A profile of welfare recipient reading behaviors. (On-going topics).

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to profile reading literacy and employability of welfare recipients in the Northwest Arkansas region. The 105 parents/adults that participated in the Transitional Employment Assistance (TEA) program profiled themselves as: (a) one hundred percent feel that reading is important to the future success of their children, (b) ninety-eight percent read to their children on a daily or weekly basis and (c) ninety-five percent have children's books in their homes.

**********

The State of Arkansas' traditional AFDC welfare program was a lifetime program with no incentive for self-sufficiency. Arkansas, like most other states, was finding that they had third and fourth generation welfare recipients. These successors were not trying better to their lifestyle by gaining employment skills that would help to break the welfare cycle. Through a collaborative effort between the Department of Human Services, the State Department of Education, Adult Education Section, the State Health Department, Employment Security Division, and the University of Arkansas, an attempt was made to redesign the welfare program to better meet the needs of its participants and the State.

Welfare in the State of Arkansas was in the process of changing from the AFDC program effective July 1, 1997. The new program, Transitional Employment Assistance (TEA) was being implemented to help welfare recipients to become employed. The TEA program was limited to a specific period of time and gave cash benefits to the recipients that affiliated. The underlying purpose of the new program was to create a system that helped welfare recipients become job ready, employable, and employed. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 established who could and who would receive welfare dollars. It included the following:

(a) Recipients must find work within two years,

(b) Education and literacy services do not count toward work requirements,

(c) Benefits are only for a five-year period,

(d) Dollar amounts are capped at the 1996 level.

This bill did away with all JOBS programs ("The Link Between Welfare Reform and Family Literacy," 1997). The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act recognized that literacy was a key for welfare recipients to find employment and to remain employed. Of the 14 million people nationally on welfare, four million are adults, many of who need to improve their literacy skills in order to succeed in the workplace ("The Link Between Welfare Reform and Family Literacy," 1997). Welfare reform as stated by the New York State Education Department indicates that "more than 60 percent of people who spend more than five years on welfare enter welfare with less than a high school education." They go on to say that more than 65 percent of welfare recipients who have a high school diploma or the equivalent leave welfare and become self-sufficient within two years ("Welfare Reform: Roles that Education Can Play," 1997). The same study states that an estimated 40 percent do not read on an eighth grade level ("Welfare Reform: Roles that Education Can Play," 1997). Educational Testing Services indicate that on a scale from one to five where one is low, one-third to one-half of today's welfare participants perform at Level One ("Low Literacy of Welfare Recipients Imperils Chances to Rise From Poverty," 1997). The National Adult Literacy Study researchers found that 20% of welfare recipients reported having a physical or mental condition. These reported conditions prevent welfare recipients from participating fully in life's activities ("Low Literacy of Welfare Recipients Imperils Chances to Rise From Poverty," 1997). Welfare Reform Watch implied that the most effective welfare-to-work program included: (a) education, (b) job training, (c) job search, and (d) work experience ("Meeting the Promise of Welfare-to-Work," 1998).

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to profile reading literacy and employability of welfare recipients in the Northwest Arkansas region.

Method

A letter was mailed on April 29, 1997, to all welfare recipients in Northwest Arkansas. The total number of participants was 482. The letter indicated that attendance to complete the survey was important and would be used to determine their future participation in the TEA program. The letter indicated that the purpose of the survey was to profile their reading literacy and to establish their employability.

The total number responding and attending the assessment-planning program was 105. The total number of children of those involved in the study was 219. The program furnished transportation and childcare and took approximately two contact hours. The purpose of the TEA program assessment-planning period was to allow a Case Manager to develop a plan to help the participants achieve their employment goals. During the two hours all 105 participants completed a Registration Educational Assessment, a Transitional Employment Assessment Health Interview, and a Transitional Employment Health Interview Addendum along with a Reading Questionnaire. Also during the assessment period the Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) locator was given.

The first step was to identify the needs of the welfare population. The committee, one member from the Department of Human Services, the State Department of Education, Adult Education Section, the State Health Department, Employment Security Division, and the University of Arkansas, believed that one of the first requirements in employability was health. Thus, an effort was made to identify health needs by asking participants to answer questions pertaining to themselves, like: 1. "Do you have a regular doctor? 2. Are you pregnant? 3. Do you have major health problems that would prevent you from working, or affect the kind of work that you can do? (Includes--physical, emotional/mental, or substance abuse). The participants were also requested to answer questions that pertained to children, such as: 1. "Have your children had their appropriate immunizations? 2. Are your children receiving regular well child health checks? 3. Do you have children with special health care needs? (Includes--physical, emotional/mental, or substance abuse)".

A second need that was identified by the committee was to establish the reading levels of the welfare parents/adults. This was accomplished by administering the Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) locator test to determine vocabulary and comprehension levels as based on this standardized test. Scores were computed and given to Case Managers and referrals were made to local adult education learning centers. A Reading Questionnaire was administered to determine parental reading behaviors and reading characteristics, such as amount of reading. This article will present the findings from the data obtained from this questionnaire and provide a profile of the reading behaviors of the 105 welfare participants.

Findings

Table 1 indicates the frequency of responses and the percent of the welfare participants who read to their children. The data indicate that 88% of the participants read to their children, and 12% do not read to their children. Table 1 suggests that of the 88% of the people that read to their children, 60% read to their children on a daily basis, while 2% read to their children only on a monthly basis. Thirty-eight percent read to their children on a weekly basis. See <http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/spri02.htm> Table 1 answered the question, "Do you have children's books in your home?" Ninety-five percent of the participants in the study indicated yes, they do have children's books in their homes while only 5% indicated that they did not. Forty-four percent of the participants indicated that they do a pretty good job helping their children with reading. Twelve percent indicated that they were not doing such a good job helping their children with reading. However, a fourth (23%) of the participants felt they did a great job helping their children with reading.

The participants responded to the question, "Do you believe it is important to read aloud to your child daily?" Table 1 depicts that 62% denoted very important, 33% denoted important to read aloud to their children, and 1% denoted that it is not at all important. "Do you believe reading is important to your child's future success?" received an 83% response of very important and 16% indicated that reading to their children is important to the future success of their child, while 1% indicated that reading had little importance. Thirty-two percent of the respondents when asked, "Would you be interested in more help with how to teach your child to read?" indicated that they were not at all interested in additional help. However, 69% of the sample indicated that they were interested is receiving more help with teaching their children to read (see Table 1). "Do you help your child with homework?" received a 52% response of often, while 23% indicated that they helped their children with homework sometimes. But 26% of the sample responded that they never helped their children with homework (see Table 1). Table 1 indicates that 51% of the sample never took their children to the library; whereas, 23% of the participants took their children to the library at least once every two weeks. Table 2 depicts that 45% of the participants in the study had library cards. Fifty-five percent, over half of the participants in the study, did not have library cards. See <http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/spri02.htm> Twenty-seven percent designated that they were excellent readers, while 14% indicated that they were poor readers. Another 27% identified themselves as very good readers, indicating that 54% felt that they were very good or excellent readers (see Table 2).

The sample indicated that 65% of the participants in this study read six or more books or magazines in a year. Eleven percent indicated that they never read books or magazines during a year. Twenty-four percent read one to five books or magazines during a year (see Table 2) Table 2 depicts that when the sample was asked to respond to, "Do you read a newspaper?" Thirty-six percent indicated that they read a newspaper on a daily basis. Thirty-four percent read newspapers sometimes, 22% read newspaper weekly, while 8% never read a newspaper at all.

Table 3 depicts the participants' children by age groupings in percentage ranging from the youngest to the oldest. Twenty-seven percent of the participants had children one year or younger and 28% of the sample indicated that they had children 12 years or older. Table 3 also depicts the number of children by percent. Thirty-four percent of the participants had one child while only 1% had more than six. 71% of the participants had two or fewer children. See <http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/spri02.htm>

Conclusions

In conclusion, the 105 parents/adults that participated in the TEA (Transitional Employment Assistance) program profiled themselves as follows:

1. Ninety-eight percent read to their children on a daily or weekly basis.

2. Less than half have library cards.

3. A small majority (51%) never take their children to the library.

4. An overwhelming majority (95%) have children's books in their homes.

5. They feel (88%) that they do a good, pretty good, or great job helping their children with reading.

6. Ninety-nine percent feel that daily reading aloud to their children is important.

7. One hundred percent feel that reading is important to the future success of their children.

8. Sixty-nine percent are interested in gaining help on how to teach their children to read.

9. A large majority (86%) consider themselves good to excellent readers, and 65% of the 85% read more than five books or magazines a year.

10. Seventy-five percent help their children with homework.

11. Seventy-one percent have two or less.

This profile indicates that the participants in this study are readers and further more they believe that reading is important to the success of their children. This profile indicates that welfare recipients need better preparation on how to help their children learn to read and should be included in the TEA program in the task of breaking the welfare cycle.

References

Educational Testing Service. (Aug. 24, 1995). Low literacy of welfare recipients imperils chances to rise from poverty, http://etis1.ets.org/research/pic/pr/litdev.htn (31 March 1997).

Hankins, G. (March 12, 1997). Personal communication: Memo on Welfare addressed to Adult Education Administrators.

Imel, S. (1995). Practice application brief. Welfare to work: The role of adult basic and literacy education. Eric Clearinghouse. http://coe.ohio-state.edu/cete/ericacve/docs/welfwork.ht (3 April 1997).

The link between welfare reform and family literacy. http://novel.nifl.gov/ncfl/NCFLHOT.HTM (26 Nov. 1997).

New York State Education Department. Welfare reform: Roles that education can play. http://www.nysed.gov/workforce/wfroles.html (26 Nov. 1997)

Reading questionnaire.

Shover, A. District expects computers in every classroom by fall 1997. http://www.nwarktimes.com/Online Dec96/120496daysnews.html#story (31 March 1997).

Shover, A. DHS hears Northwest Arkansans on welfare reform. http://www.nwarktimes.com/Online Dec96/120496daysnews.html#story (31 March 1997).

Welfare overhaul challenges literacy field (August 1, 1996). http://www.nifl.gov/policylaug96.htn (31 March 1997).

Welfare reform watch: Meeting the promise of welfare-to-work. http://www.igc.apc.org/handsnet2/w ... reform/Articles/art.905542790.html (15 Oct. 1998).

Rhonda L. Harvey, University of Arkansas Fayetteville Jack B. De Vore, University of Arkansas Fayetteviile George S. Denny, University of Arkansas Fayetteville Renee L. Cambiano, Northeastern State University, OK

Rhonda, Ph.D, is Associate Professor ast Department of Vocational and Adult Education. Jack, Ph.D, is Associate Professor at Department of Vocational and Adult Education. George, Ph.D, is Associate Professor at Department of Educational Leadership, Counseling, and Foundations. Renee, Ed.D, is Assistant Professor at Department of Teacher Education.