DOCUMENT RESUME Askov, Eunice N.; Catalfamo, Andree Rose · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 411 472 CE 074 843....
Transcript of DOCUMENT RESUME Askov, Eunice N.; Catalfamo, Andree Rose · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 411 472 CE 074 843....
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 411 472 CE 074 843
AUTHOR Askov, Eunice N.; Catalfamo, Andree RoseTITLE College of Lake County's National Workplace Literacy Program
Grant. Evaluation Report.INSTITUTION Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park. Inst. for the
Study of Adult Literacy.SPONS AGENCY Office of Vocational and Adult Education (ED), Washington,
DC. National Workplace Literacy Program.PUB DATE 1997-00-00NOTE 243p.; For related documents, see ED 402 464-468, ED 403
389-392, CE 074 844-846, CE 074 848, and CE 074 851.CONTRACT V198A40173PUB TYPE Reports Evaluative (142) Tests/Questionnaires (160)EDRS PRICE MF01/PC10 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Adult Basic Education; Adult Literacy; Basic Skills;
*Curriculum Development; English (Second Language);Formative Evaluation; Job Skills; *Literacy Education;Models; Program Development; Program Effectiveness; ProgramEvaluation; School Business Relationship; StudentEvaluation; Summative Evaluation; *Workplace Literacy
IDENTIFIERS College of Lake County IL
ABSTRACTAn independent evaluation of the College of Lake County's
National Workplace Literacy Program included both formative and summativeevaluations over the 3 years of the project. The evaluation design wasplanned primarily as a naturalistic inquiry that used the structuredinterview approach to data collection. An external evaluator interviewed allproject stakeholders during scheduled visits over the 3-year period toidentify project strengths and recommendations for improvement. In addition,the evaluator visited classes at various sites and provided feedback on theinstruction. The project had several unique aspects: development of a list oflearning objectives and curriculum that could be used as a model across allsites; development of an assessment instrument for use withEnglish-as-a-Second-Language students; and inservice education provided topart-time adult educators. The evaluator provided an introductory inservicesession to the project staff on the Kirkpatrick evaluation model. Interviewdata were entered into a Filemaker Pro Database to detect trends in dataacross time and sites. Included in the trends were that all stakeholders wereimpressed by the changes evident in the learners and that staff viewed theproject as a learning experience for themselves. Findings indicated theproject was well implemented and became more central to the businessesconcerned as time went by. (The five-page report is followed by theseappendixes: structured interview forms, interview data, and analysis oftrends.) (YLB)
********************************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.
********************************************************************************
PENNSTATE
INSTITUTEFOR THE STUDYOF ADULTLITERACY
EVALUATION REPORT OF THECOLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY'S NATIONAL
WORKPLACE LITERACY PROGRAM GRANT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement
EDU ATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.
Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.
College of Education102 Rack ley Building
University Park, PA 16802-3202814-863-3777
1 ST COPY AVAILABLE
2
NATIONAL WORKPLACE LITERACY PROGRAMU. S. Department of Education
1994 -1997GRANT #V198A40173
EVALUATION REPORT OF THECOLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY'S NATIONAL
WORKPLACE LITERACY PROGRAM GRANT
Dr. Eunice N. AskovProfessor of EducationDirector, Institute for the
Study of Adult LiteracyPenn State University102 Rack ley BuildingUniversity Park, PA 16802-3202(814) 863-3777
Assisted by:Andree Rose CatalfamoInstitute for the Study of
Adult Literacy102 Rack ley BuildingUniversity Park, PA 16802-3202
PUBLICATIONS AND COPYRIGHTS
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS(EDGAR)
Revised July 8, 1992 - Applicable to all grant awards issued on or afterSeptember 18, 1992
Para. 75.620 General conditions on publications
The contents of this document were developed under a grant from the Department of Education.However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education,and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government."
EVALUATION REPORT OF THE COLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY'SNATIONAL WORKPLACE LITERACY PROGRAM GRANT
This report is an independent evaluation of the three-year project granted to theCollege of Lake County under the National Workplace Literacy Program (NWLP)of the U. S. Department of Education. The external evaluator, who had alsoprovided an independent evaluation during the previous 18-month grant cycleawarded to the College of Lake County, was engaged at the beginning of theproject. While she did not influence the statement of the project objectives, shedid work with the project team from the outset to develop the evaluation design.The involvement of the project stakeholders upfront in the evaluation designhas been widely recommended in the evaluation research literature as theoptimal approach to evaluation.
The Institute for the Study of Adult Literacy at Penn State was contracted toprovide the evaluation services. Dr. Eunice N. Askov, Institute Director andProfessor of Education, was named the external evaluator. The contract was inthe form of consulting days that would be devoted to the project. Two visits ofthree days duration each were planned for the first and third years. One three-day visit was planned for the second year of implementation. Consulting days fordata analyses and writing were also provided for each year of the project. Thisdesign was implemented as planned with one exception: During the third yearonly one site visit actually occurred due to cutbacks in the grant to the College.At the conclusion of each visit the external evaluator wrote a letter outliningcommendations and recommendations. These letters were included in theproject's annual reports to the U. S. Department of Education.
While the external evaluator was at the project site for only limited periods oftime, she and the project team maintained periodic contact during the three-yearperiod. Communication was handled throughout the project throughtelephone, fax, and email. Products and project updates were sent to the externalevaluator periodically. Furthermore, informal visits with the project teamoccurred during various conferences, such as the Workplace LearningConferences held in April in Milwaukee. She also heard presentations from theproject team at the annual regional adult education inservice day for northernIllinois as well as at other national conferences.
Evaluation Design
The evaluation design was planned primarily as a naturalistic inquiry whichused the structured interview approach to data collection. (Sample interviewforms for partners, training directors/supervisors, learners, and project staff areprovided in Appendix A.) The external evaluator interviewed all the projectstakeholders during the scheduled visits over the three-year period to identifyproject strengths and recommendations for improvement. In addition, theevaluator visited classes at various sites and provided feedback on the
5
instruction that was observed. Thus, the project included both formative as wellas summative evaluation.
Since project objectives had been stated upfront as part of the contract of theCollege of Lake County with the US Department of Education, theaccomplishment of these objectives was also monitored during the three-yearproject. (A detailed discussion of these are included in the Final Report of theCollege of Lake County.) In addition, the Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick, D.,1994, Evaluating Training Programs, San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler) wasused as guidance to the evaluator and the project team for summativeevaluation. Since the evaluator was not located at the project site, and since shewas contracted for a limited number of consulting days throughout the project,the data for the Kirkpatrick evaluation model were collected by the project team.
The remainder of this report is structured according to the approaches toevaluation that were conducted. At the conclusion of the report a holisticevaluation summary is provided.
Accomplishment of the Grant Objectives
The Final Report of the College of Lake County to the US Department ofEducation summarizes concisely the accomplishment of the grant objectives.The ten project objectives are described accurately. Evidence for theiraccomplishment is objectively provided. There is no need to repeat this aspect ofthe evaluation study here since it is provided in the project's Final Report.
The Final Report also describes the setting for the project, namely in eightmanufacturing companies in the Lake County area. Workers were released onthe clock or paid for the time in classes. (The money used to pay the workers toattend classes was counted by the companies as the required match for the grant.)
The project was originally housed in the economic development division of theCollege since it was perceived to contribute to the economic development ofLake County. After about a year into the project, it was transferred to the adultbasic skills division under different College oversight. Its offices were alsomoved from the more centrally located business complex to an outlying buildingwhich housed the adult basic skills programs.
The project proactively attempted to use the data collection instrument providedand mandated by the US Department of Education known as NWLIS. For thefirst two years of the project the full-time assessment specialist collected andentered the data into the computerized database. While numerous problemswith the data collection system existed that were beyond the control of the projectteam, the NWLIS data do profile the learners in the project. The data from thatinstrument are also reported in the Final Report.
2
The project was unique in that it aspired to more than simply providingworkplace literacy services in eight area manufacturing companies. While itcertainly did provide instruction that was customized to the workplace, it alsosought to develop a list of learning objectives and curriculum that could be usedacross all sites. These are model efforts that were part of the spirit of being anational demonstration program. Much of the project effort throughout thethree years was devoted to curriculum development.
Furthermore, the project team also developed an assessment instrument for usewith English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) learners. They were not satisfied withthe available commercial and informal instruments. Therefore, they developedand piloted an instrument that uses workplace contextual pictures to assess alearner's language competency. It is highly commendable that the project wouldgo as far as they did with a test development effort. (This assessment instrumentshould be further developed and commercialized through a more rigorousvalidation process as well as assessed for its test reliability and predictiveness.)
Another unique aspect of this project was the inservice education provided topart-time adult educators in the Lake County area. Since the College hires onlypart-time instructors for its adult education programs, one of the project goalswas to develop a cadre of trained instructors for workplace literacy programs.The project effectively accomplished this goal through various inserviceprograms. The curriculum described above also provided the structure neededfor instructors who were previously inexperienced in workplace literacy.
Finally, the partnership of area businesses created by the project was extremelystrong and beneficial. Companies which might otherwise even be competitorsworked together to solve mutual problems, even those beyond workplaceliteracy. The regular partnership meetings across sites were highly commendablein fostering a spirit of collaboration at the local level.
Evaluation Approach Using Kirkpatrick's Model
The evaluator provided an introductory inservice session to the project staff onthe Kirkpatrick model. Using a handout which described the four levels ofevaluation--satisfaction of all stakeholders, mastery of the skills taught, transferof instruction to the workplace, and impact on the organizations--the staff thenbrainstormed how the levels could be used in data collection. They decided onprocedures for collecting the data used as evidence for the accomplishment ofeach of the four levels of evaluation. Monitoring the data collection for theselevels of evaluation served as a focal point for the external evaluator'ssubsequent visits. One member of the project team served as the lead in this datacollection effort. She worked closely with the project instructors as well as withthe companies to obtain the data. The results are reported in detail in the Collegeof Lake County's Final Report.
3
7
As one inspects the data that are reported, one can see that this was a highlyeffective project. It is also clear that the data that are reported are honest--inother words, no claims are made for total mastery, transfer, or impact. However,it is clear that over the three-year project that a very positive impact was realizedby all stakeholders. Therefore, in terms of the Kirkpatrick evaluation hierarchy,the project was judged to be highly effective.
A question must be raised about the cost effectiveness of the project. In terms ofdelivering services in the local area, it would not be considered cost effective,given the size and qualifications of the staff. If the project, however, is viewed interms of its total intent--that of developing curriculum and building the capacityof the local part-time teaching cadre--then it could be as cost effective as any ofthe national demonstration projects.
Structured Interview Data Analysis
Qualitative analysis of the interview data collected by the external evaluatoroccurred with the assistance of a staff person at the Institute for the Study ofAdult Literacy. The assistant entered the responses that were recorded by theexternal evaluator under each question in the structured interview forms (seeAppendix A) into a Filemaker Pro Database. Using a database permitted theevaluator and the assistant to see trends in the data across time and across sites.
Some of the interviews were conducted in small groups, especially of learners.Others, such as with partners, were conducted individually. The project directorand staff were not in attendance for most of the interviews with companystakeholders. These interview reports are provided in Appendix B. (The namesof the individuals and companies are removed to protect confidentiality that wasassured during the interviews.)
The analysis of trends is provided in Appendix C. It is apparent that allstakeholders were impressed by the changes that were evident in the learners.Often this anecdotal evidence convinced them of the worthwhile nature of theproject. Learners also saw changes in themselves. They felt increased confidenceand self-esteem. Many began other learning projects outside the company, forexample, by taking classes at the community college. Perhaps the mostnoteworthy of the comments made by the supervisors was that the workersbecame more independent. While scheduling the release of workers on theclock was difficult, it was perceived to be worth the effort because supervisors didnot have to spend time reading and reviewing instructions for the workers.
Furthermore, the staff viewed the project as a tremendous learning experiencefor themselves. The project director pushed all of them to become involved inthe dissemination of the project which brought about professional growthamong the staff. Some of the business partners also became actively involved inproject dissemination which opened up new opportunities for them.
4
Evaluation Summary
The NWLP project at the College of Lake County was well implemented. In fact,as time went by, the project became more central to the businesses concerned.Companies that had already made a commitment to workforce education at thebeginning of the project grew in their commitment and sophistication ofimplementation. The leadership of the project staff and the curriculummaterials produced were highly regarded. Most of the companies wanted toinstitutionalize the program at the end of the three years. All wanted tocontinue the relationship with the College of Lake County.
Not surprisingly, program institutionalization often seemed to depend on theleadership of key business partners. In one small company, for example, thebusiness partner remained constant throughout the three-year period. Hebecame so involved in the project that he collected his own data that providedevidence for the effectiveness of the project. He, in fact, became an outstandingbusiness spokesman in the project dissemination. On the other hand, whereleadership changed during the period, or where other factors intervened (such aslack of consistent support from the parent company or economic downturns),institutionalization became problematic.
Unfortunately, the project always seemed to have a marginalized status in theCollege. Although the immediate supervisor of the project recognized themerits of continuing the project, others did not seem to recognize its value. Theambitious project was not deemed to be cost effective without governmentalsupport. Rather than using the cadre of talent that had been developed by theproject to extend its reach into area businesses, the College chose not to continuethe project. Perhaps its location in the adult basic skills program worked againstthis type of entrepreneurial activity which regularly occurred in the economicdevelopment department.
Some state or regional structure seems to be necessary to enable projects like thisone to continue beyond the life of the grant. Even though the state of Illinoisoffers workplace literacy grants, it appears that an organizing state structure ismore likely to assure continuation of a demonstration project. It seemed to bedifficult for the College, on its own, to move from a government-supportednational demonstration project to locally delivered services supported by areabusinesses. Perhaps because the project was more ambitious than just deliveringservices to area businesses, it was perceived to be beyond the scope of the localcollege. For this reason this evaluator recommends that future nationaldemonstration projects be channeled through the states to encourage thedevelopment of state support structures to ensure institutionalization ofinnovation.
5
APPENDIX A
Structured Interview Forms
1.0
COLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY PROJECTWorkplace Literacy Project
Learner Interview GuideApril 15-17, 1997
1. Place of Employment:
2. Name of Class:
3. How satisfied were you with the class? Why?
4. What was the most important part? Least important?
5. What did you gain from the class?
6. How did the class help you with your job? Examples?
Reading?
Writing?
Speaking?
Listening?
Math?
Teamwork?
7. Did the class help you understand the company better? Examples?
8. Do you feel better about yourself as a worker as a result of the class?
9. Did the class prepare you for a company training program? Which one?
10. Did the class help you with getting a promotion or a better job? How?
11. How did your fellow workers feel about you taking the class?
12. Would you recommend others to take the class?
13. Did you get support from your supervisor to attend the class?
14. Do you look forward to any more classes? Where?
15. Do you do any more reading, writing, or math at work than'you did before the class? Examples?
16. Do you do any more reading, writing, or math at home than you did before the class? Examples?
17. How did the class help you outside the job? Examples?
Family?
Community?
Voting?
18. Other comments:
COLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY PROJECTWorkplace Literacy Project
Interview Guide for PartnersApril 28, 1997
1. Place of employment
2. How satisfied are you with the project? Why?
3. How effective was the partnership between industry and the College?
4. Did your expectations change during the course of the project? How?
5. What were your major disappointments?
6. How did the company benefit (productivity, quality, safety, absenteeism, retention, etc.)? Examples?
7. How did the workers benefit (morale, attendance, teamwork, etc.)? Examples?
8. How cost-effective was the project?
9. How do you feel about continuing the project?
10. Has the project helped the company with public relations (newspaper articles, TV, or radio coverage,
etc.)? Examples?
11. Has the project improved the company's training program? Examples?
12. What changes do you see in the near future that would change the needs of your workers for training?
13. Would you recommend this training program to your colleagues in other companies?
14. Other comments:
COLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY PROJECTWorkplace Literacy Project
Supervisor/Training Director Interview GuideApril 15-17, 1997
1. Place of Employment:
2. Name of Class:
3. Number of your workers who participated:
4. How satisfied were you with the class(es)? Why?
5. How did the company benefit (productivity, quality, safety, absenteeism, retention, etc.)? Examples?
6. How did the workers benefit (morale, attendance, teamwork, etc.)? Examples?
7. Has participation in the class(es) affected their chances for advancement?
8. How much did the workers talk to you about the class(es)?
9. How did the workers who participated feel about the class(es)?
10. How did the other workers feel about the class(es)?
11. How did you feel about releasing workers from the job? How did you accommodate?
12. How does this training compare with training the company has done or could do itself?
13. Would you recommend the company continue this kind of training?
14. What are the advantages and disadvantages of working with the College in offering the class(es)?
15. Other comments:
COLLEGE OF LAKE COUNTY PROJECTWorkplace Literacy Project
Staff Interview GuideApril 15-17, 1997
1. How satisfied are you with the project?
2. What are the greatest satisfactions?
3. To what extent are there agreements on the goals among all stakeholders?
4. What factors helped with the success of the project?
5. What factors acted as deterrents to the project?
6. What do you see as the major outcomes?
7. What are the major disappointments?
8. What was the most difficult part of the project?
9. How do you feel about your linkage with industry? Will it continue?
10. What would you change in a future project?
11. How has the college benefited from the project?
12. How much support have you had from the college?
13. How cost-effective was the project?
14. What are your plans for the future regarding this program?
15. Other comments:
/8
APPENDIX B
Interview Data
19
1111
11N
MI M
N M
I11
011
MN
Mt I
OW
IIIIII
Will
OM
Re
IIIIII
IN M
IN
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
20
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
1E11
2 3
4 5
6C
ompa
ny 2
Mat
h, R
eadi
ng/W
ritin
g
15 Yes
. The
y no
w h
ave
a be
tter
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
wha
t the
y re
ad, d
on't
need
to w
rite.
The
wor
kers
per
form
bet
ter
if th
ey fe
el g
ood
abou
t the
mse
lves
. The
re is
a p
arty
for
com
plet
ers-
-a fe
elin
g of
bei
ng s
peci
al.
Sel
f con
fiden
ce h
as im
prov
ed. T
he le
arne
rs a
re b
ette
r at
filli
ng o
ut fo
rms.
The
y ar
eab
le to
ask
que
stio
ns. D
emea
nor
has
impr
oved
--ca
n't r
eally
tie
to a
par
ticul
arcl
ass.
Doc
umen
tatio
n is
bet
ter
and
done
mor
e qu
ickl
y. T
he w
orke
rs u
nder
stan
d an
d ca
nex
plai
n pr
oble
ms
bette
r. BE
ST
CO
PY
AV
A11
21
OM
MIN
IM
IL O
NE
RO
I U
NN
MI
/III
1111
1111
1U
NA
1111
.11
1111
1.1
111
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ect
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e? 22
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
It is
hop
ed th
at th
e w
orke
rs w
ill g
o to
col
lege
. Opt
ions
for
prom
otio
n ar
efa
vora
ble-
-cla
ss a
ttend
ance
sho
ws
inte
rest
in th
e jo
b. O
ne p
erso
n go
t ano
ther
job
with
in th
e co
mpa
ny.
The
y ap
prec
iate
the
exte
nsio
n of
the
wor
k da
y. T
hey
don'
t hav
e tim
e to
talk
exc
ept
durin
g a
sit d
own
perio
d.
The
y w
ant t
o co
ntin
ue, t
here
fore
big
ger
num
bers
. Whe
n is
nex
t cla
ss s
tart
ing?
The
rear
e no
com
plai
nts-
-usu
ally
they
are
off
to c
lass
es.
The
re is
no
rese
ntm
ent-
-the
com
pany
is fa
ir ab
out d
ecid
ing
who
can
go
to c
lass
.T
here
is a
com
mitm
ent-
-the
per
son
mus
t go
if se
lect
ed. T
hey
are
disa
ppoi
nted
if n
otse
lect
ed.
It w
as to
ugh
to r
elea
se w
orke
rs, b
ut it
was
don
e. T
oo m
any
wan
ted
to a
ttend
,th
eref
ore
ther
e w
as a
wai
ting
list.
Thi
s w
as a
has
sle
for
supe
rvis
ors.
23
1111
111
MIN
I IO
W IN
K=
It a
Mt
1111
1PM
illM
ilt M
I11
1111
1
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
In o
fferin
g th
e cl
assf
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
In th
is tr
aini
ng, w
orke
rs c
an le
arn
at th
eir
own
pace
and
und
erst
andi
ng, a
nd c
anpa
rtic
ipat
e in
cla
ss. T
alki
ng a
nd li
sten
ing
in r
equi
red
trai
ning
. The
wor
kers
feel
com
fort
able
to a
sk q
uest
ions
.
Def
inite
ly--
"got
to c
ontin
ue e
ven
if it
is a
pai
n in
the
neck
."
The
fact
that
the
clas
ses
are
held
her
e, w
ith p
eers
, is
impo
rtan
t. P
eopl
e do
n't d
otu
ition
rei
mbu
rsem
ent p
rogr
ams.
The
col
lege
's in
stru
ctor
s ar
e go
od, e
nthu
sias
tic a
ndw
ant t
o te
ach.
The
se c
lass
es a
re n
ot a
s ef
fect
ive
with
in-h
ouse
trai
ners
. The
inte
rvie
wee
will
enco
urag
e st
uden
ts to
take
cla
sses
at t
he c
olle
ge.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
ers
20, 2
1, a
nd 2
2A
ugus
t 30-
-Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
2425
INN
MIN
IA
ll O
W 1
1111
1lit
MI M
N M
I/ U
K: O
W .1
10M
I_ I'
1111
1111
1111
1/U
NE
1110
1
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er Q
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
2:11
2 E
l 3 4
0 5
6G
roup
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ess(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
-(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
26
Com
pany
4
ES
L
4 (U
nion
pla
nt--
unio
n su
ppor
ted-
-95%
His
pani
c)
Stu
dent
s en
joye
d th
e cl
asse
s.M
eetin
gs in
Eng
lish,
Spa
nish
on
brea
ks.
Stu
dent
s ar
e ab
le to
do
the
job
bette
r--im
prov
ed q
ualit
y. T
hey
need
to u
nder
stan
d th
epr
oduc
tion
coor
dina
tion.
Pap
erw
ork
was
don
e by
sup
ervi
sors
--th
ey c
an n
ow h
ave
the
wor
kers
do
it. T
hey
lear
ned
Eng
lish
voca
bula
ry, l
eadi
ng to
bet
ter
wor
k pe
rfor
man
ce a
nd a
n ea
sier
tim
efo
r
the
supe
rvis
or.
27
imm
as wit ow Imo wii ime
imr 4Mi
am4
41111
41110
Omt
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
iii th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el /t
out
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
ies)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e lo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
28
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sel
f est
eem
has
impr
oved
. The
wor
kers
talk
mor
e an
d as
k m
ore
ques
tions
. The
y ca
nun
ders
tand
wha
t Eng
lish
spea
kers
are
say
ing.
If th
e w
orke
rs c
an le
arn
how
to fi
ll ou
tfo
rms,
etc
. the
y ca
n bi
d on
jobs
.If
they
can
't sp
eak
Eng
lish
they
are
afr
aid
to b
id.,
One
lear
ner
did
bid
and
got a
bet
ter
job,
but
will
be
disq
ualif
ied
if he
can
't do
the
trai
ning
or
the
iob
beca
use
of lo
w E
nglis
h sk
ills.
The
y as
ked
wha
t wor
ds m
eant
. The
y w
ere
enth
usia
stic
; no
nega
tives
.
Goo
d.
No
teas
ing.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
29
1111
111
1111
111
1111
1O
Mal
irA
NA
OW
Aim
am m
a gm
OM
MI
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
in o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
com
pany
may
be
able
to o
ffer
som
e tr
aini
ng in
Spa
nish
--th
ey a
re lo
okin
g in
to th
is.
Def
inite
ly.
The
col
lege
's te
ache
r is
bet
ter.
The
com
pany
had
trie
d a
sim
ilar
sort
of t
rain
ing
inte
rnal
ly, b
ut it
was
too
gene
ric a
nd th
e st
uden
ts lo
st in
tere
st. T
here
was
no
push
.
Ofte
n, th
e ch
ildre
n of
thes
e w
orke
rs a
re b
iling
ual,
but t
he w
ives
spe
ak o
nly
Spa
nish
. The
y liv
e in
Wau
kega
n--s
tore
s ar
e S
pani
sh--
ther
efor
e, th
ere
is le
ssre
ason
for
them
to le
arn
Eng
lish.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
ers
15 a
nd 1
6A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
30
wis
as
aro
asA
saw
so
ma
,ww
,pa
1st
ist
Am
' as
tor
Olt
Mil
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
gD
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
@ T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
gl1
02 0
3 04
05
06V
isit
1..P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 32
Com
pany
5
GE
D, E
SL,
mat
h
18 The
inte
rvie
wee
s w
ere
very
sat
isfie
d w
ith th
e pr
ojec
t. T
he in
stru
ctor
s w
ere
good
, the
yw
ante
d to
kno
w a
bout
the
job,
and
fit w
ell i
nto
the
envi
ronm
ent.
The
rat
e of
turn
over
is 1
1% a
mon
g em
ploy
ees
who
took
the
clas
ses,
as
oppo
sed
toth
e ov
eral
l com
pany
rat
e of
24%
. The
ann
ual s
alar
y of
par
ticip
ants
incr
ease
d 7.
8%,
whi
le c
ompa
ny w
ide
it in
crea
sed
only
5%
. One
stu
dent
has
bee
n pr
omot
ed to
lead
pers
on. A
bsen
teei
sm a
mon
g pa
rtic
ipan
ts is
"dr
amat
ical
lybe
tter"
than
for
the
com
pany
as
a w
hole
.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
33
MR
MN
MN
AM
.111
1an
MI
sA g
o ea
r m
a am
ow
am
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
In th
ecl
ass(
es)
effe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
34
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
The
wor
kers
wan
t mor
e cl
asse
s, b
ut th
e in
terv
iew
ees
are
not s
ure
wha
t the
y ca
n do
abou
t tha
t. T
he c
ompa
ny w
as b
ough
t out
in N
ovem
ber,
and
the
new
ow
ners
are
not
clea
r on
wha
t the
ir po
sitio
n is
on
this
pro
ject
.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
The
inte
rvie
wee
s di
dn't
have
to a
sk th
e co
mpa
ny fo
r re
leas
e tim
e fo
r th
e pa
rtic
ipan
ts.
Thi
s m
ade
thei
r jo
bs e
asie
r.
MI I
NN
MB
MN
NM
I all
MN
is in
sow
my
psi
MIR
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
Itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
In o
fferin
g th
e ci
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
The
com
pany
sho
uld
cont
inue
the
proj
ect;
how
ever
, thi
s co
mpa
ny is
not
a p
artn
er o
nth
e ne
w p
roje
ct. T
he in
terv
iew
ees
do n
ot k
now
how
they
will
inst
itute
this
pro
ject
--ne
edto
reg
roup
.
The
col
lege
was
alw
ays
acce
ssib
le w
ith h
elp
and
idea
s. T
hey
assi
sted
in p
robl
emso
lvin
g w
ith s
uper
viso
rs, w
ho d
on't
alw
ays
have
the
skill
s or
tim
e to
ass
ist w
orke
rsw
ith th
eir
acad
emic
nee
ds. T
he e
xter
nal e
xper
t was
goo
d.
Com
pany
use
d to
be
a sm
all c
once
rn; n
ow is
a b
ig c
ongl
omer
ate.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
ers
8 an
d 9
Aug
ust 3
0--S
epte
mbe
r 1,
199
4
36
MN
1.11
111
11M
N O
M N
M O
MM
IM
NM
illII1
MI M
INE
ll M
O N
M
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 38
1E11
02
03 0
4 05
06
Com
pany
5
Mat
h, G
ED
, ES
L
abou
t 2-4
in e
ach
clas
s (n
o un
ions
)
The
inte
rvie
wee
s w
ere
mor
e sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
e E
SL
clas
s--n
otic
ed im
prov
emen
ts.
The
re w
as le
ss fr
ustr
atio
n am
ong
empl
oyee
s, le
ss fo
r th
e su
perv
isor
to d
o. T
here
was
not a
pro
blem
in s
ched
ulin
g.
The
cla
sses
incr
ease
d th
e w
orke
rs' t
oler
ance
to m
ath.
The
com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
wor
kers
and
sup
ervi
sors
has
impr
oved
. Job
mat
eria
ls w
ere
used
in c
lass
.
39
OM
MO
MI
I I
I1
I I
I I
II
II
II
I I
MI
1111
1IN
IM
IM
NI
I I
I II
INII
II
I I
II
I I
IN N
M N
M M
I
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
In th
eci
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
cias
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
iass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e Jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouec
com
odat
e?
40
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
One
ES
L st
uden
t jus
t got
a p
rom
otio
n. P
artic
ipat
ion
in c
lass
es is
a p
lus
at r
aise
tim
e.
The
wor
kers
did
n't w
ant t
o be
late
for
clas
ses.
The
y w
ere
enth
usia
stic
and
per
sona
llysa
tisfie
d w
ith th
e cl
ass.
One
ask
ed fo
r he
lp.
Goo
d.
The
y fe
lt as
if th
ey d
idn'
t nee
d th
e cl
asse
s. T
hey
have
bee
n ou
t of t
he s
choo
len
viro
nmen
t.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed. B
ES
T C
OP
YM
AM
E41
III M
EM
MI M
I WM
IIM
MIIN
IIMIN
EM
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
In o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
42
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
Thi
s is
spe
cific
trai
ning
. Mos
t of t
he c
ompa
ny tr
aini
ng is
OJT
.
Yes
, bec
ause
sup
ervi
sors
can
then
spe
nd le
ss ti
me
in tr
aini
ng.
Adv
anta
ges:
Mot
ivat
ed g
roup
, goo
d in
stru
ctor
s, h
elp
thro
ugh
unde
rsta
ndin
g.D
isad
vant
ages
: Som
e of
the
cons
ulta
nts
wer
e no
t as
good
as
the
trai
ned
prof
essi
onal
s, in
tern
al a
ttem
pts
drop
ped
off (
frus
trat
ing)
. -
The
pro
ject
beg
an w
ith te
stin
g an
d re
crui
ting
for
clas
ses.
Now
the
prog
ram
islo
okin
g fo
r vo
lunt
eers
--an
yone
who
will
par
ticip
ate.
It is
mor
e qu
ality
orie
nted
,w
ith e
mph
ases
on
prob
lem
sol
ving
and
team
bui
ldin
g.
Tra
iner
s 10
, 11,
12
and
13A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
43
=I M
O M
N M
IM
I MO
NM
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
EH
02
03 4
5 0
6C
ompa
ny 6
2 6 ea
ch
The
y ar
e no
t sat
isfie
d w
ith th
e cl
asse
s. T
hey
have
n't i
mpr
oved
the
Eng
lish
of th
ew
orke
rs. T
he w
orke
rs a
re in
cla
ss o
nly
for
the
extr
a pa
y.
One
wor
ker's
Eng
lish
impr
oved
--he
can
now
com
mun
icat
e be
tter
and
can
writ
e hi
sna
me.
? (N
o be
nefit
?)T
he c
ompa
ny h
as to
wor
k th
roug
h an
inte
rpre
ter.
No
chan
ges
note
d.
4445
1111
1111
1IM
INM
B N
M M
I NM
NM
11.1
1U
M M
I MN
I11
MIN
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e lo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
4 6
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
Yes
, but
they
hav
en't
adva
nced
. The
pro
blem
is th
at th
ey d
on't
unde
rsta
nd, a
nddo
n't
real
ly w
ant t
o sp
eak
Eng
lish-
-the
cla
ss is
a "
geta
way
."
Non
e.
The
re a
re n
o co
mpl
aint
s w
hile
they
are
on
the
cloc
k, b
ut th
ey d
on't
like
to s
tay
afte
rw
ork.
Mos
t wan
t to
take
a c
lass
.
The
re w
as a
pro
blem
whe
n th
e w
orke
rs w
ere
rele
ased
dur
ing
wor
k tim
e--it
mes
sed
up
prod
uctio
n.
47
SS E
ll M
I I=
ION
MI
MI
NM
Ell
MI
MI
INN
IIII
II
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
In o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
It is
ver
y di
ffere
nt.
Yes
, may
be s
ome
of th
e w
orke
rs r
eally
WA
NT
to d
o it.
It w
ould
hel
p th
e su
perv
isor
san
d th
e co
mpa
ny.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Leav
e ou
t tho
se s
tude
nts
who
don
't w
ant c
lass
es a
nd m
ake
mor
e tim
e fo
r th
ose
that
do.
The
inte
rvie
wee
s do
n't k
now
Spa
nish
-th
is w
ould
hel
p th
emco
mm
unic
ate
with
the
empl
oyee
s--it
is h
ard
to w
ork
with
thos
e w
ho c
an't
spea
kE
nglis
h at
all.
The
y w
ant t
o kn
ow w
hat t
hey
empl
oyee
s sa
y ab
out t
hem
beh
ind
thei
r ba
cks.
The
y w
ould
take
Spa
nish
if it
was
offe
red.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
ers
17 a
nd 1
8A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
4849
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
0111
11N
MIN
IIIIII
IIIIM
II111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
111=
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 50
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er p
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
Egi
l 2 3
4 5
6C
ompa
ny 7
Mat
h an
d.O
ral/W
ritte
n C
omm
unic
atio
n B
AS
E P
rogr
am
6 Yes
. Job
-rel
ated
bas
ic s
kills
are
ver
y im
port
ant.
Cur
ricul
um d
evel
opm
ent w
as th
ebe
st p
art.
Dis
satis
fied
with
the
sche
dulin
g--le
avin
g in
the
mid
dle
of a
shi
ft ca
used
pro
blem
s.S
tagg
erin
g is
a c
reat
ive
solu
tion.
Trie
d to
do
clas
ses
arou
nd lu
nch
and
shift
cha
nge.
The
con
vers
ion
from
Eng
lish
to M
etric
sys
tem
was
hel
ped
by th
e cl
ass.
The
re is
an
impr
oved
abi
lity
to r
ecru
it w
orke
rs.
Mor
ale
is im
prov
ed b
y le
arni
ng in
the
wor
k en
viro
nmen
t. B
ette
r co
mpr
ehen
sion
of
inst
ruct
ions
, exp
ress
ion.
Rej
ects
wen
t dow
n; h
ad c
hart
rea
ding
pro
gram
in c
lass
so
the
wor
k w
as b
ette
r un
ders
tood
--lo
ts o
f gra
phs
(nee
d m
ore)
.
51
1111
1E
N M
EI M
I NM
OM
INN
MN
LIM
MI O
M =
I MR
NM
NM
MIN
NS
ISM
MI
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
52
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Not
dire
ctly
--bu
t abl
e to
impr
ove
in th
e jo
b--le
ads
to p
rom
otio
n.
The
y di
d no
t tal
k ab
out i
t on
the
floor
--th
ey w
ere
too
busy
. Stu
dent
s ar
e ve
ryse
lf-su
ffici
ent.
The
y w
ant t
o kn
ow w
hat's
com
ing
next
.
The
re a
re n
o ill
feel
ings
.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
53
Imo
I= =
IN
s N
u E
N N
s N
IN o
w E
NE
N N
o
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
in o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
54
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
re is
a lo
nger
term
con
tinui
ty to
this
cla
ss. T
his
is m
ore
like
scho
ol--
done
as
habi
t.M
ade
stud
ents
thin
k--s
tart
usi
ng th
eir
min
ds--
jobs
are
rep
etiti
ve a
nd n
ot c
ondu
cive
toth
inki
ng. T
hey
had
forg
otte
n ho
w to
thin
k an
d ho
w to
pro
blem
sol
ve. T
he "
Lear
n at
Lunc
h B
unch
" te
ach
each
oth
er--
one
pers
on g
ets
spec
ial t
rain
ing,
then
teac
hes
othe
rs.
Yes
--ge
t eve
ryon
e w
ho n
eeds
it in
to c
lass
es--
mor
e an
d di
ffere
nt ty
pes
of c
lass
es. T
hey
have
hit
only
the
tip o
f the
iceb
urg-
-now
they
wan
t mor
e. T
hey
got p
ast f
eelin
g st
upid
.T
he p
roje
ct n
eeds
to r
eass
ess
need
s an
d di
rect
ions
. ES
L ne
eds
to c
ontin
ue.
The
col
lege
offe
rs e
xper
tiseg
ood
teac
hers
, net
wor
k. T
hey
are
build
ing
a co
mpu
ter
reso
urce
cen
ter.
Con
tinue
d m
ath
and
ES
L ar
e ne
eded
. Thi
s co
mpa
ny c
ould
run
cla
sses
all
the
time.
The
dep
artm
ents
are
not
dee
p--le
an w
orkf
orce
, the
refo
re h
ard
to r
elea
se fo
ran
y tr
aini
ng. O
nly
rece
ntly
has
the
com
pany
hire
d ad
ditio
nal w
orke
rs.
Tra
iner
14.
Aug
ust 3
0- S
epte
mbe
r 1,
199
4
55
MI I
=M
illN
M M
NIII
IIO
M E
ll M
I I=
MO
OM
MN
1111
MI I
= I=
MN
INN
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
56
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
181
2 03
04
05 6
Com
pany
8
ES
L
10, t
hen
6
The
inte
rvie
wee
s w
ere
pret
ty s
atis
fied
with
the
clas
s. T
he n
umbe
rs w
ere
low
.
Wor
ker
conf
iden
ce h
as in
crea
sed,
and
they
are
will
ing
to ta
lk n
ow. J
ob r
elat
ed it
ems
and
cust
omer
ser
vice
ski
lls h
ave
impr
oved
, as
have
pro
duct
ivity
and
qua
lity.
The
wor
kers
like
the
job-
spec
ific
skill
s, v
ocat
iona
l ter
ms,
mea
sure
men
t. T
hey
liked
mor
e ge
nera
l ins
truc
tion
that
they
had
und
er a
pre
viou
s pr
ogra
m.
57
MIII
IINIM
IIMIII
IMM
IIIIII
11.1
=11
1111
1111
1111
1111
111M
IIIM
I0 1
1111
1111
1111
111
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
58
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
No.
Lan
guag
e sk
ills
wou
ld b
e a
fact
or, h
owev
er.
In th
e be
ginn
ing,
they
talk
ed a
lot-
-wee
kly.
The
n at
tend
ance
pete
red
out-
-inte
rvie
wee
does
n't k
now
why
. The
sup
ervi
sors
wer
e to
ld to
let t
hem
go.
The
y re
ally
like
d it.
The
re w
as n
o re
sent
men
t--t
hey
felt
good
. Peo
ple
wor
k in
team
s.S
kills
dev
elop
men
tcl
asse
s--b
asic
ski
lls c
lass
es b
ut n
ot E
SL,
are
don
e in
hou
se.
Sup
ervi
sors
wer
e to
ld to
rel
ease
wor
kers
for
clas
s.
59
IIIM
MI I
NN
MI =
MO
MI=
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
Oul
d yo
u re
com
men
d th
eco
mpa
ny c
ontin
ue th
iski
nd o
f tra
inin
g?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
in o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
Thi
s w
as m
ore
appr
opria
te th
an th
e cl
ass
men
tione
d in
que
stio
n 10
. Thi
s st
ress
esth
e im
port
ance
of a
sses
smen
t tha
t lea
ds to
app
ropr
iate
trai
ning
.
Yes
.
Wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
was
com
fort
able
and
add
ed b
ette
r de
pth.
Non
e.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
er 1
9A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
6 0
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
NM
MI
IIIIII
OM
IIIII
1111
IIIIII
INN
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
62
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
O1
®2
03 0
4 05
06
Com
pany
1
ES
L
6 of
14
The
inte
rvie
wee
is v
ery
satis
fied
with
the
clas
ses;
they
enh
ance
conf
iden
ce. B
efor
eth
e cl
asse
s, w
orke
rs w
ould
n't q
uest
ion
anyt
hing
. The
inte
rvie
wee
als
o le
arne
d th
atth
e w
orke
rs c
an te
ll on
ly o
ne th
ing
at a
tim
e.
The
wor
kers
wor
k to
geth
er b
ette
r. T
he b
uddy
sys
tem
was
use
d to
trai
n w
orke
rs o
n th
e
new
com
pute
r sy
stem
. Thi
s w
as n
ot d
one
befo
re.
Wor
kers
are
mor
e co
nfid
ent.
One
wor
ker
is r
eadi
ng th
e ne
wsp
aper
.E
nglis
h is
30-4
0% b
ette
r.
63
MI N
MM
INN
I=M
IUM
M
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
B. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e lo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e? 64
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
re is
not
muc
h ro
om fo
r ad
vanc
emen
t. W
orke
rs h
ave
take
n on
mor
e re
spon
sibi
lity,
and
ther
efor
e ge
t mor
e pa
y. T
hey
now
rem
embe
r in
form
atio
n be
tter.
The
wor
kers
talk
to th
e in
terv
iew
ee w
hen
they
hav
e a
prob
lem
or
a pr
ojec
t.
The
y ar
e en
thus
iast
ic -
they
cle
an u
p fo
r cl
asse
s.
The
re is
som
e ne
gativ
ity. S
ome
peop
le w
ant h
ighe
r le
vel c
lass
es; t
hey
curr
ently
feel
left
out.
How
ever
, it w
as th
ough
t to
be b
est t
o be
gin
with
thos
e w
ho n
eede
d th
e m
ost
help
.
Cla
ss ti
me
is s
ched
uled
, and
stu
dent
s ne
ed n
o re
min
ders
to a
ttend
. Wor
kers
are
cros
s tr
aine
d so
that
they
can
cov
er a
cros
s di
ffere
nt d
epar
tmen
ts.
It is
wor
th th
etr
oubl
e. W
orke
rs a
re b
ecom
ing
mor
e in
depe
nden
t in
follo
win
g th
e jo
b--t
his
has
light
ened
the
supe
rvis
ors'
wor
k lo
ad.
65
MI N
M O
M11
1111
1111
1M
O N
M N
M M
I MI M
N N
M N
MM
I MI
MN
MI
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
in o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
66
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
trai
ning
dep
artm
ent i
s m
ore
rece
ptiv
e to
out
side
sou
rces
.
Yes
.
The
Col
lege
mov
es s
tep
by s
tep-
-no
assu
mpt
ions
. The
colle
ge te
ache
r is
cert
ified
--ha
s st
atus
, is
bette
r. H
owev
er, t
hese
teac
hers
have
to te
ach
on a
set
sche
dule
--th
ey c
anno
t del
ay c
lass
if th
e w
orke
rs h
ave
apr
essi
ng jo
b th
at n
eeds
to b
e
com
plet
ed.
The
inte
rvie
wee
wan
ts to
ser
ve o
ther
wor
kers
too.
Wan
ts to
give
cla
sses
in
prob
lem
sol
ving
.
Tra
iner
4A
ugus
t 14-
16, 1
995
67
EM
I MN
MI M
N M
I MI M
O11
111
MI M
I OM
MI M
IM
INI
IMO
MO
Ell
MI
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
Q T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
68
EH
El 2
03 0
4 05
06
Com
pany
2
Mat
h
20 The
inte
rvie
wee
is v
ery
satis
fied.
Con
fiden
ce h
as im
prov
ed.
The
com
pany
has
ben
efite
d in
dire
ctly
--em
ploy
ees
have
mor
e m
otiv
atio
n, fe
wer
mis
take
s.. C
onfid
ence
has
impr
oved
--em
ploy
ees
are
appl
ying
for
high
er le
vel j
obs.
The
y ar
e ab
le to
use
mat
h on
the
job.
Con
fiden
ce h
as im
prov
ed. T
he c
lass
enc
oura
ged
addi
tiona
l edu
catio
n.
69
MI M
IM
I MI N
M M
I IO
W M
NIM
O M
I MI
Mill
NM
IIIIII
1111
11
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
In th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e Jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
70
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
re a
re n
o di
rect
ince
ntiv
es fo
r pa
rtic
ipat
ion;
how
ever
, cla
ss a
ttend
ance
isen
cour
aged
.
Not
muc
h.
The
wor
kers
feel
goo
d; th
ey h
ave
give
n po
sitiv
e fe
edba
ck.
Oth
er w
orke
rs a
re c
ompl
acen
t; th
ey a
re a
n ag
ing
popu
latio
n. R
ecru
itmen
t is
apr
oble
m. T
he w
orke
rs d
on't
real
ize
that
the
wor
kpla
ce is
cha
ngin
g--it
has
n't h
it th
em.
Som
e ha
ve s
econ
d jo
bs to
sup
port
thei
r fa
mili
es--
ther
efor
e, th
e ex
tra
time
toat
tend
clas
ses
is n
ot a
top
prio
rity.
The
com
pany
enc
oura
ges
the
gran
ting
of r
elea
se ti
me
for
clas
ses-
-the
yun
ders
tand
the
bene
fits.
The
y w
ork
arou
nd p
robl
ems
thro
ugh
over
time-
-thi
s is
sue
is n
obi
g de
al.
71
U11
1111
1111
1111
1MIN
IIIM
MIN
INN
ION
IMIII
IIMM
INN
ION
IRIM
MIII
I
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
In o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orIn
terv
iew
Gui
de
New
idea
s fr
om e
xter
nal t
rain
ers-
-diff
eren
t per
spec
tives
. Tec
hnic
al tr
aini
ng is
don
ein
tern
ally
. The
pro
cess
of b
asic
ski
lls le
arni
ng in
crea
ses
wor
kers
'con
fiden
ce.
It
mak
es th
em m
ore
trai
nabl
e, m
ore
conf
iden
t, m
ore
able
to r
easo
n.
The
inte
rvie
wee
wou
ld s
tron
gly
enco
urag
e th
e co
ntin
uanc
e of
trai
ning
. The
issu
e is
getti
ng th
e co
mpa
ny to
see
the
bene
fits
(incl
udin
g fa
mily
pay
offs
).It
wou
ld b
e go
od to
offe
r co
mpu
ter
trai
ning
.
The
col
lege
has
mor
e ex
pert
ise
in le
arni
ng c
once
pts;
how
ever
, in
hous
e tr
aini
ng is
mor
e sp
ecia
lized
. A fe
w o
f the
wor
kers
took
cla
sses
at C
LC--
wor
king
tow
ard
thei
ras
soci
ate'
s de
gree
s. T
hey
act a
s ro
le m
odel
s fo
r th
e ot
hers
.
Wor
ker
com
plac
ency
is th
e bi
gges
t pro
blem
. New
mac
hine
ry is
rep
laci
ngw
orke
rs.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
er 3
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
7273
we
so Is
RN
Ns
aim
s am
Nom
am
or
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
upQ
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 74
l2 3
4 5
6C
ompa
ny 4
ES
L
all
The
cla
sses
wer
e go
od. T
hey
help
ed th
e co
mpa
ny.
It is
now
eas
ier
to d
eal w
ith th
e w
orke
rs, f
rom
a m
anag
emen
t poi
nt o
f vie
w. T
hey
can
read
ord
ers-
-sup
ervi
sors
don
't ha
ve to
tell
them
wha
t to
do.
It is
eas
ier
to c
omm
unic
ate,
bot
h in
side
and
out
side
.It
is a
lso
easi
er fo
r em
ploy
ees
tom
ove
up.
75
MI M
I11
111
OM
Mil
Mill
MI N
IPill
MS
MI R
ION
MI W
O M
I ON
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
In th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
76
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sup
ervi
sors
nee
d G
ED
or
Hig
h S
choo
l dip
lom
a--t
his
is a
new
req
uire
men
t. S
o th
iscl
ass
help
s.
The
y di
d no
t tal
k to
the
inte
rvie
wee
a lo
t. A
rel
ativ
e of
the
inte
rvie
wee
who
wor
ks a
tth
e pl
ant l
ikes
the
clas
ses,
and
may
bec
ome
a le
ad m
an.
The
se c
lass
es s
houl
d ha
ve b
een
offe
red
long
ago
.
A lo
t of w
orke
rs w
ante
d to
be
in th
e cl
asse
s, b
ut c
ould
n't p
artic
ipat
ebe
caus
e of
a la
ckof
spa
ce. T
here
is n
o re
sent
men
t--e
mpl
oyee
s ar
e pa
id o
vert
ime
to c
over
thei
r tim
e.
Em
ploy
ees
are
paid
ove
rtim
e to
atte
nd, a
nd o
ther
em
ploy
ees
cove
rfo
r th
ose
atte
ndin
g cl
ass.
Thi
s is
har
d to
acc
ompl
ish
in s
mal
l dep
artm
ents
.
77
1111
111
Ulf
1111
11M
I IN
NN
MS
IMI
NM
Ial
lM
B M
I IN
S
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
in o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
com
pany
is n
ow s
tart
ing
a tr
aini
ng p
rogr
am fo
r ne
w e
mpl
oyee
s. O
ne s
uper
viso
ris
nee
ded
to d
o tr
aini
ng.
Yes
--10
0%.
Adv
anta
ges:
Em
ploy
ees
know
mor
e, a
nd it
is c
heap
er to
do
the
wor
k.D
isad
vant
ages
: non
e.
Mor
e ad
vanc
ed c
lass
es a
re n
eede
d; fo
r in
stan
ce, a
hig
her
leve
l ES
L cl
ass.
The
inte
rvie
wee
is g
oing
to ta
ke c
lass
es a
t CLC
--he
wan
ts to
mov
e up
by
getti
ng a
nas
soci
ate'
s de
gree
.
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
er 1
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
78
79
1111
111
VIM
Mil
MI
NM
SIM
INS
IND
VIII
MI M
I MB
MI I
MO
MI W
M
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 80
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er Q
Q T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
IN2
03 0
4 05
06
Com
pany
4
ES
L
5 ou
t of 1
3
Ver
y sa
tisfie
d. E
mpl
oyee
s no
w u
nder
stan
d or
ders
, pro
duct
car
ds, e
tc.
whi
ch th
ey
coul
dn't
read
bef
ore.
Less
mis
take
s ar
e be
ing
mad
e on
the
job-
-bef
ore
the
clas
s, th
eem
ploy
ees
didn
'tco
mpr
ehen
d al
l of t
he in
form
atio
n, a
nd g
uess
ed. N
ow th
ey w
illas
k in
bot
h E
nglis
h (a
tm
eetin
gs)
and
Spa
nish
(to
be
sure
they
und
erst
ood.
) T
hein
terv
iew
ee tr
ies
to ta
lk to
them
in E
nglis
h fo
r pr
actic
e.
Som
e em
ploy
ees
got G
ED
s. S
tude
nts
are
enth
usia
stic
and
wan
t mor
ecl
asse
s.
81
MS
MI N
MI
INIII
MI O
ltM
INIli
a M
I NM
IIN
N.
MIN
=Ill
MI
1111
111
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ecl
ass(
es)
effe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e lo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e?
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Yes
, par
t of i
t.1
or 2
may
be
prom
oted
. The
com
pany
wan
ts th
em to
hav
e a
GE
D o
r a
high
sch
ool d
iplo
ma
(req
uire
d.)
Mos
t par
ticip
ants
are
on
the
seco
nd s
hift,
and
the
inte
rvie
wee
is o
n th
e fir
st. A
cou
ple
of th
e pe
ople
he
talk
ed to
did
n't c
are
for
the
clas
s--s
aid
it w
as to
o ha
rd fo
rthe
m.
Par
ticip
ants
felt
good
abo
ut th
emse
lves
, and
enj
oyed
the
clas
s.
Som
e of
the
othe
r w
orke
rs h
ave
to w
ork
mor
e, a
nd th
ey d
on't
like
it. O
ther
s ha
vesi
gned
up
for
the
clas
s th
emse
lves
.
The
re is
no
prob
lem
with
this
. Oth
er w
orke
rs fi
nish
the
wor
k fo
r th
e st
uden
ts a
ttend
ing
clas
s.
8283
MI=
MO
SIM
INN
EM
I M
-»
MI
1111
111
IIII
III
1111
11M
I SI
NN
INE
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
Itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
In o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
re is
no
com
pany
trai
ning
pro
gram
; it's
all
on th
e jo
b tr
aini
ng. T
his
trai
ner
isw
orki
ng o
n tr
aini
ng th
at h
e w
ill b
e do
ing.
Yes
.
The
col
lege
is h
elpf
ul.
Som
e ho
urly
wor
kers
wan
t to
lear
n S
pani
sh s
o th
at th
ey c
an b
ecom
e bi
lingu
al.
The
maj
ority
of t
he. s
uper
viso
rs a
re b
iling
ual.,
016
inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsT
rain
er 2
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
84©
5
um u
m m
a us
an
am a
m r
e I=
In a
n as
uss
1111
MS
MN
MIS
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
O T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
1 gi
2 3
4 5
6G
roup
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. N
umbe
r of
wor
kers
who
part
icip
ated
:
4. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
5. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
6. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 86
Com
pany
9
Mat
h
8,15
Ver
y sa
tisfie
d w
ith c
lass
es. S
tude
nts
can
now
do
thei
r ow
nm
ath-
com
pute
ow
n ra
tes,
read
sca
les,
do
life
skill
s m
ath.
Whe
n w
orke
rs w
ent t
o B
luep
rintR
eadi
ng, t
hey
used
appl
icat
ion
of m
ath.
Wor
kers
wan
t mor
e ed
ucat
ion
that
they
can
appl
y.
The
com
pany
trie
d to
teac
h m
ath
and
blue
prin
t rea
ding
on
the
shop
floo
r--t
his
was
n't
succ
essf
ul.
Sel
f-es
teem
has
impr
oved
. Par
t of t
eam
that
won
sta
te c
ompe
titio
n.T
he in
terv
iew
ee is
goi
ng to
look
at t
he d
ocum
enta
tion
for
mor
etr
acki
ng.
87
MIN
MN
MI I
NN
Mil
Mil
Ma
I. III
=I M
I MIM
I11
1111
7. H
as p
artic
ipat
ion
in th
ecl
ass(
es)
affe
cted
thei
rch
ance
s fo
r pr
omot
ion?
8. H
ow m
uch
did
the
wor
kers
talk
to y
ou a
bout
the
clas
ses?
9. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs w
hopa
rtic
ipat
ed fe
el a
bout
the
clas
s(es
)?
10. H
ow d
o th
e w
orke
rs fe
elab
out t
he c
lass
(es)
?
11. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
rele
asin
g w
orke
rs fr
omth
e jo
b? H
ow d
id y
ouac
com
odat
e? 88
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Yes
. Rec
ently
, thr
ee s
tude
nts
took
on
mor
e re
spon
sibi
lity
and
got a
pay
incr
ease
.T
hey
wer
e m
ade
into
sup
ervi
sors
. In
one
inst
ance
, wor
kers
who
had
had
blu
eprin
ttr
aini
ng q
uest
ione
d a
supe
rvis
or, w
ho th
en a
dmitt
ed th
at th
e w
orke
rs w
ere
right
.
Lots
of f
eedb
ack
was
rec
eive
d, e
spec
ially
abo
ut h
ow w
hat t
he s
tude
nts
lear
ned
incl
ass
is r
elat
ed to
the
job.
The
one
s w
ho d
o w
ell t
alk
mor
e. S
ome
are
now
usin
gch
eckb
ooks
rat
her
then
get
ting
chec
ks c
ashe
d by
a m
iddl
eman
. The
y ar
e ge
tting
tokn
ow e
noug
h m
ath
so th
at th
ey w
on't
be c
heat
ed w
hen
they
sho
p.
Wor
kers
are
no
long
er a
sham
ed, b
ut th
ey w
ere
at fi
rst.
The
y hi
d th
eir
clas
spa
rtic
ipat
ion.
One
Mex
ican
stu
dent
had
nev
er g
one
to s
choo
l at a
ll.
Ver
y fe
w w
orke
rs a
re n
ot in
a c
lass
of s
ome
kind
. The
com
pany
's p
olic
y is
that
the
wor
kers
can
hav
e on
e ho
ur o
f cla
ss p
er w
eek
on c
ompa
ny ti
me.
Cla
sses
are
hel
d on
site
.
Sch
edul
es a
re a
djus
ted
to a
ccom
mod
ate
stud
ents
. The
y w
ork
in te
ams,
and
the
team
cove
rs th
e jo
b w
hile
a s
tude
nt is
in c
lass
.If
the
stud
ent i
s no
t app
lyin
g he
rsel
f/him
self
to th
e cl
ass,
she
/he
is a
sked
to le
ave.
89
MN
MIN
Me
Ow
Nis
NM
Om
rig
aft
ail a
m R
io o
lfa
r am
am
12. H
ow d
oes
this
trai
ning
com
pare
with
trai
ning
the
com
pany
has
don
e or
coul
d do
itse
lf?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
the
com
pany
con
tinue
this
kind
of t
rain
ing?
14. W
hat a
re th
e ad
vant
ages
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
wor
king
with
the
Col
lege
in o
fferin
g th
e cl
ass(
es)?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
016
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
90
Sup
ervi
sor/
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Wor
kers
are
now
abl
e to
take
req
uire
d co
mpa
ny s
afet
y tr
aini
ng a
nd u
nder
stan
d it.
The
re a
re lo
ng te
rm tr
aini
ng b
enef
its a
nd in
cent
ives
: mor
e re
spon
sibi
lity
equa
ls m
ore
pay.
Sel
f est
eem
has
impr
oved
--w
orke
rs a
re n
owlo
okin
g fo
r m
ore
resp
onsi
bilit
y.T
his
is d
ocum
ente
d in
a r
epor
t.
Abs
olut
ely.
The
inte
rvie
wee
has
alre
ady
been
doi
ng s
o, a
nd w
ill c
ontin
ue. T
heco
mpa
ny p
rovi
des
tuiti
on r
eim
burs
emen
t for
any
trai
ning
that
is jo
b re
late
d.
The
col
lege
is a
res
ourc
e--in
terv
iew
ee w
ants
to k
eep
colle
ge to
enh
ance
wor
k.T
heco
llege
offe
rs a
bro
ader
arr
ay o
f res
ourc
es. T
he c
urric
ulum
was
dev
elop
ed"f
or u
s,"
usin
g sh
op-f
loor
info
. The
col
lege
als
o of
fers
exp
ertis
e an
d th
e st
atus
of t
heco
llege
inst
ruct
or.
It is
har
d to
mov
e w
orke
rs in
to c
olle
ge c
lass
es--
the
colle
ge is
at a
rem
ote
loca
tion.
3-4
GE
Ds
have
bee
n ea
rned
by
wor
kers
. Mos
t of t
he h
ourly
wor
kers
wou
ld n
ot g
o
on to
col
lege
--th
ey r
ead
at a
6th
gra
dele
vel.
Tra
iner
s 5,
6, a
nd 7
.
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
91
1111
111
IIIIII
IIO
U11
111
MIN
MN
=III
NIP
=II
MIN
1111
MIN
I MI M
il =
I MO
MI
1. H
ow s
atis
fied
the
proj
ect?
Gro
up
Vis
it
are
you
with
2. W
hat a
re th
e gr
eate
stsa
tisfa
ctio
ns?
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
ther
eag
reem
ents
on
the
goal
sam
ong
all s
take
hold
ers?
4. W
hat f
acto
rs h
elpe
d th
esu
cces
s of
the
proj
ect?
5. W
hat f
acto
rs a
cted
as
dete
rren
ts to
the
proj
ect?
92
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
1811
2 3
4 5
6N
ine
peop
le a
re in
volv
ed in
cur
ricul
um d
evel
opm
ent-
-in th
ree
team
s,w
ith c
onsu
ltant
s.S
ix a
lso
taug
ht. G
ood
orga
niza
tion.
"It'
s ne
at to
be
the
guin
ea p
ig in
teac
hing
." G
ood
supp
ort f
or p
art-
time
wor
k fr
om C
LC a
nd th
eco
nsul
tant
s.
The
se d
issa
tisfa
ctio
ns w
ere
men
tione
d: n
eede
d m
ore
prep
time
and
guid
ance
from
ALR
C o
n w
hat c
ompe
tenc
ies
wer
e--d
idn'
t use
SC
AN
S--
cust
omiz
edco
mpe
tenc
ies
toth
e co
mpa
ny--
conf
lict a
mon
g co
nsul
tant
s le
d to
con
fusi
on,s
hort
tim
e lin
e an
d
pres
sure
with
lots
of c
omm
itmen
t. T
hese
satis
fact
ions
wer
e m
entio
ned:
per
sona
lgr
owth
from
inte
rcha
nge,
sat
isfa
ctio
n fr
omim
plem
enta
tionp
rogr
am w
ell r
ecei
ved.
Eve
ryon
e in
volv
ed in
set
ting
goal
s--w
ere
writ
ten
dow
nin
cur
ricul
um. B
est c
usto
miz
edba
sic
educ
atio
n fo
r w
orke
rs.
Ear
ly w
orks
hops
on
asse
ssm
ent,
deve
lopi
ng c
urric
ulum
,G
ED
; the
par
tner
s, s
taff
and
ALR
C to
geth
er b
uilt
a co
mm
on k
now
ledg
e ba
se; t
each
ers
doin
g cu
rric
ulum
; pilo
tte
stin
g; m
ento
ring
of o
ther
teac
hers
(ne
w r
ole)
; ini
tial a
sses
smen
tand
inte
rvie
ws;
good
rel
atio
nshi
ps w
ith c
ompa
nies
; pro
fess
iona
l. gr
owth
of te
ache
rs n
ot in
volv
ed in
curr
icul
um d
evel
opm
ent.
Old
CLC
com
pute
rs--
had
to h
ave
mat
eria
ls r
etyp
ed; c
olle
ge's
polic
y on
num
ber
ofw
orki
ng h
ours
dur
ing
sum
mer
; lac
k of
com
mun
icat
ion
atC
LC fr
om to
p->
dow
n re
emer
genc
y po
licie
s.
93
MN
IMM
IN
M I=
NM
INN
=I I
MO
MIN
ME
IIM
MI
NM
OM
I111
6. W
hat d
o yo
u se
e as
the
maj
or o
utco
mes
?
7. W
hat a
re th
e m
ajor
disa
ppoi
ntm
ents
?
8. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost d
iffi-
cult
part
of t
he p
roje
ct?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
your
link
age
with
Indu
stry
? W
ill It
con
tinue
?
10. W
hat w
ould
you
cha
nge
In a
futu
re p
roje
ct?
11. H
ow h
as th
e co
llege
bene
fited
from
the
proj
ect?
94
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Out
com
es: V
ery
frie
ndly
cur
ricul
um w
ith s
ubst
ance
--va
luab
le to
any
teac
her
orad
min
istr
ator
; cou
rse
outli
nes-
-fre
e of
jarg
on; t
each
er r
esou
rces
and
mat
eria
ls--
6sa
mpl
e le
sson
pla
ns; s
tude
nt p
erfo
rman
ce a
nd e
nthu
sias
m--
seei
ng th
em g
o on
and
tran
sfer
ski
lls to
life
.
Dis
appo
intm
ents
: tra
inin
g vs
. edu
catio
n in
pro
blem
sol
ving
- -
had
to b
ack
off a
nd u
sege
neric
; not
eno
ugh
time
in c
lass
--co
uldn
't ge
t off,
som
etim
es p
eopl
ein
volv
ed in
alit
erac
y ta
sk a
naly
sis
wer
e no
t in
clas
s.
Cus
tom
izin
g th
e as
sess
men
ts a
nd c
ompe
tenc
ies,
kep
t rev
isiti
ng c
ompe
tenc
ies,
conc
erne
d ab
out d
oing
them
rig
ht; t
ime
cons
trai
nt; l
ogis
tics-
-offi
ce s
uppo
rt w
as a
tC
LC
but t
each
ing
site
was
at C
ompa
ny 8
.
Thi
s de
pend
ed o
n th
e co
mpa
ny--
som
e in
itial
pro
blem
s w
ith r
elea
se ti
me-
-mos
tco
mpa
nies
wer
e ve
ry s
uppo
rtiv
e. C
ompa
nies
wan
ted
bette
r se
lf es
teem
.W
rote
pitfa
lls to
Adm
inis
trat
ors
who
wan
t mon
ey to
sta
rt p
roje
ct.
Mor
e re
sour
ces
shou
ld b
e pr
ovid
ed a
head
of t
ime.
Tim
e fr
ame
shou
ld b
eex
tend
ed -
need
abo
ut tw
o m
onth
s lo
nger
. Bet
ter
com
pute
rs s
houl
dbe
pro
vide
d.A
LRC
som
etim
es n
ot a
s go
od a
s it
shou
ld h
ave
been
--w
as b
ette
r in
beg
inni
ng.
Tea
cher
s w
ere
not t
reat
ed a
s pr
ofes
sion
als
until
they
ass
erte
d th
emse
lves
.
Not
app
licab
le--
ques
tion
was
not
ask
ed.
95
OM
IIMO
I=O
M M
I I=
MI
NM
MN
12. H
ow m
uch
supp
ort h
ave
you
had
from
the
colle
ge?
13. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ojec
t?
14. W
hat a
re y
our
plan
s fo
rth
e fu
ture
reg
ardi
ng th
ispr
ogra
m?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
96
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
N/A
.
Ver
y co
st-e
ffect
ive
- -lo
ts o
f wor
k an
d pr
oduc
ts fo
r th
e m
oney
--a
barg
ain
Alre
ady
seek
ing
out w
orkp
lace
teac
hing
. Tea
cher
sw
ant t
o w
ork
on c
urric
ulum
deve
lopm
ent.
The
y m
ay w
ant t
o be
pro
gram
adm
inis
trat
ors.
Fut
ure
prof
essi
onal
grow
th is
a g
oal.
Tea
cher
s fe
el m
ore
"gro
unde
d"--
in p
roce
ss,c
urric
ulum
deve
lopm
ent,
etc.
Fac
tors
that
hel
ped
with
dev
elop
men
t of t
he p
rogr
am: (
Tra
iner
) re
spec
ted
teac
hers
'ab
ilitie
s, g
ave
free
rei
n, v
ery
self-
dire
cted
and
task
orie
nted
; bra
inst
orm
ing.
Fac
tors
that
det
erre
d: la
ck o
f cla
rity
abou
t com
pete
ncie
s.
Sta
ff M
embe
rs 5
, 6, a
nd 7
Com
pany
8A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
BE
ST
CO
PY
AV
AIL
AB
LE97
MN
MN
- N
M N
M M
N=
MN
MI M
O M
IIII
IIO
M M
N M
I
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. H
ow s
atis
fied
are
you
with
the
proj
ect?
2. W
hat a
re th
e gr
eate
stsa
tisfa
ctio
ns?
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
ther
eag
reem
ents
on
the
goal
sam
ong
all s
take
hold
ers?
4. W
hat f
acto
rs h
elpe
d th
esu
cces
s of
the
proj
ect?
5. W
hat f
acto
rs a
cted
as
dete
rren
ts to
the
proj
ect?
98
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
0 P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
0112
32 3
4 5
6T
he in
terv
iew
ee is
sat
isfie
d w
ith th
e pr
ojec
t. T
here
has
bee
n a
lot o
f sup
port
from
the
colle
ge. C
ompa
nies
wan
t wor
kers
to b
e ab
le to
rea
d fo
rms-
-but
wor
kers
are
not
fam
iliar
with
them
.
The
pho
togr
aphy
was
men
tione
d--t
he in
terv
iew
ee lo
ves
usin
g th
e ca
mer
a. (
teac
her
only
). V
ocat
iona
l sto
ries,
clo
ze e
xerc
ises
, ass
essm
ents
. Mea
ning
ful t
o st
uden
ts.
Like
s C
olla
bora
tors
boo
k.
The
re is
goo
d ag
reem
ent a
mon
g th
e st
akeh
olde
rs. C
ompa
ny is
ver
y co
oper
ativ
e an
dhe
lpfu
l. T
hey
allo
w th
e ed
ucat
ors
to d
o w
hat's
bes
t. T
hey
are
clea
r ab
out t
hego
als-
-nam
es o
f too
ls, m
achi
nery
, etc
. The
y re
aliz
e th
at th
e w
orke
rs n
eed
basi
csk
ills-
-it's
oka
y to
use
the
text
.
The
se fa
ctor
s w
ere
men
tione
d: th
e co
oper
ativ
e sp
irit o
f the
com
pany
, the
vol
unta
rypa
rtic
ipat
ion,
(te
ache
r's)
ques
tions
and
res
ourc
es fa
cilit
ate
easy
rel
atio
nshi
ps.
The
se fa
ctor
s w
ere
men
tione
d: ti
me
(mor
e in
-cla
ss, m
ore
wee
ks o
f cla
ss),
fatig
ue fo
rw
orke
rs.
59
=I I
= M
I= II
IMM
IMI1
1 M
Th
IM
6. W
hat d
o yo
u se
e as
the
maj
or o
utco
mes
?
7. W
hat a
re th
e m
ajor
disa
ppoi
ntm
ents
?
8. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost d
iffi-
cult
part
of t
he p
roje
ct?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
your
link
age
with
indu
stry
? W
ill it
con
tinue
?
10. W
hat w
ould
you
cha
nge
in a
futu
re p
roje
ct?
11. H
ow h
as th
e co
llege
bene
fited
from
the
proj
ect?
100
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Thi
s cl
ass
whe
ts a
n ap
petit
e fo
r ed
ucat
ion-
-it s
houl
d be
long
er. T
hecl
ass
shou
ld b
eco
ntin
ued
and
inst
itutio
naliz
ed. P
rodu
ctio
n, q
ualit
y, e
tc. h
ave
impr
oved
.
Non
e.T
he g
ap b
etw
een
the
last
gra
nt (
Aug
ust)
and
the
curr
ent o
ne(F
ebru
ary)
was
men
tione
d.
Cla
ssro
om s
pace
has
poo
r ve
ntila
tion
and
is s
mal
l. N
o A
-Veq
uipm
ents
only
ach
alkb
oard
and
a d
ry m
ount
boa
rd. T
each
er s
houl
d be
par
t of
scre
enin
g an
d ab
le to
sepa
rate
the
stud
ents
into
leve
ls-s
he w
ishe
d sh
e ha
d m
ore
anec
dota
l inf
o in
adva
nce-
-she
got
onl
y sc
ores
--co
uld
have
beg
un th
e "m
eat"
of t
hete
achi
ng fa
ster
.
The
link
age
with
indu
stry
is g
ood.
The
inte
rvie
wee
doe
s no
t kno
wif
it w
ill c
ontin
ue.
See
que
stio
n #8
. The
teac
her
shou
ld b
e in
volv
ed u
pfro
nt.
The
col
lege
has
n't b
enef
ited
as m
uch
as it
cou
ld. T
hey
don'
trea
lize
wha
t a "
little
gem
"th
ey'v
e go
t. T
hey
coul
d us
e th
e m
edia
bet
ter
and
get m
ore
busi
ness
esin
volv
ed.
I
MN
=I N
M N
M a
ll M
I MI N
ME
MM
O =
I MN
UM
MI N
M
12. H
ow m
uch
supp
ort h
ave
you
had
from
the
colle
ge?
13. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ojec
t?
14. W
hat a
re y
our
plan
s fo
rth
e fu
ture
reg
ardi
ng th
ispr
ogra
m?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Inte
rvie
wP
artic
ipan
ts
102
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sup
port
from
the
colle
ge h
as b
een
good
.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
The
inte
rvie
wee
wou
ld li
ke to
teac
h m
ore-
-can
't be
full-
time.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Sta
ff M
embe
r 2
Com
pany
1A
ugus
t 14-
16, 1
995
103
On
NB
InIII
IIIIn
NM
OM
MI a
ll M
I MIN
NM
En
MI N
M M
I NE
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
up()
Sta
ff pP
artn
er °
Tra
inin
g D
irect
orLe
arne
r
visi
t12
32 3
4 5
61.
How
sat
isfie
d ar
e yo
u w
ithth
e pr
ojec
t?
2. W
hat a
re th
e gr
eate
stsa
tisfa
ctio
ns?
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
ther
eag
reem
ents
on
the
goal
sam
ong
all s
take
hold
ers?
4. W
hat f
acto
rs h
elpe
d th
esu
cces
s of
the
proj
ect?
5. W
het f
acto
rs a
cted
as
dete
rren
ts to
the
proj
ect?
4
Ver
y sa
tisfie
d.
Com
pany
2 is
nic
e. S
tude
nts
are
good
--su
ppor
tive.
The
inte
rvie
wee
got
the
book
ssh
e w
ante
d.
Hum
an R
esou
rces
is s
uppo
rtiv
e of
the
proj
ect,
but t
he in
terv
iew
ee d
oesn
't kn
ow a
bout
man
agem
ent.
Gen
eral
ized
edu
catio
n, n
ot s
peci
fic tr
aini
ng p
ique
s an
inte
rest
ined
ucat
ion.
Whe
n st
udyi
ng th
e m
etric
sys
tem
, eve
ryon
e he
lped
eac
h ot
her,
in s
pite
of t
heir
diffe
renc
es. P
ublic
ity w
ithin
the
com
pany
hel
ped.
Peo
ple
com
e in
with
mat
hpr
oble
ms
durin
g th
eir
brea
k. T
here
is te
amw
ork-
-the
y ar
e us
ed to
that
on
the
job.
The
mat
h cl
ass
rang
es fr
om 3
rd g
rade
leve
l to
calc
ulus
leve
l--w
as p
ublic
ized
as
mul
ti-le
vel,
and
was
bas
ed o
n sc
hedu
ling,
not
leve
ls. T
here
are
diff
eren
t gro
ups
for
diffe
rent
thin
gs. T
his
is o
kay
for
expe
rienc
ed te
ache
rs, b
ut m
ore
diffi
cult
for
clas
sroo
mm
anag
emen
t. M
any
diffe
rent
dep
artm
ents
--ha
rd to
be
very
job-
spec
ific.
Can
do
gene
raliz
ed c
usto
miz
atio
n.
BE
STC
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
1 05
MI
=I
- N
MM
IN U
MN
MI N
MM
I MI M
I
6. W
hat d
o yo
u se
e as
the
maj
or o
utco
mes
?
7. W
hat a
re th
e m
ajor
disa
ppoi
ntm
ents
?
8. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost d
iffi-
cult
part
of t
he p
roje
ct?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
your
link
age
with
indu
stry
? W
ill it
con
tinue
?
10. W
hat w
ould
you
cha
nge
In a
futu
re p
roje
ct?
11. H
ow h
as th
e co
llege
bene
fited
from
the
proj
ect?
106
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
stu
dent
s w
ant m
ore
clas
ses-
-com
mun
icat
ions
, adv
ance
dm
ath.
Ane
cdot
al d
ata
was
men
tione
d.
The
re is
no
cont
act w
ith s
uper
viso
rs--
Par
tner
4 is
the
only
con
tact
.H
ad to
ask
for
tool
s
thro
ugh
Par
tner
4.
She
did
n't k
now
if s
tude
nts
wer
e tr
ansf
errin
g sk
ills
to jo
b. T
hecl
ass
is n
ot a
s su
ppor
tive
of lo
w-le
vel s
tude
nts
as it
isof
adv
ance
d on
es. A
tuto
r fo
ron
e ho
ur p
er w
eek
wou
ld h
ave
been
goo
d.S
he d
idn'
t use
the
com
pute
r-as
sist
ed
The
inte
rvie
wee
had
diff
icul
ty m
akin
g up
stu
dent
obj
ectiv
esfo
r a
mul
ti-le
vel c
lass
from
diffe
rent
dep
artm
ents
by
the
end
of th
e th
ird c
lass
.
Goo
d.
The
inte
rvie
wee
wou
ld s
plit
the
stud
ents
into
leve
ls,
wou
ld b
ring
a co
mpu
ter
into
the
clas
sroo
m, a
nd w
ould
offe
r co
unse
ling
(stu
dent
s ar
e no
tco
mfo
rtab
le w
ith it
--tw
o
stud
ents
are
goi
ng o
n to
CLC
)
Tw
o st
uden
ts a
re e
nrol
ling
in C
LC. T
he a
ttitu
de o
fthe
stu
dent
s is
that
they
app
reci
ate
lear
ning
. Whe
n th
ey a
re la
id o
ff, th
ey w
ill g
o to
col
lege
tore
skill
.
107
12. H
ow m
uch
supp
ort h
ave
you
had
from
the
colle
ge?
13. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ojec
t?
14. W
hat a
re y
our
plan
s fo
rth
e fu
ture
reg
ardi
ng th
ispr
ogra
m?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Inte
rvie
wP
artic
ipan
ts
F-1
7-7
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
trim
NIE
S M
I NM
I11
1111
RIO
At t
he b
egin
ning
, sup
port
from
the
colle
ge w
as g
ood.
Afte
r cl
ass
was
und
erw
ay, t
hey
stop
ped
chec
king
on
her.
The
pro
ject
is w
orth
whi
le. T
he p
ay is
com
para
ble.
Upf
ront
pla
nnin
g w
as m
ore
than
wha
t she
was
com
pens
ated
for.
The
inte
rvie
wee
has
thre
e pa
rt-t
ime
jobs
--al
so w
orks
for
com
pani
es a
nd C
LC. S
hew
ould
like
to d
o an
inse
rvic
e pr
ojec
t.
Som
e as
sess
men
ts a
re u
niqu
e. S
he h
asn'
t mas
tere
d so
me
of th
em. T
here
are
5 fo
r
one
grou
p an
d 4
for
the
othe
r--3
for
both
. Dec
imal
cloc
k--a
ll st
uden
ts a
re in
tere
sted
init
beca
use
they
nee
d it
to d
o th
eir
jobs
.
Sta
ff M
embe
r 3
Com
pany
2A
ugus
t 14-
16, 1
995
108
109
IIIIII
I
Gro
up
Vis
it
I. H
ow s
atis
fied
are
you
with
the
proj
ect?
2. W
hat a
re th
e gr
eate
stsa
tisfa
ctio
ns?
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
ther
eag
reem
ents
on
the
goal
sam
ong
all s
take
hold
ers?
4. W
hat f
acto
rs h
elpe
d th
esu
cces
s of
the
proj
ect?
5. W
hat f
acto
rs a
cted
as
dete
rren
ts to
the
proj
ect?
110
all
MS
MI N
IBM
INI
1111
1111
MI M
O M
I
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
1rg
i 2 0
3 04
05
06T
he in
terv
iew
ee s
aid
that
she
/he
wou
ld g
ive
the
prog
ram
a 4
on
a 5
poin
t sca
le.
The
se s
atis
fact
ions
wer
e m
entio
ned:
sta
ff de
velo
pmen
t, th
e m
ento
ring
prog
ram
,th
eco
nfer
ence
pre
sent
atio
ns, t
he c
oope
ratio
n of
the
part
ners
, the
feed
back
from
the
teac
hers
and
the
stud
ents
(th
e w
hole
pur
pose
of t
he g
rant
).
Goo
d ag
reem
ent a
mon
g st
akeh
olde
rs. U
nion
site
s ar
e co
mfo
rtab
le.
Com
pany
4lo
oks
at w
hat t
he le
arne
rs w
ant,
and
the
lear
ners
sai
d th
ey w
ante
dG
ED
(no
w n
eed
for
supe
rvis
ory
posi
tion)
. Sup
ervi
sor
wor
ksho
ps h
eld
to g
et b
uy-in
from
sup
ervi
sors
."T
own
mee
tings
"--
held
--q
and
a se
ssio
ns fo
r th
e w
hole
com
pany
(rec
ruitm
ent t
ool).
See
abo
ve.
The
se fa
ctor
s w
ere
men
tione
d: ti
me,
ince
ntiv
es fo
r pa
rtic
ipan
ts (
varia
ble
acro
ssco
mpa
nies
--te
ache
rs n
eed
to k
now
wha
t to
do).
111
On
NB
NM
I MI N
B M
R M
il11
1111
11M
I MO
NM
MI M
I in
ION
6. W
het d
o yo
u se
e as
the
maj
or o
utco
mes
?
7. W
hat a
re th
e m
ajor
disa
ppoi
ntm
ents
?
8. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost d
iffi-
cult
part
of t
he p
roje
ct?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
your
link
age
with
Indu
stry
? W
ill It
con
tinue
?
10. W
hat w
ould
you
cha
nge
in a
futu
re p
roje
ct?
11. H
ow h
as th
e co
llege
bene
fited
from
the
proj
ect?
112
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
se o
utco
mes
wer
e m
entio
ned:
Thu
s fa
r, th
ere
is a
goo
d re
latio
nshi
p w
ith th
epa
rtne
rs--
they
hav
e es
tabl
ishe
d a
syst
em; t
here
is a
goo
d cu
rric
ulum
; the
adv
isin
gfo
cuse
s on
life
long
lear
ning
.
The
inte
rvie
wee
was
dis
appo
inte
d th
at th
e pr
ogra
m is
mov
ing
into
Bui
ldin
g 4-
-thi
sin
dica
tes
a la
ck o
f est
eem
for
the
prog
ram
. Adu
lt E
duca
tion
has
not b
een
wha
t she
/he
thou
ght i
t wou
ld b
e--t
here
is a
lack
of s
uppo
rt a
nd v
alua
tion
of th
e pr
ogra
ms.
Tut
orin
gis
diff
icul
t =pl
acem
ent i
s ha
rd--
it's
hard
to fi
nd tu
tors
who
kno
w S
pani
sh.
Tim
e is
nee
ded
to w
ork
on o
ther
issu
es in
dep
th.
Exc
elle
nt.
The
"sy
stem
s" w
ork
wou
ld b
e m
ore
prod
uctiv
e an
d le
ss c
risis
man
agem
ent.
Tim
ew
ould
be
take
n to
lear
n ab
out b
usin
ess
tren
ds--
they
kno
w a
bout
edu
catio
n bu
t not
abou
t the
bus
ines
s si
de. T
his
coul
d be
got
ten
from
the
part
ners
. Bus
ines
s pe
ople
coul
d be
bro
ught
in a
s sp
eake
rs.
The
col
lege
cou
ld b
e m
ore
supp
ortiv
e. T
his
is a
n im
port
ant i
ssue
and
par
t of C
LC's
goal
s. N
WLP
sho
uld
not b
e in
corp
orat
ed in
to th
e co
llege
--it
is to
o no
n-tr
aditi
onal
.A
dult
educ
atio
n is
not
val
ued.
113
UM
NM
NM
I UM
UM
MI
UM
MI
1111
111
MI
1111
111
12. H
ow m
uch
supp
ort h
ave
you
had
from
the
colle
ge?
13. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ojec
t?
14. W
hat a
re y
our
plan
s fo
rth
e fu
ture
reg
ardi
ng th
ispr
ogra
m?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Inte
rvie
wP
artic
ipan
ts
114
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
col
lege
pub
liciz
ed th
e pr
ogra
m in
thei
r P
R. L
earn
ers
mad
e tr
ansi
tion
from
NW
LP
clas
ses
to th
e co
llege
. Sta
ff de
velo
pmen
t, ad
ditio
nal m
ater
ials
pro
vide
d. C
ente
rfor
Eco
nom
ic D
evel
opm
ent b
enef
ited-
-got
pub
licity
from
the
gran
t. A
re d
oing
bas
ic s
kills
in o
ther
com
pani
es, b
ut w
orkp
lace
lite
racy
is p
roba
bly
mos
t app
ropr
iate
in a
dult
Thi
s is
unk
now
n in
term
s of
wha
t the
lear
ners
are
get
ting.
The
y tr
y to
get
as
muc
hba
ng fo
r th
e bu
ck a
s po
ssib
le. S
tart
up
expe
nses
wer
em
entio
ned.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Tem
pora
ry h
uman
res
ourc
es p
erso
n--n
o cl
asse
s, n
o re
crui
tmen
t.O
ne c
lass
per
year
--al
l the
y w
ill a
llow
--E
SL
shut
dow
n fo
r cl
ass.
Las
t gra
nten
able
d th
e cr
eatio
npa
cket
for
staf
f dev
elop
men
t and
for
busi
ness
(15
pac
kets
--2
read
ings
per
pack
et)-
Thi
s w
as a
sel
f-st
udy
cour
se w
hich
the
lear
ners
cou
ld a
pply
and
refle
ct u
pon.
The
re is
a n
eed
to p
rom
ote
prog
ram
.
Sta
ff M
embe
r 4
Com
pany
4A
ugus
t 14-
16, 1
995
BE
ST
CO
PS
VA
iLO
Uti,
WM
MR
WM
IMO
WIN
NM
IM
MI
EM
I WM
i W
IS it
IMP
NM
ME
WM
NM
I MR
1. H
ow s
atis
fied
the
proj
ect?
Gro
up
Vis
it
are
you
with
2. W
hat a
re th
e gr
eate
stsa
tisfa
ctio
ns?
3. T
o w
hat e
xten
t are
ther
eag
reem
ents
on
the
goal
sam
ong
all s
take
hold
ers?
4. W
hat f
acto
rs h
elpe
d th
esu
cces
s of
the
proj
ect?
5. W
hat f
acto
rs a
cted
as
dete
rren
ts to
the
proj
ect?
116
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
1 1:
32 3
4 5
6H
ad o
nly
four
mat
h cl
asse
s so
far.
The
inte
rvie
wee
is d
evel
opin
g an
acc
eptin
g at
mos
pher
e; h
e w
ants
to g
et r
id o
f mat
han
xiet
y. W
ants
to d
evel
op th
e th
inki
ng p
roce
ss, i
s no
t nec
essa
rily
inte
rest
ed in
the
right
ans
wer
, or
prod
uct.
All
the
stak
ehol
ders
agr
ee th
at ta
lkin
g to
the
lear
ners
is im
port
ant,
that
it is
impo
rtan
t to
unco
ver
thei
r ne
eds.
Tra
iner
1 is
a g
ood
linka
ge to
the
com
pany
. The
inte
rvie
wee
mus
t kee
p w
ithin
the
curr
icul
um o
f CLC
, bec
ause
Tra
iner
1 li
ked
this
. Stu
dent
s w
ant
text
; the
y w
ant i
t for
hom
ewor
k, w
ant C
LC fo
lder
s, e
tc.
The
inte
rvie
wee
like
s th
e lin
kage
with
the
colle
ge, e
ven
thou
gh h
e ne
ver
thou
ght h
ew
ould
hav
e. H
e lik
es th
e te
ache
r, m
ater
ials
. The
lear
ners
are
exc
ited
abou
t the
hom
ewor
k--t
ryin
g to
figu
re o
ut th
e an
swer
s. L
earn
ers
are
the
best
sou
rce
for
the
curr
icul
um.
Non
e.
117
MI
1111
111
all
NM
OM
MIN
MIM
I NM
us a
sN
om
e am
MN
as=
Iow
6. W
hat d
o yo
u se
e as
the
maj
or o
utco
mes
?
7. W
hat a
re th
e m
ajor
disa
ppoi
ntm
ents
?
8. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost d
iffi-
cult
part
of t
he p
roje
ct?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
your
link
age
with
indu
stry
? W
ill it
con
tinue
?
10. W
hat w
ould
you
cha
nge
In a
futu
re p
roje
ct?
11. H
ow h
as th
e co
llege
bene
fited
from
the
proj
ect?
118
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
inte
rvie
wee
hop
es fo
r a
tran
sfer
to a
job.
He
also
hop
es to
dev
elop
crit
ical
thin
king
and
pro
blem
sol
ving
with
the
stud
ents
. Wan
ts to
teac
h th
em h
ow to
thin
k.T
his
may
not
dire
ctly
tran
sfer
to th
e jo
b se
tting
. The
mat
eria
l is
not y
et d
irect
lyap
plic
able
to th
e w
orkp
lace
. He
is s
till a
sses
sing
nee
ds.
Non
e.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
1 1
9
MI N
IB M
B =
IliO
lt W
M IN
NIn
t r 1
1111
1N
IBfir
mu
am N
MI W
M B
IM
12. H
ow m
uch
supp
ort h
ave
you
had
from
the
colle
ge?
13. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ojec
t?
14. W
hat a
re y
our
plan
s fo
rth
e fu
ture
reg
ardi
ng th
ispr
ogra
m?
15. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Inte
rvie
wP
artic
ipan
ts
120
Sta
ff In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Lots
of g
ood
supp
ort h
as c
ome
from
the
colle
ge. T
he in
terv
iew
ee s
aid
he w
as g
oing
to le
arn
a lo
t fro
m th
is e
xper
ienc
e. H
e is
not
goi
ng to
cha
nge
the
way
that
he
teac
hes
adul
t edu
catio
n cl
asse
s. U
sual
ly G
ED
pre
para
tion-
-thi
s is
ver
y di
ffere
nt.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Too
ear
ly to
com
men
t.
Sta
ff M
embe
r 1
Com
pany
9A
ugus
t 14-
16, 1
995
121
1111
1111
111
1101
MI
1101
um
am
MO
mir
0111
re u
m io
n ow
NE
ow
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
o S
taff
p P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
l En
03 o
4 o5
06
Com
pany
1
The
pro
ject
had
a s
low
sta
rt.
Diff
eren
t fro
m N
orth
ern
Illin
ois-
-vol
unta
ry, n
ot m
anda
tory
,an
d or
ient
ed to
the
indi
vidu
al. O
nly
one
clas
s w
as m
ore
enth
usia
stic
(E
SL
1).
Thi
s w
as c
omfo
rtab
le--
CLC
sen
t him
to s
emin
ars.
Fee
ls a
par
t of t
he C
olle
ge.
Bet
ter-
-mor
e sa
tisfie
d.
The
se d
isap
poin
tmen
ts w
ere
men
tione
d: th
e sl
ow s
tart
, the
follo
w-u
p (d
iffer
ent g
roup
for
ES
L 2)
; the
re w
as a
gap
bet
wee
n E
SL
1 an
d 2
for
thos
e co
mpl
etin
g 1-
-ent
husi
asm
will
dro
p. S
uper
viso
rs s
houl
d sp
eak
in E
nglis
h, n
ot S
pani
sh--
2 ou
t of 8
will
ask
tosp
eak
Eng
lish.
TO
M h
as b
een
inef
fect
ive
due
to li
tera
cy. T
here
is n
ot a
big
cha
nge
yet.
Did
see
ach
ange
in th
e pe
ople
.Is
mon
itorin
g ab
sent
eeis
m.
122
123
MI
Ma
-- 1
.11
UM
um
on
ail a
m a
s m
u am
Imo
Am
am
am
am
mil
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t Im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
124
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Ent
husi
asm
and
mor
ale
have
incr
ease
d. T
hey
need
to p
ract
ice
Eng
lish.
The
pro
gram
was
exp
ensi
ve. T
he s
tart
up
cost
s w
ere
high
. Man
agem
ent t
ime
was
also
con
side
red.
Rec
ordi
ng fo
r co
st o
f qua
lity
time-
-"pr
even
tativ
e m
aint
enan
ce"
The
re is
pos
sibl
y gr
ant m
oney
com
ing
from
the
stat
e. T
hey
can
still
hav
e th
eed
ucat
iona
l pro
gram
with
out t
he e
xter
nal m
oney
. Bas
ic e
duca
tion
is in
tegr
al. T
heco
mpa
ny is
gro
win
g an
d ne
eds
educ
atio
n.
The
re h
ave
been
2 c
usto
mer
rev
iew
s: M
otor
ola
and
Dan
foss
. Mot
orol
a ha
s a
trai
ning
prog
ram
that
they
req
uire
. No
com
pany
pub
licity
from
CLC
.
Peo
ple
wan
t mor
e tr
aini
ng--
mor
e co
oper
atio
n. W
ants
CLC
to h
elp
with
sup
ervi
sor
trai
ning
--m
anag
emen
t ski
lls. C
ompu
ters
als
o.
125
1111
311
1111
MI !
MI U
M M
illM
I UM
MIN
- IM
ON
ISI
INN
EM
I MN
ill
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
ein
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
com
pany
is g
row
ing.
Tec
hnic
ally
--ne
w s
oftw
are
syst
em is
com
ing-
-wor
kers
will
be a
ble
to m
ake
data
ent
ries
on th
e flo
or--
log
into
jobs
. Thi
s is
bra
nd n
ew. R
obot
ics
wer
e m
entio
ned.
Yes
, thi
s co
mpa
ny w
as ig
nora
nt o
f the
wor
kers
' nee
ds in
the
past
. Bus
ines
sas
soci
atio
ns, s
uppl
iers
cou
ld b
enef
it. T
here
has
bee
n no
com
mun
ity d
evel
opm
ent a
sof
yet
.
Lear
ning
from
oth
er c
ompa
nies
. Nor
ther
n Ill
inoi
s di
dn't
tell
them
how
to d
o it-
-tot
ally
diffe
rent
.
015:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsP
artn
er 2
.
126
127
NM
ME
MN
lin
I=M
O M
NM
S M
IN N
M M
I
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 12
8
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
pp P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
l rg2
3 4
5 6
Com
pany
2
Rea
ding
and
mat
h --
eve
ryon
e ha
s ta
ke it
who
nee
ds it
.H
owev
er, t
he s
tude
nts
still
need
com
mun
icat
ions
(be
twee
n su
perv
isor
s an
d w
orke
rs)
(bot
h E
SL
and
nativ
esp
eake
rs)
and
prob
lem
sol
ving
.
The
col
lege
has
don
e ev
eryt
hing
that
the
inte
rvie
wee
ask
ed th
em to
do.
The
y ha
vegi
ven
asse
ssm
ents
as
requ
ired.
The
re h
as b
een
a co
oper
ativ
e ef
fort
. The
inte
rvie
wee
like
s th
e cu
rric
ulum
--th
ere
is a
rea
l ben
efit
to it
, as
it m
eets
the
need
s of
the
wor
kpla
ce.
Exp
ecta
tions
hav
e ris
en--
now
com
mun
icat
ions
and
pro
blem
sol
ving
mus
t be
addr
esse
d--a
ste
p be
yond
the
3 R
's. S
he h
asn'
t don
e a
need
s an
alys
is a
bout
this
.
Try
ing
to g
et a
suf
ficie
nt n
umbe
r of
stu
dent
s fo
r cl
ass
was
a d
isap
poin
tmen
t.
The
re w
as q
ualit
y w
ork
team
par
ticip
atio
n in
crea
sed
the
num
ber
of h
ourly
wor
kers
.T
he p
rogr
am h
as g
iven
them
the
self
conf
iden
ce to
par
ticip
ate.
Mor
ale
has
impr
oved
.T
he in
terv
iew
ee is
trac
king
the
tang
ible
res
ults
of t
he p
rogr
am--
docu
men
ting
erro
rs,
tota
l em
ploy
ee in
volv
emen
t, su
gges
tions
of s
uper
viso
rs a
re b
eing
trac
ked.
129
MO
MM
IN i
MM
E-
- -
111
MO
MO
MO
NM
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sel
f est
eem
has
impr
oved
--it
is a
sta
tus
sym
bol t
o pa
rtic
ipat
e. S
tabl
e w
orkf
orce
--th
eco
mpa
ny h
elps
laid
-off
wor
kers
to g
et jo
bs. T
he e
mpl
oyee
s w
ant m
ore
trai
ning
. The
reis
a s
ense
of t
he b
igge
r pi
ctur
e th
at le
ads
to in
divi
dual
dev
elop
men
t.
The
pro
gram
was
ver
y co
st-e
ffect
ive-
-hel
d on
the
cloc
k. T
he in
terv
iew
ee h
asn'
t yet
figur
ed th
e re
turn
on
inve
stm
ent.
She
is n
ow g
athe
ring
base
line
data
.
The
com
pany
will
inst
itute
the
prog
ram
with
or
with
out s
tate
fund
ing.
Yes
, thi
s pr
ogra
m is
act
ing
as a
rol
e m
odel
for
com
pany
bra
nche
s in
diff
eren
tlo
catio
ns. W
ithin
the
corp
orat
ion-
-420
peo
ple
(at t
his
site
) ou
t of 6
0,00
0 to
tal B
axte
rem
ploy
ees
part
icip
ate.
Em
ploy
ees
are
mor
e w
illin
g to
vol
unte
er fo
r co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ng.
130
131
=I
MI N
MI=
NM
OM
MN
=I
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
eIn
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Aut
omat
ion
has
led
to th
e ne
ed fo
r fe
wer
wor
kers
. Doc
umen
tatio
n is
per
form
ed v
ia a
pape
rless
sys
tem
. Em
ploy
ees
have
had
to d
iver
sify
the
type
of w
ork
they
do.
Bax
ter
wan
ts a
flex
ible
, tra
inab
le w
orkf
orce
.
Yes
, whe
re a
ppro
pria
te, b
oth
to o
ther
man
ufac
ture
rs a
nd w
ithin
Bax
ter
itsel
f.In
terv
iew
ee w
ould
be
will
ing
to d
o th
is.
Non
e gi
ven.
015:
inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsP
artn
er 4
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
133
132
1111
O11
1111
MN
NM
OM
MN
NM
MI'
MI N
MIN
N M
I'
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
134
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
Op
Par
tner
O T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
1 E
l2 3
4 5
6C
ompa
ny 3
The
pro
gram
is g
ettin
g be
tter.
The
y ar
e no
w g
ettin
g th
e pa
ybac
k th
at m
anag
emen
tw
ante
d. T
here
are
now
two
clas
ses
of 2
0 le
arne
rs g
oing
. Sen
t tw
o le
arne
rs to
CLC
for
asse
ssm
ents
, sin
ce th
ey w
eren
't th
ere
initi
ally
. The
re a
re m
ostly
old
er, l
ong-
term
wor
kers
in th
e pr
ogra
m.
The
par
tner
ship
is g
ood.
The
ste
erin
g co
mm
ittee
, whi
ch m
eets
reg
ular
ly,
is fa
ntas
tic.
The
y ar
e in
tune
with
the
com
pany
nee
ds.
No,
the
inte
rvie
wee
had
exp
ecte
d a
shor
ter
time
fram
e. D
idn'
t und
erst
and
at fi
rst h
owth
e pr
ogra
m w
ould
be
wor
kpla
ce-o
rient
ed--
was
ple
asan
tly s
urpr
ised
. The
pur
pose
of
the
need
s an
alys
is w
as n
ot u
nder
stoo
d.
Up
fron
t, th
e pr
ogra
m w
as ti
me
cons
umin
g. B
oth
the
colle
ge a
nd th
e co
mpa
ny w
ere
slow
--it
took
sev
eral
mon
ths
to d
o st
uden
t ass
essm
ents
, and
the
colle
ge w
as s
low
with
hirin
g pe
rson
nel.
The
gap
bet
wee
n th
e an
noun
cem
ent o
f the
pro
gram
and
the
begi
nnin
g of
the
clas
s w
as fo
ur m
onth
s. D
id o
ne c
lass
--on
ly s
ix p
eopl
e ou
t of 7
0as
sess
ed w
ere
in a
ttend
ance
.
Onl
y on
e cl
ass
so fa
r--t
oo e
arly
to te
ll. (
ES
L 1)
. One
mor
e co
mm
on g
roun
d be
twee
nm
anag
emen
t and
the
hour
ly w
orke
rs.
135
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
136
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Mot
ivat
ion
impo
rtan
t. O
ne o
lder
wor
ker
was
abl
e to
res
pond
to th
e C
EO
at a
n aw
ards
cere
mon
y. G
ood
atte
ndan
ce--
othe
rs w
ant i
nto
the
prog
ram
. The
se it
ems
need
to b
eco
nsid
ered
--cu
stom
er r
etur
ns, v
olum
e/ou
tput
--af
fect
ed b
y sa
les,
saf
ety
(the
num
ber
ofac
cide
nts
has
been
ver
y ba
d du
e to
new
em
ploy
ees)
, qua
lity
in h
ouse
--pr
oced
ures
,te
amw
ork,
pro
blem
sol
ving
. Bet
ter
read
ing
and
writ
ing
proc
edur
es n
eede
d.
Nee
ds to
hav
e go
vern
men
t mon
ey--
the
prog
ram
wou
ldn'
t hap
pen
othe
rwis
e. T
heco
mpa
ny is
pay
ing
stra
ight
tim
e fo
r le
arne
rs to
atte
nd. M
anag
emen
t tim
e w
as p
aid
for
up fr
ont.
The
re is
stil
l a n
eed
for
the
proj
ect,
but t
he in
terv
iew
ee d
oes
not k
now
how
it w
illco
ntin
ue. H
e w
ill ta
lk to
CLC
.
An
artic
le a
ppea
red
in th
e co
rpor
ate
new
slet
ter.
The
inte
rvie
wee
ant
icip
ates
that
the
prog
ram
will
hav
e an
impa
ct o
n tr
aini
ng. T
hey
dolo
ts o
f in-
hous
e tr
aini
ng w
ith in
tern
al r
esou
rces
. Em
ploy
ees
will
hav
e to
pas
s te
sts
inab
out a
yea
r. T
here
are
qua
lity
prob
lem
s fr
om la
ck o
f com
mun
icat
ion.
137
=II
1111
11 M
I= N
M M
I MI I
= N
MI
MN-'-
MN
INN
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
eIn
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Tea
ms,
pro
blem
sol
ving
, and
com
pany
-wid
e co
mm
unic
atio
n ar
e al
read
y in
pla
ce.
Yes
. The
com
pany
is a
lso
doin
g a
prog
ram
in D
aven
port
IA--
they
are
app
roac
hing
the
com
mun
ity c
olle
ge. T
he o
lder
wor
kfor
ce p
rese
nted
this
idea
to m
anag
emen
t.
Bus
ines
s is
bad
. The
y st
ill w
ant t
o ke
ep th
e cl
asse
s an
d cu
t oth
er tr
aini
ng. C
urric
ulum
clos
ely
rela
ted
to n
eeds
--w
ill h
elp
wor
kers
on
the
floor
.
015:
inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsP
artn
er 3
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
139
138
MI O
MN
MIII
SM
INIIN
IMM
O IN
N M
N M
I MN
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Gro
up 0
Sta
ff O
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0Le
arne
r
visi
t 1 1
812
3 4
5 6
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 14
0
Com
pany
4
Sat
isfa
ctio
n is
goo
d. T
here
is a
hig
h de
man
d fo
r th
e pr
ogra
m. S
ome
empl
oyee
s do
n't
wan
t it,
how
ever
.
The
pro
gram
has
res
ulte
d in
con
trac
tual
wor
k w
ith C
LC. W
orke
rs n
ow ta
king
addi
tiona
l cla
sses
, not
nec
essa
rily
in th
e cl
ass
at th
e w
orks
ite. T
his
incl
udes
offi
cew
orke
rs.
Yes
. The
re is
no
quic
k fix
.
The
tim
e la
pse
betw
een
clas
ses
(6-1
0 w
eeks
) w
as m
entio
ned.
Qua
lity
prob
lem
s ar
e de
crea
sing
.
(
141
1111
111
111.
1111
111
10M
IM
S M
I M
N E
MI
MI
MN
MI
Mg-
MI
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t Im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
142
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
pro
gram
has
res
ulte
d in
a b
uild
ing
of c
onfid
ence
and
mor
ale.
Em
ploy
ees
know
wha
t the
y ar
e re
adin
g.
Thi
s is
toug
h to
mea
sure
, bot
h in
dol
lars
and
cen
ts a
nd in
loya
lty, m
oral
e, e
tc.
The
inte
rvie
wee
sai
d th
at h
e w
ill p
ush
for
cont
inui
ty a
t a s
mal
l pric
e (c
ontr
actu
al).
The
com
pany
's in
tern
al m
agaz
ine
feat
ured
the
prog
ram
, inc
ludi
ng in
terv
iew
s w
ithle
arne
rs a
nd in
terv
iew
ee. O
ther
pla
nts
are
calli
ng a
nd a
skin
g ho
w th
ey c
an s
tart
thei
row
n pr
ogra
ms.
Tra
iner
s ha
ve b
een
rece
ptiv
e to
the
prog
ram
, sta
ting
that
som
e of
the
empl
oyee
s ha
vebe
com
e m
ore
trai
nabl
e. T
rain
ers
supp
ort i
mpr
ovin
g th
e w
orke
rs' l
iste
ning
, rea
ding
,an
d sp
eaki
ng s
kills
.
143
1E11
INS
MIS
MI
1111
111.
111
MO
MI
MI
OM
1111
111
MI
NM
NIB
NI
1111
11
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
eIn
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
re is
a n
eed
for
mat
h cl
asse
s. A
new
com
pute
r sy
stem
is b
eing
impl
emen
ted
atth
e co
mpa
ny -
-pi
lot t
estin
g at
the
mom
ent.
Eac
h m
achi
ne h
as a
com
pute
r at
tach
ed,
and
the
wor
ker
can
ente
r da
ta d
irect
ly.
Yes
.
Par
tner
mee
tings
are
exc
elle
nt a
nd s
uppo
rtiv
e. T
he in
terv
iew
ee s
ugge
st s
uper
viso
rtr
aini
ng a
cros
s th
e co
mpa
nies
.
015:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsP
artn
er 5
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
144
145
MN
MN
OM
MO
SN
MI N
M I=
MI N
M IN
N A
M M
IIII
MI
IIIII
WI
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
Indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 14
6
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
o S
taff
0 P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or Q
Lea
rner
Dl
2 3
04 0
5 6
Com
pany
9
The
inte
rvie
wee
is v
ery
satis
fied.
(She
teac
hes
non-
gran
t lea
rner
s.)
The
cur
ricul
umde
velo
pers
cus
tom
ized
the
curr
icul
um. S
he is
sat
isfie
d w
ith a
dditi
onal
cla
sses
,in
stru
ctor
s, m
ater
ials
. She
is a
lso
satis
fied
with
the
netw
ork-
-sta
ff de
velo
pmen
t,pa
rtne
rs' m
eetin
gs.
Ver
y ef
fect
ive-
-goo
d us
e of
res
ourc
es.
Yes
, bec
ause
now
she
kno
ws
mor
e ab
out w
hat t
he g
rant
will
do.
It w
as h
ard
to fi
nd a
teac
her
who
wou
ld te
ach
one
day
a w
eek
for
2 ho
urs.
It's
far
away
from
CLC
. Now
they
hav
e a
"ter
rific
" te
ache
r.
Tar
dine
ss, a
ccid
ents
and
abs
ente
eism
hav
e al
l dec
reas
ed. J
ob p
rom
otio
n an
d fu
rthe
red
ucat
ion
wer
e al
so m
entio
ned.
147
NM
IN M
B M
IN
MI O
M11
1111
MI r
111
N11
1I11
1111
111
1111
11
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t Im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
148
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Mor
ale
is g
reat
. Tea
m s
yste
m--
cut l
ead
time
from
21
to 7
day
s. W
on s
tate
com
petit
ion
and
did
larg
e pr
esen
tatio
n.
Ver
y, b
ecau
se it
free
s th
e in
terv
iew
ee u
p.
Ver
y go
od.
The
pro
gram
has
n't b
een
publ
iciz
ed--
don'
t see
the
Lake
Cou
nty
New
s.
Had
mat
h to
pre
pare
for
blue
prin
t rea
ding
. Als
o S
PC
--ca
n se
e di
ffere
nce-
-ena
bles
them
to ta
ke tr
aini
ng.
149
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
ein
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
11.1
1M
N IN
S M
N N
IBW
M N
M O
M-
MO
INN
MIN
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Com
pute
r tr
aini
ng--
to a
cces
s co
mpa
ny in
form
atio
n. S
trea
mlin
e--w
orke
rs c
an a
cces
sin
form
atio
n di
rect
ly r
athe
r th
an th
roug
h an
info
rmat
ion
hand
ler.
The
re h
as b
een
anap
prov
al to
buy
com
pute
rs.
Abs
olut
ely
yes.
Rap
id e
xpan
sion
--C
ompa
ny 9
bou
ght 2
oth
er c
ompa
nies
. Par
tner
1 m
aint
ains
conf
iden
tialit
y. S
uper
viso
rs a
sk h
er fo
r ad
vice
abo
ut p
rom
otio
ns. S
he g
ives
gen
eral
feed
back
, not
sco
res.
015:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsP
artn
er 1
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
150
151
MIR
1111
1111
111
1111
111=
11 M
I MI M
illM
IN M
I in
MN
NE
NW
NM
MS
MS
MN
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es? 15
2
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
° P
artn
er O
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or p
Lea
rner
1 2
18,3
4 5
6C
LC
The
cur
ricul
um a
nd th
e de
velo
pmen
t of t
he p
artn
ersh
ips
wer
e ex
trem
ely
effe
ctiv
e.T
he c
urric
ulum
was
inte
grat
ed fo
r th
e fir
st ti
me;
it m
eets
the
indu
stry
's n
eeds
. It w
as a
long
pro
cess
and
har
d w
ork,
but
the
outc
omes
epi
tom
ize
wha
t bus
ines
s w
ants
.
Ver
y ef
fect
ive.
Few
col
lege
s ha
ve b
een
able
to k
eep
activ
e bu
sine
ss m
embe
rshi
ps.
The
y ar
e bu
ildin
g a
cadr
e of
com
mitt
ed c
ompa
nies
, and
are
exp
andi
ng th
eir
role
.T
his
proj
ect i
s a
sprin
gboa
rd to
mor
e in
volv
emen
t.
Thi
nkin
g sk
ills
and
the
lear
ning
pro
cess
hav
e im
prov
ed. N
ow, i
t's b
ette
r un
ders
tood
wha
t com
pani
es w
ant i
n te
rms
of o
utco
mes
. Thi
s ha
s af
fect
ed th
e w
ay in
whi
ch th
ein
terv
iew
ee th
inks
abo
ut o
utco
mes
for
the
colle
ge.
The
inte
rvie
wee
was
res
pons
ible
for
an a
rea
that
mus
t be
self-
suffi
cien
t. T
here
are
not
enou
gh c
lass
es to
sup
port
the
staf
f. C
lass
es n
eed
to b
e sm
all i
n or
der
to la
y th
efo
unda
tion.
The
y sh
ould
be
able
to e
xpan
d se
rvic
es n
ow.
Com
pani
es h
ave
to r
efle
ct o
n hi
ring
proc
esse
s, c
omm
unic
atio
n w
ith e
mpl
oyee
s (in
the
past
, the
y ha
ve a
ssum
ed th
at th
ey k
now
how
), g
aps
in p
rodu
ctiv
ity. T
hey
don'
t usu
ally
refle
ct o
n pr
oces
ses
and
syst
ems-
-the
y as
sum
e th
at e
mpl
oyee
s kn
owco
nten
t--w
orke
rs a
re n
ow q
uest
ione
d.
BE
ST
CO
PY
AM
IAB
LE15
3
Ma
MN
Ma
MIM
IM
I VIII
1111
111
=I =
IIM
IN11
111
MP
MI =
I MS
MN
MIN
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
154
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
em
ploy
ees
wer
e th
e lu
ckie
st o
f all!
The
y de
velo
ped
lang
uage
ski
lls w
hich
will
help
them
to a
dapt
to tr
ansi
tions
--ot
herw
ise,
they
will
lose
thei
r jo
bs. T
here
is a
ben
efit
to fa
mili
es a
nd c
omm
uniti
es, w
hich
is im
poss
ible
to m
easu
re. I
nter
view
ee w
ill b
e ab
leto
trac
k st
atis
tics
from
wor
kpla
ce to
CLC
.
The
pro
gram
was
exp
ensi
ve. C
reat
ing
a po
ol o
f tra
ined
teac
hers
, and
teac
hing
them
to th
ink
abou
t out
com
es-b
ased
edu
catio
n an
d th
e us
e of
com
pany
mat
eria
ls w
asex
pens
ive,
but
rev
enue
s ca
n be
gen
erat
ed b
y pu
blis
hing
the
curr
icul
um s
o th
at th
epr
ogra
ms
can
be s
elf-
supp
ortin
g. T
he p
rogr
am is
not
cos
t-ef
fect
ive
acco
rdin
g to
hous
e-ge
nera
ted
stat
istic
s. T
here
has
to b
e ev
iden
ce o
f pot
entia
l rev
enue
.
In Il
linoi
s, th
e D
epar
tmen
t of E
cono
mic
Dev
elop
men
t has
mer
ged
with
Adu
ltE
duca
tion.
1-S
top
care
er c
ente
rs a
re b
eing
impl
emen
ted-
-the
y ar
e w
orki
ng h
ard
toge
t one
at C
LC. S
ocia
l sys
tem
s fo
r bu
ildin
g th
e w
orkf
orce
are
nee
ded-
-lite
racy
is p
art
of w
orkf
orce
trai
ning
.In
bus
ines
s an
d in
dust
ry, m
any
mid
size
d co
mpa
nies
are
outs
ourc
ing
trai
ning
.
Yes
. The
inte
rvie
wee
hel
ped
get c
ompa
nies
on
boar
d fo
r ot
her
proj
ects
. She
has
one
pers
on d
edic
ated
to d
oing
sal
es fo
r w
orkf
orce
dev
elop
men
t tra
inin
g pr
ogra
ms.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
155
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
ein
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
015:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
156
MM
INI1
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1=11
111=
1101
1
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Com
pany
8--
mod
el fo
r ot
her
com
pani
es. T
hey
are
build
ing
brid
ges
from
ent
ranc
eex
ams-
> tr
aini
ng->
em
ploy
men
t. T
hey
need
to b
e ab
le to
mea
sure
app
lican
ts. T
hey
can'
t tak
e th
e "c
ream
" an
ymor
e--t
here
is a
ver
y hi
gh e
mpl
oym
ent r
ate.
Lite
racy
nee
dsto
sto
p be
ing
gran
t fun
ded-
-nee
ds to
be
secu
re.
Def
inite
ly. M
ost c
ompa
nies
don
't un
ders
tand
the
leve
l of t
heir
own
empl
oyee
s.
The
pro
gram
is lo
okin
g at
oth
er s
ourc
es o
f fun
ding
. Edu
catio
n to
car
eers
--bu
ildin
gbr
idge
s fr
om e
duca
tion
to th
e w
orkp
lace
. The
y m
ay h
ave
to b
road
en th
eir
expe
rtis
ebe
yond
ES
L. T
hey
will
ask
for
hard
mon
ey s
uppo
rt fo
r co
ntra
ct s
ervi
ces.
Bus
ines
san
d in
dust
ry c
an't
mee
t new
sta
ndar
ds w
ith th
e cu
rren
t wor
kfor
ce. T
here
is a
sys
tem
for
k-12
--th
ere
shou
ld b
e on
e fo
r be
yond
as
wel
l.
Col
lege
Rep
rese
ntat
ive
Oct
ober
17,
199
6
157
OM
NM
I=
MI
NM
ME
NM
=M
I= M
N M
I M
EM
ME
Gro
up
Vis
it
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
Indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
id y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
/58
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
° P
artn
er °
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or (
)Lea
rner
1 2
D 3
El 4
5C
ompa
ny 8
Goo
d.
The
par
tner
ship
has
bee
n ex
celle
nt--
been
sen
sitiv
e to
nee
ds.
Inte
rvie
wee
had
bee
n m
ore
invo
lved
than
exp
ecte
d. H
e is
con
cern
ed th
at o
nce
the
prog
ram
gai
ns m
omen
tum
, the
re w
ill b
e no
mec
hani
sm to
con
tinue
. He
has
been
inth
e pr
ogra
m s
ince
199
2--it
take
s a
long
tim
e to
inst
itute
.
Inte
rvie
wee
is d
isap
poin
ted
that
he
has
to r
esel
l the
pro
gram
eve
ry y
ear
tom
anag
emen
t. T
he g
over
nmen
t has
not
sen
t cle
ar s
uper
visi
on fo
r th
e pr
ogra
m. T
heva
lue
of e
duca
tion
to th
e ec
onom
y is
not
see
n. A
dult
educ
atio
n is
und
erva
lued
. The
prog
ram
is fr
agm
ente
d--t
here
is n
ot a
cle
ar fo
cus
or m
essa
ge to
com
pani
es.
Inte
rvie
wee
is d
oing
RO
I on
Leve
l 3 w
ith o
utsi
de c
ontr
acto
r--c
anno
t do
leve
l 4. T
hey
alre
ady
did
leve
ls 1
and
2. T
he c
olle
ge h
as th
e re
port
s. W
orke
rs o
n al
l lev
els
are
seei
ng th
e im
port
ance
of L
LL-t
hey
are
begi
nnin
g to
feel
the
pinc
h of
low
unem
ploy
men
t rat
es. T
hey
now
hav
e a
wai
ting
list t
o ge
t int
o th
e pr
ogra
m (
for
the
1st
time)
. Mgt
. had
to a
dd c
lass
es th
at w
ere
paid
for
by th
e de
part
men
ts.
159
NM
1111
1111
1M
N IN
N M
I MI
IIIII
MI M
I NM
IMO
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t Im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
169
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
One
em
ploy
ee s
aved
the
com
pany
$26
,000
by
cont
ribut
ing
idea
s. S
elf e
stee
m h
asim
prov
ed--
wor
kers
ent
ered
"S
peak
Out
" co
mpe
titio
n at
the
Col
lege
, and
wro
te th
eir
own
artic
les.
Pro
mot
ions
: 2 e
mpl
oyee
s go
t "E
mpl
oyee
of t
he Y
ear"
aw
ards
for
thei
r
depa
rtm
ents
.
The
com
pany
con
side
rs th
e pr
ogra
m c
heap
.It
need
s be
tter
data
on
hour
lyw
orke
rs--
stud
ying
how
long
it ta
kes
them
to g
et th
roug
h th
e pr
ogra
m. H
ow w
ell d
osk
ills
tran
sfer
?
The
CE
O s
aid
the
proj
ect w
ould
con
tinue
. The
inst
ruct
or is
alre
ady
prov
ided
thro
ugh
a co
ntra
ct w
ith th
e co
llege
.
The
pro
ject
has
not
bee
n pu
blic
ized
--th
e co
mpa
ny is
qui
et a
bout
the
prog
ram
.T
hey
usua
lly h
ave
cons
erva
tive
PR
. A v
isit
from
man
agem
ent o
n th
e na
tiona
l lev
elw
ould
help
.
Yes
. The
y ar
e no
w lo
okin
g at
com
pute
r-ba
sed
trai
ning
in a
ll de
part
men
ts. T
hey
wan
tm
ore
com
pute
r tr
aini
ng.
161
MI U
M M
I MI M
NIM
O M
Th
MO
BM
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
eIn
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s in
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
015:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
ts
162
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
The
sci
entif
ic c
omm
unity
can
not s
hare
find
ings
due
to la
ngua
ge b
arrie
rs.
Glo
baliz
atio
n an
d ac
quis
ition
will
affe
ct b
usin
ess.
Tec
hnol
ogy
for
trai
ning
will
be
impo
rtan
t, as
will
OS
HA
. Sta
tistic
s ne
eded
at h
ighe
r le
vels
.
Yes
, int
ervi
ewee
wou
ld r
ecom
men
d th
is p
rogr
am to
pee
rs in
oth
er c
ompa
nies
--lik
eM
otor
ola.
He
acts
as
a sp
okes
man
to o
ther
com
pani
es. S
omeo
ne in
a h
igh
plac
ene
eds
to b
e a
visi
ble
prom
oter
am
ong
the
CE
Os.
Thi
s is
the
only
cou
ntry
that
doe
s no
ttie
edu
catio
n to
the
econ
omy.
NA
B s
houl
d be
doi
ng m
ore.
Par
tner
6A
pril
28, 1
997
163
Gro
up
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
MIIM
MIM
EM
IN
IIII O
NIII
MU
M
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
0 S
taff
()P
artn
er 0
Tra
inin
g D
irect
or 0
Lea
rner
Vis
it 01
02
3 1;
94 5
6
2. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e pr
ojec
t? W
hy?
3. H
ow e
ffect
ive
was
the
part
ners
hip
betw
een
indu
stry
and
the
Col
lege
?
4. D
ld y
our
expe
ctat
ions
chan
ge d
urin
g th
e co
urse
of th
e pr
ojec
t? H
ow?
5. W
hat w
ere
your
maj
ordi
sapp
oint
men
ts?
6. H
ow d
id th
e co
mpa
nybe
nefit
(pr
oduc
tivity
,qu
ality
, saf
ety,
abs
en-
teei
sm, r
eten
tion,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
164
Com
pany
10
Won
derf
ully
- -m
et n
eeds
by
cour
ses
that
wer
e de
velo
ped
(GE
D, w
orkp
lace
mat
h, E
SL,
prob
lem
sol
ving
).
The
rel
atio
nshi
p w
as fl
exib
le--
the
colle
ge w
as w
illin
g to
cus
tom
ize
to w
hat t
heco
mpa
ny w
ante
d.
Inte
rvie
wee
had
exp
ecte
d on
ly tr
aini
ng in
the
begi
nnin
g.S
he is
ple
ased
with
the
curr
icul
um a
nd th
e w
orks
hops
for
supe
rvis
ors.
She
is d
isap
poin
ted
that
the
gran
t is
endi
ng. S
he h
as b
ecom
e de
pend
ent o
n th
eC
olle
ge's
ser
vice
s an
d ac
cess
to in
form
atio
n.
Wor
kers
mov
ed b
eyon
d lit
erac
y to
hig
her
leve
l ski
lls, m
oved
into
sup
ervi
sory
and
grou
p le
ader
rol
es, s
ough
t add
ition
al tr
aini
ng o
n th
eir
own,
bec
ame
mor
e ab
le to
solv
e pr
oble
ms.
Atte
ndan
ce h
as im
prov
ed a
nd ta
rdin
ess
decr
ease
d.
165
OM
OM
MI
MIN
MN
INII
NM
IM
I =II
7. H
ow d
id th
e w
orke
rsbe
nefit
(m
oral
e, a
tten-
danc
e, te
amw
ork,
etc
.)?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. H
ow c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e w
asth
e pr
ogra
m?
9. H
ow d
o yo
u fe
el a
bout
cont
inui
ng th
e pr
ojec
t?
10. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t hel
ped
the
com
pany
with
pub
lic r
ela-
tions
(ne
wsp
aper
art
icle
s,T
V, r
adio
cov
erag
e, e
tc.)
?E
xam
ples
?
11. H
as th
e pr
ojec
t Im
prov
edth
e co
mpa
ny's
trai
ning
prog
ram
? E
xam
ples
?
"166
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Sel
f est
eem
has
impr
oved
. The
re h
ave
been
mor
e th
an 5
0 pr
omot
ions
. 15
wor
kers
have
mov
ed fr
om s
alar
ied
to m
anag
emen
t pos
ition
s. S
ever
al g
ot G
ED
s.
Abs
olut
ely.
The
com
pany
onl
y ha
d to
don
ate
the
spac
e an
d th
e w
orke
rs't
ime.
The
com
pany
inst
itute
d a
prog
ram
in S
C, i
n a
com
pany
they
just
bou
ght.
Wor
kers
atte
nd c
lass
es o
n th
e cl
ock.
The
pro
gram
def
inite
ly w
illco
ntin
ue--
they
wilt
out
sour
ce
the
clas
ses
to C
LC.
Abs
olut
ely.
The
new
com
pany
bro
chur
e sh
ows
a pi
ctur
e of
the
lear
ning
cen
ter.
Cus
tom
ers
are
plea
sed
that
the
com
pany
is w
illin
g to
inve
st in
its
wor
kers
. Als
o w
ant
to s
tart
pro
gram
s.
Yes
, it h
as im
prov
ed; t
here
was
no
trai
ning
pro
gram
bef
ore.
Peo
ple
wou
ld le
arn
on
the
job
afte
r th
ey w
ere
prom
oted
. Thi
s pr
ogra
m h
as s
how
nth
e co
mpa
ny th
e ne
eds
for
trai
ning
and
impl
emen
tatio
n.
167
MI O
M a
ll=
II O
M =
II M
I MR
MI M
I OM
XIII
MO
all
111.
MI
INN
I
12. W
hat c
hang
es d
o yo
u se
ein
the
futu
re th
at w
ould
chan
ge th
e ne
eds
ofyo
ur w
orke
rs fo
r tr
aini
ng?
13. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
this
trai
ning
pro
gram
toyo
ur c
olle
ague
s In
oth
erco
mpa
nies
?
14. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Par
tner
s In
terv
iew
Gui
de
Wor
kers
will
nee
d m
ore
prob
lem
sol
ving
and
tech
nica
lsk
ills,
due
to n
ew m
achi
nery
(CN
C; p
rogr
amm
ed, a
utom
ated
.)
Inte
rvie
wee
doe
s so
eve
ry d
ay! G
roup
dev
elop
men
tgoo
d so
ther
e is
n't t
he n
eces
sity
to r
einv
ent t
he w
heel
. The
y sh
are
curr
icul
um. C
LC a
cts
as a
cen
tral
cle
arin
ghou
se fo
r
info
rmat
ion.
Job
inst
ruct
ion
time
has
decl
ined
33%
and
is b
ette
rqu
ality
. (T
imed
by
supe
rvis
ors)
.C
ycle
tim
e re
duce
d fr
om 2
8 da
ys to
5 d
ays
from
sta
rt to
finis
h. (
Thi
s is
due
tote
amw
ork,
and
SP
C, w
here
wor
kers
do
thei
r ow
n ch
ecki
ng.)
Wha
t has
the
fede
ral
gove
rnm
ent d
one
to in
stitu
te p
rogr
ams
in c
olle
ges?
015:
Inte
rvie
w P
artic
ipan
tsP
artn
er 1
Apr
il 28
, 199
7
168
69
IIIII
MI
1111
1111
11M
I MN
OM
MI M
IM
I MB
MN
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
Lea
rner
visi
tE
y 2
3 4
5 6
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost I
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r Jo
b?E
xam
ples
?
170
Com
pany
2
Mat
h, r
eadi
ng/w
ritin
g
Had
fun,
like
d so
lvin
g pr
oble
ms.
Mos
t im
port
ant:
good
inst
ruct
or (
took
tim
e w
ith s
tude
nts)
, rec
alle
d pa
st le
arni
ng,
incr
ease
d co
nfid
ence
, had
to th
ink.
New
wor
ds--
how
to lo
ok u
p w
ords
in th
e di
ctio
nary
, etc
. Inc
reas
ed s
elf-
este
em. P
ayat
tent
ion
to p
aper
wor
k.
Can
rea
d m
emos
, che
ck p
aper
wor
k. Im
prov
ed s
pelli
ng w
hen
writ
ing,
pro
nunc
iatio
nw
hen
spea
king
.
181
Rea
ding
Eg
Writ
ing
El S
peak
ing
List
enin
g18
) M
ath
Tea
mw
ork
Oth
er...
171
MI a
.III
IIII
MI M
N11
1111
1M
S M
O11
1111
MO
MI
if
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
orbe
tter
job?
How
?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
172
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
The
se c
lass
es h
elpe
d to
impr
ove
skill
s, w
ill h
elp
in p
rom
otio
n. O
ne s
tude
nt g
ot a
prom
otio
n be
caus
e th
e cl
ass
help
ed h
im w
ith h
is w
ritin
g.
Som
e gr
umbl
ed; s
ome
wer
e ok
. Som
e w
ere
unha
ppy
abou
t hav
ing
to p
ick
up th
ew
ork
of o
ther
s.
Yes
--to
o ol
d, n
o pr
omot
ion.
173
MI O
M M
I MI M
I NIB
Ili In
NM
EM
IM
INI1
11IM
O M
IM
INI
NM
MI N
M
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es ?
.
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
job?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
174
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Goo
d su
ppor
t and
no
hass
les
wer
e re
ceiv
ed fr
om th
e su
perv
isor
s. T
hey
trie
d to
sche
dule
aro
und
the
clas
ses.
The
inte
rvie
wee
s fe
lt be
tter
abou
t lea
rnin
g--le
d to
cla
sses
at c
olle
ge a
nd th
eG
ED
--w
ant m
ore
lear
ning
. One
lear
ner
wan
ts to
bec
ome
a se
amst
ress
on
her
own.
Yes
--cr
ossw
ord
puzz
les,
spe
akin
g in
fron
t of o
ther
s, S
unda
y sc
hool
, oth
er c
lass
es.
Not
afr
aid
to d
o m
ath-
-don
't ha
ve to
ask
for
help
. Sto
od u
p in
chu
rch.
Rea
ding
New
sfo
r Y
ou e
ven
afte
r cl
ass.
Rea
d ne
wsp
aper
and
boo
k, a
nd u
nder
stoo
d it.
Is a
ble
to c
heck
gro
cery
pric
es to
mak
e su
re s
he's
not
get
ting
chea
ted.
Hel
ped
with
dau
ghte
r (1
4) s
elf-
este
em. G
ood
exam
ple
for
kids
.
gl F
amily
IN C
omm
unity
0 V
otin
g O
ther
...
It's
scar
y to
go
back
to s
choo
l--dr
oppe
d ou
t 27
year
s ag
o. T
hink
ing
abou
t com
mitt
ing
to a
dditi
onal
edu
catio
n--w
ants
to g
o on
.Le
arne
r G
roup
Aug
ust 3
0-S
epte
mbe
r 1,
199
4
175
1111
111
1111
111
1111
11M
I N
E M
I IN
N N
M11
1111
111
M1
MN
Nil
MN
IM
O M
I
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff Q
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
visi
tE
ll 2
3 4
5 6
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r jo
b?E
xam
ples
?
176
'Com
pany
4
'ES
L
Goo
d.
The
teac
her
was
mos
t im
port
ant.
A c
ompl
aint
was
that
mor
e E
nglis
h, r
eadi
ng a
ndw
ritin
g w
ere
need
ed--
the
stud
ents
nee
d ev
eryt
hing
!
Lear
ned
the
right
par
t of s
peec
h. H
elpe
d so
n w
ith h
omew
ork.
Lear
ned
mor
e ab
out w
ork-
-tap
e, m
achi
nes,
hav
e to
rea
d w
hat m
achi
ne s
ays.
Rea
ding
Writ
ing
Spe
akin
gLi
sten
ing
Mat
hT
eam
wor
kO
ther
...
177
101
1111
1M
I le
MS
IIIIII
IM
ISM
illIN
SM
IMI
MI
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r lo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Yes
, mor
e fo
r ow
n fu
ture
.
Rea
ding
and
writ
ing,
not
in E
nglis
h or
Spa
nish
. The
re w
as a
n ac
cept
ance
and
an
unde
rsta
ndin
g. N
o te
asin
g.
Yes
, the
y ha
ve s
igne
d up
.
178
179
MI M
INI
INN
1111
111
11.1
1111
11M
il M
NIII
III11
111
INI1
1111
1M
I11
1111
11
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
eth
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
job?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
180
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
, it i
s go
od fo
r th
e st
uden
ts to
enj
oy c
lass
es.
Yes
.
On
the
job:
Wor
ds, d
imen
sion
s, m
eetin
gs a
ll in
Eng
lish-
-und
erst
and
mor
e.
At h
ome:
do
hom
ewor
k, u
nder
stan
d w
hat k
ids
are
sayi
ngin
Eng
lish.
gi F
amily
Cg
Com
mun
ityV
otin
gO
ther
...
none
.Le
arne
rs 1
5, 1
6, 1
7, 1
8A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
1.81
MIS
UM
MI
MIN
OM
MIR
, all
PUP
OM
IIII
II11
1111
1 M
S M
IL-
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
visi
t®
1 02
o3
4 5
06
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r jo
b?E
xam
ples
? 182
Com
pany
5
ES
L, G
ED
, Mat
h
Ver
y sa
tisfie
d.
The
mos
t im
port
ant p
art w
as th
at it
was
ons
ite.
Som
e le
arne
rs h
ad b
een
goin
g to
the
high
sch
ool f
or E
SL-
-thi
s w
orkp
lace
cla
ss is
bette
r, m
ore
com
fort
able
.
The
lear
ners
lear
ned
to u
se c
alcu
lato
rs, d
o m
ath,
fill
out r
epor
ts. G
ED
cla
sses
incl
uded
som
e w
ork
rela
ted
mat
eria
l.
Rea
ding
El W
ritin
gS
peak
ing
List
enin
g E
l Mat
hT
eam
wor
kO
ther
...
183
1111
111
'MI M
IR A
IM M
P M
k 11
11IN
SIN
N M
I Mill
1111
1101
MIN
MN
IMF
MI M
I
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r lo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
184
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
No.
No.
No
hass
le.
Yes
, but
oth
ers
didn
't--d
id th
ey c
op o
ut?
The
oth
ers
know
they
hav
e lo
w s
kills
--th
ein
terv
iew
ees
didn
't kn
ow w
hy o
ther
s w
eren
't in
the
clas
ses.
185
MB
=II
EN
O \1
1111
.al
lio
nN
s N
ei N
ow
e m
a am
am
as
am m
ot a
s im
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
lob?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
186
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
It w
as m
ade
conv
enie
nt to
atte
nd c
lass
es.
Yes
--so
me
wan
t to
finis
h th
e G
ED
.
No,
but
they
und
erst
and
wha
t the
y re
ad b
ette
r. T
hey
use
the
calc
ulat
or m
ore.
Yes
--so
me
said
they
can
be
bette
r pa
rent
s by
hel
ping
kid
s w
ith h
omew
ork.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
1 F
amily
Com
mun
ityV
otin
gO
ther
...
Rea
ding
/writ
ing
clas
ses
shou
ld b
e of
fere
d if
at a
ppro
pria
te le
vel.
Lear
ners
8, 9
, 10
and
11A
ugus
t 30-
Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
187
1111
111
1111
11M
I NM
I41
1111
MN
MI M
I I=
MN
MIN
MIN
MI
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff p
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
visi
tE
li 02
3 0
4 5
06
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
het d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r Jo
b?E
xam
ples
?
.188
Com
pany
6
ES
L
The
wom
an s
aid
clas
ses
wer
e ok
. The
man
sai
d th
ey w
ere
so-s
o.
The
cla
sses
hel
ped
perf
orm
ance
on
the
job
som
ewha
t "so
-so.
"
The
y ca
n sp
eak
Eng
lish
to th
e bo
ss a
nd e
xpla
in a
pro
blem
on
the
mac
hine
.
The
y ca
n ta
lk to
oth
ers
on th
e jo
b.
Rea
ding
Writ
ing
El S
peak
ing
List
enin
gM
ath
Tea
mw
ork
Oth
er...
189
U.
MS
MN
NM
MN
MI
1111
11M
O=
NM
II111
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r jo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
1n
3
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Not
yet
.
The
y do
not
atte
nd c
lass
es d
urin
g th
eir
wor
k sh
ifts-
-bef
ore
or a
fter-
-pai
d to
do
so.
Yes
, to
lear
n E
nglis
h, a
nd p
ract
ice
read
ing
and
writ
ing.
One
inte
rvie
wee
reco
mm
ende
d th
e cl
ass
to a
bro
ther
--sa
ying
that
it is
impo
rtan
t to
know
Eng
lish
in th
eU
$.
BE
ST
CO
PY
AV
AIL
AB
LE1
91
IM M
IMI=
=I -
- -
NM
- -
-=
I
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
lob?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
192
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
No
enco
urag
emen
t fro
m th
e su
perv
isor
.
Yes
. One
inte
rvie
wee
sai
d th
at s
he/h
e pr
efer
s th
e cl
asse
s to
bei
ng a
car
pent
er.
No. No,
eve
ryon
e in
the
fam
ily s
peak
s S
pani
sh.
The
-man
has
a 4
yea
r ol
d da
ught
er, a
ndth
e fa
mily
spe
aks
both
lang
uage
s--w
atch
es T
V, l
iste
ns to
rad
io, r
eads
new
spap
er.
Yes
, see
#6.
Fam
ily C
omm
unity
0 V
otin
g 0t
her.
..
The
wom
an th
inks
it's
impo
rtan
t to
lear
n to
spe
ak E
nglis
h. S
he w
ants
to le
arn
to ty
pe.
Lear
ners
12
and
13A
ugus
t 30-
-Sep
tem
ber
1, 1
994
BE
ST
CO
PY
AV
AiL
Abi
l19
3
I= O
M N
M M
EI
1111
11I=
OM
Mil
II1
IIII
III=
MI
MB
Ell
ME
I
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
upO
Sta
ff Q
Par
tner
p T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
*Le
arne
r
Vis
it®
1 2
3 4
5 6
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r lo
b?E
xam
ples
?
Com
pany
7
Mat
h
The
cla
sses
are
fant
astic
, and
are
get
ting
bette
r.
The
teac
her's
del
iver
y w
as im
port
ant.
The
cou
rse
was
str
uctu
red
arou
nd th
e st
uden
ts'
need
s. T
he s
mal
ler
clas
ses
wer
e cr
eate
d fo
r pe
ople
with
sim
ilar
need
s. T
he le
asse
sar
e fle
xibl
e. S
mal
l gro
ups
help
eac
h ot
her.
Stu
dent
s w
ere
stim
ulat
ed to
lear
n m
ore.
The
re w
as a
n in
crea
sed
in s
elf c
onfid
ence
.
Sta
ts--
bette
r co
mpr
ehen
sion
--ca
n no
w c
heck
mac
hine
--co
uldn
't be
fore
. Tau
ght h
owto
wor
k as
a te
am in
sm
all g
roup
s. M
utua
l pro
blem
sol
ving
on
the
floor
.Le
arni
ng h
ow
to w
ork
with
diff
eren
t eth
nic
grou
ps.
Rea
ding
Writ
ing
Spe
akin
g12
:1 L
iste
ning
IR M
ath
Tea
mw
ork
Oth
er...
194
/95
1111
1M
I IN
N N
MIII
IIIM
I I=
MI M
Ns
IIIII
I=11
1111
NM
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r lo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
196
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Par
ticip
ants
are
hop
ing
that
this
is th
e ca
se. T
hey
are
taki
ngte
chni
cal e
xam
s. O
nepe
rson
has
mov
ed u
p a
leve
l. T
he c
lass
gav
eth
e st
uden
ts th
e co
nfid
ence
to s
tart
wnr
kinn
on
adva
nced
tech
nica
l den
rees
and
trai
ninn
The
y w
ere
inte
rest
ed in
the
clas
s an
d w
ant t
o ta
ke it
.
Yes
.
197
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
lob?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
198
MI O
M M
I MO
MO
NM
MN
MN
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
The
sup
ervi
sor
wan
ts to
take
the
clas
s! N
o pr
oble
m w
ith b
eing
rel
ease
d--g
ot s
uppo
rt.
Tak
ing
adva
nced
tech
nica
l tra
inin
g du
e to
incr
ease
d se
lf co
nfid
ence
. The
re is
gro
upsu
ppor
t.
At w
ork,
em
ploy
ee n
ow d
oubl
e ch
ecks
the
com
pute
r, e
xpla
ins
wha
t he'
s do
ing
with
num
bers
.
One
em
ploy
ee h
elps
his
dau
ghte
r w
ith m
ath-
-now
see
s th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
it. H
e ca
nex
plai
n th
e m
ath
now
, not
just
giv
e an
swer
s. T
his
is a
res
ult o
f hav
ing
good
teac
hers
.H
e ha
s hi
s w
ife g
oing
bac
k to
sch
ool t
oo.
181
Fam
ilyC
omm
unity
Vot
ing
Oth
er...
The
col
lege
did
n't w
ant t
o in
clud
e R
elia
ble
and
M-L
Mol
ded-
-too
far.
Ber
nie
says
she
wou
ld lo
ve to
. Adu
lt ed
cla
sses
taug
ht a
fter
wor
k--t
oo ti
red
and
long
hou
rs. I
deal
envi
ronm
ent h
ere
betw
een
shift
s--a
ll pa
id (
3 ho
urs/
wee
k). W
ould
be
will
ing
to d
o on
own
time-
-con
veni
ence
. Lea
rner
14.
Aug
ust 3
0-S
epte
mbe
r 1,
199
419
9
MI M
I MI
1101
1
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
Q T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
O L
earn
er
Vis
it12
:11
02 3
4 5
6
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r jo
b?E
xam
ples
?
Com
pany
8
ES
L
Yes
, wan
ted
mor
e E
SL
clas
ses.
Cus
tom
er s
ervi
ce is
eas
ier.
Like
d th
e 2
hour
s/2
times
per
wee
k sc
hedu
le.
Bet
ter
with
ver
bs, i
mpr
oved
cus
tom
er s
ervi
ce, m
ore
com
fort
able
in w
ritin
g an
d ta
lkin
g.
Rel
ated
to k
itche
n--m
ath,
etc
.
El R
eadi
ng jg
Writ
ing
El S
peak
ing
List
enin
g E
l Mat
hT
eam
wor
kO
ther
...
200
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
201
NM
MB
MN
MO
MI I
=III
III=
MI M
N
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r jo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
202
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
Que
stio
n no
t ask
ed.
No,
may
be la
ter.
Oth
ers
feel
it is
not
fair
that
the
stud
ents
get
to le
ave
befo
re th
e w
ork
is d
one.
Trie
d to
finis
h w
ork.
Will
ing
to g
o to
cla
ss w
ithou
t bei
ng p
aid.
Yes
, but
the
leve
l was
too
low
(bu
t not
rea
lly).
Nee
d m
ore
stud
ents
toha
ve m
ore
leve
ls.
203
MI I
= M
I I=
MN
MI-
MI G
NI M
I MO
1011
1M
I MI
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
lob?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
204
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
.
Yes
, will
pro
babl
y ta
ke a
cla
ss a
fter
wor
k. H
as o
ther
wor
k.
Yes
, one
stu
dent
doe
sn't
let h
er k
ids
wat
ch S
pani
sh T
V. O
ne ta
lked
Eng
lish
to h
er 1
2ye
ar o
ld s
on, (
for
his
requ
ired
clas
s) a
nd c
an s
peak
in s
choo
l, at
the
doct
or, a
t the
stor
e.
(8)
Fam
ilyC
omm
unity
Vot
ing
Oth
er...
Pro
nunc
iatio
n w
as h
arde
st to
lear
n. S
omet
imes
, a le
arne
r w
as la
te to
cla
ss b
ecau
sesh
e st
ill h
ad to
fini
sh h
er w
ork.
Sch
edul
ing
prob
lem
s le
d to
dro
pout
s.Le
arne
rs 1
9 an
d 20
Aug
ust 3
0-S
epte
mbe
r 1,
199
4
205
MI I
= N
M N
MI O
M N
M M
I MI M
I- w
MI
MIII
I11
I MI M
I MI
MI
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
visi
t1
cg2
3 4
5 06
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost I
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r Jo
b?E
xam
ples
?
Com
pany
1
ES
L
Fin
e.
Not
hing
was
leas
t im
port
ant.
Tea
cher
cou
ld a
sk q
uest
ions
from
job.
The
lear
ner
lear
ned
how
to s
peak
mor
e an
d be
tter
Eng
lish.
Thi
s is
nec
essa
ry fo
r hi
m.
The
cla
ss w
as o
f no
help
in r
eadi
ng, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath.
Rea
ding
Writ
ing
figl S
peak
ing
eg L
iste
ning
Mat
h18
1 T
eam
wor
kO
ther
...
206
207
MI
MI
Ilia
1111
1111
OM
MIN
IIIIII
NIB
MIM
IIN
S M
I MI M
I all
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r jo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
208
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
No.
Yes
.If
the
lear
ner
need
s pa
rts,
he
can
spea
k E
nglis
h to
his
sup
ervi
sor.
Yes
, on
the
com
pute
r. T
he le
arne
r is
now
ent
erin
g da
ta.
Yes
, bec
ause
he
need
s to
lear
n m
ore
Eng
lish.
OK
.
Yes
, he
has
reco
mm
ende
d th
e cl
ass
to fr
iend
s.
209
In M
I MI N
M N
M N
S N
M11
110
11.1
111
1111
1111
11IN
N11
1111
MS
NM
MI M
I
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
job?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
2? 0
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
, but
no
enco
urag
emen
t.
Yes
, ES
L 2.
Yes
, esp
ecia
lly m
ore
read
ing
and
writ
ing.
Writ
ing
is m
ore
diffi
cult.
Mor
e sp
eaki
ngal
so.
The
lear
ner
talk
s to
his
wife
in E
nglis
h to
pra
ctic
e hi
s sk
ills.
The
lear
ner
has
now
cha
nged
from
the
Spa
nish
TV
cha
nnel
.
Fam
ilyC
omm
unity
Vot
ing
Oth
er...
Thi
s le
arne
r w
ants
mor
e jo
b-re
late
d re
adin
g an
d w
ritin
g. O
ne o
f the
hig
hest
in th
ecl
ass-
-wan
ts a
hig
her
leve
l cla
ss. L
earn
er 1
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
211
EM
Mill
EM
I NM
MIN
.-11
115
MIE
ME
I11
,111
1111
11E
M
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
0 T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
p. L
earn
er
visi
t0
1 ®
2 3
4 5
6
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
.
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r lo
b?E
xam
ples
? 212
Com
pany
2
Mat
h
The
lear
ners
are
ver
y sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
e cl
ass.
The
y ar
e le
arni
ng n
ew th
ings
.. T
he n
ewsy
mbo
ls a
re a
cha
lleng
e.
Kno
wle
dge
of th
e m
etric
sys
tem
is n
eede
d fo
r ad
vanc
emen
t. A
lgeb
ra is
impo
rtan
t.T
he te
ache
r w
as m
entio
ned
as im
port
ant.
A k
now
ledg
e of
the
met
ric s
yste
m w
as g
aine
d, a
s w
ell a
s re
ason
ing
skill
s, th
roug
h th
eus
e of
wor
d pr
oble
ms
and
com
puta
tion.
Rea
ding
--jo
b de
scrip
tions
, pro
cedu
res
(SO
P),
spe
cs. M
ath-
-mea
sure
men
t too
ls,
met
rics.
Tea
mw
ork-
-wor
ked
in te
ams
in c
lass
, nee
d to
be
able
to d
o th
at o
n th
e jo
b.
El R
eadi
ngW
ritin
gS
peak
ing
Eg
List
enin
g E
l Mat
h E
l Tea
mw
ork
Oth
er...
213
IMO
I= M
I =II
MI M
IMI M
N IO
N M
I IN
N11
1111
MIM
I11
111
1111
111
1111
11IO
W M
N
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r jo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
214
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
No.
Yes
, a h
igh
opin
ion
of s
elf (
not c
ocky
) he
lps.
The
y fe
el g
ood
abou
tth
emse
lves
.
Yes
, one
of t
he in
terv
iew
ees
is n
ear
retir
emen
t age
but
may
nee
d to
keep
wor
king
.G
iven
the
chan
ce, t
hese
lear
ners
wou
ld ta
ke a
com
pany
trai
ning
pro
gram
.
It co
uld.
The
lear
ners
got
som
e go
od n
atur
ed te
asin
g ab
out t
he fo
lder
from
CLC
.
Yes
, the
y di
d.
215
MI
1E11
1111
1M
INI
1111
111
111
INS
NM
IN
N O
M 1
111
NM
MI
NM
IIN
SW
INIl
l
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
lob?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
216
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
, all
the
way
up.
the
line,
sup
ervi
sors
wer
e su
ppor
tive.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Yes
, the
y ca
n fig
ure
mor
e ou
t, su
ch a
s nu
mbe
r of
bag
s pe
r ho
ur, a
nd p
lay
with
it.
One
lear
ner
help
s he
r so
n w
ith m
ath.
One
lear
ner
does
her
hom
ewor
k an
d m
ore.
Bot
h ar
e av
id r
eade
rs.
Fam
ily--
see
abov
e.. V
otin
g--t
hese
two
alw
ays
vote
.
rg F
amily
Com
mun
ity (
8:1
Vot
ing
Oth
er...
Lear
ners
2 a
nd 3
.A
ugus
t 14-
16, 1
995
217
1111
11'M
N M
O E
n11
1111
1111
11M
il M
N M
B M
N11
1111
NM
IE
li an
MI E
N11
1111
1111
1
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff co
Par
tner
Q T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
® L
earn
er
Vis
itl ®
2 3
4 5
61.
Pla
ce o
f em
ploy
men
t:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
hat w
as th
e m
ost i
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
het d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r Jo
b?E
xam
ples
?
211S
Com
pany
3
ES
L 1
Mos
t of t
hese
four
wor
kers
hav
e w
orke
d he
re a
long
tim
e. O
ne tr
ied
to g
o to
col
lege
(nig
ht s
choo
l) bu
t cla
sses
wer
e to
o la
rge.
Thi
s cl
ass
is g
ood
beca
use
it is
sm
all.
All
part
s of
the
clas
s w
ere
impo
rtan
t, es
peci
ally
spe
akin
g.
Rea
ding
and
spe
akin
g sk
ills
wer
e m
entio
ned.
Rea
ding
: saf
ety
inst
ruct
ions
, mai
nten
ance
, sig
ns, j
ob o
rder
s. W
ritin
g: n
one-
-wan
ts fo
rse
lf, n
eeds
to b
e ab
le to
writ
e. S
peak
ing:
fore
man
, per
sonn
el o
ffice
, uni
on. L
iste
ning
:un
ders
tand
s be
tter.
Mat
h: n
one,
nee
d it.
Tea
mw
ork:
alre
ady
wor
k in
team
s.
03)
Rea
ding
Ig1
Writ
ing
Spe
akin
gC
31 L
iste
ning
Mat
hT
eam
wor
kO
ther
...
219
1111
111
111.
1M
INII
IMI
Mel
OE
MN
MI
MO
MIN
I11
1111
IIII
IIM
I IM
P N
M
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r jo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
220
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
.
Yes
, now
bet
ter
in w
ritin
g. F
eel m
ore
conf
iden
t.
Yes
, but
thro
ugh
the
unio
n. N
eed
Eng
lish
to g
et p
rom
oted
--pa
y ov
ertim
e fo
r cl
ass
also
.
Bec
ause
the
wor
kers
wen
t to
clas
s af
ter
the
shift
, thi
s w
asn'
t a p
robl
em.
Yes
.
Yes
, but
the
rest
don
't ne
ed E
SL.
All
of th
em n
eed
som
ethi
ng, h
owev
er.
221
IM =
I Ell
MIM
MIII
IMM
M
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
eth
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
lob?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
.
Yes
.
Yes
.
Yes
, esp
ecia
lly th
e ne
wsp
aper
and
writ
ing.
Spa
nish
TV
was
men
tione
d.
Fam
ily: t
wo
lear
ners
had
kid
s w
ho s
poke
Eng
lish
(one
had
a 1
0 ye
ar o
ld s
on w
hoco
rrec
ted
his
Eng
lish)
, tw
o ha
d ki
ds w
ho s
poke
onl
y S
pani
sh. C
omm
unity
: a li
ttle.
Fam
ily ig
Com
mun
ity 0
Vot
ing
Oth
er...
In th
e H
ispa
nic
com
mun
ity, e
very
one
spea
ks S
pani
sh; E
nglis
h is
not
nee
ded.
The
rear
e be
tter
jobs
ava
ilabl
e fo
r E
nglis
h sp
eake
rs. M
ost h
ave
been
in th
e U
S a
bout
20
year
s. T
here
wer
e no
ince
ntiv
es to
lear
n E
nglis
h.Le
arne
rs 4
,5,6
and
7
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
222
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
223
1111
1111
111M
INIM
ME
NIII
IMIN
III11
1111
1IM
IMIII
IIIM
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Gro
up0
Sta
ff 0
Par
tner
Q T
rain
ing
Dire
ctor
0 L
earn
er
visi
t01
232
03
04 0
5 06
1. P
lace
of e
mpl
oym
ent:
2. N
ame
of c
lass
:
3. H
ow s
atis
fied
wer
e yo
uw
ith th
e cl
ass(
es)?
Why
?
4. W
het w
as th
e m
ost I
mpo
r-ta
nt p
art?
Lea
st?
5. W
hat d
id y
ou g
ain
from
the
clas
s?
6. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
you
r Jo
b?E
xam
ples
? 224
Com
pany
4
ES
L
The
lear
ners
like
d th
e cl
asse
s; th
ey a
re m
ore
conf
iden
t.
The
y al
l spe
ak m
ore
Eng
lish.
One
got
a G
ED
.
The
y al
l spe
ak m
ore
Eng
lish.
Rea
ding
: lea
rned
dim
ensi
ons,
und
erst
and
wha
t the
y ha
ve to
rea
d. W
ritin
g: a
little
, its
a pr
oble
m. S
peak
ing:
mor
e on
job,
in b
oth
Spa
nish
and
Eng
lish.
Lis
teni
ng: y
es.
Mat
h: G
ED
, nee
ds m
ore.
Tea
mw
ork:
no,
alre
ady
wor
k in
team
s.
2] R
eadi
ng 2
] Writ
ing
21 S
peak
ing
el L
iste
ning
21
Mat
hT
eam
wor
k 0
Oth
er...
225
1111
111
OM
111.
111
1111
MI M
I MO
III I=
NM
NM
INN
=I N
M
7. D
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
unde
rsta
nd th
e co
mpa
nybe
tter?
Exa
mpl
es?
8. D
o yo
u fe
el b
ette
r ab
out
your
self
as a
wor
ker
as a
resu
lt of
the
clas
s?
9. D
id th
e cl
ass
prep
are
you
for
a co
mpa
ny tr
aini
ngpr
ogra
m?
Whi
ch o
ne?
10. D
ld th
e cl
ass
help
you
with
getti
ng a
pro
mot
ion
or a
bette
r Jo
b? H
ow?
11. H
ow d
id y
our
othe
rw
orke
rs fe
el a
bout
you
rta
king
the
clas
s?
12. W
ould
you
rec
omm
end
othe
rs to
take
the
clas
s?
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Yes
.
The
se w
orke
rs fe
el th
ey d
on't
need
trai
ning
unl
ess
they
wan
t a n
ew jo
b.
Yes
, it w
ill h
elp.
If yo
u w
ant t
o be
a s
uper
viso
r, y
ou m
ust s
peak
Eng
lish.
Oth
er w
orke
rs s
aid
thes
e m
en w
ere
too
old
for
clas
s.
Yes
, but
mos
t did
n't w
ant t
o.
226
227
1111
1011
1111
1111
1111
1111
0111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1011
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
11=
13. D
id y
ou g
et s
uppo
rt fr
omyo
ur s
uper
viso
r to
atte
ndth
e cl
ass?
14. D
o yo
u lo
ok fo
rwar
d to
any
mor
e cl
asse
s?W
here
?
15. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
eth
at w
ork
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
16. D
o yo
u do
any
mor
ere
adin
g, w
ritin
g, o
r m
ath
at h
ome
than
you
did
befo
re th
e cl
ass?
Exa
mpl
es?
17. H
ow d
id th
e cl
ass
help
you
outs
ide
the
job?
Exa
mpl
es?
18. O
ther
com
men
ts:
228
Lear
ner
Inte
rvie
w G
uide
Yes
.
Yes
, all.
No
answ
er g
iven
.
Yes
. GE
D: o
ne m
an p
ract
ices
the
wor
k w
ith h
is w
ife to
teac
h he
r. O
ther
s sp
eak
Eng
lish
with
thei
r ch
ildre
n a
little
. Mos
tly s
peak
Eng
lish
at w
ork
and
Spa
nish
at h
ome.
Yes
--G
ED
. The
com
mun
ity is
Spa
nish
onl
y. T
he w
orke
rs h
ope
to b
e ab
le to
vot
ein
the
futu
re.
IN F
amily
Com
mun
ityV
otin
gO
ther
...
The
se w
orke
rs w
ant t
o co
me
to s
choo
l to
lear
n m
ore
and
to h
elp
lots
of p
eopl
e.Le
arne
rs 2
1, 2
2 an
d 23
Aug
ust 1
4-16
, 199
5
229
APPENDIX C
Summary of Trends
230
Summary of TrendsTrainers
Trainers at these companies seemed to be impressed by the effects of the programon students. Most noted that students showed increased self-esteem,motivation, and trainability. Communications had also improved. It was notedthat this program had the effect of showcasing the needs for continual training inthese companies.
Question 1: Place of Employment?
The five respondents were employed at Stone (2), Baxter, General Metal, andReliable.
Question 2: Name of Class?
Three respondents represented ESL classes; the other two math classes.
Question 3: Number of workers who participated?
Answers to this question varied widely, from "all" to "5 of 13" and "6 of 14."These responses could cause the observer to conclude that the intervieweesdid not understand the question.
Question 4: How satisfied were you with the class(es)? Why?
The interviewees were generally satisfied or very satisfied with the classes.They noted that employee performance has improved and self-confidence hasincreased. Workers now understand product orders and workplace materialsbetter, and they are more eager to obtain additional training.
Question 5: How did the company benefit (productivity, quality, safety,absenteeism, retention, etc.)? Examples?
One respondent stated that it was now easier to deal with the employees onboth personal and professional levels, since workers are now able to workmore independently. Less mistakes are being made on the job, said anotherrespondent. Intangible benefits, such as improved morale and self-confidence,were also noted.
Question 6: How did the workers benefit (morale, attendance, teamwork, etc.)?Examples?
It is easier for the workers to communicate with supervisors, management,and each other. Some employees have gotten GEDs and are now pursuingadditional educational and employment opportunities. One respondent
mentioned that an ESL student has begun reading the English languagenewspaper every day, as a result of improved reading skills.
Question 7: Has participation in the class(es) affected their chances forpromotion?
Two respondents mentioned that since their companies now required workersto have GEDs or equivalent high-school achievement in order to advance,participation in the literacy program will eventually positively affect chancesfor promotion. One interviewee mentioned an incident where workers,newly confident in their English-speaking ability, questioned a supervisorwho had given them a work directive. It turned out that the workers werecorrect to question the supervisor, who admitted his mistake.
Question 8: How much did the workers talk to you about the class(es)?
Only one of the respondents stated that he talked to workers frequently aboutthe classes. However, he said that he received a great deal of feedback aboutthe positive relationship of the course work to the job. Another intervieweesaid that students come to him when they have questions or problems. Theother three respondents noted that they do not have much interaction withthe workers on this topic.
Question 9: How do the workers who participated feel about the class(es)?
All of the respondents stated that the workers felt good, enthusiastic, andbetter about themselves, as a result of the class. One interviewee mentionedthat students "clean up" for class. Another respondent said that students hadbeen saying that classes should have been offered long ago.
Question 10: How do the other workers feel about the classes?
Some other workers resent that they have to cover for those attending class,said one respondent. Another company has a waiting list for classesmanywant to participate, but there is not adequate space. One interviewee notedthat at his company some workers were resentful because this programaddressed only basic skills, not "higher ESL." One training directorcomplained that most of the workers in his company were "complacent" anddid not prioritize education.
Question 11: How do you feel about releasing workers from the job? How didyou accommodate?
Most of the respondents said that some schema had been devised in order toallow workers to attend classes. However, companies with small departmentsfound it difficult to cover for workers who were not on the shop floor. One
232
interviewee mentioned that his company "works through the problems" thatsurround this issue because they "understand the benefits" of a literacyprogram for workers.
Question 12: How does this training compare with training the company hasdone or could do itself?
Only one respondent mentioned that his company offers a wide range of safetyand other types of training. Two of the companies offer "on the job" trainingonly, while another offers only technical training. One noted that hiscompany was just beginning a formal training program.
Question 13: Would you recommend the company continue this type oftraining?
All respondents gave emphatic positive responses to this question. Wordslike "Absolutely!" "100%" and "strongly encourage" were used.
Question 14: What are the advantages and disadvantages of working with theCollege in offering these class(es)?
One interviewee said that although the company had more specializedknowledge, the college has more expertise in learning concepts, thisinsinuating that the partnership was a positive one. "The college is aresource," said one respondent, who appreciated that the College had helpedto create a curriculum especially for his employees. Some workers now takeclasses at the Collegethe partnership encouraged them to pursue additionaleducation. Another respondent said that the College was very helpful andmethodical about helping to set up the program. However, the samerespondent stated that he would like teachers hired by the College to be moreflexible, especially in terms of accommodating workers who might have towork late, etc.
Question 15: Other comments?
One trainer noted that advanced ESL classes are needed at his company andadded that his involvement in this program had inspired him to pursueadvanced education on his own. Some of the hourly English-speakingworkers want to learn Spanish so that they can communicate with co-workers.One person noted that worker complacency is the biggest problem at hiscompany but that the complacency would soon be shaken loose as newmachinery would soon start to replace workers.
'233
Summary of TrendStaff
Staff members, overall, reported varying degrees of satisfaction with theprogram. Early interviews suggested that there had been problems with programimplementation, with receiving funding from the funder, and with gettingsupport from the college. However, later interviews revealed that many of thesebugs had been worked out and that the program began to run smoothly in eachcompany. Staff members expressed concern over the continuation of theprogram once the funding had ceased; many were not optimistic that theprogram would continue solely under the aegis of the companies involved.
Question 1: How satisfied are you with the project?
Three of the interviewees said they were "very satisfied" or "satisfied" withthe project; one said it was too soon to tell. One enthusiastic respondent saidshe would give the project a "4 on a 5 point scale." No interviewee said he orshe was dissatisfied with the project.
Question 2: What are the greatest satisfactions?
Satisfaction levels were primarily affected by the progress of students whowere participating, the development of workers' thinking skills, the materialsbeing used, the staff development, and the cooperation of the partners. Onerespondent mentioned that she enjoyed using photography with her class.
Question 3: To what extent are there agreements on the goals among allstakeholders?
A high degree of cooperation among the stakeholders was cited. Most saidthat cooperation had been "good." One interviewee was not certain of themanagement buy-in at her company, however. Stakeholders, according to therespondents, that uncovering students' needs and specializing the curricula tomeet those needs were of importance.
Question 4: What factors helped the success of the project?
The linkage with the College, the teaching staff, the materials, the enthusiasmand interaction of the learners, the "cooperative spirit of the company," andthe cooperation of the stakeholders were all mentioned as positive factors.
Question 5: What factors acted as deterrents to the project?
The amount of time spent in class by learners was mentioned as a deterrent;the interviewee felt that there should be more time allotted for classes. Multi-leveling in classes (the practice of keeping students of all achievement levels
in the same class) was seen as a deterrent, in that students could not get theamount of individualized and small group attention they need. This was seenas a classroom atmosphere that was difficult for all but the most experiencedteachers to handle. In addition, the fact that there were not tangible incentivesfor students was seen as a deterrent. One respondent mentioned nodeterrents.
Question 6: What do you see as the major outcomes?
One interviewee said that the program had affected him personally; he wasgoing to pursue additional education and a transfer to another job. Thisperson wants to work on developing thinking skills and problem solvingabilities with'students in the workplace setting. Another respondentmentioned that these workplace classes "whet the appetite" for education;therefore, classes should be continued and institutionalized. Improvingrelationships with partners, and the quality of the curriculum were also seenas major outcomes.
Question 7: What are the major disappointments?
One respondent stated that the program at her company was being moved to alow-profile location, and that it was being perceived as a "lack of esteem" forthe program. This person also noted that adult education was harder than shethought it would be; although it is important, it is not valued by others.Recruitment, placement and retention of students was mentioned; as was thedifficulty in finding qualified tutors and teachers who are willing to work sofew hours per week. The gap between the end of the last grant and thebeginning of this one (six months) was mentioned. One interviewee did notrespond to the question.
Question 8: What was the most difficult part of the project?
One respondent commented on the lack of materials and the poorly ventilatedspace in which she had to run the program, There was no A-V equipment,only a small chalkboard and a dry mount board are available. Another teacherhad difficulty creating and meeting objectives for a multi-level class. Time toplan and implement ideas was mentioned. One interviewee did not respondto the question.
Question 9: How do you feel about your linkage with industry? Will itcontinue?
Almost all the interviewees said that this linkage was "excellent" or "verygood, " without much further comment. One interviewee did not respond tothe question.
2
235
Question 10: What would you change in a future project?
This question elicited varying responses from the interviewees. One said thatthe teacher should be more involved up-front in the creation and planning ofthe program and curricula. Another respondent would split students intogroups according to level, would incorporate the use of computers, and wouldoffer career counseling to students. A third respondent said that the programshould be more attuned to business trends, and that an additional buy-in fromthe partners could accomplish this. Business people could also be brought inas guest speakers. One interviewee did not respond to the question.
Question 11: How has the College benefited from the project?
One respondent noted that the College "hasn't benefited as much as it could"from the project, saying, "They don't realize what they've got." This personstated that additional media coverage might be a way to improve thissituation. Another person noted that the although the college publicized theprogram in its own PR, it could be more supportive than it has been. Otherinterviewees mentioned that workers were increasingly enrolling in coursesat the College, in order to reskill. One person did not respond to the question.
Question 12: How much support have you had from the College?
Some staff development, materials, and other support have been receivedfrom the College, said most of the respondents. One interviewee was verypositive about the College's support. One person mentioned that at first theCollege had been supportive, but after a while, they "stopped checking" onher.
Question 13: How cost - effective was the project?
Two respondents did not answer this question, while a third was uncertain.Only one said that the project was "worthwhile."
Question 14: What are your plans for the future regarding the project?
Two respondents did not answer this question. Another would like to do aninservice project for the company, while a fourth lamented that she wouldlike to teach more, but cannot, since the contract will not pay for her to teachfull time.
Question 15: Other comments?
,Interview participants: staff working at Reliable, General Metal, and two thatwere not clearly identified.
3 236
Summary of TrendsPartners
The partners seemed satisfied with the project, especially with the flexibility of thecurriculum and with the networking possibilities between the companies and theCollege. All of the partners seemed convinced as to the worth of the program; thiswas especially apparent in later interviews in which the partners reflected on thereturn on the investment they had made in the program. They noted the positiveeffects of the program on worker retention, training, and motivation.
Question 1: Place of Employment
The following companies participated in this project: Reliable Power (MacLeanPower), General Metals, Nichols Aluminum, Baxter, and Stone.
Question 2: How satisfied were you with the project? Why?
All the interviewees expressed satisfaction with the project, although only onestated that she/he was "very satisfied." Reasons for satisfaction included:customized and individualized curricula, staff development and networkingamong partners, numbers of learners involved, and demand for the program.One interviewee stated that she felt the program was flexible enough to meet theneeds of all the company's employees.
Question 3: How effective was the partnership between industry and the College?
The partnership was termed "very effective," "comfortable," "flexible" and"cooperative." All interviewees noted that the College had been helpful inproviding resources, materials, and other assistance to the programs. One personmentioned that the College had sent him to seminars for advanced training.Another interviewee said that the College was an active participant in thesteering committee, and that the College was in tune with his company's needs.One other respondent stated that the partnership had resulted in contractualwork with the College.
Question 4: Did your expectations change during the course of the project? How?
Reactions to this question were mixed. All respondents reported a change inexpectations; however, while some changed for the positive, others werenegative. Two respondents mentioned that they were clearer about the purposeof the grant than they had been at its inception. One person said that he hadexpected a shorter time frame in which to begin the project, and that he had notunderstood that the program was to be workplace-oriented until he saw theclasses in action. Another interviewee mentioned that because the currentprogram had been successful in her company, expectations for additionaleducation had risen to include communications and problem-solving courses.One respondent stated that he had come to realize that "there is no quick fix" for
the literacy problems in his company. A respondent said that he had becomemuch more involved in the program than he had anticipated.
Question 5: What were your major disappointments?
Several respondents mentioned the long time gap between the announcement ofthe program and its actual start. One also mentioned the time gap between the.completion of one course (ESL 1) and the start of another (ESL 2) as being de-motivating for the students involved. The program loses momentum unlessclasses are continuously held. Recruiting students to participate in the programwas a problem for two of the respondents; one said that the student assessmentand teacher-hiring processes took much too long to complete. One person statedthat hiring a quality teacher who would teach on a very limited part-time basiswas difficult. One interviewee also said that he had been disappointed in havingto re-sell the program to management every year, despite its obvious successes.
Question 6: How did the company benefit (productivity, quality, safety,absenteeism, retention, etc.)? Examples?
Absenteeism, tardiness and accidents have decreased, while output, quality andcommunications have improved. One company, which works in quality teams,recorded that workers who were involved in the project seemed to haveincreased self confidence. ROI has increased overall for one of the companies.Three respondents said that it was too early for them to have noted any trends orpositive results from the program.
Question 7: How did the workers benefit (morale, attendance, teamwork, etc.)?
All respondents said that the program has resulted in an increase in morale,enthusiasm, and self-esteem on the part of the students. An intervieweementioned that it was a "status symbol" to be involved with these classes at hiscompany. Another company, which improved its team system after input fromworkers involved in this project, won a state award and was invited to a largepresentation. At another firm, one older worker was able to respond with somedegree of eloquence to the company CEO during a ceremony.
Question 8: How cost effective was the program?
Responses to this question were mixed. Several respondents believed that theproject was cost-effective, ("absolutely so," according to one respondent)although one had not yet figured the return on investment. One intervieweestated that the program was expensive, and that start-up costs were high; he istracking the effect of the program as "preventative maintenance." One personmentioned that without the government funding, the program would not behappening at his company. Another said that the return on investment would behard to calculate, as the program has an effect not only on skills, but on morale,
238
company loyalty, and self-confidence. One person mentioned a dramatic decrease(about 33%) in training time because of the program, resulting in cost-savings forthe company.
Question 9: How do you feel about continuing the project?
All the respondents wish to continue the project. Some feel confident that theycan find the finding to independently run the programs; others believe that theircompanies will not pay for the program to the same extent as was done by thegrant. One interviewee said that he envisioned the program continuing, but on asmaller scale. Getting buy-ins from management, and presenting the success ofthe program as being integral to the company's success, seemed to be key issues.
Question 10: Has the project helped the company with public relations (newspaperarticles, TV, radio coverage, etc.)? Examples?
Only one respondent mentioned widespread publicity of the project within thevarious branches of his corporation. Another three said that articles about theproject had appeared in the company newsletters or in-house magazines.
Question 11: Has the project improved the company's training program? Examples?
All of the respondents, to one degree or another, stated that the project has madeemployees more "trainable." The learning of basic math, for instance, helps anemployee to grasp blueprint reading concepts. Computer training and problem-solving courses are being asked for by the employees. One interviewee said thatthis project had the effect of creating greater demand for all sorts of in-housetraining programs. Another person said that the company had finally begun tosee the value of training as a result of this program.
Question 12: What changes do you see in the future that would change the needsof your workers for training?
Growth of the companies, especially in the area of the addition of computers andautomation, was seen as the greatest need for employee training. Severalrespondents also mentioned the need for workers to learn team techniques and tohone their problem-solving abilities, as workers are going to be called on tobecome more flexible in the future. Communications issues, such as bridging thegap between workers who speak different languages, is seen as a major issue.
Question 13: Would you recommend this training program to your colleagues inother companies?
All of the interviewees responded positively to this question. One personbelieves that other companies, like his own, ignored the educational needs of the
workers in the past, but are more cognizant of them now. Another company isattempting to duplicate the program at another of its sites.
Question 14: Other comments?
One interviewee mentioned that "business is bad" at his company, thus throwingthe continuation of the literacy program into question. Another respondentoffered the suggestion that literacy training be offered across companies.
L
240
Summary of TrendsLearners
Generally, the learners seemed to have positive responses to the program.Although most learners said that they were satisfied with the program, not all ofthem seemed convinced of its value to them as employees and as citizens,especially those who were interviewed during the early evaluations. However,the positive results of the program became apparent, as employees became moreamenable to learning, more promotable, and more able to communicate withtheir co-workers and with supervisors.
Question 1: Place of Employment?
Learners from the following companies were interviewed: General Metal,Baxter, Nichols, and Stone.
Question 2: Name of class?
Three respondents are involved in ESL classes; one in a math class.
Question 3: How satisfied were you with the class(es)? Why?
Most of the learners said that satisfaction was "good" or "very good." One saidhe felt challenged; another liked the small class size. Some said that they hadgained confidence as a result of the classes.
Question 4: What was the most important part? Least?
Important to the learners were the instructor, the English speaking practice,the learning of the metric system, and the relevance of the curriculum . Onelearner earned a GED. No least important factors were cited.
Question 5: What did you gain from the class?
A better knowledge of spoken and written English was most often cited as again. One respondent mentioned the knowledge of the metric system, as wellas improvement in reasoning and math computation.
Question 6: How did the class help you with your job?
Students mentioned that they were more comfortable with speaking, listeningand teamwork. One respondent mentioned that the class really did not helpwith reading and writing. However, others mentioned that they were nowable to read specs, job orders, signs, job descriptions, and safety procedures withgreater ease and accuracy. Two respondents said that they were also able tospeak to supervisors now, where they could not in the past.
241
Question 7: Did the class help you understand the company better? Examples?
Three interviewees said no, this class did not help them to understand thecompany better, while one said yes, it did. One interviewee did not respond,and no illustrative examples were given by any of the respondents.
Question 8: Do you feel better about yourself as a worker as a result of the class?
All respondents answered this question affirmatively. Self esteem hasimproved, and there is an increased feeling of confidence because of improvedspeaking and reading skills. One student said, "Having a high (not cocky)opinion of yourself helps."
Question 9: Did the class prepare you for a training program? Which one?
One student thought he was now ready for a computer class as a result of hisstudies in the program. Another said that given the chance, he would opt totake additional company-sponsored training courses. Some interviewees saidthat they do not need additional training unless they go to a new job.
Question 10: Did the class help you with getting a promotion or a better job?How?
All respondents answered this question positively. They stated that thelearning of English would help them to become more eligible for supervisorypositions.
Question 11: How did your other workers feel about your taking the class?
One interviewee stated that he had gotten teased as a result of his attendance,namely about the folder he was carrying. In one instance, co-workers said thatthe students were too old to be in school. Other respondents received positivefeedback from their co-workers.
Question 12: Would you recommend others to take the class?
All of the interviewees responded affirmatively to this question. They all saidthat they have recommended the class to friends, with varying degrees ofresponse. Some of the co-workers believe that they do not need additionaleducation, while others showed interest.
Question 13: Did you get support from your supervisor to attend the class?
Most learners said they had received support from supervisors, although onestated that he had gotten "support, but no encouragement."
2 242
Question 14: Do you look forward to any more classes? Where?
All interviewees responded yes to this question, although most had no furthercomment. One student said that he wanted to attend ESL 2 classes, whileanother wanted to take another course in anything that was offered.
Question 15: Do you do any more reading, writing, or math at work than you didbefore the class? Examples?
Most of the students said yes, they were doing more reading, speaking andwriting or math on the job. The respondent from the math class said that shewas able to perform more mathematical calculations on the job, which helpedher to perform her job better. One respondent did not answer the question.
Question 16: Do you do any more reading, writing, or math at home than youdid before the class? Examples?
Several students mentioned that they were speaking English at home more sothan in the past. One said that he is teaching his wife to speak English, whileanother noted that he no longer watched Spanish TV, but instead viewed theEnglish-speaking programs. One learner is able to help her son with math;another has become an avid reader. Others said that they were able to readnewspapers and magazines with more understanding.
Question 17: How did the class help you outside the job? Examples?
One student said that he had started communicating with his children inEnglish. Another mentioned being able to get his GED. The Spanish speakersdo not need to communicate in English outside of the job; they live incommunities which are Spanish-speaking. A student from the math class isnow able to help her son with homework.
Question 18: Other comments?
One learner wants more job-related reading and writing classes; he said that hewould like to see a higher-level ESL class offered. The learners realize thatthey must learn English in order to compete for better jobs. Most of theselearners have been in the US for many years; they have not had cause to learnhow to speak English up until recently. Other workers said that they want tocome to school not only for themselves, but to help others.
3 243
(9/92)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)
Educational Resources information Center (ERIC)
NOTICE
REPRODUCTION BASIS
1 ERIC I
This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.
This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Releaseform (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").