Skip to main content

Full text of "ERIC ED378426: Tools for the 21st Century. Southwest Alabama Cooperative Literacy Project. Final Evaluation."

See other formats


DOCUMENT RESUME 

ED 378 426 CE 068 149 



AUTHOR Lipscomb, Judith D. ; Cronin, C. Hines 

TITLE Tools for the 21st Century, Southwest Alabama 

Cooperative Literacy Project . Final Evaluat ion, 
INSTITUTION University of South Alabama, Mobile, 

SPONS AGENCY Office of Vocational and Adult Education (ED), 
Washington, DC* National Workplace Literacy 
Program. 
15 Oct 94 
Sip- 
Reports - Evaluative/Feasibility (142) 

MF01/PC02 Plus Postage- 
Adult Basic Education; Adult Literacy; Basic Skills; 
Competency Based Education; ^Literacy Education; 
Manufacturing Industry; Outcomes of Education; 
'''Partnerships in Education; Program Effectiveness; 
^Regional Programs; *School Business Relationship; 
Tables (Data) 

-Alabama (Southwest); -'Workplace Literacy 



The Southwest Alabama Cooperative Literacy Project 
was a workplace literacy program involving the University of South 
Alabama and seven manufacturing plants in the LeMoyne Industrial 
Complex in southwestern Alabama, The project's primary objective was 
to increase job productivity by teaching both conventional and 
functional literacy skills in reading and mathematics. During the 
project, 26 employees participated in 1 or more sessions of reading 
classes, and 35 employees took 1 or more sessions of math classes. Of 
the 39 participants who completed one or more sessions in reading, 
math, or both, 27 were black males, 2 were black females, and 10 were 
white males. All were between the ages of 35 and 60. The participants 
held diverse positions at their respective plants, such as: welder, 
storeroom worker, pulp handler, operator, millwright, loader, and 
foreman. Fifteen of the 24 participants who completed the reading 
sessions and 21 of the 27 participants who completed the math 
sessions scored 807. or higher on their end-of-session competency 
tests. Follow-up evaluations of the participants 1 job productivity 
were slated for the coming months. Information about the project was 
disseminated through various conferences and publications. (Also 
included are the project's final performance report and nine tables 
summarizing the characteristics of participants in the various 
project classes.) (MN) 



PUB DATE 
NOTE 
PUB TYPE 

EDRS PRICE 
DESCRIPTORS 



IDENTIFIERS 
ABSTRACT 



ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft * ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft 

* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made ,f 
ft from the original document. ,c 

ftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftftft***ftftftft 



F IN AL EVALUAT I ON 



CM 
00 

Q 



TOOLS FOR THE 2 1 ST CENTURY 



Southwest 
Cooperative Li teracy Project 



National Workplace Literacy Program 
U. S. Department of Education 



Submitted To: 



Dr. Sylvia Spann, Project Director 
University of South Alabama 



Submitted By: 

Judith D. Lipscomb, Evaluator 
C. Hines Cronin, Evaluator 



October 15, 1994 



0- 



U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 
0 I,, { L o» [ /lucntmnai ResM'C* nnd iTiprovo'innl 
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION 
/ CENTER 'ERIC) 

h Ihr, Document has neon repriced .r'i 
v tpcc'vod <rv>mtlie person oi orga.^aiion 

onqinntmq it 
□ Minor rh.wqcs have boon mndo In 
improvr topioduclion niminy 



tow*, oi v.rw 01 opinions f.l.nrrt m this 

Ilno.mrnt riua ov.ai.1> .cpm^ 

oll.r.al OF HI portion w pom y 



2 



BEST COPY AVAILABLE 



TOOLS FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 

SUMMARY INFORMATION 



Grant Award: 



U. S. Department of Education 
Literacy Program Grant 



$274,000, 18 month 
1993-1994 



Grant Recipient : 



University of South Alabama 
Department of Developmental Studies 
Mobile, Alabama 



Dr . Sylvia Spann, Director 



Literacy Advisory 
Board Members 



John Green, Zeneca 

Steve Johnson, AKZO 

Rick Weldon, ELF-Atochem 

Chris Butler, Hoeschst-Celanese 

Ed Holmes, Barry Steam Plant 

Lisa Carlisle, Dupont 

Brenda McClure, Courtaulds 



Private Sector 

Participants 



AKZO 

Courtaulds 
Zeneca 



Class Enrollments 



Pilot 

Fall 

Winter 

Spring 

Summer 



12 students 

27 students 

27 students 

25 students 

14 students 



TOTAL: 105 students 



Final Evaluation 



Page 2 



PROJECT ORGANIZATION 



Tools for the 21st Century was a cooperative effort by the 
University of South Alabama and seven manufacturing plants in the 
LaMoyne Industrial Complex, Mobile, Alabama. Dr. Sylvia Spann, 
Project Director, and Ms. Charlotte Matthews, Project Coordinator, 
and an advi.3ory board with training officers from seven industries 
were committed to the project goals, screening, recruiting and 
furnishing job-related information. The Barry Steam Plant 
provided a training site, utilities and furniture in the 
industrial complex area where the plants were located . A 
commitment was evident to achieve a priority need for students to 
master basic literacy skills. With these skills participating 
employers felt confident employees would (1) cope with inevitable 
job changes associated with technology and total quality 
management practices, and (2) pass anticipated standardized tests 
to meet federal guidelines. 



Management Plan 

The University of South Alabama : The University of South 
Alabama, as the educational partner, provided (a) the project 
design and implementation* (b) the instruction, (c) the 
instructional materials, (d) lab and classroom facilities, (e) 
project management, (f) project evaluation, and (g) follow-up 
counseling and consultation. 

The Project Director administered the project, directed 
planning and implementation, and coordinated all activities 
involving instruction, assessment, recruiting and evaluation. The 
Director met on a regular basis with the Literacy Advisory Board 
composed of training officers from each participating partner, the 
Employee Advisory Board, and the Project Training Coordinator. 

The project training coordinator was responsible for 
selection and training of all instructors and tutors, supervised 
all learning lab activities and reviewed instructional material*. 
The project coordinator participated in regular meetings with the 
Project Director and others. 

External evaluators conducted content evaluation, assessed 
job tasks, and performed formative and summative evaluation. The 
project evaluators determined if instructional goals were 
appropriate and that cichievement was measurable. 

The site coordinator for the LeMoyne Industrial Complex 
coordinated all project activities among the seven complex 
members. The site coordinator assisted in literacy audits, 
materials collection, recruiting and scheduling of classes. The 
LeMoyne coordinator also served as a member of the Literacy 
Advisory Board. 



Final Evaluation 



Page 3 



The Literacy Advisory Board, composed of training officers 
from each of the plants in the LeMoyne Industrial Complex served 
as consultants throughout the project. 

Preparation for instruction and project implementation 
followed the proposed task completion schedule: 

• Curriculum development with job-related emphasis in 
literacy instruction for reading and math. 

• Pilot reading and math instruction. 

• Fall, 1993, reading and math classes. 

• Winter, 1993, reading and math classes. 

• Spring, 1994, reading and math classes. 

• Summer, 1994, reading and math classes. 



Oh jeer, i ves : The focus of the project's objectives was to 
increase job productivity by teaching both conventional and 
functional literacy skills in reading and math. 

• Workers show measurable gains in tests of basic math 
skills . 

• Workers show measurable gains in tests of basic language 
skills . 

Employees scoring belcw seventh grade on the ABLE established 
a student target group . A vigorous recruitment act ivity was 
enacted to recruit and instruct employees in the LaMoyne 
Industrial Complex . 



Evaluation : To capture both the qualitative and quantitative 
dimensions of the Project, a holistic model was vised which 
negotiates four major evaluation tasks. These tas^ > addressed 
integration of academic needs for reading and math and job tasks 
as described in job descriptions, employee demographic data, 
policy manuals and site observations and interviews. 

• Determine the degree to which the curriculum design 
reflected workplace-specific literacy improvement needs . 

• Determine the degree to which the proposed learning 
programs were designed to meet partnership specifications. 

• Determine the degree to which the learning programs were 
effective in helping adult learners achieve the desired 
objectives . 



Final Evaluation 



Page 4 



ERIC 



• Determine the degree to which the achievement of lesson 
objectives were related to the attainment of enhancement of 
workplace skills and workplace outcomes , 



Observations 

Employers and Supervisors : What were the expectations of 
employers and supervisors with regard to work and non-related work 
outcomes and with regard to the conduct of the project? 

Upon the completion of the pilot project, training officers 
on the Literacy Advisory Board were committed to the Project 
goals, screening, recruiting, furnishing job related information 
and cooperatively working with the Project Director and staff. 
One industry furnished a training site, utilities, furniture and a 
VCR, The commitment to success was evident. Three industries 
sent employees to participate in the classes. 

The industries training officers emphasized a priority need 
for participants to master basic literacy skills , With these 
skills, they felt confident employees would (1) cope with 
inevitable job changes associated with technology and total 
quality management practices, and (2) pass anticipated 
standardized tests to meet federal guidelines. 

The constraints of class scheduling, varied shift work 
schedules and volunteer participation created a serious 
recruitment problem, A VCR tape was prepared by the Project staff 
to encourage employee par -icipation , The video tape was given 
each training officer and used in the plants as a recruiting tool. 

When the math and reading classes were formed after the 
pilot, employees from three industries enrolled in the classes. 
Three companies provided released time, either full - or half- 
time. The limited participation was attributed to unexpected 
plant problems, management changes, down-sizing of the workforce 
and class schedules. 

The upper management levels of industry partners delegated 
responsibilities of employee participation to training officers. 
The Project Director in collaboration with training officers 
communicated recruiting problems to plant managers and created 
more flexible class schedules responsive to varied work schedules. 

Instructors : What were the instructors ' understanding of 
their roles in the overall success of the project? 

Instructors prioritized teaching academic basic skills in 
reading and math, particularly with regard to skills required for 
participants to successfully achieve reading and math standards, 
enhance job performance and productivity and escalate self esteem. 



Final Evaluation Pa< *« 5 



ERLC 



Instructors were clear about their responsibilities in 
assigned areas of teaching expertise. There was collaborative 
planning to individualized instruction plans for each student. 

ShnHpnt s : Do students understand why they are enrolled in 
the course, what they want from the courses, and what they should 
be learning? 

Students knew that their scores on the ABLE Selectable 
diagnostic test administered at their plants targeted them for 
participation. Whether they knew why they were targeted was not 
evident from the interviews. In regard to academic weaknesses, 
students listed fractions, spelling and vocabulary* Several 
expressed a need for increased skills in order to pass anticipated 
standardized tests . 



Process Of The Project 

Employers and Supervisors : What was the understanding of 
employers' and supervisors' roles in the success of the project? 
Was there a willingness to preside release time or incentives to 
participants, and what were the expectations with regard to 
conduct of the class? 

Zeneca and AKZO required students' attendance and provided 
release time. Courtaulds gave incentives for volunteers to 
participate. Barry Steam Plant furnished the instructional 
facility. 

Training officers and Project staff understood the 
recruitment and enrollment problems, and accepted the challenge of 
finding solutions applicable to each industry partner. 

Instructors : What were instructors' perspectives on the 
training they received, materials they used, curriculum developed, 
record-keeping, and their in-put into the learning process? 

All instructors received three days of training. The manual 
used for this training was compiled by Charlotte Matthews, 
Training Coordinator. Training included an overview of adult 
education and philosophy, information about designing and 
implementing st? te-of-the-art workplace literacy programs, the 
project proposal, samples of a literacy audit, and results from 
industry interviews. From a number of individuals who received 
the training, the following were hired to work in the program — 
Kim Boyles, Bob Houston, Diane Garden, Janice Brown, Sylvia Spann 
in Reading and Larry Brown Jacqueline Wade, Michael Hockey and 
Charlotte Matthews in Math. Michael Hockey was hired as computer 
lab coordinator. 

Instructors employed in the program expressed satisfaction 
;*ith their experience, training, and expertise in assigned subject 
areas . They were ab.\e to conduct the classes and expressed 
general satisfaction with the materials they used . Each 



Final Evaluation 



Page 6 



( 



instructor wrote content-specific lesson plans in either math or 
reading. Lesson plans for each computer lab session were given to 
the lab coordinator who supervised the lab hour "and then 
forwarded print -outs of results to instructors. Instructors and 
the lab supervisor inferred about the lab assignments. From an 
inventory of programs for reading, math and workplace related 
topics, students experienced a broad scope of technology-driven 
learning experiences. 

Individual folders of each student's work were kept for each 
math and reading class. The folders contained diagnostic test 
results, forms indicating which objectives were mastered, and the 
post-tests. Th3 folders also contained information on the 
student's job, educational course of study, student-generated 
work, samples of work-related lessons and teacher comments. 

Instructors were enthusiastic about the project and seemed to 
take genuine interest in the students. 

Students : How did students react to schedules, materials, 
conduct of class, and facilities? 

Students were enthusiastic about the program. No scheduling 
difficulties were mentioned. They seemed to appreciate the 
facility and the computer lab. Instructors mentioned that they 
suspected many of the participants preferred being in class to 
being at work. 

There was absolute acceptance of teacher-assigned materials 
by students. They expressed enjoyment of the class time spent in 
collaboration with other students. Pleasing the teacher and 
following directions were seen as personal accomplishments. 

When asked about improved skills at work or home, they 
expressed more awareness of higher self esteem than concre* - 
benefits at work or home. 

The students stressed their appreciation for the instructors 
who worked with them, and the students .were very enthusiastic 
about the classes and their own progress. 



QutCQmfta of the Pro-ier:*-. 

Emplovers and Supervisors; How did employers and supervisors 
know when goals of the project had been met? 

The Project Director forwarded to each student's training 
officer results of the mastery tests on objectives in either math 
or reading, interpreted these test scores and made recommendations 
for the next course session. Each training officer then decided 
whether or not to reassign a worker to classes. The supervisors 
maintained a commitment to the Project's stated goal of "enhanced 
job performance and productivity". 

Final Evaluation . „ , 



f 
G 



T W .tn,^.nr 8 i How did instructors recognize when the goals 
and objectives of the Project were met? What do current data 
show? 

Each instructor designed and administered a mastery tests for 

g i Vei ?H continue c asses in the succeeding session. The low 
Seg^nning leve^ V E ^y Students made 80% mastery unrealistxc. 

Stndenta : How did the students recognize progress and goal 
atta inment" Was there a realization of applications of new 
knowledge at work? How did the students rate the program? 

Students expressed pleasure in seeing their progress in 
tt&^Ztt-^tE ^^eased wi^their 
progress . 

students' comments included, "I learned fractions and it 
helps me do my job", and «I can read the Bible and pronounce the 
names" . 

deviation i 10.4. So the gain is approximately one-half a 
stan^rd-de^ation -e ave a, f the pr-tj-t ; 

^^.^^^^^^^^^ *o the 
published mean, roughly equivalent >o 8th grade level. 

Of six student scoring le^l I «Gr. ^^""^f Veering 
le^fll-'preVe^, l^sco"^^^^! <Gr. 9-12, on post-test 
(see enclosed scope and sequence chart) . 

<„r^H nradpq reflected student's performance in 
Instructor-assigned grades reuecteu ^ - 4 _ a i „ rafl ps were 

as srgned for 7 9 students. enough classes to be 

e"iuate d d. ^Se" we're^a total of 48 students who were enrolled xn 
one or more classes for a total of 105 partxexpants . 

FTNAT, EILQI PROGRAM 

READING Main 



2 4 

3 3 



80 - 100% 
70 - 79% 
60% (Less) 
No Grade 

*TOTALS: 12 12 



6 4 
1 1 



*The 12 participants in the pilot program were enrolled in 
both reading and math. 



Page 8 



Final Evaluation 



c 



FTNAL ORAOKS RY CYCLE 



GRADES 


FALL 


WINTER 


SPRING 


SUMMER 


TOTAL 


ftft - 100% 


12 


14 


9 


7 


42 


70 - 79% 


5 


4 


4 


4 


17 


69% or Less 


5 


5 


o 
o 


O 

Z 


z u 


Non-Completers 


5. 


1 


1 


l 


n 


TOTALS : 


27 


27 


25 


14 


93 



FT V *AL GRADKS BY CYCLE (Co tnpt fttftrs Only) 





GRADES 


EALL 


WINTER 


SPRING 


SUMMER 


TOTAL 


80 - 


100% 


12 


14 


9 


7 


42 




(55%) 


(61%) 


(43%) 


(54%) 


* (53%) 


70 - 


79% 


5 


4 


4 


4 


17 


69% 


or Less 


5. 


5. 


a 


2 


ZD. 




TOTALS : 


22 


23 


21 


13 


79 



♦Percent of participants completing each cycle who reached 
the stated goal of 80% mastery on the skills in reading or math. 



CONCLUSIONS BASED ON PROJECT EVALUATION 

After careful review and analysis of the data and the 
interviews with employers, instructors, students and the Project 
Director, some conclusions are evident. Summary data are attached 
for all four quarters of reading and math instruction. 



Purpose 

The industry training officers, participants and Project 
staff believed that basic literacy skills were needed by workers. 
With varying degrees of knowledge, they agreed that basic skills 
of math and reading must be mastered before one can move on to 
higher-order processing of information. Mastery of skills in a 
continuum was the curriculum design agreed upon in the hope that 
it will move a student toward the overall goals of literacy and 
enhanced job performance and productivity. 

Three participating companies were faithful to their 
commitment to provide students. However, the number of students 
actually enrolled is lower than the 60 students per quarter 
anticipated at the time the proposal was submitted. 

There was no evidence to support job performance and 
productivity were achieved. Training officers and supervisors 

Page 9 

Final Evaluation 



10 



maintained a strong commitment to literacy training and supported 
continuation of classes after the Project was terminated. 



PrQceaa 

The program of studies was developed using standard texts # and 
adding work-related problems to infuse work relevance into 
lessons. Literacy audits were performed to determine student work 
assignments, team responsibilities and specific academic 
requirements to perform tasks. The curriculum was generalized in 
an attempt to achieve relevancy for all participants. 

Computers were used to provide drill and practice, and the 
lab assignments were relevant to class study or to work-related 
needs . 

Students viewed instructors as "teachers" rather than as 
facilitators in the learning process. They were not partners in 
the determination of their course of study. 



Outcomes 

A good working partnership was established between the 
Project Director and industry partners who agreed to participate. 

The educational facility was pleasant, convenient to the 
workers, and a positive environment, for learning. 

Instructors capable of teaching skills of reading and math 
were hired and trained. 

Anecdotal data indicate that the participants enjoyed the 
classes and appreciated the efforts being made on their behalf. 
The goal of improved self-esteem on the part of the workers was 
met . 

There were no baseline data on job productivity, current 
worker pay status, supervisor's evaluations, or students' own 
views of individual capabilities as a team member. 



pAn*r»l C onclusions 

The Project staff, training officers, supervisors and 
students maintained a strong belief in the relatedness of literate 
employees and job performance. They clearly defined reading and 
math as the basic academic skills needed in the work environment. 

Most students were experienced employees who enjoyed job 
satisfaction and felt no threat of termination because of literacy 



Final Evaluation 



Page 10 



deficiencies. They were capable of coping with academic-related 
problems through team processes and tutorial processes. Those who 
had difficulty reading asked co-workers to explain written 
materials. Others learned through tutoring math skills specific 
to their jobs, but had difficulty transferring or expanding their 
skills to solve new problems. 

Literacy education to achieve mastery levels at grades 8 or 9 
in reading and math required long-term released time. Students, 
with few exceptions, were not willing to voluntarily perform 
additional academic tasks beyond scheduled work time. This was 
further supported by x~>w to no participation in the program from 
plants when released time was not given by management. 

The integration of work tasks and academic mastery to achieve 
literacy was difficult. An effective literacy audit required an 
extensive time requirement to analyze and understand the 
employees ' written job descriptions and real or perceived work 
tasks. The problem was compounded by students' inability to 
formulate relationships among academic expectations and job 
responsibilities — they lacked higher order thinking skills. The 
burden of establishing integrated learning was placed on the 
instructor and curriculum designer to make reading and math 
relevant to the employees' specific work tasks. 

Work schedules in different industrial plants created a 
difficult class scheduling problem. Having a training site in the 
industrial complex was extremely beneficial. Participation was 
constrained by various shift-work schedules and number of 
employees that managers would allow to attend classes on released 
time. Scheduling for individual plants was an obvious need — 
creating schedules appropriate for multiple plants was a major 
problem. 

The Project staff, training officers and students believed 
the Project was successful. Without exception, all recommended 
continuation of classes and efforts to integrate academic and 
work-related skills. They were commixed to focusing on reading 
and math as the most work-related skills needed for employees. 



Final Evaluation 



Page 11 



SOUTHWEST ALABAMA COOPERATIVE LITERACY PROJECT 

Final Performance Report 



1. Compare actual accomplishments to the objective contained in the approved 
application. 

The project's objective was to increase job productivity by teaching both conventional 
and functional literacy skills in reading and math. The learning goals were to make 
measurable gains in tests of basic math and basic language skills* Proficiency was set at 
80% correctness on periodic and final tests* 

Twenty-six employees participated in reading classes one or more sessions. Of the 
twenty-four who completed sessions, fifteen scored 80% 7 or above, on their competency 
exams* 1 

Thirty-five employees took math classes one or more sessions. Of the twenty-seven 
persons who completed sessions, twenty-one scored 80% or above on their competency tests* 

Of the twenty-nine employees participating in the project who completed both the 
SelectABLE pre and post tests, twenty-four showed gains in scores ranging from 1-18 points* 
For a detailed record of performance for each participant, refer to the summary sheets 
attached to the final external evaluation report* Increased job productivity has not been 
measured scientifically, but anecdotal information obtained from team supervisors and 
training managers from the participating plants indicate a positive change* 

Follow-up evaluations of job productivity is scheduled during the coming months* 

2* Refer to the schedule of accomplishments and their target dates contained in the 
approved application and give reasons for slippage in those cases where established 
objectives were not met. Include any corrective measures taken to correct slippage. 

All target dates were met according to the project timeline with the exception of 
selection of other chemical plants for replication* 

We spoke to representatives of other chemical plants in the area and gave them 
information about replicating the workplace program. However, none of the plants 
we contacted have elected to implement a similar project at this time. 

3* Identify the number and characteristics of project participants who completed 
planned project activities and of those who did not, and the outcomes achieved by 
participants who completed project activities. 

Forty-eight employees registered for classes during the project's activities. Fourty- 
four of those registering had been administered the SelectABLE in order to identify grade 
level placement* Ten scored at Level One (grades 1-4); thirty-four scored at Level Two 
(grades 5-8). 



Thirty-nine participants completed one or more sessions in reading, math or both. 
Of this group, twenty-seven were black males, two were black females and ten were white 
males. The age range of this group was 35-60* Job titles were welder, storeroom, pulp 
handler, soda man, operator, spinner, painter, maintenance, production, millwright, loader, 
foreman* Highest grade in school completed ranged from 7th- 12th grade. Twenty-seven 
completed 12th grade, seven completed 11th grade, four completed 10th grade, one 
completed 8th grade and one completed 7th grade (see attached list of job titles and grades 
completed - includes one non-completed). 

Fifteen participants obtained 80% competency in reading and twenty-one participants 
obtained 80% proficiency in math. 

Seven participants registered but failed to complete any session. This group was 
composed of four black males, two white males and one black female. Their ages ranged 
from 37-49. Data is not available on job titles and grades completed for this group. 



4. Report on any dissemination activities. 

Sylvia Spann, project director; Charlotte Matthews, training coordinator; and John 
Green, site coordinator participated in various dissemination activities. A detailed listing 
follows. 

Spann, "Workplace Writing, 11 NCTE Interregional Conference, March 4, 1995, New 
Orleans. 

Matthews, "Developing Math Curriculum for the Workplace," Texas Community and 
Technical College Workforce Education Consortium, Dallas, Texas, May, 1994. 

Matthews, "Developing Math Curriculum for the Workplace," National Association 
for Developmental Education, Kansas City, March, 1994. 

Green and Spann, Tour Company Can Establish Workplace Literacy Classes," 
Mobile Area Trainers and Educators Meeting, Mobile, AL, November 10, 1993. 

Green and Spann, Literacy Workplace Seminar panelists, "Building a Better 
Workforce," Mobile, AL, Oct. 28, 1993. 

Spann, "USA Teaches Workplace Literacy* to Area Industries," USA Midsummer 
Memo . August 19, 1993. 

Matthews and Spann, "The Cooperative Southwest Alabama Literacy Project," 
Alabama NWPL Conference, Montgomery, AL, August 3, 1993. 

Green, "Tools for the Twenty-first Century," The Spotlight (Newsletter of Zeneca, 
Inc.) Vol. 9, 2nd issue, Summer 1993. 



ERLC 



13 



Spann, "USA Joins Effort in Workplace literacy/ Ha ppenings in Higher Education . 
July/August, 1993. 

Spann, "Workplace literacy Grant Awarded to USA, 1 USA Midweek Memo , May 20, 
1993. 

5. Report on any evaluation activities. 

External evaJuators evaluated the pilot program at the end of summer, 1993 and at 
the project's end in November, 1994. 

Participants in each of the five instructional sessions completed evaluations of the 
courses and the instructors. 

Ongoing evaluation of the project occurred throughout the projects in meetings with 
the Literacy Advisory Committee and the Employee Advisory Boards. 

6. Report on any changes in Key personnel* 
There were no changes in Key personnel. 



is 



Job title and Grade Level List 



January 13, 199C 



Job Title 


Grade Level j Count 


Welder 


12 ! 1 


Storeroom 


12 M 


Welder/Pipe Fitter 


10 M 


Pulp Handler 


12 h 

. ^ww~~vw* ,,*.**** ******, *. *~ . *~*~~-*** 


Soda Man 


12 ' |1 


Spinner 


12 |1 


Operator 


11 ! 1 

, , w . ^4 — 


Operator 


12 |1 


Operator 


12 11 


Painter 


12 M 
'»•■» - — 


Operator 


12 |1 


Production 


12 |1 


Maintenance 


12 j1 


Maintenance 


10 h 


Maintenance 


11 |1 


Maintenance 


11 h 


Millwright 


11 (.1 


Maintenance 


8 [l 


Millwright 


12 M 


Operator 


10 |1 


Operator 


12 M 


Operator 


ii2 h 


C/P 


12 ! 1 • 


C/P 


11 GEO |1 


CAVE Operator 


12 M 


Bale Press Operator 


12 |1 


A Operator 


12 }1 


C/P 


12 h 


1st Class Operator 


12 h 


Loader 


in ;i 

W . ^ . ... >■ ...» i 


Loader 


10 |1 


Maintenance 


12 |1 


Forklift Operator 


112 11 


Churn Room Operate 


i! 1 1 ! 1 


Foreman 


12 h 


Maintenance 


i 1 2 i 1 

* * ■ " ****** ******* ■ s» •- ***** . w *~**.* *** 


Maintenance 


12 1 1 


Maintenance 


12 |1 


Maintenance 


i h 


Maintenance 


112 il 


1 40 



16 



o 
co 

CD- 



CO 

c 

CO 
CL 

a 



CO 

CL 



ERJC 



PILOT 


R80 M86 


R70 M69 
R63 M72 


NG 

R68 M34 


[R75 M77 


R55 M90 


R93 M74 


LO : o ! o 
j oo \ oo 

00 \ LO | CO 

co l cd j 
LXjcria: 




RACE 


White 


Black 
Black 


Black 


Black 


Black 


Black 


Black 


Black 
White 
White 




AGE 








o 

CO 


LO 


CD 

LO 



o> 

LO 

i 


| ! 

1 O) \ 05 

i co j 




SEX 


S 


sis 


Li- 








s 


! ! 

- . f ,, —> 




o 




I 












j • 




Chngl 


CO 


i- j 00 


co 

CM 
i 


LO 




CVJ 


1 


t— | 1 CD 
1 1 1 1 "~ 




SEL PO 


CO 


| 

! 

C\J S O) 
00 [ CVJ 




CO 


CVJ 
CO 


o 

CO 




CD j CO ! ^- 

j CVJ { CO 




SEL PR 


CO 


CO j ^~ 

[ 
t 

1 

• 


CO 
CVJ 


CD i CO 
CM j CM 

J 
j 


00 


LO 


r^j o> i lo 

\ \ 

j 1 




PLANT 


Akzo 


Akzo 
Zeneca 


Zeneca 


Zeneca 
Zeneca 


Zeneca 


Zeneca 


Zeneca 
Zeneca 
Zeneca 





CD 
i— 

Q) 

00 

*c 
E 

CO 

o 
c 

CO 

c 

CD 
■D 
3 

00 



CO 
CO 
0> 

O 

c 
c 

CO 
CD 

E 

CO 

c 

E 

3 

O 

o 

CD 

c 

CO 
-C 

o 



o 
< 

a. 



a 
< 



o 



LLI 

a 
< 



LU 



a 



c 
a 



o 
a 

— i 

LU 
C/) 



X 
LU 

CO 



a 
-j 

LU 

V) 



z 
< 



CO j 



IO 


I CO I 
!TT : 


in 

CD 


O 

: 


; o) 


; j 

j CD: 


CD 


; cd 


: C 


t C . 


c 


> c 


: T3 


I'U 2 




i^o 


3 03 


: CO i 


CO 


f CO 


j <D 


: Q> • 


CD 


: Q) 


:cc\az\ 


DC 


;cc 







a> 






0) 




jsC 








o 




o 


i O 




o 


o 




o 




co 


IE 


■ CO 


! 05 


IE 


CO 


CO 




CO 


1 


CD 




.CD 


Icq 




CD 


ICQ 


i 


CD 



in 



co 



CD 00 
— *— 



CM ] 



CD } O 
CO I *— 



CO j 
CO J CM 



t 

o\ o 

N J N 
JsC i JsC 

<i< 



I CM 



CM 2 CD 
CM I CO 



O O 
JsC \JsC 
<f< 



iO 
TTf o 
CD t 



0>! 
2(CC 



CM c ^ CO 



in *m 
co*^ 



LO { j f^. t 00 { CO 



CD } h* 
CM 5 



LO { tJ- 
CO ICO 



CD i O j CO 

in ! 2 I cd 



en; 

C : 



i CD! 



C 



I co 

j CD 



CO I J CO , _ 

(X S^iCC |S 



j co 



JsClJzCljsC 

Of o o 
m jjr j_co 

CDfCiCQ 



JsC \JsC 
O j o 
JO } _co 

mi 2) 



cd « » t : o 
in { co \ co | co 1 



f J cm ! co i co 

CM I CM J CM j y- \ CM 



Ocm|Trrr^(CD!TTfN. 
CO f CM CM i CM i CM : CM ^ CM 



O i O ! 
Nj N: 
JsC \ JsC \. 

<!<{« 



I CM ! 00 ) CO 
I CM ) CM 



o 


o! 


o 


O 


o 


O 


N 




N 




N 


N 


J*. 




JSC 






JsC 


< 


<! 


< 


<! 


< 


< 



I co : co i co 
|XJ !XJ l"C 



CO \ CO I CO 
k- t »— I fc- 

Of O O 



CD| 

c j 

CO f 

0 
cr 



cd|0 
cdJZ 



c t 

CO : *s : 



CM E i r*- 
■ co I 



co i co J in 
CD f cd i 

ice !cr ice 



^ O i jiC \ JsC \ JsC 
O • — : O J O O 
JO : JO [JO j JO 

DQ {5 ! CD ICQ ICQ 



f 
I 
{ 

co I m 
i co 



O i CO J CO 

: co I if)\ co 



cxi ex: a:; 
S o! oj oj «| ffl 



I o 




o 


iCD 




i co 


|2 




12 


i in 


ro i 


}in 


tin 




}C0 


ice 




IDC 



cc 



OlUiCiO .-iO; 

CQiCQicDiai^icQi 



in!cc:^icDi^iTr[cDicDicMicD:CoScD 
Tj-icoiiniCOJiniiniuo; uo { co \ co [ ^ 



\ o ■ co t m 



Tr-micMimfCOtxrtcDjcD 

E — f — - - — s | : h~ 



CD t ^ CM : CM O 
CM ; CO 1 CO : CM I CO 



i <»— > co j i 

( CO J CM • CO i CO 



•!CD{CO!h*{C0:UOlC0JCD:m 
IcMCsj! • — CM J ^ f CM 



03 : i 
CO I CO i CO 

O : C i C 



cos 



NilSHNI 



CO 


CO 


CO 


i 
j 

CO t CO 


o 


CJ 


o 


Ol o 


c 


2 


cy 


0) I CD 


c 


S 




c[ c 








N 


N 


Nl 


NIN 



m 



co! 

Si 

Si 



c 

CO 



o 
a. 

CO 

O 

5 

CO 



CO 

O 
^- 

JO 

5 

00 

^5 

CO 
CO 

_o 

CD 



CO 
0) 



JO 

c 

o 

o 

CD 
CD 

s 

o 



CM 



LU 

o 
< 

a: 



LU 
O 
< 



X 
US 



c 
O 



O 

Ol 



C/) 



DC 

CL 



LU 

C/) 



< 



O : 
O £ CT) 



CT>: 



o i 

CD ( LO 



CD £ CO 
CO i C\J 



0):0 
CM j CO 



o\ O 



o 

(0 



C0?tT 



lo J co 



CO j CO 

CO ; co 



oo i o 

CM I CO 



O: O 
<\<\<\< 



OOIZ CO 2:r^|oo|oo 



CM 



Q) f CD 



COf^r 



TT i CM 



0) 











o 


o 


JZ 


CO 


CO 




CD 


,00 



^3" j LO i 



O) 3 00 «~ I CO 
tT 1 f LO } ^ 



CO i 
CM | 



CO 



C0| 

col 



O) ! 
CM 



o ! o 
<!<! 



i co 



CD i ( 
C03 < 



i CM J 



cd I 

CM i 



CO i 
CM j 



O) } CD J 
CM CO 



O j O 

<!<i 



CM I 
CM | 



lo \ 

CM \ CM 



c 


Oi 


o 


O 


oi o 


' O 


N 




rsi 




rsi } rsi 




< 




<*< 


<l< 


< 



o 



col^r IloIo 
co i I s - o> ! 



O): 
C t 



X3 TJJ.C 
1 CO? 03f *S 
. CD: 0) <0 

CHIlX 2 



5im 



! CM l^r 

: tco 
|2j2 
I co i co 

3 CD £ CD 

icclcc 



D5i D5 

CO E CO 
CD c CD 

CCICC 



O Oi OI O Oi o 
00 {00 jCQ 1 00 } 00 [CD 



LO \ LO • O) o ; v- o> 

co i vr • lo t lo 3 lo ! co 



LO 1 

CO* CO 



N* J CD 
CM 5 CM 



\ CO I CO 

CM CM ■ "~ 

ifi* 



LO 



: CM 1 CO 



00 » r- £ CD 
CM ! — { CM 



to i 

CO : 



oj g 



r-£TT 
LO £ LO 



I LO 



CM j CM 
CO \ CM 



CO i 
CM ! 



eca 


C0£ CO 
O ! CJ 
CD i CD 


c 


c; c 


CD 


CDf CD 


N 





cOjZt^r 



1 CM 
lO) 



1 c 

C0{ 
CO j Q) 



;!£! 

COJ 



SiLriSiSgS 



C i 

CO : 
CD i 
iLX 



O JTT 



LO I CO 
LO : CT> 

cria: 



j oo i 



iLOi 

} CD : 

JLX1 



CO 
ICC 



O O O S[0 
JO 5 _C0 j JO I ^ jjO 

00i00iCQi>!CQ 



if! 
CD J O) I CM I | CO 
LO 5 LO \ CD J CO ! ^3" 



CNJ 



CO 



LOj CO i^T j CD 



^tCOr*- 
CO 1 CM t CO 



LO i CO J O) I LO 
«r- CM f | CM 



CO CO I CO { CO 

CD j O CD i CD : CD 
C \ C\ CZt C 
CD ! CD I CD J CD t CD 

ISJ3N NiNjrsi 



CD 



-H:CM 



CD i 

j 



CO; 



LOt 



col 

Si 

C ! 
CD J 
N 



0) 

ro 
o 

0) 

o 

CL 

T3 
C 
CO 
I 

CD 

cl 

CO 



o 

XI 

"S 
"5 

CO 



in 
c 

CD 
3 



CO 
CO 

o> 
c 
*c 

CO 
CD 



CO 

H 

o 
o 

CD 
O 

c 

CD 
»— 

CD 



ERLC 



CM 



ERIC 



CO t tT 
GO I CO 









r* | 






*CO £ 


"to 


"5 


C f 




<0 t 


2! 


2 


2 


Si 


2 


2; 



o 



CD 

c 
_c 
O 



E CD 

co;$ 



o f CO 
cd f 



212 



s : in 



I 

o I o 

Si | Nl 

t 

<f < 



— i cd 

cd < 



515 



in { co 

LO t 



CO { O 



CD | CO 
CO t CO 


CO 
CM 


1^ 

CO 


CM 


CD 1 
CM ! 


in 

CO 


CD t CO 
CN4 t CNJ 


o 

CO 


CD 
CM 


CM 

CM : 


in f 

CM | 


f^. 

CM 



CO t 
CO i 



^ CP 



o : .tr j c_> 
jo i x: j c 

CO |5ico 



— f in | co 
in { co I t?" 



CO ; CM 

J ro 



o 


o 


Si 


o 


M 






Si 










< 


< 


31 


< 



CD! Si O 
CD ! CJ) j N 



E CO 
5 CD 



) cd 



CD CD 

c ! c 

CO J CO 

0)! o 
CCICC! 



co { co t co > CO 



I CO 



j co 
1 CD 



o 

_ , i Jo 

5 j CD ! 00 i CD j CD i CD 



i 

o 

CO 



U O t OS 
CO 1 CO f CO ) 



co l co I in in t <<r J co 



CM \ CO 
CM f <— 



: co > m 



CD 

I CM 



in ? cm 

CM J CM 



CO 


CO 


CO j 


CO 




"D 


TD i 


~o 






: 




jO 


JO 


CO : 


JO 




k_ 


n I 

3 : 


3 


o : 


o 


O : 


o 


O j 


O 


O! 


O 



cd E in » 

CM \ CO ) CO 



CD f N» i CD 
CM { CM } CM 



CO i 


i 
) 

CO i co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


o ; o 


o 


o 


o 


CD ] 


CD i CD 


CD 


2 


CD 




C | c 








© i 


© t CD 


CD 


CD 


CD 


N 


N!N 


N 


M 


M 



n t Z ! in i 2 < co 1 s 



l CD 



£ j ^ j £ 

CO J c: : CO e CO I CO j m 

siir;2j2i2!a: 



— "O 
~ i CO 



si 



! <D.: S ; 



E in 



i m ! co ■ i co 

: in : O } E CO 
iCCiOU I DC 



U I O j 



E ^ 



CO t _C0 j _co t JO 1 JO [ JO 
CO i CO I CO t CD ! CO I CO 



•*— | rj- J CD | O | CM I 

in i in j in E in i cd • 



i 



CM i CM 
CO I CM 



CM { in J CO : •»— 



O : 
CO : 



» i- I CD 

J CO { 



CO ! S 1 CO i ID j CD 
CM j ! <— i | CM 



! 

CO I CO 

O t o 

CD E CD 

C ! C 

CD f CD 



S! 

CD 



NiN 



O l CO 
CO : CD 



CO i CO : 
M CD : 



s \ 








CD j 




co 


CO 


2S 


-> 


s 


s 



: O 
' CO 



; m 
: CD 



) CO i 
12: 

ico; 
» s ■ 
iCCi 



i CD O : 

co 3 -c co ; 
m!§ 515! 



CO | CD j CO | CD | 

j co i i j 



•is! 



CM \ T 



j f in 

— J -Hi CM 



CM 


CO 


CO 


CM 


o 


CD 


CO 





CO > CO : 



CO' 


CO i 


CO 


CO i 


o . 


O J 


o 




Q) 3 


O i 


CD 


cd ; 


C : 


c i 


c 




cd ; 


CD I 


CD 


5 1 


Nil 


Ml 


N 





,2 

-Q 



o 
O 
CD 

CO 
> 

To 
o 

Gu 

T3 
C 

co 
« 

CD 
>_ 
Q- 

o 

-5 
o 

-D 

"D 

CD 

k— 

s 

"c 

E 
■o 

CO 

o 
c 

JO 

c 

CD 



CO 
CO 

_o 

CD 

E 
"c 

CO 

CD 

£ 

.CO 

c 
£ 

o 

o 

CD 
CD 
C 
CO 



IX 

C3 



O) J 00 



OJ 1 CO 
CO : h- 



* i CO 
o> i r^- e co 



O 

en 



O 



ill 

o 
< 



&\1 



C 













Readi 




Mat 




2 


Mai 


Mai 


Ma' 



: C 



2 

p 

CO 
CO 



C0|M 



CO : LO 
CD i r^- 



!L0 



J CO 
! CO 



o 

CO 



t CO j 

ICC I 



o; o 

cqIcd oq 













o 






o 


o 


CO 


c 




co 


CO 


00 




.XI 


CD 


CD 



O : O 
JO 3 JO 

CD j CD 



o o 

JO j _C0 ? 
CD JOQ i 



is I 



5 



LU 

o 
< 




LO «TT 1 CO j LO j LO 



CD { OJ 
LO CD 



CO i CO 



!0> 
1^5" I 



X 
LU 

cn 



a 



CI 

c 
O 



CVJ5CVJ 
OJjOJ 

i 



I CO 



*— • co ; lo 



} LO t C\J j CO 



OJ } CO { CO j 



o 

a. 

_l 

LU 

CO 



DC 

a 

_J 
LU 



< 



C\J : 
C\J ! 



i C7> 
OJ 



OJ : CO ! CO j CO j C\J 



O r- 

co {cr> 



cd c\j 1 *- j 
^|coico[co j 



: OJ 
t OJ 



CC ■ • co ! CO i 
OJ : OJ i OJ i OJ ' 



CO I CO 
OJ 



O } LO f LO j 

coion*- 



0) E CO 

03 [ JO 
k— t 

oi o 

OiO 



CO C J CO j CO ! CO 
O j O : O J O i O 

CD J CO ! CD i CD t CD 
NiMINiNiN 



CO: CO 

a i a 

<D t <D 
C: C 
CD: CD 
NiN 



CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


o 


o 


Q> 


Q> 


0) 


c 


C 


c 


a> 


0) 


o 


N 


N 


N 



CO CO 

G O 

CD CO 

c c 



C5 

3 

C/) 


1 

e 
t 

t 








i 
i 










i 
i 


1 






i i i 

MM 

..-1 t '- ----^ 


CT) 








i 

\ 
i 






line 






D 

cn 


- t - 

e 
t 

I ; 
















i | 


— i 


n » 

1 








j * 
! 

j | 


Read 








\ 


> 

] 


3 CO 

IS 






SP GI 


I 

CO i 
CO i 


00 




LO 




1 

i 




— — «i 


CT) : 


TT j 


t 

Ico 

£ CO 


3 

; 


CT) 




j i 

> • 
} j 


i 


NG 




NG 


i 

CO i 
CT) j 




' — — 


CT) 






SPR C 


Math 


Math | 


i 


Math j 










Math ; 


Math j 


Math 


| 

j 

! 
i 

| 


Math 


j | 


j \ 

\ \ 




Reading 




Reading 
Reading 




Readinc 






Wl GR 


O : 
O i CT) 
«- IO) 


o 

CO 


CO 
CD 


CO 
CT) 




o 

CO! 


CO 
CO 


o 
z 


| ! 

cojo 

COjZ 


I 

CO i 

; 


I 

Icsj 

r CO 


j 
j 

co: 


\ : j 
! : 
(CD: CT) | 

CT)iZir^! 


\ \ 
! 










io 
; o 

i 


j 


I 
I 






Wl CL 


heading! 
Math"'""!' 


Math 1 


Math j 


Math 




Math 


Math I 

t 


Math j 


Math 
Math 


Math 


Reading 


Math 


* : t 

i ; 

CO \ CD : CO 


j 










Readinc 










FA CL |FA GR 1 




CO 


CsJ 
CT) 








CT) 
CO 




NG 


CO 


1 

to 1 o 
ct) E 


1 

| 


i ; 
t : 
i : 

io! 

CT) ; — | LO 


NG 






ico 

•O) 


ON 


1 


ico 

j CT) 


o j 

CO i 




ON 


£ 
£ 


Reading 


1 
\ 

"5 i 
si 






Math 1 




Reading 


S? 
"6 

CO 
0) 
LX 


Reading 
Reading 
Math 


{ o; co 
i c ; c 

^ I'd I'd 
s co ? co 

CO t 0) : 0) 

S^lcr 


j 

i c 
IS 




Reading 


|Math 


1 


! 

IS 


Reading 


- 


Math 


PILOT 


C 
£ 

t 
£ 


\ \ 
• { 

j l 


CD 
CO 

o 

1 CO 

'rr 








I 
i 
! 




; ) 
: i 
i } 
t \ 
t 

£ j 

| ! 


t : 
t ; 
f : 
j j 

| I 


R70 M69 1 










1 

i 
t 


j 


| 
1 

| 






Chngl Ctl 




• | 

LO i CO j CvJ 
: t ' 

:* \ 

• i 


~co" 












1 j 












bk 




^ \ 








CsJ 


CO 
CsJ 
i 


CO • co 

iCO 
: i 


o 

1 


j j 


OOIOO-tT 


1 CM 

£ > i 
\ 

\ 


CsJ 
CM 


CM \ CM 
COjCM 


00 
1 


LO I CO 
CM I CM 
i : i 


ojcc 

5 CM 

; 1 


i 


CsJ 
CM 
i 


O 


o 


selToT 


CD j CO 
CO ! CM 


1 i 
i i 

co i co i co 

CO : CO I CM 


CO 


r> 

CO 


CsJ 




CO j 


|CM 


: j 
i } 

lo i co ) 

CO j CsJ 1 «- 


t I 

H I 

< ) 

•LOfTri 
:coico; 


I 

I 

i 

ICsJ 

:co 




: CsJ 

I CM 






| 

j 
i 








j 
j 

I 

i ! 


SEL PPI 


CT> : O 
CsJ | CO 

j 


CO O i o 
CM j CO j CO 

i ! 


CO 


: 0> 
:CsJ 


CsJ 
CsJ 


! CO 
; CsJ 


CT) i CO 
CsJjCO 


i CsJ 
CsJ 


O i LO j 
CO • CM j CM 

j \ 

; \ 
\ } 
j > 


; r-- 

:CM 


|CO : 
j CsJ j CsJ 

i | 


CO 


CM 




I CM : CM 
CO \ CM 


CO 


! LO ! CO 
CM [ CM 

j 


i CO 
jCM 


r^- i CM 

:«-]CM 

I 

1 






LU 

o 

.<r 


o ! 

CD I LO 


coItt 


i 

iLO 




\o> 

CO 






LO i CT) 

LO j 


CO 


■ i **" 

: > 
CO i y- j CO 


! LO i LO 1 CT) 
: CO f j LO 


c JCO 




col^- 

iTT i CO 


CO 


[o 
CO I LO 


Io 


Loi^r 

Tf ) CO 




CO 
CO 


RACE), 


Blacki 
Black 


White 
Black 


Blacki 


White 


White! 


White 


White 


White! 
Black! 


Blacki 


White 
Black 
Black 


White 


Black 
Black 
Black 
Black 


Black 


Black 
Black 


Black 


White 
Black 


Black 
Black 


Black 
Black 


1 White 


White 


SEXl 


sis 


SIS 


L 


IS 


Is 


S 


Is 


sis 


S 


slsss 


S 


sis 


j 


s 


is 


sis 


S 


sjs 


SIS 


sis 




S 


PLANT 1 


Akzo 
Akzo 


Akzo 


Akzo f 


Akzo j 


Akzo 1 


;o 

: M 


j 

ol - 


Akzo 
Akzo 


Akzo 1 


Akzo 
Akzo 


Akzo 


Akzo 


Akzo 
Akzo 


Akzo 


lAkzo 


Courtaulds 


Courtaulds 
Courtaulds 


Courtaulds 


Courtaulds 
Courtaulds 


Courtaulds 
Courtaulds 


[Courtaulds 
[Courtaulds 


|H. Ceianese 


|H. Celanese 



cd 

CD 
CO 
Cl 



CO 

2 



< 
D 
O 



ERLC 



00 I CO 



£f£ 

CO f CO 



O i CD 



"5 ? "co 



cp 
co 

CD 



OJ co 



f co : CT> f co 



I CO | CO Q) 



to>!co|0 



| :£ i£| 1 D|.£ 



rlOCl 



N- : CD | Tj" 



j CD: Q5 

-si (0! CO 
J?! <Di 0) 



CM ^ CO t Tf 

co : cd 



CO 



cd jO f co 



rju Lc 

CO i m CO 

2 foe 2 



CO i lO I O * CO 

h- i co • co i in 



CO 



: C : 

: CO ; 
: CD t 
ICC: 



0>j COi D5 
C C : C 

CO CO t CO } ~ 

cd cd i cd JS 

cclaziazIS 



ICO 



i n- i 

i j 



CD r CD 
CVJICvJ 



' ! CO 
• S CM 



1X1 

O -In. 

< LO t LO 



O t o 
JO [JO 

CD (CD 



f co 1 in ; 



CO ^ 



f CD:N. 

i LO i CO 
* LO i CD 

laria: 



t-lT-}T-i»-tT- 



: LO | CM | LO ! CO 



iCMiCM 
{ CO i CO i CM 



CO f CD » 00 ; 
CM CM J CM ; 



{CO 



O : o 
JO i JO 

00 I CD 



CO I CO 
& I CD 
CD t 0) 

rsilrsi 



LL j LL 



CO CO 

U: U 

CD I CD 

C J c 

a> cd 



O ■ i r- 

CO ? {CO 



00 5 » ) f 00 
CM 



LO : LO 



CD f O 
LO i LO 



O : O 
J5 : J5 
CDlCQ 



SIS 



oi oi o 

JO f CO \ CO 

do Icoim 



CO : CO ; CO 
Oi Ot o 
CD J CD f CD 
CjCEC 
CD J CD { CD 

NiNiN 



S | 



:C0 
N. 3 00 I 



CO i CO 



C i 

CO 
CD , 

ari 



O }C0 
00 1 CD 



*C0 I "5 



J CM 
i CD 



I CO 
1 h- 



} CO 



00 f 

CD • 



I ^ CO i 

I LSI 



icoi 

J 00 



} o 

i 00 



!£; 

i CO I 



I CO 



00 i 



J CD i 

iccj 



JCO | 



-r-ICMJ^rir^JCDjCD: 



CD CM | CO : 
— j CO } CM i 



)C0|C0? 



N { O } O) i i 



LO i LO i 
CM: — j 



I CO ; CD I 
( } CO 



|C0:C5 i 



y j CD , 



CO: CO 

CD | CD 
C{ C 
CD | CD 

NlN 



CO J CO 
O: O 
CD : CD 

Ci c 

0)3 CD 

rsjjrsi 



CO CO 

u a 

CD t CD 
Cf C 
CD E CD 

rsifrsi 



CO: CO 
O ! O 
CD J CD 

c 

CD J CD 

fM]fM 



Summary of Pre/Post Selectable Score Differences page 1 



PLANT 


SEX 


RACE 


AGE 


e ci on 
ocL rn 


DEL rU 


Chng 




Akzo 


M I Rlark 


60 


on 

29 


oc i 
OO : 


( 


1 


Akzo 


M \ DlaCK 


C7 

57 


oU 


00 i 
20 : 




1 


Akzo 


M [White 


A O 

43 


oo 

2o 


00 : 
00 : 


c 

0 


1 


Akzo 


[VI i DlaOfV 


A A 

44 


oU 


OO : 


0 


4 

I 


Akzo 


F | Black 


A C 

45 


oU 


2o : 


0 
-2 


1 


Akzo 


M i White 




O 1 
O I 


04 : 


0 


1 

I 


Akzo 


M {White 


39 


29: 


00 i 
OO • 


4 


1 


Akzo 


M 1 White 


A 4 

41 


22: 


OA 5 

24 


2 


4 

1 


Akzo 


M 


| White 


55 


29 


37 


Q 
O 


4 

1 . 


Akzo 


M ! biacK 


48 


22 


12 


- 1 u 


4 

1 


Akzo 


ft i (YA/hi+a 

r~ 


42 


30! 

- n.i 


35 I 


c 
0 


4 

1 


Akzo 


ft i I DU-ly 

M i Black 


51 


251 26 | 


1 


4 

I 


Akzo 


* *t — — 

M ; biacK 


43 


24! 17 




4 

1 


Akzo 


M [White 


35 


27|35 


Q 

O 


4 

1 


Akzo 


M ( DOCK 


45 


26! 


34 


O 
O 


4 

1 


Akzo 


M | Black 




31 


32 


4 

1 


4 

1 


Zeneca 


I M [ Black 


51 


11 


29 


4 a 

1o 


4 

1 


Zeneca 


| M i Black 


57 


28 


29 


i 1 


1 


Zeneca 


IF ! Black 


41 


27 


35 


I 8 


1 


Zeneca 


I M \ Black 


39 


26 


31 


j 5 


1 


Zeneca 


|M | Black 


51 


28 


32 


! 4|1 


Zeneca 


!M \ Black 


54 


7 


[22 


I 15)1 


Zeneca 


! M 1 Black 


56 


18 


|30 


j 12 


i 1 


Zeneca 


| M j Black 


62 


28 


131 


! 3 


1 


Zeneca 


|M j Black 




17 


16 


j -1 


1 


Zeneca 


[m [Black 


43 


30 


32 


I 2 


1 


Zeneca 


|M 1 White 


39 


19 


23 


i 4 


1 


Zeneca 


[m ! Black 


43 


25 


31 


j e 


> 1 


Zeneca 




49 


15 


i 3 1 


I 16 


|1 




|M | White 








j 122i29 



Only includes tho^e who took both pre- and post- tests 

kj JL