphasizes the use of mainstream colleges.
Women Employed Institute (2005)	A comprehensive guide for developing career pathway and bridge programs for adults with limited education and skills	The study is based on a systematic survey of 11 exemplary career pathway and bridge programs nationwide.	Reports on the major program components needed by workforce practitioners for comprehensive program development	Each section of the report is based on recent research and includes templates and examples for use in program development.	Separates coverage of career pathways from bridge programs even though most programs combine elements of both	Developing effective career education programs for this population requires a careful sequence of program development and multiple partners.
Group 5: Research Reports—Multiple Topics
Comings, Reder, and Sum (2001)	Quantifies the percentage of adults with limited education and skills in the U.S. and proposes strategies to improve systems for adult education and employment	Comparison of National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) data from 13 states on three education criteria (language, high school credential, workplace basic skills)	64 million 18- to 64-year-old adults—an estimated 42% of all working-age adults—lack the academic preparation and skills needed to succeed in postsecondary education and in the modern workplace.	Developed three categories of different educational challenges affecting working-age adults: language challenge credential challenge new literacy challenge	Data on the proportion of adults who lack the education and skills to succeed in school and the workplace are estimates based on only data from CY 2000.	Demonstrates the relationships between basic skills proficiency and positive outcomes in employment, academic success, income, health, quality of life, and retirement
Holzer (2009)	Tracks the recent reductions in federal funding for workforce development and offers comprehensive recommendations for the funding and evaluation of training and employment programs	Analyzed DOL funding (1963–2003), state Workforce Investment Act data, and existing studies of workforce development programs	In an era when skills are more important than ever as determinants of labor market earnings, federal spending on workforce development is lower than ever.	Analyzes the cost-effectiveness of alternative workforce development programs	The study relies on existing government reports and research. Little new empirical analysis of workforce development programs is presented.	Citing the benefits of education, career pathways, and SEI, this research refutes the contention that spending on education and training for disadvantaged adults is cost-ineffective.
Jenkins (2005)	Offers demographic, academic, and employment evidence of earnings gains for those attending college for a least 1 year and earning a credential/certificate	Tracked two student cohorts over 5 years to compare earnings based on student educational attainment	Identified the milestone known as the “tipping point”—earning 1 year of college credit and a credential	Used a large sample (34,956 students) and compared transcript and unemployment insurance wage record data	The analyses did not control for selection bias and characteristics related to students who chose to enroll in I-BEST.	Provides research support for premise that economic returns occur only for those who complete a degree or credential
Jenkins, Zeidenberg, and Kienzl (2009)	Compared education and employment outcomes of two groups of students in Washington’s I-BEST program	Compared I-BEST students with non-I-BEST basic skills students also enrolled in one workforce course using a matched pairs design	I-BEST students were more likely than comparison students to earn college credits, obtain an occupational credential, and make basic skills gains.	Tracked student outcomes for a 2-year period and used propensity score matching to control for observed differences in student backgrounds	The study was unable to control for selection bias. Similar comparative studies should provide follow-up for timeframes longer than 2 years.	Provided evidence from a multivariate analysis to challenge the conventional notion that basic skills instruction should be completed prior to college-level courses
Perin and Hare (2010)	Describes the positive effects of contextualized instruction on student learning, performance tests, and employment outcomes	Compared 246 students in treatment and control groups to assess the effects of contextualization on student achievement and employment	Contextualization improved abilities to write summaries of text, formulate questions on reading, and learn vocabulary.	Quasi-experimental design enabled random assignment and comparison of pre- and post- test scores among groups.	The study did not allow follow-up to assess whether or not there are long-term benefits of contextualization.	Using contextualized learning with academically underprepared students improves basic skills and employability.
Prince (2008)	Describes how community college students attain the momentum to achieve the tipping point identified in Jenkins (2005)	Compared three groups of students from 24 Washington community colleges: basic skills only, basic skills and other courses, and I-BEST	I-BEST students earned the most momentum points, followed by students in basic skills and other courses. Fewest were basic skills only.	Developed a monitoring system to identify the momentum points of basic skills students toward achieving the tipping point	Momentum points are completing basic skills classes, building a year of college credit, completing college math, and earning a credential.	Demonstrates that learning basic skills in the context of other course content increases basic skills and job skills

Comprehensive review and critical analysis provided a new, integrated perspective on the topic through synthesis. Two forms of synthesis were used: a comparison and critical analysis of the literature (Table 1) and a model of the barriers and instructional innovations for limited-skilled adults (Figure 1). This generated new perspectives on the topic and a significant, value-added contribution to new knowledge. The basic elements of the literature sources are shown in Table 1, which is organized by the five categories. The table compares and critiques the literature on the seven dimensions used to critically analyze the literature. These dimensions, shown as column headings in Table 1, identify the literature source, the topic addressed, the type of study or research design, the main findings or outcomes of the research, strengths and advantages, weaknesses and limitations, and the implications for workplace learning and education (see Table 1).

Figure 1.

Model of Barriers and Innovations for Adults With Limited Education and Skills.

The integrated framework in Table 1 was then used as the basis for developing a new perspective on the topic. Since the critical analysis of this body of literature identified new relationships and perspectives on the topic, it raised new questions that can be expressed as an agenda for further research and a new conceptual model. The next section addresses the significance of the findings in Table 1, a synthesis of these findings, and implications for further research on the topic.

Implications of the Model for Future HRD Research and Practice

Literature has been reviewed from five streams of research on adults with limited education and skills and summarized in Table 1. This study presents a significant, value-added contribution to HRD by bringing together fragmented knowledge from various disciplines of adult education, finding patterns and commonality across these disciplines, and presenting this as a framework for further research. This section discusses the significance of the findings shown in Table 1 and their implications for future HRD research and practice. Three significant issues that emerge from this review are (a) adults with limited education and skills face multiple barriers to advancement, (b) new strategies are needed to help adults with limited education and skills, and (c) there is a need for further research and development. These issues are discussed next.

Adults with limited education and skills face multiple barriers to advancement

It is significant that the barriers identified in the literature cut across such a large and diverse population. The barriers to education and employment affect all adults with limited education and skills in some way. This means that all of the groups that constitute the limited-skilled adult population are likely to face multiple barriers to educational and career advancement.

However, whereas most adults with limited education and skills face multiple barriers including a language or learning barrier such as inadequate basic skills (Jobs for the Future, 2004) and limited ability to speak English (Kurlaender, 2006), other challenges faced by subgroups (e.g., high school dropouts, ex-offenders, low-income working adults) are distinctive and related to their unique circumstances. Consequently, there is convincing evidence from the literature that developing a better understanding of the distinctive needs of the subgroups that compose this population is needed before attempting to offer education and training programs intended to surmount the multiple barriers facing such a diverse group of adults (Comings et al., 2001; Torraco & Dirkx, 2008).

The challenges confronting adults with limited education and skills are shown graphically in Figure 1. The barriers faced by this population are shown on the left side of Figure 1 grouped into Socio-Cultural Barriers, Barriers to Educational Success, and Barriers to Employment. Instructional innovations and innovative policies described in the literature are listed on the right side of the model. Listed in the middle of the figure is literature that links innovations with the barriers they are intended to address. The circled numbers in the heading of each box indicate the group of literature from Table 1 that supports the barriers or innovations shown in the model (see Figure 1).

Figure 1 presents a graphic representation of the many barriers and challenges faced by adults with limited education and skills. It also shows the relationship of innovations recently reported in the literature to the barriers they address. Figure 1 enables us to better understand why new programs that incorporate the innovations listed on the right side of the model are becoming so comprehensive and sophisticated; it is because they must address the formidable challenges represented by the multiple barriers listed on the left side of Figure 1.

New HRD strategies are needed to help adults with limited education and skills

Previous approaches to meeting the educational needs of adults with limited education and skills have a poor track record and do not take account of their diversity (Comings et al., 2001). For example, currently, adults are forced to choose between basic literacy programs and job skills programs, even though a large majority of adults from across these diverse groups need both basic academic skills and job skills (Brock & LeBlanc, 2005). Emphasis is needed on developing basic academic skills in the context of occupational preparation so these adults can acquire the skills they need to more fully participate in U.S. culture and employment.

Human resource development is well positioned to investigate more effective ways to meet the needs of adults with limited education and skills. The HRD discipline is unique in embracing a holistic perspective of how education and work experiences can be integrated to capitalize on the reciprocal reinforcement of learning and work—content from the classroom is practiced and refined on-the-job, and experiences from the workplace enrich the meaning and relevance of additional learning in the classroom. To a greater degree than other education-based disciplines, HRD research and practice draw heavily on theoretical foundations that include human capital theory, experiential learning, situated learning theory, contextualized learning, academic–occupational integration, and social learning theory. Drawing on these theoretical foundations, research is needed to develop instructional strategies that are more responsive to the distinctive learning needs of adult students and that take advantage of their wealth of real-life experiences.

An agenda for further HRD research and development

Those working with this population regularly confront difficult problems and unanswered questions in the process of helping disadvantaged adults move toward self-sufficiency. So it should not be surprising that education and workforce development professionals readily embrace new ideas from research that offer directions for addressing these challenges. Although recent research has done much to advance our understanding of the distinctive educational needs of adults with limited education and skills, more research is needed on this topic. For example, there is little research that examines our beliefs and assumptions about who is responsible for addressing the problems of limited-skilled adults. Those with obligations in this area include public education, employers, policy makers, and the adults with limited education and skills themselves. Whose responsibility is it to address the problem of low-wage work and the increasing proportion of adults with limited education and skills and working poor families in the United States? Is the responsibility shared? If so, shared among whom? What are common misconceptions and false assumptions about low-wage work and working poor families in the United States? To what degree are limited-skilled and low-wage earners themselves responsible for their situation?

Another important area for further research is to investigate the factors into why innovative methods of instruction and student support are not being adopted on a larger scale. Research has demonstrated the beneficial effects of accelerated learning on course completion, student retention, and GPAs (Brancard et al., 2006). Contextualized learning has been shown to improve students’ abilities in reading comprehension, writing, and learning vocabulary (Perin & Hare, 2010). Programs that integrate basic skills with occupational skills have demonstrated higher levels of student engagement, persistence, and learning gains (Jenkins et al., 2009). Then, why is it that promising innovations such as accelerated learning, contextualized learning, and academic–occupational integration are not adopted on a larger scale?

Summary

Despite the value placed on education in the United States and the growing shortfall of skilled workers in this country, large numbers of adults lack the literacy and numeracy skills needed to fully participate in an increasingly competitive economy. Serving this population is as much an issue of building political will as developing new pedagogic innovations. A review of the literature on adults with limited education and skills reveals the diverse subgroups that constitute this population, their distinctive educational needs compared with traditional college-age students, and the many barriers they face to learning, educational access, and employment. Although recent research offers directions for addressing some of these challenges, more research is needed. Human resource development researchers and practitioners possess the expertise to make substantive contributions to resolving this important problem.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, 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.

Author Biographies

David W. Hamilton received his MBA from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and is a PhD candidate in education leadership and higher education. He has worked with underprepared adults, teaching remedial math in a for-profit college for the past 13 years. He currently is an adjunct instructor in accounting at Southeast Community College.

Richard J. Torraco is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Administration at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. He is a faculty member in the educational leadership and higher education (ELHE) program and conducts research and teaching in educational leadership and in workforce and human resource development. He is the editor of Human Resource Development Review and has served as the editor of the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference Proceedings and as the vice president for research for the Academy of Human Resource Development.

References

Acs

Loprest

(2007). TANF caseload composition and leavers synthesis report. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Acs

Loprest

Ratcliffe

(2010). Progress toward self-sufficiency for low-wage workers. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Appleseed Foundation. (2009). Building “The Good Life”: Investing in opportunities for Nebraska families, communities and the economy. Lincoln: Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest.

Berker

Horn

Carroll

C. D.

(2003). Work first, study second: Adult undergraduates who combine employment and postsecondary enrollment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Bolden

(2006). The experiences of low-income women enrolled in a GED program [Doctoral dissertation]. Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses: A&I. (AAT 3218037)

Brancard

Baker

E. D.

Jensen

(2006). Developmental education project research report. Denver, CO: Community College of Denver.

Brock

LeBlanc

(2005). Opening doors: Promoting student success in community college and beyond. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Brookfield

S. D.

(1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Capps

Fortuny

Fix

(2007). Trends in the low-wage immigrant labor force, 2000–2005. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

10.

College Board. (2006). Education pays: The benefits of higher education for individuals and society (2nd update). New York: The College Board.

11.

Comings

Reder

Sum

(2001). Building a level playing field: The need to expand and improve national and state adult education and literacy systems. Cambridge, MA: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy.

12.

Ewell

P. T.

Jones

D. P.

Kelly

P. J.

(2003). Conceptualizing and researching the educational pipeline. Boulder, CO: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.

13.

Hauan

Douglas

(2004). Potential employment liabilities among TANF recipients: A synthesis of data from six state TANF caseload studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

14.

Heinrich

C. J.

Holzer

H. J.

(2010). Improving education and employment for disadvantaged young men: Proven and promising strategies. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

15.

Holzer

H. J.

(2009). Workforce development as an antipoverty strategy: What do we know? What should we do? In Cancian

Danzifer

(Eds.), Changing poverty, changing policies (pp. 301–329). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

16.

Holzer

H. J.

Raphael

Stoll

M. A.

(2003). Employer demand for ex-offenders: Recent evidence from Los Angeles. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

17.

Jenkins

(2005). Building pathways to success for limited-skilled adult students: Lessons for community college policy and practice from a longitudinal student tracking study. Olympia: Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges.

18.

Jenkins

Zeidenberg

Kienzl

(2009). Education and employment outcomes of I-BEST integrated basic education and skills training program: Findings from a multivariate analysis. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center.

19.

Jobs for the Future. (2004). Breaking through: Helping low-skilled adults enter and succeed in college and careers. Boston, MA: Author.

20.

Kazis

Liebowitz

(2003). Changing courses: Instructional innovations that help low-income students succeed in community college. New York: MDRC.

21.

Knowles

M. S.

(1990). The adult learner: A neglected species (4th ed.). Houston: Gulf.

22.

Kolb

(1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

23.

Kurlaender

(2006). Choosing community college: Factors affecting Latino college choice. New Directions for Community Colleges, 133, 7–16.

24.

Kusterer

K. C.

(1978). Know-how on the job: The important working knowledge of “unskilled” workers. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

25.

Lumina Foundation for Education. (2007). What we know about access and success in postsecondary education. Retrieved June 20, 2007, from http://www.luminafoundation.org/research/what_we_know/index.html

26.

Martinson

Holcomb

(2007). Innovative employment approaches and programs for low-income families. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

27.

Merriam

S. B.

Caffarella

R. S.

Baumgartner

L. M.

(2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

28.

Mezirow

J. D.

(2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

29.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). National Postsecondary Student Aid Study. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/npsas/tables.asp

30.

Osborne

Marks

Turner

(2004). Becoming a mature student: How adult applicants weigh the advantages and disadvantages of higher education. Higher Education, 48(3), 291–315.

31.

Perin

Hare

(2010). A contextualized reading-writing intervention for community college students. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Community College Research Center.

32.

Prince

(2008). Increasing student achievement for basic skills students—Research report 08–1. Olympia: Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges.

33.

Roder

Clymer

Wyckoff

(2008). Targeting industries, training workers and improving opportunities. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.

34.

Rose

(2004). The mind at work: Valuing the intelligence of the American worker. New York: Viking.

35.

Stiglitz

J. E.

(2012). The price of inequality: How today’s divided society endangers our future. New York: W. W. Norton.

36.

Terenzini

P. T.

Cabrera

A. F.

Bernal

E. M.

(2001). Swimming against the tide: The poor in American higher education [Research Report No. 2001–1]. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

37.

Torraco

R. J.

(2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367.

38.

Torraco

R. J.

Dirkx

J. M.

(2008). Academically underprepared adults—An exploration into their diversity and educational needs. In Chermack

(Ed.), Academy of Human Resource Development conference proceedings (pp. 1027–1034). Bowling Green, OH: Academy of Human Resource Development.

39.

Women Employed Institute. (2005). Bridges to careers for low-skilled adults: A program development guide. Chicago: Author.

40.

Working Poor Families Project. (2004). Working hard—still falling short: New findings on the challenges confronting America’s working families. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from http://www.workingpoorfamilies.org/pdfs/NatReport08.pdf

41.

Zedlewski

S. R.

Chaudry

Simms

(2008). A new safety net for low-income families. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

42.

Zedlewski

S. R.

Holcomb

Loprest

(2007). Hard-to-employ parents: A review of their characteristics and the programs designed to serve their needs. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

43.

Zemke

(1995). Adult learning: What do we know for sure? Training, 23(6), 31–37.