Investigating the 

Language and Literacy Skills 

Required for Independent Online Learning

Investigating the 

Language and Literacy Skills 

Required for Independent Online Learning

Author

Heidi Silver-Pacuilla

American Institutes for Research

Original Analysis

Stephen Reder

Portland State University

October 2008
This report was produced under National Institute for Literacy Contract No. ED-06-PO-1973 with American Institutes for 

Research (AIR). It was written by Heidi Silver-Pacuilla, Senior Research Analyst at American Institutes for Research with 

original analysis by Stephen Reder, Professor of Applied Linguistics at Portland State University. Lynn Reddy served as 

the contracting officer’s representative. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies 

of the National Institute for Literacy. No official endorsement by the National Institute for Literacy of any product, 

commodity, or enterprise in this publication is intended or should be inferred.

For quality assurance purposes, drafts of all publications commissioned by the National Institute for Literacy are 

subjected to a rigorous external peer review process by independent experts. This review process seeks to ensure that 

each report is impartial and objective and that the findings are supported by scientific research. 

The National Institute for Literacy, a Federal government agency, is a catalyst for advancing a comprehensive 

literacy agenda. The Institute bridges policy, research and practice to prompt action and deepen public understanding of 

literacy as a national asset.

Sandra Baxter, Director

Lynn Reddy, Deputy Director

September 2008

The citation for this report should be: National Institute for Literacy, Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills 

Required for Independent Online Learning, Washington, DC 20008

To order additional copies of this report, contact the National Institute for Literacy at EDPubs, PO Box 1398, Jessup, 

Maryland 20794-1398 or call 1-800-228-8813 or email edpubs@inet.ed.gov The report may be downloaded in PDF 

or HTML versions at www.nifl.gov
Table of Contents

Executive Summary 1

Introduction 3

Learning from Large Scale Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Learning from the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Learning from the Field 28

Key Finding 32

Discussion and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

References 35

Appendix A 40

Appendix B . 41

1

This investigation was undertaken to investigate the threshold levels of literacy and language proficiency 

necessary for adult learners to use the Internet for independent learning. As the investigation unfolded, it 

became apparent that the interaction among the learners’ skills, the opportunities they encounter, and the 

supports available determines those thresholds. Understanding how to balance those elements can create 

new options and opportunities for learning, instruction, program planning, and content development. 

This report is structured around three distinct sections that contribute to the investigation: learning 

from large-scale surveys, learning from the literature, and learning from the field. Triangulating from the 

three major data sources affords this report solid footing on which to draw key findings from the guiding 

research questions. The search for thresholds revealed that such thresholds did not exist: Learners at even 

the lowest levels of literacy and language proficiency can engage with online learning content. Moreover, 

all reports indicate that they are eager to do so and that they benefit in important ways, such as selfconfidence, self-directedness, and independence. Adult learners across the literacy and language spectrum 

show strong motivation to gain computer literacy skills, perceived as key to work advancement. 

Limitations of this report include the gap between the rapid pace of change in technology trends, access 

patterns among American adults, and delivery platform options develop and the relatively slower pace of 

data collection, published evaluations, and program planning, rendering guidance from literature difficult. 

And while this report is not an attempt at an exhaustive literature review, it is clear that the literature base 

is broad rather than deep, hampering efforts to draw clear conclusions. 

The report concludes with the following key findings and the hope that it can join other voices moving the field toward a discussion of evidence-based technology-enhanced solutions.

•	 Understanding the interrelatedness of the task, skill, and supports necessitates research and development 

to guide the design of learning environments and activities that are flexible and that can differentiate 

on all three dimensions. Experimenting with flexible supports, both human and technological—the 

variable most accessible to adjustments by educators, program managers, and Web designers—is likely 

to yield a wealth of information to guide further development. 

•	 The centrality of work readiness—what the British call “upskilling”—to adults’ learning lives provides a 

key leverage point for programming and content design to address this goal more directly and, through 

it, more basic literacy and language skills.

•	 Adults’ existing family and social networks that have proven critical to learning pursuits with technology provide another leverage point that could be tapped with community-based, authentic learning 

environments, activities, and products.

•	 Self-directed skills valued in lifelong learners can be nurtured by providing facilitated access to online, 

independent learning environments. The studies converge on the findings that engagement with these 

environments fostered the skills associated with successful self-directed learning.

Executive Summary
2

•	 The large numbers of visitors to the freely available online sites such as English for All, TV 411, and 

California Distance Learning Project Online indicate that users are finding them. However, evaluation 

data are needed to determine how users are interacting and learning with the material and whether 

these sites are or could be stepping stones into more formal courses of study.

•	 Rates of access and connectivity in the low-income community are definitely growing, yet highquality equipment and broadband or wireless access are far from ubiquitous. This reality constrains 

development and dissemination of online learning portals and sites. Findings from the United Kingdom 

(Selwyn, Gorard, & Furlong, 2006) do not support an expanded use of public Internet terminals by the 

low literacy and language proficiency population as a solution to this problem.

•	 The use of emerging technologies to deliver learning content is only beginning to be reported in the 

research literature (for example, Kambouri, Mellar, & Logan, 2006). Nevertheless, technology enthusiasts 

believe strongly that consumer electronics (such as cell phones and personal digital assistants [PDAs]), 

interactive Web 2.0 platforms (such as blogs, videoconferencing, and immersive environments), and the 

convergence of media (such as television and radio delivered over the Internet) have the potential to 

reach new populations and provide authentic learning and communication.

Online environments engage and inspire adults, serve the common adult goal of improving workforce 

readiness, provide authentic communication channels that tap into adults’ family and community involvement, and supply an opportunity to engage in self-study and informal learning. We have confirmation 

that we are headed in the right direction with the inclusion of online technologies for the instruction and 

engagement of adult learners, even those with the most limited skills and language proficiencies. What is 

missing is research and evaluation that could provide guidance on content design and flexible supports to 

serve users’ needs and create new options and opportunities for learning, instruction, program planning, 

and content development. 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

3

This report captures a panoramic view of the interaction of language and literacy proficiency levels and 

online learning participation among adults with low 

literacy and low English proficiency. Describing this 

interaction is of high interest to program managers 

and practitioners interested in supporting learners 

not yet enrolled in their programs or during periods 

of attendance gaps, and for supplementing classroom 

instruction. Each of these implementation environments poses unique challenges and user expectations 

for the literacy and language learner. Policymakers are 

equally intent on the potential of online learning as 

they look for ways to boost system capacity to meet 

the needs of a growing population of adult learners. 

Both learners and service providers are looking to 

capitalize on the potential of the Internet and computer technology to address the vast needs of adult 

literacy and language learners. Many practitioners 

and researchers see technology-enhanced teaching 

and learning, including distance education, as the 

future of adult basic, English for Speakers of Other 

Languages (ESOL), and continuing education, as well 

as a means of reaching the large numbers of adults 

who do not participate in formal adult and continuing education offerings. 

However, the digital divide remains particularly 

wide in the low-income, low-literacy, and limited 

English proficiency communities. Access to computers and the Internet has improved dramatically 

around the country, but the explosion of content 

requiring robust bandwidth and processing speed 

as well as text at high readability rates continues to 

fuel the divide. According to 2003 U.S. Census data 

(Day, Janus, & Davis, 2005), the majority of American 

households now have computers (62%) and Internet 

access (54%). These percentages are up from 51% and 

41.5%, respectively, in 2000. Yet when disaggregated 

for family income and head of household’s educational attainment (important correlates for the adult 

education student population), the rates are significantly lower. Among households earning less than 

$25,000, only 41% have a computer and only 30.7% 

have Internet access. Among households headed by 

someone with less than a high school education, only 

27.9% have a computer and 20.2% have Internet 

access. 

The Children’s Partnership (http://www.childrenspartnership.org/) studied the existence of accessible and relevant online content for the estimated 50 

million Americans with low income, low literacy, or 

low English proficiency. Youth and adults in the lowincome, low-literacy communities engaged with the 

Partnership to identify the lack of local information 

and cultural diversity on the Web as significant barriers to access and involvement with online content. By 

analyzing online content, the Partnership also identified literacy and language barriers in high readability levels and few sources of content in languages 

other than English. In 2000, they found that only 1% 

of all Internet content was accessible or relevant to 

this large underserved population (Lazarus & Mora, 

2000). On the update to their survey in 2002, they 

found improvements; the percentage of accessible 

and relevant online content for users with low literacy skills had increased to 5%, but the gap persisted 

(Children’s Partnership, 2002). The update also highlighted the emerging necessity for more user-friendly 

search engines and syndication portals, a topic that 

was heard repeatedly through this investigation. The 

lack of accessible content limits adult learners’ ability 

to turn to the Internet for self-study and learning 

opportunities.

Growing use and access for all subgroups—in 

the home, in a community venue, and at work—

is a trend that is undeniably creating opportunities. 

Understanding the use, access, and connectivity patIntroduction
National Institute for Literacy

4

terns and rates for various subgroups of the adult 

population could greatly inform policy and program 

planning. Understanding the challenges that online 

content presents to adults with low literacy and 

English language skills could also inform instruction 

and content development.

This investigation was undertaken to investigate 

the threshold levels of literacy and language proficiency necessary for adult learners to use the Internet 

for independent learning. It synthesizes a wide range 

of information that fits broadly into three perspectives: learning from large-scale surveys; learning from 

the literature; and learning from the field. The first 

section offers the widest angle of view, taking in the 

entire adult landscape at all literacy and language proficiency levels to see what learning the population as 

a whole is engaged in and what role technology plays. 

The report then shifts focus and looks at the research 

literature on the use of online technologies in adult 

literacy and language learning. However, adults who 

are not participating in formal education are largely 

lost from this view, as the research is nearly completely 

based on students in programs. The third perspective is found in the voices of practitioners—content 

developers and educators. Their experiences involve 

adult learners and can represent the challenges that 

learners encounter. By triangulating from these three 

perspectives, the overall panorama is brought into 

sharper focus and the report can speak to the findings and inferences with greater confidence. 

As the investigation unfolded, it became apparent 

that it is the interaction among the learners’ skills, the 

opportunities they encounter, and the supports available that determines threshold levels of literacy and 

language proficiency. Understanding how to balance 

those elements can create new options and opportunities for learning, instruction, program planning, and 

content development.

For the purposes of this investigation and report, 

key terms were defined as follows:

•	 Online: Activities for which Web-based content 

and Internet connection and interactivity are integral to the experience for at least a portion of the 

engaged time. 

•	 Independent: Activities that users engage in outside 

of class time, including supplemental activities, 

activities recommended by instructors or program 

personnel, or activities unconnected to class work 

or programs; the term “independent” does not 

necessarily mean that learners must work alone, as 

learners could work with friends, family members, 

or others to accomplish their goals.

•	 Learning: Activities that are either self-directed 

inquiries and pursuits (searches, leisure/hobby 

perusals) or self-study toward an academic or credentialing goal.

•	 Success: Activities that left the learners feeling satisfied that they had fulfilled a question or search, 

found helpful information, or advanced target 

skills. 

Methods

Acknowledging the underdeveloped knowledge 

base about the research questions, this investigation encompassed a broad range of data sources and 

included in its parameters research and findings from 

other English-speaking industrial societies with comparable adult education systems. The guiding framework of parameters for this investigation coalesced 

around the following set of questions to guide the 

literature review and search for additional sources: 

•	 Is there a threshold of basic skills for successful 

online learning?

•	 Is there a threshold of English language proficiency 

for successful online learning?

•	 What implementation and design issues have been 

documented to show online learning by populations 

with low literacy and low English language skills? 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

5

•	 What do we know about this population’s informal learning habits? 

These questions were used flexibly as a start to a 

constant comparison method of data collection. As 

literature searches were returned or listserv postings 

were found, each data point’s relation to these themes 

was considered. A multipage spreadsheet was used to 

capture and catalog data that spoke to each theme. 

The themes were revisited in discussions about the 

project at several points through the year as data were 

or were not being found to inform them uniformly.

Survey data have the potential to provide us with a 

broad view of patterns of behavior and correlations of 

factors from a representative sample of adults, not just 

the fraction of the adult population seen in programs 

and discussed in the research studies reviewed in the 

next section. Survey data, therefore, are an important 

perspective for triangulation in our research design. 

The findings of four large-scale studies relevant to adult 

independent online learning are synthesized, starting 

with the largest survey, the National Assessment of 

Adult Literacy (NAAL), for which a secondary analysis on technology use was conducted for this report. 

This is followed by another very large survey exploring patterns of participation in lifelong learning in 

the United States. In keeping with the inclusion of 

relevant research from English-speaking industrial 

countries, recent survey data from Canada and the 

United Kingdom are examined for findings on adult 

learning habits and patterns of technology use. These 

findings are followed by a closer, focused look at the 

correlation of adult learners’ informal learning and 

technology use through an analysis commissioned 

specifically for this report from the Longitudinal 

Study of Adult Learners (LSAL), contributed by the 

study’s principal investigator, Stephen Reder. This 

analysis reveals new insights into the learning patterns of adults who are not in formal adult education 

or language classes. Table 1 outlines key parameters 

of the five surveys. 

National Assessment of Adult Literacy 

(NAAL)—Focus on Technology Use

The first survey examined is the NAAL survey, which 

was conducted in 2003 with 19,000 U.S. adults ages 

16 and older in households or in prisons (Kutner, 

Greenberg, Jin, Boyle, Hsu, & Dunleavy, 2007). 

This assessment measured literacy directly through 

administered and observed tasks in three types of 

literacy: Prose (the knowledge and skills needed to 

search, comprehend, and use information from continuous texts), Document (the knowledge and skills 

needed to search, comprehend, and use information 

from noncontinuous texts); and Quantitative (the 

knowledge and skills needed to identify and perform computations using numbers that are embedded in print materials). A related survey on Health 

Literacy used the same scale (Kutner, Greenberg, Jin, 

& Paulsen, 2006). Results were scaled into four levels of proficiency: Below Basic, Basic, Intermediate, 

and Proficient. Below Basic Document literacy, for 

example, corresponds to the ability to circle the date 

of a medical appointment on a hospital appointment 

Learning from Large-Scale Surveys
Table 1. Large-Scale Surveys

Survey name (coun-

try of data collec-

tion)

Year(s) and method 

of data collection

Sample size and 

description Key finding

s

Technology-related 

findings

National Assessment of Adult 

Literacy (NAAL) (USA)

2003; individually adminis-

tered surveys

19,000 representative of 

adult population; prison 

sample of 1,000 not included 

in technology questions

Describes adults’ literacy performance within four levels 

plus health literacy

Access, use, and connectiv-

ity are strongly correlated to 

literacy level

Participation in Adult 

Education and Lifelong 

Learning (USA)

2000–2001; telephone 

survey

10,873 representative of 

adults over age 16 not in fulltime formal schooling

Confirmed trends that adults 

with higher educational attain-

ment and incomes participated 

in more continuing education 

activities; reported less than 

1% participates in ABE-ESOL 

classes

Technology is increasingly 

used in instruction, but the 

Internet and World Wide 

Web are still a novelty for 

course delivery

Adult Learning@Home (UK)

2002; individually adminis-

tered surveys, case studies 

conducted in homes

1,001 adults over age 21 in 

western England and Wales

Despite large government 

investment, few adults had 

made use of online courses

The most common learning 

activity on home computers 

was “learning about” computers; learners were motivated 

to improve job performance; 

close social networks pro-

vided support

New Approaches to Lifelong 

Learning (NALL) (Canada) 1998; telephone survey

1,562 Canadian adults over 

the age of 18 who spoke 

English and French

Surveyed adults’ patterns 

of informal learning, found 

more than 95% engaged in 

self-directed informal learning 

>15 hours per week

Learning computer skills that 

would be valued at work 

ranked as one of the top four 

informal learning pursuits

Longitudinal Study of Adult 

Learning (USA)

1998–present; individually 

administered surveys and 

literacy assessments

940 adults ages 18–44 who 

had not finished high school 

or a GED at time of first 

recruitment; representative of 

local (Portland, OR) popula-

tion

Full analysis not yet complete 

as Wave 6 is still in the field; 

preliminary findings point to 

the prevalence and importance of self-study in the adult 

population

Wave 5 analysis found sig-

nificant percentages of adults 

even at the lowest literacy 

levels were engaged in selfstudy with technology options

National Institute for Literacy

6
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

7

slip, find the phone number to call embedded in a 

newspaper ad, or locate the intersection of streets on a 

clearly marked map. Basic Document literacy extends 

to the ability to summarize magazine articles using 

the structure of the magazines’ table of contents. 

A secondary analysis of the public NAAL dataset 

was conducted by the primary author of this report 

to provide a more detailed profile of technology use 

among populations with low literacy and low English 

language proficiency. 

The extensive background survey questions administered for the NAAL asked several questions about 

technology use and access. Most of the questions 

had a scaled answer such as “How often do you....” 

or “How many times per week....” For the current 

analysis, these scales were collapsed into dichotomies (such as yes/no questions) to create rough profiles of technology users and non-technology users 

among the household (i.e., non-incarcerated) population. The parameters of these profiles were that a 

Technology User was someone who lived in a house 

with an Internet-connected computer or used the 

Internet at least once per week to find information 

on public events or news or sent or received an e-mail 

at least once per week. This profile allows for technology users who do not have a computer at home 

or do not use e-mail. It is slightly confounding that 

simply having a computer with Internet access with 

no other indicators of usage would mark a person as 

a Technology User, but it does represent a commitment to the monthly cost of access in most parts of 

the country in 2003, and therefore recognition of the 

value of the connection. The Non-Technology User 

profile was defined as someone who did not live in a 

house with an Internet-connected computer or use 

the Internet at least once per week to find information on public events or news or send or receive an 

e-mail at least once per week. 

The Technology User profile corresponds to 

approximately 3,500 survey responses, which represent approximately 44 million American adults. 

The Non-Technology User profile corresponds to 

approximately 7,800 survey responses, representing 

approximately 81 million American adults. These surveys were collected in 2003, and the penetration of 

technology has increased since then; these numbers 

and percentages have surely shifted by 2008.

The Technology User profile was matched to 

Document literacy scores across several demographic 

variables. Document literacy was chosen as the backdrop because it best represents the type of reading 

associated with technology and hypertext: skimming 

and scanning, identifying embedded key information, 

reading with a specific purpose, etc. The analysis was 

conducted with AM software that takes into account 

the NAAL’s complex survey design (how the sample 

was drawn, how the test items were administered, 

etc.). The software package was used to conduct the 

statistical procedure of marginal maximum likelihood 

(MML) with a filter identifying Technology Users or 

Non-Technology Users. (See the official AM technical manual for use with the NAAL at http://am.air.

org/naal.asp.) 

A pattern emerged when comparing Technology 

Users and Non-Technology Users on Document 

literacy scores that show approximately 10% fewer 

Technology Users with Below Basic scores and 

approximately 10% more with Intermediate scores 

than Non-Technology Users (see charts 1 and 2). To 

test the strength of the relationship between literacy 

and technology use, the same profiles were analyzed 

with Prose, Quantitative, and Health literacy scores. 

An almost identical pattern is found on all three 

of these scales as well. Additionally, the following 

demographic data from the Document Literacy and 

Technology Use analysis inform the pattern: 

•	 Technology Users across all age groups except 16- 

to 18-year-olds were more likely to have higher 

literacy scores;

•	 Technology Users across income levels were more 

likely to have higher literacy scores;
National Institute for Literacy

8

•	 Except for students still in high school, for all other 

educational attainment levels, Technology Users 

were more likely to have higher literacy scores; 

•	 Among those who did not complete high school 

(“less than/some” high school), more than 50% 

of Non-Technology Users have Below Basic 

Document literacy scores in this subpopulation, 

compared to 38% of Technology Users;

•	 Technology Users with disabilities (learning disabilities and/or other health-related disabilities) 

were more likely to have higher literacy scores; 

and

•	 Technology Users whose native language is English 

(with or without other languages) generally 

had higher literacy scores than those who spoke 

Spanish with or without other languages. 

In keeping with the overall NAAL findings that 

show females having higher average Document literacy scores, females outnumber males in Intermediate 

and Proficient literacy ranges while more males both 

Technology Users and Non-Technology Users, are 

found at the Below Basic and Basic levels. 

This pattern—evidenced along the demographic 

variables of income, education, and age as well as the 

other available literacy scales—indicates that technology use is strongly associated with higher literacy scores. 

The direction of the relationship is more appropriately 

pursued in the research literature than in survey data. 

However, it appears safe to assume that adult learners 

of all ages, even at the lowest income and lowest levels 

of formal educational attainment, could be expected 

to be or become Technology Users. Given that these 

data were collected in 2003, we can assume that more 

of them already have.

Participation in Adult Education and Lifelong 

Learning 2000–2001

The second survey contributing to this perspective is the National Household Education Survey, 

Participation in Adult Education and Lifelong 

Learning 2000–2001 (Kim, Hagedorn, Williamson, 

& Chapman, 2004). This telephone survey was 

conducted by the U.S. Department of Education’s 

National Center for Education Statistics. The sample 

of 10,873 is nationally representative of adults ages 16 

and older who were not enrolled in elementary or 

secondary school at the time of the interview. 

Respondents were asked about both formal and 

informal learning activities in which they may have 

participated during the 12-month period prior to the 

interview. There were seven types of formal learning 

Charts 1 and 2. Technology and Non-Technology Users by 

Document Literacy Scores
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

9

activities to indicate: ESOL programs, basic skills education, college or university degree programs, vocational or technical diploma programs, apprenticeship 

programs, work-related courses, and personal interest courses. Work-related informal learning activities 

included supervised training or mentoring, self-paced 

study using books or video tapes, self-paced study 

using computers, attending “brown-bag” or informal 

presentations, attending conferences or conventions, 

and reading professional journals or magazines. 

The 12-month overall participation rate for all 

adults in formal adult education activities (but not 

full-time enrollment in degree programs) was 46% in 

2001, representing a total of 92 million adults. Workrelated courses had a 30% participation rate. Only a 

tiny percentage of adults—less than 1% each—participated in ESOL programs, basic skills education, 

vocational or technical programs, or apprenticeship 

programs.

The data show that the use of technology in 

instruction varied by type of educational activity. 

Technology use was reported at the highest rates for 

college or university instruction. Technology use for 

instruction in work-related courses included the use 

of television, video, or radio as reported by 54% of 

respondents) and computer instruction (53%). Much 

smaller percentages reported the use of computer 

conferencing and the Internet or World Wide Web 

(10% and 16%, respectively). The use of technology for instruction in personal interest courses was 

reported less often than in work-related courses. 

Almost one-third of adults taking personal interest 

courses reported the use of television, video, or radio 

as an instructional mode (32%). A smaller percentage 

reported the use of computers for instruction (19%). 

Only 8% reported the use of the Internet or World 

Wide Web for instruction.

To investigate the reasons adults participate in educational activities, the study asked respondents about 

their participation in voluntary or compulsory certificate or license courses. Almost half of all college and 

university students (part- and full-time) indicated that 

a reason for their attendance was obtaining or maintaining a license or certificate. Thirty-eight percent 

of adults who took work-related courses provided 

the same reason. Ninety-five percent of adults who 

took work-related courses reported that they did so 

to maintain, improve, or learn new skills, methods, or 

knowledge. Other reasons included getting a raise or 

promotion (22%) or getting a new job (10%).

Overall, the survey confirmed earlier findings that 

in the United States, greater percentages of adults with 

higher levels of educational attainment and higher 

incomes participate in continuing education and that 

higher paid work positions are more likely to offer 

work-related educational opportunities. The survey 

also shows that much of adult informal educational 

participation is work-related. Standing out starkly in 

this survey is the very low percentage of participation 

in adult basic education and ESOL classes.

Adult Learning@Home in the United Kingdom

Researchers from the United Kingdom undertook 

an ambitious household survey of adults’ access, use, 

and perceptions of information and communication 

technologies (ICTs) called Adult Learning@Home 

(Selwyn, Gorard, & Furlong, 2006). The authors 

devised a mixed-method, tiered approach that yielded 

large-scale demographic data as well as individual 

case studies. Their focus was on actual “present” 

engagement of adult learning with technology, partially motivated to disentangle reality from the British 

government’s strong promotion of the “potential” of 

e-learning. A total of 1,001 adults over age 21 were 

randomly selected from four sites in Wales and western England, two sites in each that were representative 

of the general population, to engage in a personally 

administered survey in their home. Of these respondents, 100 were selected for further semistructured 

interviews that also took place in the home. Of this 

group, a further 25 who had been rated as moderate 

or high users of ICT were asked to participate in a 
National Institute for Literacy

10

year-long ethnographic case study that involved three 

home visits, interviews with family and friends, photographs of the home, and other aspects. A “booster 

sample” of an additional 100 individuals was purposefully chosen to inform the research about the use of 

public access sites.

Despite significant investment in online learning 

content and promotion of its value by the British 

government, this survey found little evidence of 

adults engaging in the official learning opportunities. The U.K. data show trends similar to the United 

States, with very low participation in formal adult 

education, “over a third of the adult population has 

not engaged in any further learning at all” (p. 80) after 

leaving compulsory secondary education, and the 

same pattern of those with more education continuing to seek education through their lifetimes. From 

the current study and secondary analyses on other 

surveys conducted in the U.K. totaling 10,000 adults, 

Selwyn, Gorard, and Furlong (2006) conclude that 

the key social determinants predicting lifelong participation in learning are time (age cohorts), place (geographically mobile adults seem to be more inclined to 

engage in formal education than those who live close 

to where they were raised), sex (men are more likely 

to engage, women are reporting delaying it for other 

responsibilities), family background (including parental 

occupation and educational attainment of parents), 

and initial schooling experience. These variables were 

found to be just as predictive in the current study 

of adults’ use of ICTs as in other adult education 

options.

Overall, 44% of respondents were using ICTs at 

home and 32% at the workplace, but only 21% had 

ever been taught at least partially via ICT and only 

10% had participated in formal training to use computers. In fact, the researchers write, “we found far 

more sustained evidence of learning about computers 

rather than learning through them” (p. 161); that is, 

if people had computers in their homes, they indicated that their primary use of the equipment was to 

learn about using it. They did so informally through 

a combination of self-learning, experimentation, and 

learning from others in a close social network (family, close friends, children, and grandchildren). This 

was often done in order to practice skills that would 

be valued on the job as “work-based informal learning permeate[d] beyond the workplace and into the 

home” (p. 115). Despite the efforts to provide widespread public access, the survey found few adults, 

only 11% of the sample, using public computers. The 

researchers conclude that the government campaign 

and investment has overlooked the realities of adults’ 

patterns of access, use, and need for further and online 

learning.

New Approaches to Lifelong Learning (NALL) 

in Canada

The NALL sheds light on independent, informal 

adult learning and questions the assumptions of participation patterns. It was conducted in 1998 as a 

phone survey with a representative sample of 1,562 

Canadian adults over the age of 18 who spoke English 

or French. The interview was designed to elicit selfreflection on a wide range of informal learning and 

explicitly included social networks of learning.

As reported by Livingstone (1999), the findings 

for adults’ engagement in formal continuing education echo the pattern in other industrial nations, with 

adults with higher educational attainment participating at higher rates than those with less. According to 

the NALL, of adults without a high school diploma, 

only 18% had taken a formal course within the past 12 

months while 67% of adults with a university degree 

had done so. Adults with self-reported low literacy skills 

engaged in very little formal continuing education.

This survey, however, uncovers what Livingstone 

calls the submerged portion of the “icebergs” of adult 

learning: the extensive engagement of adults in informal learning activities. Informal learning was categorized as employment related, community volunteer 

work related, household work related, and other gen-
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

11

eral interest related. In each area, respondents reported 

high rates of learning outside of formal courses or 

workshops. In fact, more than 95% of respondents 

reported engaging in “significant” learning activities, 

at an average rate of 15 hours per week. The learning activities rated the most important in each of the 

four categories included computer skills related to 

employment, communication skills related to community involvement, home renovations and cooking 

in the household category, and health issues in the 

general interest category. 

This survey contradicts the assumptions of participation rates and patterns by demonstrating that levels 

of engagement in informal learning activities were not 

stratified according to educational attainment, as has 

been shown in other surveys for adults’ participation 

in formal continuing education. 

Longitudinal Study of Adult Learners

This section concludes with a unique analysis of 

the Longitudinal Study of Adult Literacy (LSAL). 

Stephen Reder, at Portland State University, has led 

the LSAL for the past ten years. This study addresses 

literacy development, learning, education, and life 

experiences of out-of-school adults. The analysis is 

conducted to determine whether there are threshold 

levels of literacy associated with patterns of independent, technology-enhanced learning. 

Although the LSAL collects rich information 

about a wide range of topics related to adult learning 

and literacy development, only two areas are relevant 

to this paper. One is the use of computer technology specifically among adults in the target population 

who are seeking to improve their basic skills or prepare for the GED on their own rather than by attending a class or program. The second is a “snapshot” 

of technology use from the most recent LSAL data 

available. Because previously published LSAL findings have suggested that this “self-study” population 

is large and potentially important for the adult education field to serve (Reder, 2007; Reder & Strawn 

2001, 2006), understanding the role that computer 

technology might play in serving these adult learners 

is important. The snapshot affords an understanding 

of rates of use and access in 2004–2005. 

Background

The LSAL is a panel study, representative of a local 

(rather than a national) target population. This target population is defined as residents of the Portland, 

Oregon, metropolitan area who were ages 18–44, 

proficient but not necessarily native English speakers, and high school dropouts (i.e., did not receive a 

high school diploma and were no longer enrolled in 

school) who had not received a GED or other high 

school equivalency credential when first recruited. 

Participants are interviewed and assessed in “waves” 

or cohorts. Skills assessments include a standardized 

functional literacy assessment (alternate forms) administered in each wave and other measures administered 

once on particular waves, such as oral vocabulary, 

reading fluency, and writing samples (Reder, 2007; 

Reder & Strawn 2001, 2006). The instrumentation 

has been developed to yield data that are comparable 

with other large-scale surveys, such as the NAAL.

The main data reported here are drawn from Wave 

5, a cross-sectional cohort, for which 801 individuals 

were interviewed in 2004–2005, representing 86% of 

the total sample. At the beginning of the study, the 

population had an average age of 28 and was evenly 

divided among males and females. Approximately 

one-third were members of minority groups, about 

one in ten were born outside of the United States, 

approximately one-third described themselves as 

having a learning disability, and one in three reported 

having taken special education classes while in school. 

By Wave 5, the population had an average age of 34 

and ranged in age from 24 to 50.

Technology Use and Access in Wave 5

By Wave 5, 88% of the LSAL population are computer users. This is a dramatic increase from the 38% 
National Institute for Literacy

12

who were computer users some six years earlier when 

the study began in 1998. Seven in ten (71%) have 

computers in their homes, 90% of which are used by 

the respondents themselves (rather than only by other 

household members). Two-thirds (66%) use computers in settings other than or in addition to their 

homes, such as at work, a friend’s or family member’s 

home, a library, or some other public venue. Three 

in five (62%) use computers that have Internet connections. They spend a median of six hours per week 

using a computer, including a median of five hours 

using the Internet.

There is no significant difference between men 

and women or between minority and non-minority group members in the percentage of computer 

users. A significantly lower proportion of individuals who report having learning disabilities are computer users (81% versus 91% of those not reporting learning disabilities), but the overall rate is still 

quite high. The penetration of computers into the 

LSAL population has evidently progressed quite 

far in the Portland area, but all indications are that 

this trend is growing around the country (see Pew 

Internet and American Life Project trend reports at 

http://www.pewinternet.org/). 

Self-Study and Computer Use 

From the Wave 5 interviews, about one in three 

(32%) reported self-studying in the two years since 

the previous wave to improve their reading, writing, 

or math skills or prepare for the GED. An estimated 

43% of individuals in the LSAL population with 

proficiency below 225 (comparable to the Basic or 

Below Basic levels on the 2003 NAAL) self-studied 

between Waves 4 and 5. 

Individuals who reported self-study at Wave 5 

were asked about the media and technologies they 

used for this self-study. A number of alternatives 

were mentioned, including the computer, books and 

workbooks, videos and TV broadcasts, CD-ROMs, 

and audiocassettes, and respondents indicated which 

ones they had used. About half (51%) of those who 

reported self-study indicated that they used the 

computer.

The population in the LSAL dataset with low literacy skills, defined as individuals with Document 

literacy proficiencies below 250 (Basic or Below 

Basic in the 2003 NAAL), made up 25% of the LSAL 

population. This compares to 34% of the general 

population of the nation as sampled in the NAAL. 

Approximately 38% of this LSAL low-proficiency 

population engaged in self-study to improve their 

basic skills or prepare for the GED. Among those in 

the low-literacy population who self-study, nearly 

two in five (39%) use the computer to do so.

Likelihood to Use an Online Portal

All individuals who reported self-study in Wave 5 

were also asked:

“If there was a free service available through the 

Internet to guide your efforts to improve your 

basic skills, prepare for the GED, or prepare for 

college and hook you up with resources like Web 

sites, tutors, homework helpers, or adult education 

programs, how likely would you try it out?”

They were asked to respond on the following 

four-point scale: not likely at all, maybe, probably, 

and very likely. Matching the literacy proficiencies of 

respondents to how they rate their likelihood of using 

such systems, as in table 2, shows a trend among those 

who do self-study that the lower the literacy proficiency, the more apparent interest there is in using 

such technologies. 

Further analysis reveals that nearly half (49%) of the 

low-literacy subpopulation (Basic and Below Basic in 

the 2003 NAAL) describe themselves as “very likely” 

to use the computer, with another 14% responding 

they “probably” would use it. 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

13

The trend of decreasing self-study with increasing literacy proficiency appears elsewhere in the 

LSAL analysis, indicating that the proportion of 

the population that self-studies generally declines

with increasing literacy proficiency. This possibly 

reflects that individuals feel less need to improve 

their basic skills as their literacy proficiency rises. 

Self-study does not go away completely, however: 

Some 26% of those with proficiencies above 300 

(high Intermediate level in the 2003 NAAL) still 

self-studied.

These data show that threshold levels of adult literacy may not be interacting with independent learning in the assumed pattern. Indeed, the interaction 

may be in the opposite direction to that commonly 

assumed. Adults with low levels of literacy may be 

more likely to seek learning opportunities than those 

with high Intermediate levels. How much success 

they find in their efforts to self-study with online 

content is not shown in these data, but their success 

can be investigated through the research literature in 

the next section.

Summary

Taken together, the findings in this section converge 

on a few key points. 

•	 Learners with low skills are seeking and engaging 

in learning, but mainly outside of formal systems.

•	 The use of computer equipment and online technologies increases as adults’ literacy and language 

skills increase. 

•	 Much of what adults seek to learn and practice 

in their leisure time are skills that will improve 

their work performance—and much of this skill 

enhancement is technology-based. 

The penetration of a strong work-related learning motivation into all sectors of the societies studied provides strong evidence that an element of the 

motivational aspect of learning with technology is 

the perceived applicability of computer literacy skills 

to job advancement. This finding is supported by the 

literature reported in the next section.

Table 2. Individuals Who Self-Studied in Wave 5

LIKELIHOOD OF USE OF ONLINE

PORTAL MEAN TALS* SCORE N STD. ERROR OFMEAN

Not likely at all 292.35 32 9.456

Maybe 279.52 26 7.309

Probably 273.88 26 9.910

Very likely 266.63 157 3.803

Total 272.24 242 3.112

*TALS, Test of Applied Literacy Skills
National Institute for Literacy

14

An extensive literature search was undertaken to 

identify information on the topic of independent 

adult literacy and language learning online. Few 

published research studies document independent, 

self-directed learning—after all, finding and following independent learners on self-chosen tasks is not 

typical research. Therefore, this investigation surveyed 

broadly to find published articles as well as reports and 

evaluations shared at conferences or posted on Web 

sites, and even program-level reports and documentation solicited on listservs and e-mail. The databases 

ERIC, EBSCOHost, and JSTOR were searched with 

combinations of the following terms: 

adult, education, basic, literacy, ESL, skills, functional, online, computer, computer-assisted, 

Internet, reading, writing, mathematics

Abstracts were determined to be potentially relevant on the following criteria:

•	 Sample population (adult learners, not university 

students);

•	 Publication date after 1990;

•	 Intervention (online learning; basic skills or ESL); 

and

•	 Setting (relevant secondary or adult settings 

excluding senior or university focus; United States 

or English-speaking country; in or out of formal 

education).

In the end, most research documentation found 

on adult literacy and language learning online is not 

about independent self-directed activities, but about 

online learning that is supplemental to classroom and 

program involvement. It is not surprising that studies reporting evidence of skill improvement through 

test scores were evaluations of supplemental activities 

for students in programs where such tests are administered, rather than independent, out-of-program 

activities. The implications of this finding, of course, 

are that this knowledge is based on learners who 

are already in programs and, as shown above (Kim, 

Hagedorn, Williamson, & Chapman, 2004), represents only a tiny fraction of the adult population with 

low literacy and low English language proficiency. 

Articles gathered were sorted into the following categories in a database according to the facets 

of independent online learning they could inform: 

evidence of basic skills and language proficiency 

threshold levels or of improvement, implementation 

issues and evaluations, student skills and dispositions 

necessary for success, and the design of instructional 

environment and materials. Key points and findings 

from each article were extracted and entered into the 

database. Many articles and reports fell into more than 

one category, and as articles and reports were read 

and summarized, some categories were collapsed into 

emergent themes. 

What follows is a series of thematic analyses within 

and across the categories and identification of emergent subthemes. Descriptions of the research contexts are explicitly described so that extrapolations are 

clear. There is much to be gained from this literature 

as an important point of triangulation for an overall 

investigation that will provide a fuller understanding 

of the issues surrounding independent online learning by adults with low literacy and English language 

proficiency.

Evidence of Basic Literacy and Language

Skills Improvement

Reviewed here are reports of single studies as well as 

previous literature reviews on the topic, all with some 

reporting of student achievement data. The findings 

Learning from the Literature
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

15

suggest that adult learners’ work with computerbased or online materials that are supplemental to 

adult literacy and ESOL classes positively contributes 

to their overall literacy and language acquisition plus 

complementary learning skills. The following studies 

were of supplemental materials available to students 

with some type of program support (on-site trained 

teacher or support person, support person available 

online, tech support available through the program, 

and/or automated feedback system in the program) 

and varying degrees of integration with the regular class curriculum. The supplemental materials and 

online interfaces were either uniquely developed 

or chosen for adult literacy and language learners. 

This addresses one of the key needs for this population mentioned in the Introduction (Lazarus & 

Mora, 2000): relevant and comprehensible content 

with clear navigation. Table 3 provides an overview 

of the studies and findings reviewed for evidence of 

literacy and language skills improvements, which are 

described more fully below. 

Basic Literacy

Studies that speak directly to gains in literacy skills 

represent research conducted in quite different settings, with different materials and interventions, and 

with different measures of components of basic literacy. They cannot easily be synthesized. Nevertheless, 

the studies speak collectively to learners engaging in 

texts and activities in an online environment driven 

by interest. 

AlphaRoute is an online learning environment 

(available in French and English, with some resources 

available for learners who are deaf) that is a portal to 

sites and activities that have been created and selected 

for adult literacy and language learners. AlphaRoute 

provides introductory text and activities for off-site 

links and provides e-mail chat capabilities; facilitator 

support is available onsite and via distance interaction. It is used extensively as a supplement, but can 

also be accessed by non-enrolled learners. Evaluators 

(Long, Kennell, Moriaty, & Strum, 2003) found that 

not only were students and teachers reporting literacy gains, but that students were reporting a great 

difference in their confidence and self-directedness. 

“The results were astounding: For virtually every 

skill, competency, or attitude mentioned, learners felt 

AlphaRoute had made at least some difference in 

helping them improve, and in many cases they said it 

had made ‘a lot of difference’” (p. 59). Learners who 

were working with the lowest two levels of materials in AlphaRoute (56% of the participants) reported 

the greatest gains on “intangible competencies such 

as confidence, sticking with a task, etc.” (p. 60). These 

competencies, as will be discussed below, have been 

shown to be critical skills for students being able to 

work independently. The evaluation showed that 

“total time spent using AlphaRoute was by far the 

best predictor of transferability [of skills]” (p. 60). 

The National Research and Development Centre 

(NRDC) in the United Kingdom has researched 

and published extensively on promising practices in 

adult literacy, numeracy, and ESOL. In 2004, NRDC 

conducted an observational study of how ICTs were 

being implemented in adult basic education and language classes. The authors found a limited range of 

methods and types of learning technologies and shallow implementation that was strongly correlated to 

the instructors’ personal comfort level with technology (Mellar, Kambouri, Sanderson, & Pavlou, 2004). 

Research and training projects in recent years have 

aimed to expand the use and repertoire of methods 

and tools used by instructors.

The impact of NRDC’s professional development 

and training efforts (Kambouri, Mellar, & Logan, 2006; 

Mellar et al., 2007) is documented in a series of action 

research projects by teacher participants to improve 

adult education and ESOL practice. Using emerging 

ICTs, this group of teachers documented basic skills 

improvements as well as technology literacy acquisition. Teachers adopted a range of technologies and 

techniques, including webquests (Internet inquiry 
National Institute for Literacy

16

Table 3. Research in Literacy, Numeracy, and English for Speakers of Other Languages

AUTHOR, DATE TITLE CONTEXT SUBJECTS/UNIT OF 

ANALYSIS OUTCOMES

Literacy

Long, E., Kennell, T., Mori-

arty, M., & Sturm, M. (2003) 

What difference does it 

make? Literacy learner 

perspectives on Web-based 

learning with AlphaRoute

Surveys at sites supplementing basic education in English 

and French with AlphaRoute 

materials; 86% of learners 

logged 1–2 hrs/week, 14% 

logged 3–25 hrs/week

142 students, teachers at 42 

sites across Ontario using 

AlphaRoute to supplement 

adult literacy and language 

classes

Gains in literacy, oral 

language, confidence, 

independence, and self-di-

rected learning; time spent on 

AlphaRoute was the strongest 

predictor of growth 

Mellar, H., Kambouri, M., 

Logan, K., Betts, S., Nance, 

B., Moriaty, V. (2007); and 

Kambouri, M., Mellar, H., & 

Logan, K. (2006) 

Effective teaching and learn-

ing using ICT 

and

Adult learners and ICT: An 

intervention study in the UK

Teachers as practitionerresearchers using technology 

and media productions as the 

curriculum of 8-week classes

Individual student data ag-

gregated into 7 intervention 

classes 

Gains in computer literacy, literacy, reading, listening, oral 

language, and confidence

Silver-Pacuilla, H. (2007) and 

(2006)

Assistive technology and 

adult literacy: Access and 

benefits 

Access and benefits: Assistive 

technology in adult literacy

Supplemental supported ac-

cess to an assistive technolo-

gy lab 1–2 hrs per week over 

2 semesters; control students 

in basic reading class

10 students with learning 

disabilities 

Gains in phonological 

awareness, spelling, selfdirectedness

Numeracy

Li, Q., & Edmonds, K. A. 

(2005)

Mathematics and at-risk adult 

learners: Would technology 

help?

Adult basic math classes 

supplemented with online 

resources, avg. 15 hrs per 

semester plus avg. 5 hours 

out of class; two-way random 

design

48 “at-risk” adult learners 

at adult education center in 

western Canada

Gains in math skills for both 

CAI and teacher-led classes, 

differential gains based on 

math unit topic; students 

greatly valued the online 

activities
National Institute for Literacy

17

AUTHOR, DATE TITLE CONTEXT SUBJECTS/UNIT OF 

ANALYSIS OUTCOMES

Nicol, M. M., & Anderson, 

A. (2000)

Computer-assisted vs. 

teacher-directed teaching of 

numeracy in adults

Adult basic math classes 

supplemented with online 

resources, avg. 15 hours per 

semester; three-way random 

design 

24 adults with LD at an adult 

education center in Scotland

Gains in math skills for 

both computer-assisted and 

teacher-led classes

English for Speakers of Other Languages

Richmond, M., Thacher, M., 

& Porter, P. (2005)

Studying ESOL online Evaluation of the supplemental use of English for All

26 students in intermediate 

ESOL classes 

Gains in reading skills were 

comparable to other students’ 

scores in the regular class at 

that program; retention was 

88% (avg. in CA is 61%)

Rivera, N. V. (2003)

A study of the effectiveness 

of LAUSD’s Adult ESL CBET 

Program 

Evaluation of student data 

from classrooms in which a 

suite of ESOL software and 

online activities was used an 

avg. 1–2 hrs per week (most 

commonly used software 

included Rosetta Stone, Oxford 

Picture Dictionary, Focus on Grammar, 

and Discoveries)

Individual student data aggregated into 60 classes

Use of CAI materials led 

to skill gains and greater 

self-directedness and goal development; students in classes 

using CAI also showed better 

post-class outcomes such as 

getting a GED, finding a (better) job, and being involved 

in the community 

Stiles, R., & Porter, D. (2006)

The California Adult Education 2004–2006 Innovation 

and Alternate Instructional 

Delivery Program: A review

Evaluation of California 

statewide data on 79 adult 

schools operating Innovative 

Programs

Data from 51,089 students in 

2004–2005; 92% of students 

were ESL learners

Gains in reading, listening, 

and completion/persistence 

for ABE and ESL students 

attributed to blended models; 

students in beginning to intermediate ESL levels gained 

the most
National Institute for Literacy

18

projects), e-portfolios, tablet PCs, mobile learning 

with handheld devices, digital video, mindmapping 

software, and specific Web sites. Evaluations on a 

variety of standardized tests of students’ skills after 

the eight-week trials showed that learners improved 

in almost all cases in both computer literacy and in 

literacy and language proficiencies on pre- and posttests. The authors conclude, “Learners who use ICT 

for basic skills double the value of their study time 

acquiring two sets of skills at the same time” (Mellar 

et al., 2007, p. 8). 

In 2004, adults with learning disabilities joined a 

participatory action research study led by the author 

(Silver-Pacuilla, 2006, 2007) during which they supplemented their classroom instruction with weekly 

facilitated access to an assistive learning technology 

lab. These adults at all levels of literacy skill were 

taught to use assistive and Internet technologies to 

engage in self-study of their class materials or for personal interests. The facilitator provided coaching and 

computer skill tutoring, assisting students to engage 

with word processors, text-to-speech and voice recognition software, Internet searches, e-books, Web 

sites, and e-mail programs. In reflective dialogue and 

praxis, the students shared that not only was facilitated self-study crucial to their ability to learn and 

retain class material, but that the experience had 

boosted their self-determination through feelings of 

confidence and self-efficacy. 

Basic Numeracy

Two studies looked directly at the use of online technologies and computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in 

adult numeracy instruction. Both compared learners in classes of regular teacher-led instruction with 

classes that supplemented teacher instruction with 

online activities learners accessed during class with 

facilitation and outside of class. The online activities 

were either created by the instructor or chosen specifically by the instructor to complement the curriculum materials. Both studies strongly emphasize that 

the role of the teacher-facilitator is key to helping 

students bridge their understanding of math concepts 

from class instruction to online activities.

Li and Edmonds (2005) contrasted teacher-led 

without CAI to teacher-led CAI with adults learning math. The control group was drawn from student 

scores in the semester prior to the study. The CAI 

instruction was constructed as supplemental tutorials 

or simulations, chosen and delivered on a course Web 

site by a teacher trained in educational technology. 

Students averaged 15 hours on the CAI and reported 

an average of 5 additional hours per week on the 

course Web site outside of class. Final scores revealed 

little difference between teacher-led and CAI supplemental scores—both groups gained overall—but different patterns of test scores per unit topic. Students’ 

surveys indicated strong positive response to the 

technology-enhanced experience, expressing appreciation for the immediate feedback and opportunities 

to practice their skills in an engaging format, but also 

indicated that the teacher was vital to provide guidance and scaffolding. Qualitative data analysis suggests 

that students increased their confidence and satisfaction levels in mathematics as well as learning generally, and that there was detectable transferability of the 

skills, knowledge, and abilities gained. Additionally, 

technology supports such as text-to-speech software 

were found extremely helpful to ESOL learners and 

diverse students. 

In Nicol and Anderson’s (2000) study conducted 

in Scotland, 24 adults with mild learning disabilities were randomly assigned to a CAI class (where a 

teacher taught basic math supplemented with commercial software and Web applications), a teacherdirected basic math class (no CAI), or a non-math 

class at the adult center (workplace literacy or art). 

In the CAI class, students worked in pairs with the 

software one hour per week throughout the semester. At post-test, students in both the teacher-directed 

and CAI classes had made steady improvement on 

their math skills; the control students had made none. 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

19

Students in the CAI class had larger gains than those 

in the teacher-directed class, but these gains were not 

statistically significant. 

English for Speakers of Other Languages

Three studies from California inform the research base 

on how online technologies contribute to achievement gains by adult ESOL students. It is not surprising that California would be investigating this service 

delivery option: It is the first ranking state in sheer 

numbers of foreign-born population and the limited 

English proficiency population (Migration Policy 

Institute, 2007). In 2005, the state’s adult education 

programs served 429,025 students (U.S. Department of 

Education, OVAE, 2007), representing nearly 73% of 

enrollment. Because the state of California uses a common ESOL accounting measure across the programs, 

the Comprehensive Adults Student Assessment System 

(CASAS), the findings of the following three studies 

can be compared and contrasted to state averages. 

Rivera (2003) conducted an effectiveness study 

of Los Angeles Unified School District’s adult ESL 

Community-Based English Tutoring (ESL-CBET) 

program, which offers Internet access and CAI as a 

supplement to ESOL classroom instruction. Rivera 

examined student outcome data from 60 classrooms 

that used computers. Teachers and students in the 

computer-using classrooms reported that computer use led to skill improvement and greater selfdirectedness and goal development; 92% of students 

indicated that they wanted computers to continue 

to be a part of their ESOL instruction. Students in 

classes using computers also showed significantly 

better post-class outcomes such as getting a GED, 

finding a (better) job, and being involved in the 

community. As Rivera pointed out, these outcomes 

are directly related to students’ standard of living 

and integration into the mainstream of society. The 

difference in rates for promotion to next level of 

ESOL between computer users and nonusers were 

not statistically significant.

The online curriculum, English for All, was developed by Los Angeles Unified School District under a 

federally funded adult education project, Cyberstep. 

It targets learners of English in the high beginning 

to low advanced levels. It has been used as a supplemental activity by classes around California and as an 

online curriculum for distance courses in California, 

Texas, Massachusetts, and North Carolina. 

An evaluation of a supplemental use of English for 

All was conducted (Richmond, Thacher, & Porter, 

2005) in several modes: online, via TV, in class, and labbased individualized instruction. Twenty-six students 

in intermediate-level ESOL classes in California were 

recruited to participate. The students who volunteered 

tended to be computer literate and to have completed 

formal education in their native countries. Reading 

gains at post-test for the participants were on par with 

their peers in the program (average gain of 5 points on 

the CASAS); retention rates were significantly higher 

than their peers in the state (88% vs. 61%). Adults’ successful participation, the authors felt, was due in part to 

the presence of a friend or family member who could 

provide “tech support,” and to a thorough orientation 

before beginning the individualized component. 

Evaluations of the California Distance Learning 

Project (CDLP) consistently show positive outcomes 

for students in classes where distance learning is a 

supplement or an option for self-study when a student 

has to “stop out” of regular class attendance. From an 

analysis of the 2004–2005 statewide data (Stiles & 

Porter, 2006), students who participated in blended 

learning (regular class attendance plus supplemental 

distance learning ) demonstrated greater gains on the 

CASAS post-test than students in traditional ESOL 

classes across reading and listening score ranges, with 

the greatest percentage gains shown in the lower levels of proficiency. 

Complementary Literature Reviews

The findings from the individual studies and evaluations are augmented by three literature reviews 
National Institute for Literacy

20

conducted on related topics. Condelli and Wrigley 

(2004) reviewed research in adult ESOL and second 

language learning. Although they found the literature 

not yet fully developed in its capacity to recommend 

particular effective instructional strategies, the review 

determined that the use of CAI and online learning 

in adult ESOL indicated potential with English language learners to provide authentic and motivating 

contexts for practicing language. 

Chapelle (2005) reviewed studies of computerassisted language learning, or CALL, conducted along 

several lines of second language acquisition research 

and theory, only a few of which were conducted in 

adult basic ESOL programs. In particular, the review 

found studies that strengthened the hypotheses of noticing, or the imperative for students to notice particular 

language elements in order to learn them, and input 

modification, or the practice of elaborating and enhancing teaching materials to make them more comprehensible for students. The technological features of CALL 

that were found to be beneficial to language learning 

include hyperlinked e-resources such as annotations, 

translations, and definitions; dynamic highlighting and 

narration; and English subtitles on video materials. 

A review of effectiveness research conducted for 

the New Zealand Ministry of Education (Benseman, 

Sutton, & Lander, 2005) found mixed results in 

the literature (from research conducted on CAI in 

English-speaking industrial countries) in adult literacy, numeracy, and language classrooms. The authors 

summarize their findings with the following: 

CAI may be more effective in [teaching] maths 

and with learners at basic levels. There is some evidence for gains in reading...Teachers are central to 

making CAI programmes work. The programmes 

work best as a supplement... Irrespective of its effectiveness compared with other modes of instruction, 

CAI is consistently reported as valuable for motivating reluctant or hesitant learners...[this] is an essential 

consideration when participation in programmes is 

still predominantly voluntary... (p. 49).

The authors lament that in addition to the difficulties researchers face in conducting controlled research 

in the adult settings, the complexity of comparing 

quite dissimilar technology applications and implementation models and contrasting an intervention 

to an ill-defined “traditional mode” of classroom 

instruction does not readily contribute to a generalizable knowledge base. 

The ESOL literature in particular is replete with 

practice reports of how educators are utilizing computer-assisted and online technologies to enrich 

English language instruction. Several published 

resources from technical assistance providers are available to guide implementation (Center for Impact 

Research, 2002; Florez, 2000; Imel & Jacobson, 2006; 

NCEL, 2002). Missing is empirical research documenting the outcomes of this work. Synthesizing and 

legitimizing the practical knowledge and experience 

in the ESOL field would fill a gap in the research.

Despite methodological weaknesses and dissimilar 

implementation models, these studies converge on the 

value of using technology in adult literacy, numeracy, 

and language classrooms for all levels of students for 

broad personal development gains such as self-confidence, motivation-retention-persistence, independence, goal directedness, real-world transfer, and reinforcement of skill acquisition, and to meet the secondary goal of learners to become more computer literate. 

Quantifying academic skills achievement attributable 

solely to a technology component is less straightforward, but several studies of significant numbers of students report learning gains attributable to the supplemental use of technology in instruction and practice.

Implementation and Design Issues

Online learning, for the purposes of this paper, has 

been defined earlier as “activities for which Web-based 

content and Internet connection and interactivity are 

integral to the experience for at least a portion of the 

engaged time.” Therefore, for this section, the investigation sought findings and recommendations from 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

21

evaluations that focused on Web-delivered or distance 

instruction and learning materials. However, none of 

the studies evaluated adults’ independent online learning outside of a class or program. These evaluations 

and recommendations are from programs’ attempts 

to offer supplemental online offerings to students in 

and out of their programs. The findings from these 

program-based efforts can inform our understanding 

of where strategic supports could make independent 

learning more successful.

Many adult, family, and continuing education 

programs have added distance learning options to 

their course offerings. In a survey of state directors 

of adult education (Parke & Tracy-Mumford, 2000), 

31 states reported plans for incorporating some form 

of distance learning into their programs. Often, these 

options are an attempt to address some of the traditional barriers for student participation: time, transportation, unpredictable schedules, and unease in class 

environment. In fact, an evaluation of Pennsylvania’s 

pilot effort to offer the online curriculum Workplace 

Essential Skills via distance learning found that at least 

50% of the students would not have been traditional 

classroom/program students (Askov, Johnston, Petty, 

& Young, 2003). This trend is echoed in the evaluation of California’s distance learning project (Stiles & 

Porter, 2006). Distance learning can encompass many 

types of arrangements including video checkout, televised courses, facilitated and synchronous Web conferencing, integrated learning system software available via password login, and Web-based self-directed 

inquiry assignments. 

Wagner and Hopey (1998) sum up the hope about 

the potential of new technologies for adult literacy 

and ESOL programs and learners: 

[ICTs] hold enormous promise for the future 

because they can (a) reduce the isolation that many 

adult literacy providers and students experience, (b) 

facilitate communication among staff and students 

within and between programs, (c) increase access 

to high quality materials and emerging research, (d) 

streamline administrative and reporting processes, and 

(e) help to provide the delivery vehicle for innovative 

instructional and staff development approaches” (p. 1).

However, in a study conducted in Australia, a country with a long history of using all manner of distance 

learning media, Brennan, McFadden, and Law (2001) 

report that despite the variety of technologies and 

distance options, “the new technologies...are being 

used for searching, for communicating, for providing information, and for processing text in various 

forms—not for online delivery” (p. 22). This section 

covers evaluations of programming efforts as well 

as evaluations of the design of online materials and 

environments.

Table 4 gives a thumbnail overview of the scope of 

the evaluations and surveys from blended and supplemental online efforts for adult learners. Following the 

table is a synthesis of findings and recommendations 

from these evaluations.

Program Evaluations

Convergence on the following recommendations is 

found in these evaluations and surveys of students in 

adult literacy and language programs:

•	 Online learners and teachers need support—pure 

online delivery is not best practice for adult literacy and ESOL learners (AlphaRoute, 2003; 

Daniels, Gillespie, Stites, & Nelson, 2004; FHRD, 

1999; NCVER, 2002; Parke & Tracy-Mumford, 

2000; Porter & O’Connor, 2001; Stiles & Porter, 

2006). Support could include:

Ķ a facilitator for students at least some of the 

time; 

Ķ student-to-student communication;

Ķ readily available tech support for both teachers 

and students; and

Ķ peer group for teachers of distance courses as 

teachers learn the new medium.
National Institute for Literacy

22

Table 4. Program Evaluations

AUTHOR(S); 

PUBLICATION DATE TITLE SPONSOR PROJECT SCOPE

Askov, E., Johnston, J., Petty, L., & 

Young, S. (2003)

Expanding access to adult literacy 

with online distance education

National Center for the 

Study of Adult Learning 

and Literacy (NCSALL)

Examines the potential and feasibility of 

online distance education for adult learners

Brennan, R., McFadden, M., & 

Law, E. (2001)

All that glitters is not gold: Online 

delivery of education and training

National Centre for 

Vocational Education 

Research (NCVER), 

Australia

Research review of published and unpublished evaluations of distance learning 

efforts (most supplemental to program 

participation) across Australia

Daniels, M., Gillespie, M., Stites, 

R., & Nelson, E. (2004)

Project CONNECT: Final evaluation report Project CONNECT, PBS

Formative evaluation of the pilot sites and 

modules of Project CONNECT, surveyed 9 

sites and 292 students

Eady, M. (2006) Literacy learning at a distance: A 

new approach

AlphaPlus Centre, 

Toronto, Canada

Evaluation of AlphaRoute implementation 

via distance delivery in rural, remote northern Ontario, Canada

Ginsburg, L. (2004)

Adult literacy practitioners’ 

readiness to use technology in the 

classroom: A five state survey in 

2002–2003

National Center on 

Adult Literacy

Conducted needs assessment of administrators and instructors in 5 states (n = 444 

responses) to inform professional development planning

Lock Kunz, J., & Tsoukalas, S. 

(2000)

Riding the technology wave: 

Experiences of literacy students 

and teachers in Ontario

Canadian Council on 

Social Development, 

Ottawa, Canada

Surveys and focus groups to gauge use of 

computer technology in Ontario for literacy 

education from students’ and teachers’ perspectives. Gathered data from students (n = 

643) and teachers (n = 135) plus analysis 

of 460 student activity sheets

Long, E., Kennell, T., Moriarty, 

M., & Sturm, M. (2003)

What difference does it make? 

Literacy learner perspectives 

on Web-based learning with 

AlphaRoute

AlphaPlus Centre, 

Toronto, Canada

Conducted surveys of teachers at 42 sites 

and students (n = 142) using AlphaRoute 

materials as supplement to literacy instruction

National Centre for Vocational 

Education Research (2002) Flexibility through online learning

National Centre for 

Vocational Education 

Research (NCVER), 

Australia

Key findings and implications from review 

of published and unpublished evaluations of 

distance learning efforts (most supplemental 

to program participation) across Australia

Porter, P., & O’Connor, L. (2001)

What makes distance learning 

effective? Support mechanisms to 

maximize the impact of distance 

learning in adult education

Massachusetts ABE Distance Learning ProjectEvaluation of four ABE distance learning 

pilot programs

Stiles, R., & Porter, D. (2006)

The California Adult Education 

2004–2006 Innovation and 

Alternative Instructional Delivery 

Program: A Review

California Distance 

Learning Project (CDLP)

Evaluation of student and program data 

from the California Innovation and Alternative Instructional Delivery Program which 

served 51,089 students in 2004–2005 in 

79 programs. Highlights include: most common distance learning option in California 

is a video checkout plus teacher feedback 

system that involves Crossroads Café; CDLP 

served mainly English learners (92% of the 

students) in nearly half (48%) of the offered 

courses; other DL courses were GED (nearly 

20%) and basic literacy (12%); women 

participate at a rate of 2:1; participation of 

students with low literacy and low ESL levels 

increased 8–10% and 3% respectively in 

the 2004–2005 data.
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

23

•	 Induction programs or computer literacy skills 

prerequisites set the stage for success (Askov et al., 

2003; Hawkins, 2001; NCVER, 2002). 

•	 Students are eager to learn computer literacy skills 

alongside content (AlphaRoute, 2003; Askov et al., 

2003; Brennan et al., 2001; Kambouri, Mellard, & 

Logan, 2006; Lock Kunz & Tsoulakis, 2000).

•	 Supplemental online learning can be a positive 

option that increases students’ overall improvement and retention (AlphaRoute, 2003; Daniels 

et al., 2004; Porter & O’Connor, 2001; Stiles & 

Porter, 2006). 

•	 The quality of the equipment—on both ends—

makes a significant difference for the success of 

the experience, and surveys point to the reality 

that most students do not have access to highquality computers and broadband Internet service, 

and programs do not take learner costs (such as 

connectivity) into consideration when planning 

and offering distance learning (Askov et al., 2003; 

Brennan et al., 2001; Ginsburg, 2004; Lock Kunz 

& Tsoulakis, 2000).

The complicating factor of teachers’ own comfort 

and skill level with integrating technology into their 

instruction is well documented across educational 

settings (Hughes, 2005; MacArthur, 2001; NCES, 

2000). A 2003 survey of adult education teachers in 

the United States (Carter & Titzell, 2003) found that 

teachers who self-reported that they were proficient

technology users rated distance learning in their top 

four choices. Teachers who self-reported that they 

were technology users with enough [skill] to get by

did not include distance learning in their top four 

choices, preferring instead to indicate their choices 

as learning more about planning resources or classroom-based activities. Another survey of adult education teachers and administrators (Ginsburg, 2004) 

confirmed these relationships. Teachers who were 

only “somewhat comfortable” were far more likely 

to use computers for practice and drill activities than 

teachers who were “extremely comfortable”—62% 

to 44% (p. 7). As teachers increased their comfort 

level, they increasingly used computers for problemsolving and learner-directed activities. These findings 

were echoed in an Australian survey (Javed, 1998) in 

which teachers who were more comfortable and had 

easier and more access to equipment and the Internet 

in their leisure time were more likely to be observed 

integrating technology into their literacy and language teaching in creative and learner-driven ways. 

While this issue is beyond the scope of this investigation, this reality must be considered if change is to 

be effective.

Design of Environments and Materials

Very few evaluations were found of the design of 

online environments and materials specifically created 

for students in adult literacy and language programs. 

The most recently published articles are reviews and 

evaluations of designs that were completed prior to 

publication and have since been updated and significantly changed. This lag in published research to 

guide development is a common problem in other 

areas of technology implementation as well (SilverPacuilla, 2005). Current thinking and advice were 

shared by the content development experts and by 

participants on the Institute’s listserv, where it is discussed in more depth. Nevertheless, general information can be gleaned from published evaluations, 

briefly described in table 5. 

From these evaluations, researchers identified several key design elements that contributed to learners’ 

engagement, enjoyment, and ultimately, their persistence and success with the materials and environment:

•	 Authentic writing and communicating activities;

•	 Readability levels that balanced authentic vocabulary in an easy-to-read format;

•	 Timely facilitator feedback;
National Institute for Literacy

24

•	 Tasks that taught computer and media literacy 

alongside content;

•	 Embedded video presentations;

•	 Graphics and images that were clear and that reinforced the content;

•	 Clear navigation that facilitated organization and 

did not embed information on subpages; and

•	 Multiple means of working with the information 

(online, in print, on portable CD-ROMs or disks) 

to accommodate various levels of access and connectivity.

Guidance for design and development is available in Cybersteps’ Materials Development Framework

(1999b), Evaluation of Cyber Products (1999a), and 

design framework for multimedia (Wrigley, 2001) 

which can guide future evaluations and designers in 

the development of online learning environments for 

adult learners. Cybersteps’ list of criteria emphasize 

that language and literacy:

•	 Are social processes that involve interaction with 

others; 

•	 Require risk taking;

•	 Develop when the target language is slightly above 

the current proficiency level of the user; 

•	 Require focus, engagement, and practice;

•	 Are multidimensional and require different kinds 

of interactions with different kinds of genres;

•	 Develop through interactions with tasks that 

require cognitive involvement; and

•	 Develop more deeply if skills are connected to an 

overall topic or theme. 

Also useful are design suggestions from the League 

of Innovation in the Community College (2005), a 

coalition to guide research and development of innovative instruction in community colleges. Echoing 

the findings from the program evaluation section 

above, these criteria lists converge on the emphasis of 

active learning, authentic reading and writing activiTable 5. Design Evaluations

ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT STUDIED EVALUATOR; PUBLICATION DATE DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT

NIBBLE Olson, R. B., & Cohen, N. 

(2000)

Text-based information at an intermediate readability level 

organized into topics on a Web site that links out to outside 

Web sites, but does not provide interactivity

Project CONNECT Daniels, M., Gillespie, M., 

Stites, R., & Nelson, E. (2004)

Online activities to practice English and learn basic skills at a 

high beginning level; site has various supports (such as audio, 

video, and embedded dictionaries) and interactivity features 

(such as e-mail, work feedback, and online class groups)

Workplace Essential Skills

Sabatini, J. P. (2001); 

Johnston, J., Young, S. J., & 

Petty, L. I. (2001)

Online lessons designed for intermediate reading level that 

present information in text, link to outside Web sites, and 

provide interactivity (with text answers); correlates with workbooks and TV broadcast lessons
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

25

ties, multiple means of engaging with the information, available support, and an integration of content 

and computer skills. Other guidance may be found in 

the extensive databases and online forums of general 

consumer Web design and usability, but it must be 

adapted to adult literacy and language learners with 

consideration to users’ specific needs and habits.

Student Skills and Dispositions

What does it take to be successful with independent 

online learning? The definition of success stated above 

is “activities that left users feeling satisfied that they had 

fulfilled a question or search, found helpful information, 

or advanced target skills.” Adult literacy and language 

learners are confronted by interfaces and information 

presentations that are written above their reading level, 

devoid of local content, and developed predominantly 

in English (as described above), but also by their own 

learning habits that were developed in very different 

environments, such as traditional classrooms. Both the 

skills and dispositions are discussed below.

Skills Necessary for Independent Online Learning

Observational studies of technology users are particularly useful for providing examples of the types of challenges online environments present to adult literacy 

and language learners. Two studies, Birru, Monaco, and 

Charles (2004) and Harrysson, Svensk, and Johansson 

(2004), engaged small groups of adults with low literacy skills to participate in observed trials of online 

information searching. In the first study, adults were 

given health scenarios and asked to generate information searches. In the second study, adults were asked to 

find consumer information. The researchers’ observations converge on the following difficulties adults with 

low literacy experience in the online environment: 

•	 Difficulty generating optimal search terms (i.e., 

could not remember if search terms were to be 

separate words or “all one word” as in “lungcancertreatment”); 

•	 Difficulty interpreting the search results; 

•	 Difficulty finding health information in easy-toread language; 

•	 Difficulty comprehending and interpreting found 

information due to inappropriate reading level; 

and 

•	 Difficulty distinguishing between commercially 

sponsored and informational links (i.e., understanding the value of .com vs. .gov).

•	

These difficulties were compounded by the adults’ 

misinterpretation of the information they did find. 

Some adults reported reading about topics that the 

researchers could not later verify as present on the visited 

sites. This raised grave concerns among the researchers 

as to the veracity of information these adults felt they 

had gathered during the search experience.

The usability of the interface, search tools, and presentation of the information found on the Internet 

impede adult literacy and language learners from 

using the Internet effectively and independently 

finding the information they seek. In fact, as shown 

in the Birru et al. study (2004), adult literacy learners 

can misinterpret the information they do find, casting 

doubt on their ability to benefit from their searches.

Rouet (2006) looked closely at the skills necessary to comprehend documents and information 

found online. He presents a detailed review of the 

research on the cognitive processes involved in “the 

skills and mental processes that underlie our ability to 

read, comprehend, and make use of complex documents in real life situations” (p. xix), what he defines 

as functional literacy in print and online. Across multiple 

studies conducted with youth and adults of various 

ages and educational levels, Rouet documents the 

difficulties users have evaluating information found 

on the Web. Users are often “misled by surface markers found on the web pages” (175) and have little or 

no criteria for evaluating information.
National Institute for Literacy

26

Drawing on studies that sought to identify the most 

effective and comprehensible information and Web 

portal design for online learning, Rouet concludes 

that the following three elements must be balanced for 

creating productive Web-based learning activities:

•	 Comprehension skills that support the student 

“to identify and evaluate source information, to 

integrate information across sources, and to assess 

the quality of content information from a given 

perspective”;

•	 Well-designed tasks that are “explicit and require 

in-depth processing of the materials”; and

•	 An environment that provides the informational 

and organizational resources and tools to complete 

and manage the task (p. 171).

•	

More needs to be done to understand effective 

instructional methods for supporting adults’ reading 

and navigating the Web and emerging technologies. 

While it is beyond the scope of this investigation, 

research and best practice guidance on this topic is 

underway in the K–16 educational area that could 

inform the adult literacy and language field.

Dispositions Necessary for Independent Online 

Learning

Self-directedness and active learning are repeatedly 

emphasized as the hallmarks of successful online 

learning in the program evaluations and descriptions, 

no matter the literacy and language proficiency levels 

of the students. Self-directedness has been defined 

by Brookfield as “the dispositions and capabilities of 

learners to accept responsibility for planning, seeking 

out learning resources, implementing and evaluating their own learning” (1984, p. 61). Added to these 

dispositions are unique skills (as detailed above) and 

dispositions necessitated by the online environment. 

The American Center for the Study of Distance 

Education (ACSDE) at Pennsylvania State University 

(1999) identified the skills and dispositions necessary 

for any learner to succeed in online learning: basic 

computer literacy; reading and writing skills; skills 

in searching for, navigating, and organizing found 

information; netiquette; self-motivation; independent 

learning skills; and time management skills. Expanding 

Access (Askov et al., 2003), which is focused on adult 

language and literacy learners, presents a parallel list of 

skills, knowledge, and learning dispositions: “distance 

education requires that the student be able to function independently, be able to structure and organize 

time, and have a high level of self motivation... [and] 

be comfortable working with the appropriate technology and have access to a computer” (p. 34).

The challenges and the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to address them have been documented by practitioners working to offer and improve 

online and flexible delivery courses. An evaluation of 

the implementation in Pennsylvania of the Workplace 

Essential Skills (WES) online distance education program identified a list of skills and characteristics of 

successful students, including the following (Askov et 

al., 2003, p. 34): 

•	 They were employed or actively seeking employment;

•	 They had a clear goal for their participating in the 

program;

•	 They read at a seventh-grade level or higher;

•	 They had the ability to organize their time and 

work independently;

•	 They either had a computer at home or easy access 

... at a place they felt comfortable; and

•	 They had computer skills that allowed them to 

navigate the [WES] site and the Internet. 

•	

These skills and dispositions reappear in other 

descriptions of successful online literacy and language 

learners, including those in Australia (NCVER, 2002) 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

27

and the United Kingdom (Selwyn, Gorard, & Furlong, 

2006). Recognizing the importance of these skills to 

students’ success, programs have begun implementing courses or elements specifically designed to teach 

computer and media literacy as well as foster selfdirectedness and personal organizational skills. 

In Australia, Certificate in Adult General Education 

(CAGE) courses are presented through flexible delivery, which means that students can study on- and/

or off-site with some teacher facilitation. Success 

in such a flexible environment requires students to 

“meet deadlines, manage their own time, be appropriately assertive and seek support and assistance, and 

show a preparedness or willingness to take control of 

their learning” (Hawkins, 2001, p. 69). In an effort 

to address the difficulties students were facing with 

the course and the high attrition rate (up to 62%) of 

students from CAGE in Queensland, an additional 

Bridge course was designed to teach the prerequisite 

skills and dispositions. Hawkins (2001) interviewed 

and surveyed 28 students and their teachers and analyzed student outcomes in CAGE to determine the 

effectiveness of the 150-hour Bridge program or a 

more intensive, 500-hour personal development and 

skills readiness course called Newstart, which eight 

students had completed. Overall outcomes indicated 

that students who had engaged in some other course 

before attempting CAGE had higher satisfactory participation and completion than those who did not. 

Also, youth under age 18 had higher rates of unsatisfactory participation and correspondingly low rates 

of progress toward goals (mainly since goals were illdefined). Hawkins concludes that more work needs 

to be done to prepare students for flexible online 

delivery in both skill and disposition development.

Other distance and Web-based learning materials 

build computer and media literacy into the curriculum. Project CONNECT and TV 411, both online 

and in supplemental print and video materials, promote media literacy and dispositions of self-directed 

learning. For example, TV 411 includes a “Learning” 

subject area with lessons on Time Management and 

Knowing Your Learning Style, and weaves media literacy into the subject areas. 

Respondents to the evaluation of AlphaRoute 

(2003) indicated that they had learned significant 

amounts about computer literacy and self-directedness. More than 92% of respondents said they were 

now “very comfortable” using a computer, compared 

with 50% before they worked in AlphaRoute, and 

more than 80% of students said that they were “better 

able to figure things out for themselves before asking 

for help” (p. 71). Additionally, the transferability of 

personal growth skills emerged as a major finding: 

Most striking was AlphaRoute’s effect on learners’ 

feelings of confidence, as measured in several different 

ways. About nine out of ten “have more confidence in 

themselves, and 56% reported “a lot of difference”. This 

was confirmed by an equal number (89%, with 58% 

finding “a lot of difference”) who feel they can do things 

they didn’t think they could since starting AlphaRoute. 

More than eight out of ten agreed AlphaRoute helped 

them to feel they are smarter than they thought, with 

50% saying it made “a lot of difference” (p. 68).

The interdependence between learner skills and 

the demands and supports of the task and environment are illustrated in many of the studies cited 

throughout this paper and by the experiences shared 

by practitioners. Understanding how to plan for the 

balance of skills, supports, and challenges is an area of 

great need in the field of technology-enhanced adult 

literacy and language learning.

Summary

Determining threshold levels of language or literacy 

associated with successful learning or demonstrating causal achievement gains solely to a technology 

intervention cannot be done at this time. Instead, the 

field is amassing reports, evaluations, and evidence of 

the catalytic nature of technology-enhanced learning 

for even the lowest skilled learners. The motivational 

draw of learning with and about new technology 
National Institute for Literacy

28

applications energizes learners’ literacy, numeracy, language, and self-development. It is no longer a question 

of whether enhancing literacy and language learning 

with technology is appropriate for low-skilled learners, but rather how. The lack of replicable studies or 

interventions (published curriculums or shared online 

programs) is an impediment to creating an evidence 

base in this area that could guide future professional 

development, teaching, and research. However, waiting for a traditional research base to be amassed is 

impractical: practitioners need guidance, adults need 

opportunities to grow their skills, and advocates need 

to represent the learners to content developers and 

syndicators. The following section captures how the 

field is moving forward with the research, technical 

assistance, and practice experience that already exists.

A third perspective on the research questions comes 

from the adult literacy and ESOL field. A great deal 

of professional knowledge about adults’ online learning has not yet been documented in the published 

literature. Various programs are creating and offering 

online opportunities to their learners and to adults on 

their waiting lists, professional organizations are creating and hosting content for adult learners, teachers are 

creating or aggregating supplemental online materials 

for their students, and so on. Several outreach activities 

were undertaken to capture this knowledge: teleconference calls with experienced content producers and 

researchers, e-mail conversations with content managers, requests for information posted on the Institute’s 

Technology listserv early in the spring of 2007, and a 

discussion around preliminary literature findings on 

the listserv in the summer of 2007. Key insights from 

these sources are presented below and then synthesized to articulate a perspective from the field.

Talking with Experts

Several researchers, developers, and practitioners who 

have been working in and leading the conversation 

on adult online learning were identified and invited 

to participate in teleconference calls to discuss the 

research questions from their experience. Their experience spans several decades and a variety of delivery 

media. Their names, affiliations, and online content 

efforts are listed in table 6. 

Before the calls, these individuals were sent an 

article from the literature review (Birru, Monaco, & 

Charles, 2004) and a set of scenarios (appendix A) to 

review. This provided a common set of examples from 

which to discuss issues related to online learning and 

adult literacy and language acquisition. 

The challenges outlined in Birru et al. (2004) resonated with these experienced literacy providers and 

content producers. They shared the following insights 

about the potentials of online learning:

•	 Reading levels, amount of text, and conventions of 

online text present real challenges for adult literacy 

and language learners, given the vast amount, readability levels, and complexity of text online. Adult 

learners’ reading skills and styles put them at a disadvantage; particularly problematic are word-byword reading rather than skimming habits, ineffective interpretive and synthesis strategies, and vast 

amounts of unknown vocabulary.

•	 Media and Web literacy skills and knowledge need 

to be recognized as necessary skills, and the adult 

education and ESOL field needs to determine 

appropriate methods of teaching them. These 

skills include evaluating credibility, understanding 

Learning from the Field
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

29

search terms and results, building navigation skills, 

becoming familiar with information architecture 

conventions, and understanding netiquette. 

•	 Generational and attitudinal differences within 

the adult learner and ESOL population challenge 

designers and practitioners to accommodate user 

preferences; younger users generally navigate more 

aggressively than older users, who prefer a more 

linear presentation.

•	 The consequences of the shift toward user-generated content and interactivity are unclear for adult 

learners as well as content producers.

•	 Practitioners are not always aware of appropriate and relevant Internet content that is written 

in easy-to-read language, translated content, sites 

with embedded text-to-speech features, or sites 

with instructional videos. There are few formal 

channels of information dissemination to literacy 

and language instructors. 

•	 Practitioners are not always aware of technology 

options available on most operating systems and 

browsers that could greatly enhance adult learners’ 

access to Internet and computer-based information. These options are customizable, and include 

text readers, translation tools, font size and color 

contrast controls, input choices, and icon and menu 

item enlargement or reordering.

•	 Aggregation and syndication of online content 

especially chosen for adult learners is a valuable 

service, but not a substitute for the media and Web 

literacy skills that would allow adults to engage 

more successfully in self-directed learning on the 

Web. 

The enthusiasm of this group of experienced content creators for the potential of literacy and language 

learning through technology was sustained by their 

personal experiences of adult learners’ success with 

online learning. These success stories energize leaders to continue to innovate and create solutions and 

opportunities. Several new projects to offer online, 

mobile, and interactive content delivery in the adult 

literacy and language learning field were discussed 

on the calls, including promising improvements and 

exciting new directions.

Table 6: Contributing Experts

Contributor Main content development effort 

Eunice Askov Formerly of Pennsylvania State University, evaluator of Workplace Essential Skills

John Fleischman Executive director of the Outreach and Technical Assistance Network (OTAN), developer 

of English for All, co-developer of TV 411

Steve Quann Web design and curriculum specialist at World Ed

Alex Quinn Executive director of Games for Change; former project director for the Adult Literacy 

Media Alliance (ALMA), co-developer of TV 411

Steve Reder Project director of the Longitudinal Study of Adult Learners, producer of the Learner Web 

syndication pilot

David Rosen Independent consultant, manager of adult ed wiki, contributor to eSquare
National Institute for Literacy

30

From their experiences designing and hosting 

online content, the experts shared these success stories:

•	 TV 411 (www.tv411.org) was developed for adult 

learners to use on their own (with supplemental 

print materials). Usability testing with adult learners helped developers to determine a successful balance of information and graphics (graphics should 

reinforce, not compete with the message), iterativeness, and linearity. It also encouraged them to pay 

special attention to what happens when a learner 

makes a mistake. The Web site features more than 

100 lessons, six of which are in Spanish. In 2006, 

the site had more than 17 million page views, and 

nearly 500,000 unique visitors, and nearly 27,000 

downloads of teacher resource materials. 

•	 The California Distance Learning Project site 

(www.cdlponline.org), maintained by OTAN, 

offers hundreds of “repurposed” news stories from 

mainstream media organizations. Each story provides a simple-to-read version with accompanying audio narration, and some with video. Users 

can complete a variety of vocabulary, spelling, and 

reading comprehension activities about the story. 

The site averages more than 3.5 million visitors 

per month. The popularity of this site is attributed 

to its extensive audio assistance and the repetitive, 

controlled nature of the learning environment.

•	 English for All (www.myefa.org), the online curriculum developed under Cyberstep, has been 

adopted around the country and the world by 

English language learners. Analysis of the Web data 

shows that the site receives 1,000 unique visitors 

per day. Thirty-five percent of visitors (75% of the 

total from the United States) are from California. 

These experts recommend that adult literacy practitioners and policymakers should be providing guidance to mainstream Web designers, content producers, 

and syndicators on the features and tools that could 

make the Internet, browsers, and search engines more 

user-friendly to adults new to the Web and with low 

levels of literacy and language proficiency. 

Sharing with the National Institute for

Literacy Technology Listserv Community

In the summer of 2007, preliminary findings from 

the literature review were shared with the Institute’s 

Technology listserv, an online community of educators who are interested and involved in incorporating 

technology into their instructional programming (at 

various levels of education). The overarching research 

questions and direction were shared with the group. 

Subscribers were asked to provide feedback on the 

findings to date and to share experiences from their 

work that confirmed or questioned those findings. 

Over the period of a month, the list was very active, 

with a robust conversation about the three findings 

shared: program implementation issues, evidence of 

improvements of basic literacy and language skills, 

and student skills and dispositions associated with 

successful technology-based and online learning. (See 

the full posting in appendix B.)

A thematic analysis was then conducted on the 

more than 30 posts that were directly related to the 

findings, although many related conversations were 

also generated during and after the assigned guest 

moderation. Contributors included program coordinators, instructors, instructional designers, and fellow 

researchers. As would be expected from this group of 

dedicated technology enthusiasts, they shared a belief 

that technology creates enthusiasm, incentives, and 

motivation for adult learners—even for those with 

the lowest literacy and language proficiencies. Two 

listserv comments capture this value: 

•	 Students do enjoy working at computers. For many of 

them, it’s a reassurance that they are really part of the 

modern world. 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

31

•	 Learning technology is in and of itself a great incentive 

for the lowest skilled people we serve.

The following themes emerged from the listserv 

about incorporating technology into adult literacy 

and ESL instruction.

•	 Aging equipment at programs and at students’ 

homes is a barrier to using multimedia options for 

supplemental or distance learning.

•	 The multimedia, multimodal engagement of technology-based learning is key to its effectiveness 

and engagingness for adult learners.

•	 Video games and online multiuser virtual environments offer compelling delivery alternatives, yet 

are underdeveloped as educational options.

•	 Orientation activities for distance learning options 

have been found to:

Ķ Promote retention;

Ķ Provide an opportunity to assess students’ technical skills and learning dispositions; and

Ķ Provide a safe, penalty-free way to try out new 

learning modes; yet

Ķ There is no clear guidance on how much 

orientation is sufficient, what an orientation 

should include, or how to orient students to 

every different platform. 

•	 Computer literacy courses are an important offering that complements both academic and workforce development skills, and have been offered as 

courses that are:

Ķ Folded into distance learning courses;

Ķ Taught as a stand alone programs; and

Ķ Offered as drop-in labs with onsite support.

•	 As students recommend resources to each other, 

they develop an important referral network.

Online resources were shared extensively on the 

listserv, from typing practice sites to language practice 

via voice-over Internet protocol.

Reinforcing the literature findings, the majority 

of models shared were of the supplemental use of 

online learning resources and options matched with 

some type of facilitated support from an adult literacy program. Programming models seem to be 

designed based on programs’ infrastructure and available teacher expertise rather than theory or research. 

Offering orientation or try-out periods was resoundingly endorsed as an effective way of boosting retention in supplemental and distance learning options; 

orientations have been evaluated informally in Project 

IDEAL and through AlphaRoute. A major concern, 

among listserv participants, however, was that there 

was no clear guidance related to orientation and 

matching supports to students’ abilities: how and on 

what dimensions to screen adults, what supports to 

offer based on screening results, or how to structure 

orientation experiences to be most effective. 

Instructors noted that students, like as teachers, are 

sharing and recommending resources and Web sites 

to each other. This informal networking is encouraging to technology enthusiasts and indicates that more 

students are looking to self-study online. However, it 

is clear that reviewers have few common evaluation 

criteria to guide recommendations. Most of these 

types of posts said Program X software is good, Program 

Y is better, We use program Z, etc. without providing 

further information to guide the receiver(s) of the 

message. Only one participant shared her process for 

finding resources:

I Google the type of help [a student] needs and pick out 

a site that looks helpful and not full of advertisements. I 

have also learned of some valuable resources when taking 

a DL102 class through the University of Michigan’s 

Project IDEAL...
National Institute for Literacy

32

Guidance on how to evaluate and/or a clearinghouse of learning resources evaluated on a common 

set of guidelines might help guide decision making 

and save instructors significant time. The sites shared 

on the listserv were mainly stand-alone, not aggregated 

on one easy-to-find and navigate site; nor were they 

in any way developed with similar design principles. 

Users have to negotiate new vocabulary and interfaces 

on each site. As is discussed in the literature review, this 

lack of consistency presents additional challenges for 

users with low literacy and language proficiency.

A resounding gap in the listserv conversation was 

a lack of discussion about of students’ engagement 

with technology as a goal related to their role as 

family members and parents. Contributors discussed 

students’ motivation to improve workplace skills, but 

there was no mention of family roles. This may have 

been an anomaly, and it remains for further research 

to pursue the connection often heard from students 

that, as parents, they want to be able to assist their 

children with homework on the computer.

Summary

It is clear that many educators are committed to integrating technology into all skill levels of adult literacy, numeracy, and language learning because of the 

synergistic quality of the learning and development 

they see in students. It also is apparent that the efforts 

of educators in most instances are not coordinated 

above the program level. Project IDEAL, funded 

since 2002 by the U.S. Department of Education, 

Office of Vocational and Adult Education, has been a 

lighthouse project and is recognized in the field, but 

it does not reach all programs and educators. Content 

developers likewise remain committed to harnessing 

new technologies and options for the low literacy and 

language proficiency population, and their efforts are 

meeting with enormous demand. 

Triangulating from the three major data sources—

large-scale studies, research literature, and experts and 

practitioners in the field—affords this report solid 

footing on which to draw some key findings to the 

guiding research questions. The search for thresholds, 

foremost, revealed that such thresholds did not exist: 

learners at even the lowest levels of literacy and language proficiency can engage with online learning 

content. Moreover, all reports indicate that they are 

eager to do so and that they benefit in important 

ways such as self-confidence, self-directedness, and 

independence. Matching the content and interface 

to the learners’ skill and language level, however, 

remains challenging. Programs’ efforts to implement 

supplemental and alternative learning options with 

online content are being documented. Yet technology trends, access patterns among American adults, 

and delivery platform options develop and change 

ahead of the pace of data collection, published evaluations, and program planning.

Although not all of the findings below are wholly 

new to the field, finding them again as the result of a 

systematic investigation adds credibility to commonly 

known realities in adult literacy and language learning, such as the importance of work-related skills. It 

is hoped that this report can join other voices moving the field toward a discussion of evidence-based 

technology-enhanced solutions.

•	 Understanding the interrelatedness of the tasks, 

skills, and supports necessitates research and 

development to guide the design of learning 

environments and activities that are flexible and 

that can differentiate on all three dimensions. 

Key Findings 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

33

Experimenting with flexible supports, both human 

and technological—the variable most accessible 

to adjustments by educators, program managers, 

and Web designers—is likely to yield a wealth of 

information to guide further development. 

•	 The centrality of work readiness—what the British 

call “upskilling”—to adults’ learning lives provides 

a key leverage point for programming and content design to address this goal more directly and, 

through it, more basic literacy and language skills.

•	 Adults’ existing family and social networks that have 

proven critical to learning pursuits with technology provide another leverage point that could be 

tapped with community-based, authentic learning 

environments, activities, and products.

•	 Self-directed skills valued in lifelong learners can 

be nurtured by providing facilitated access to 

online, independent learning environments. The 

studies converge on the findings that engagement 

with these environments fostered the skills associated with successful self-directed learning.

•	 The large numbers of visitors to freely available 

online sites such as English for All, TV 411, and 

California Distance Learning Project Online 

indicate that users are finding them. Evaluation 

data, however, are needed to determine how users 

are interacting and learning with the material or 

whether these sites are or could be stepping stones 

to a more formal course of study.

•	 Rates of access and connectivity in the lowincome community are definitely growing, yet 

high-quality equipment and broadband or wireless access is far from ubiquitous. This reality constrains development and dissemination of online 

learning portals and sites. Findings from the U.K. 

(Selwyn, Gorard, & Furlong, 2006) do not support 

an expanded use of public Internet terminals by 

the low literacy and language proficiency population as a solution to this problem.

•	 The use of emerging technologies to deliver learning content is only beginning to be reported in the 

research literature (for example, Kambouri, Mellar, & 

Logan, 2006). Nevertheless, technology enthusiasts 

believe strongly that consumer electronics (such as 

cell phones and PDAs), interactive Web 2.0 platforms 

(such as blogs, video conferencing, and immersive 

environments), and the convergence of media (such 

as television and radio delivered over the Internet) 

have the potential to reach new populations and provide authentic learning and communication.

This report is a panoramic look at online learning participation by adults with low literacy and low levels of 

English proficiency. As such, it is neither overly detailed 

nor focused on particular elements of the field. The 

large-scale studies afford a broad view of adults’ patterns of technology use, access, and connectivity and 

reinforce the strong connection between literacy and 

technology use, but they do not answer many questions about how and why, what if and for whom. The 

research literature provides a view of how adults are 

learning with online technologies, but there are too few 

studies with student achievement data to aggregate to 

make conclusive statements; furthermore, this literature 

is almost completely limited to the population of students already in programs. Practitioners point the way 

to creative solutions to program planning and engaging 

students, but the knowledge base is too informal and 

program-specific to prescribe actual development. 

This investigation set out to determine whether 

thresholds of basic skills and/or English language 

Discussion and Conclusion
National Institute for Literacy

34

proficiency for successful online learning were 

identifiable with what was known in the field to 

date. Specific test scores or ESL levels have not 

been identified. Instead, this investigation triangulated from multiple data sources to reveal some of 

the access, implementation, and design issues for the 

target populations and their online learning habits. 

Together, these data suggest that it is the interaction

among learners’ skills, the online environments they 

encounter, and the supports available that determines 

those thresholds, and that even learners with very low 

literacy or language proficiency have been successful 

with some online environments. Supports—in the 

form of an online avatar, distance coach, tech support 

hotline, drop-in facilitator, or tutor—are critical to 

helping learners strike and maintain a balance and 

be successful. 

Existing online and hybrid learning options could 

serve as ready platforms for investigations that could 

yield the guidance the field craves for development 

and implementation. Observation studies could demonstrate how adult learners use online content, and 

quasi-experimental studies could document vocabulary, language, and skill acquisition trajectories and 

the types of support that are most beneficial and efficient for different groups of learners. Understanding 

how to design flexible environments that provide the 

elements of skills, content design, and supports to 

serve multiple users’ needs could create new options 

and opportunities for learning, instruction, program 

planning, and content development. 

And finally, the report focused on online, desktopcomputer based learning portals and content. The 

convergence of television, radio, and Internet content as well as the penetration of powerful mobile, 

Internet-enabled personal devices will challenge the 

dominance of this mode. In the United States, mobile 

access is currently estimated at 62% (Pew Internet and 

American Life, 2007) of the adult population and is 

projected to grow. Around the world, offering learning opportunities through cell phones and mobile 

devices is a growing reality with great potential, especially for migratory populations and those without 

the infrastructure to support high-quality desktop 

equipment or broadband Internet connections. 

Online environments engage and inspire adults, 

serve the common adult goal of improving workforce 

readiness, provide authentic communication channels 

that tap into adults’ family and community involvement, and supply an opportunity to engage in selfstudy and informal learning. We have confirmation 

that we are headed in the right direction with the 

inclusion of online technologies for the instruction 

and engagement of adult learners, even those with the 

most limited skills and language proficiencies. What 

the field needs now in is a compass and a few strategic 

landmarks to chart a course forward with online technologies—our learners already inhabit the landscape.
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

35

1. AlphaRoute. (2003). Evaluation of AlphaRoute 

2002–2003: Report on a survey of AlphaRoute 

use in Literacy and Basic Skills delivery agencies. 

Toronto, ON, Canada: AlphaPlus Centre.

2. American Center for the Study of Distance 

Education. (ACSDE). (1999). Critical success 

factors for online learning. Retrieved December 

12, 2006, from http://www.ed.psu.edu/

ACSDE/Critical_Success_Factors.pdf. 

3. Askov, E. N., Johnston, J., Petty, L. I., & Young, S. 

(2003). Expanding access to adult literacy with online 

distance education. Cambridge, MA: National 

Center for the Study of Adult Learning and 

Literacy.

4. Benseman, J., Sutton, A., & Lander, J. (2005). 

Working in the light of evidence, as well as aspiration: A literature review of the best available evidence 

about effective adult literacy, numeracy and language 

teaching. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of 

Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction 

Service No. ED 490618).

5. Birru, M. S., Monaco, V. M., & Charles, L. (2004). 

Internet usage by low-literacy adults seeking 

health information: An observational analysis. 

Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(3). Retrieved 

November 25, 2006, from http://www.jmir.

org/2004/3/e26.

6. Brennan, R., McFadden, M., & Law, E. (2001). 

All that glitters is not gold: Online delivery of education and training. Adelaide, Australia: National 

Centre for Vocational Education Research 

(NCVER). (ERIC Document Reproduction 

Service No. ED 462612).

7. Brookfield, S. (1984). Self-directed adult learning: A critical paradigm. Adult Education Quarterly, 

35(2), 59–71.

8. Carter, J., & Titzell, J. (2003). Technology in today’s 

ABE classroom. Boston, MA: World Education.

9. Center for Impact Research. (2002). What’s new? 

Reaching working adults with English for Speakers of 

Other Languages instruction (ESOL). A best practices 

report. Retrieved May 30, 2007, from http://

www.impactresearch.org/publication/publicationdate.html. 

10. Chapelle, C. A. (2005). Computer-assisted language learning. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: 

Erlbaum Associates.

11. Children’s Partnership. (2002). Online content for low and under-served Americans: An 

issue brief. Washington, DC: Children’s 

Partnership. Retrieved May 30, 2006, from 

http://www.childrenspartnership.org/AM/

Template.cfm?Section=Home§ion=Tec

hnology1&template=/CM/ContentDisplay.

cfm&ContentFileID=1239. 

12. Commonwealth of Australia. 2002. Flexibility 

through online learning: At a glance. Australian 

Flexible Learning Framework. Available at 

http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/flx/go.

13. Condelli, L., & Wrigley, H. S. (2004). Identifying 

promising literacy interventions for adult ESL literacy 

students: A review of the literature. Final draft prepared for the U.S. Department of Education.

14. Cyberstep. (1999a). Evaluation of cyber products: 

Involvement of technology users in product developReferences
National Institute for Literacy

36

ment. Retrieved November 30, 2006, from 

http://www.cyberstep.org/pdfs/evaluation.pdf.

15. Cyberstep. (1999b). Materials development framework for courses targeting low-literacy and limitedEnglish speaking adults. Retrieved November 30, 

2006, from http://www.cyberstep.org/pdfs/

multimedia_devStandards.pdf.

16. Daniels, M., Gillespie, M., Stites, R., & Nelson, 

E. (2004). Project CONNECT final evaluation report. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. 

Retrieved May 30, 2007, from http://

pbslearnenglish.org/learn/summary.pdf. 

17. Day, J. C., Janus, A., & Davis, J. (2005). Computer 

and Internet use in the United States: 2003: Special 

studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Commerce Census Bureau.

18. Eady, M. (2006). Literacy learning at a distance: A 

new approach. Toronto, ON, Canada: AlphaRoute.

19. Florez, M. C. (2000). Finding and evaluating adult ESL resources on the world wide 

web. ERIC Q & A. Washington, DC: National 

Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education. 

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 

ED 445564).

20. Florida Human Resources Development, Inc. 

(1999). Technology and distance learning survey. 

Gainsville, FL: Florida Department of Education. 

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 

ED 452348).

21. Ginsburg, L. (2004). Adult literacy practitioners’ 

readiness to use technology in the classroom: 

A five state survey in 2002–2003. NCAL Policy 

Report. Philadelphia: National Center on Adult 

Literacy. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from http://

www.literacy.org/products/T21SurveyRptjcs14-feb13.pdf. 

22. Harrysson, B., Svensk, A., & Johansson, G. I. 

(2004). How people with developmental disabilities navigate the Internet. British Journal of 

Special Education, 31(3), 138–142.

23. Hawkins, L. (2001). Preparing students to study 

by flexible delivery in the Certificate in Adult 

General Education. In J. Davis & J. Searle (eds.), 

Seeding literacy: Adult educators research their practice. 

Melbourne, Australia: Adult, Community, and 

Further Education Board. (ERIC Document 

Reproduction Service No. ED 458375).

24. Hughes. J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology 

and Teacher Education, 13(2), 277–302.

25. Imel, S., & Jacobson, E. (2006). Distance education and e-learning: New options for adult basic 

and English language education. Research Digest 

No. 4: Technology. Retrieved December 12, 2006, 

from http://www.otan.us/browse/index.cfm?fu

seaction=doc&catid=16756&ref=5573. 

26. Javed, S. (1998). Going online: A research report on 

the use of online technologies by adult literacy teachers and learners. Brisbane, Australia: Australian 

National Training Authority (ERIC Document 

Reproduction Service No. ED 426 187).

27. Johnston, J., Young, S. J., & Petty, L. I. (2001).

National field test of Workplace Essential Skills. Ann 

Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University 

of Michigan. Retrieved November 20, 2007, 

from http://www.projectideal.org/index.html. 

28. Kambouri, M., Mellar, H., & Logan, K. (2006). 

Adult learners and ICT: An intervention study 

in the UK. In Innovative approaches for learning 

and knowledge sharing (pp. 213–226). Heidelberg, 

Germany: Springer Berlin.
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

37

29. Kim, K., Hagedorn, M.,Williamson, J., & 

Chapman, C. (2004). Participation in adult 

education and lifelong learning: 2000–01.

National Household Education Surveys of 

2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction 

Service No. ED 483093).

30. Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin, Y., Boyle, B., Hsu, 

Y., & Dunleavy, E. (2007). Literacy in everyday life: 

Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult 

Literacy (NCES 2007–480). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics.

31. Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin,Y., & Paulsen, 

C. (2006). The health literacy of America’s adults: 

Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult 

Literacy (NCES 2006–483). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics.

32. Lazarus, W., & Mora, F. (2000). Online content for 

low-income and underserved Americans: The digital 

divide’s new frontier. Retrieved May 2, 2007, from 

http://www.childrenspartnership.org/pub/

low_income/index/html. 

33. League of Innovation in the Community 

College. (2005). Basic education online: Identifying 

high-quality developmental education and ESOL 

courses for the open-content environment. Phoenix, 

AZ: League of Innovation in the Community 

College. Retrieved May 30, 2007, from http://

www.league.org.

34. Li, Q., & Edmonds, K. A. (2005). Mathematics 

and at-risk adult learners: Would technology help? Journal of Research on Technology in 

Education, 38, 143–166.

35. Livingstone, D. (1999). Exploring the icebergs 

of adult learning: Findings of the first Canadian 

Survey of informal learning practices. Canadian 

Journal for the Study of Adult Education 13(2), 

49–72.

36. Lock Kunz, J., & Tsoukalas, S. (2000). Riding 

the technology wave: Experiences of literacy students 

and teachers in Ontario. Ottawa, ON: Canadian 

Council on Social Development.

37. Long, E., Kennell, T., Moriarty, M., & Sturm, 

M. (2003). What difference does it make? Literacy 

learner perspectives on Web-based learning with 

AlphaRoute. Toronto, ON: AlphaPlus Centre.

38. MacArthur, C. A. (2001).Technology implementation in special education: Understanding 

teachers’ beliefs, plans, and decisions. In J. 

Woodward & L. Cuban (eds.), Technology, curriculum, and professional development: Adapting schools 

to meet the needs of students with disabilities (pp. 

115–120).Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

39. Mellar, H., Kambouri, M., Sanderson, M., & 

Pavlou, V. (2004). ICT and adult literacy, numeracy, and ESOL. London, England: National 

Research and Development Centre. Retrieved 

November 25, 2006, from http://www.nrdc.

org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=329. 

40. Mellar, H., Kambouri, M., Logan, K., Betts, S., 

Nance, B., & Moriaty, V. (2007). Effective teaching and learning using ICT. London: National 

Research and Development Centre. Retrieved 

June 5, 2007, from http://www.nrdc.org.uk/

content.asp?CategoryID=329. 

41. Migration Policy Institute. (2007). Fact sheet on 

the foreign born: California. Retrieved June 30, 

2007, from http://www.migrationinformation.

org/datahub/state2.cfm?ID=CA.

42. National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES). (2000). What are the barriers to the use 

of advanced telecommunications for students with dis-
National Institute for Literacy

38

abilities in public schools? Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Education: Office of Educational 

Research and Improvement 2000-042.

43. National Center for ESL Literacy Education 

(NCEL). (2002). Uses of technology in adult ESL 

education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department 

of Education: Office of Vocational and Adult 

Education.

44. National Centre for Vocational Education 

and Research (NCVER). (2002). At a glance: 

Flexibility through online learning. Adelaide, 

Australia: National Centre for Vocational 

Education and Research.

45. Nicol, M. M., & Anderson, A. (2000). 

Computer-assisted vs. teacher-directed teaching of numeracy in adults. Journal of Computer 

Assisted Learning, 16, 184–192.

46. Olson, R. B., & Cohen, N. (2000). NIBBLE 

for adult basic education: Website and lessons 

for low-literate learners. Journal of Nutrition 

Education, 32(5), 285–286. 

47. Parke, M., & Tracy-Mumford, F. (2000). How 

states are implementing distance education for adult 

learners. (ERIC Document Reproduction 

Service No. ED 438398).

48. Pew Internet and the American Life Project. 

Trends. Retrieved on April 12, 2008 from 

http://www.pewinternet.org/trends.asp. 

49. Pew Internet and the American Life Project. 

Mobile access to data and information. Retrieved on 

April 12, 2008 from http://www.pewinternet.

org/pdfs/PIP_Mobile.Data.Access.pdf. 

50. Porter, P., & O’Connor, L. (2001). What makes 

distance learning effective? Support mechanisms to 

maximize the impact of distance learning in adult 

education. A report to the Massachusetts ABE 

Distance Learning Project. Retrieved on June 

30, 2007, from http://anywhereanytimeabe.

org/?page_id=26. 

51. Reder, S. (2007). Giving literacy away, again: 

New concepts of promising practice. In A. 

Belzer (ed.), Toward defining and improving quality in adult basic education: Issues and Challenges 

(pp. 255–276). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum 

Associates.

52. Reder, S., & Strawn, C. (2001). Program participation and self-directed learning to improve 

basic skills. Focus on Basics, 4(D), 14–17.

53. Reder, S., & Strawn, C. (2006). Broadening the 

concepts of participation and program support. 

Focus on Basics, 8(C), 6–10.

54. Richmond, M., Thatcher, M., & Porter, P. 

(2005). Studying ESOL online. Focus on Basics, 

7(C), 38–42. 

55. Rivera, N. V. (2003). A study of the effectiveness of LAUSD’s Adult ESL CBET Program. 

Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Unified School 

District Program; Evaluation and Research 

Branch; Planning, Assessment and Research 

Division Publication #163.

56. Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: 

From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

57. Sabatini, J. P. (2001). Designing multimedia 

learning systems for adult learners: Basic skills 

with a workforce emphasis. Philadelphia, PA: 

National Center on Adult Literacy. Retrieved 

November 20, 2007, from http://www.literacyonline.org/index.htm. 

58. Selwyn, N., Gorard, S., & Furlong, J. (2006). 

Adult learning in the digital age. London: 

Routledge.
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

39

59. Silver-Pacuilla, H. (2007). Assistive technology and adult literacy: Access and benefits. In J. 

Comings, B. Garner, & C. Smith (eds.), Review 

of adult learning and literacy, Vol. 7 (pp. 93–136). 

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

60. Silver-Pacuilla, H. (2006). Access and benefits: 

Assistive technology in adult literacy. Journal of 

Adolescent and Adult Literacy 50(2), 114–125.

61. Silver-Pacuilla, H. (2005). Moving toward solutions: Assistive and learning technology for all students. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Technology Innovation. Retrieved June 30, 

2006, from http://www.nationaltechcenter.

org/index.php/2007/03/04/moving-towardsolutions-assistive-and-learning-technology-forall-students/. 

62. Stiles, R., & Porter, D. (2006). The California 

Adult Education 2004–2006 Innovation and 

Alternate Instructional Delivery Program: A review. 

Carson, CA: California State University 

Dominguez Hills College of Extended and 

International Education.

63. U.S. Department of Education, Office of 

Vocational and Adult Education. (2007). Adult 

education facts at a glance. Retrieved November 

20, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/about/

offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/aefacts.html.

64.Wagner, D. A., & Hopey, C. 1998. Literacy, electronic networking, and the Internet. ILI Technical 

Report: TR98-10. Retrieved November 20, 

2007, from http://www.literacyonline.org/

index.htm. 

65.Wrigley, H. S. (2001). Principles and indicators to assist in the development and evaluation of 

technology-based materials: A design framework for 

multimedia development in adult literacy. Retrieved 

November 30, 2006, from http://www.cyberstep.org/principles.html. 
National Institute for Literacy

40

Appendix A: Scenario Shared with Expert Panelists
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

41

POST 1: 

My charge from NIFL has been to investigate the literacy and language proficiency thresholds necessary 

for adults to participate in online learning successfully. Every noun in that sentence is, I realize, loaded 

with assumptions and in need of definition.

My participation on the listserv for the week of 

June 11–15 is to host a discussion with all of you on 

my preliminary findings from the literature as well 

as to solicit your input to the research based on your 

experiences in programs. 

Mariann has been kind enough to let me post a 

request for documentation or background information on the topic through the listserv before, and I 

very much appreciate all the responses and productive 

leads I received about how programs are providing 

learning opportunities to adults not actively involved 

in classes.

Here then, to begin, are preliminary findings (and 

not my full methodology or bibliography since both 

are currently incomplete) from the published and 

posted literature on adult online literacy and language learning. I hope you find them validating or 

provocative (or both!) and can join in a lively discussion of what’s actually happening in your school or 

program.

It is not surprising that few published research studies document independent, self-directed learning—

after all, finding and following independent learners 

on self-chosen tasks is not typical research. Therefore, 

the nets were cast as widely as possible. In the end, 

most of what I found is about computer-assisted and 

online learning that is supplemental to classroom and 

program involvement. The implications of this, of 

course, are that this knowledge is based on learners 

who are already in programs and, as we know, these 

learners represent only a small fraction of the adult 

population with low literacy and English language 

proficiency.

Nevertheless, the findings are useful as an important source of information about the issues and complexities of online learning by adult learners as well as 

offering signposts to where strategic supports could 

prove helpful for learners working with minimal program or teacher/facilitator involvement. 

There are three main areas I would like to share 

with the listserv: program implementation issues, evidence of improvements of basic literacy and language 

skills, and student skills and dispositions associated 

with successful technology-based and online learning. I’ll share them in successive posts through the 

week.

To start, here are some key findings on implementation issues from a review of program and project 

evaluations:

•	 Online learners and teachers need support—pure 

online delivery is not best practice for adult literacy and ESOL learners. Support could include:

Ķ a facilitator at least some time for students, 

Ķ student-to-student communication,

Ķ readily available tech support for both teachers 

and students, and

Ķ a peer group for teachers of distance courses as 

teachers learn the new medium 

•	 Induction programs or computer literacy skills 

pre-requisites set the stage for success 

•	 Students are eager to learn computer literacy skills 

alongside content

Appendix B: Posts to the National Institute for 

Literacy Technology Listserv
National Institute for Literacy

42

•	 Supplemental online learning can be a positive 

option that increases students’ overall improvement, retention, and persistence

•	 The quality of the equipment and the connection—

on both ends—makes a significant difference for 

the success of the experience and all surveys point 

to the realization that most students do not have 

access to high quality computers and broadband 

Internet service nor do programs take learner costs 

(such as connectivity) into consideration.

So, how do these findings correlate with your 

experience and knowledge? Can you share an example that confirms, challenges, or adds to them?

POST 2:

To recap, I am posting preliminary findings (and not 

my full methodology or bibliography since both are 

currently incomplete) from the published and posted 

literature on adult online literacy and language learning. I hope you find them validating or provocative 

(or both!) and can join in a lively discussion of what’s 

actually happening in your school or program. 

This is the second of the three main areas I am 

sharing with the listserv: program implementation 

issues, evidence of improvements of basic literacy 

and language skills, and student skills and dispositions associated with successful technology-based and 

online learning. 

Here are some key findings from the review of 

studies reporting evidence of improvement of basic 

literacy and language skills:

There is growing evidence that adult learners’ 

work with computer-based or online materials that 

are supplemental to adult literacy and ESOL classes 

contributes positively to their overall literacy and 

language acquisition plus complementary learning 

skills. The evaluations reviewed were of supplemental materials available to students with some type of 

program support (on-site trained teacher or support 

person, support person available online, tech support 

available through the program, and/or automated 

feedback system in the program) and varying degrees 

of integration with the regular class curriculum. 

Importantly, the supplemental materials and online 

interfaces were either uniquely developed or chosen 

for adult literacy and language learners. Programs 

have documented successful use of these materials 

with all levels of students, including those with the 

lowest levels of literacy and English proficiency.

Quantifying specific academic skills achievement 

is difficult to pinpoint, but several significant studies 

report learning gains attributable to the supplemental 

use of technology in instruction and practice. It must 

be acknowledged that there is still no “body of evidence” with repeated and comparable studies that can 

definitely answer questions about particular interventions used with particular literacy or language levels 

with predictable results. 

How do these findings correlate with your experience and knowledge? Can you share an example that 

confirms or challenges them? What has been your 

experience with the lowest skilled students?

POST 3:

To recap, I am posting preliminary findings (and not 

my full methodology or bibliography since both are 

currently incomplete) from the published and posted 

literature on adult online literacy and language learning. I hope you find them validating or provocative 

(or both!) and can join in a lively discussion of what’s 

actually happening in your school or program. 

This is the third of three main areas I am sharing 

with the listserv: program implementation issues, evidence of improvements of basic literacy and language 

skills, and student skills and dispositions associated with 

successful computer-assisted and online learning. 

What follows are some key findings from the review 

of studies reporting student skills and dispositions that 

are associated with successful computer-assisted and 

online learning. This area includes a few studies of pilot 

programs closer to the target inquiry into independent 
Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning

43

online learning that looked specifically at students’ performance and skills and dispositions. Self-directedness 

and active learning are repeatedly emphasized as the 

hallmarks of successful online learning in the program 

evaluations and descriptions, no matter the literacy and 

language proficiency levels of the students. 

Most studies’ findings converge to the following list of defining skills and dispositions of successful independent online students published by Askov 

et al. (2003: Expanding Access to Adult Literacy 

with Online Distance Education. Askov, Eunice 

N.; Johnston, Jerome; Petty, Leslie I.; Cambridge, 

Massachusetts, National Center for the Study of 

Adult Learning and Literacy, p. 34): 

•	 “They were employed or actively seeking employment.

•	 They had a clear goal for their participating in the 

program.

•	 They read at a seventh grade level or higher.

•	 They had the ability to organize their time and 

work independently.

•	 They either had a computer at home or easy access 

to a computer at a place they felt comfortable.

•	 They had computer skills that allowed them to 

navigate the site and the Internet.” 

These skills and dispositions reappear in other 

descriptions of successful online learners, including those in Australia (see Flexibility through online 

learning: At a glance (2002), at http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/flx/go) and the United Kingdom 

(see Selwyn, N., Gorard, S. and Furlong, J. Adult 

Learning in the Digital Age [London: Routledge, 

2006]).

Also, a reciprocal relationship seems to emerge: 

technology-based learning environments foster the 

very skills necessary for success (you learn by doing it). 

From the program evaluations come the documentation of gains in personal growth (mainly self-reported 

or teacher-observed) in the following dimensions: 

•	 self-confidence

•	 motivation-retention-persistence

•	 independence and self-directedness

•	 goal directedness

•	 real-world transfer and reinforcement of skill 

acquisition.

Additionally, assisting learners to meet their goal 

to become more computer literate help adult literacy 

and language learners feel a part of the mainstream 

digital and information age. 

How do these findings correlate with your experience and knowledge? Can you share an example that 

confirms or challenges them? How are you involving 

learners new to technology or independent learning 

situations?


1775 I Street, NW; Suite 730

Washington, DC 20006-2401

Phone: 202/233-2025

Fax: 202/233-2050