Adult Education 1972, A Re-Analysis.

Autor/inn/en	Froomkin, Joseph; und weitere
Institution	Froomkin (Joseph) Inc., Washington, DC.
Titel	Adult Education 1972, A Re-Analysis.
Quelle	(1977), (174 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Adult Education; Adult Programs; Adult Students; Age; Dropout Rate; Educational Background; Educational Demand; Enrollment Rate; Income; National Surveys; Participant Characteristics; Program Length; Statistical Data; Student Characteristics; Student Participation; United States + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Adult; Adults; Education; Adult basic education; Adult training; Erwachsenenbildung; Student; Students; Erwachsenenalter; Studentin; Schüler; Schülerin; Alter; Lebensalter; Vorbildung; Bildungsanforderung; Bildungsnachfrage; Einkommen; Schülermitarbeit; Schülermitwirkung; Studentische Mitbestimmung; USA
Abstract	The survey of adult education conducted by the National Center for Educational Statistics in 1972 is analyzed. The following facts are highlighted in the more detailed analysis of 1972 results: (1) The demand for hours of adult education is distributed in proportion to eligibles in each age and education group, (2) persons with lower levels of either education or income, or both, are likely to enroll in courses of longer duration, and (3) their dropout rate is consequently higher. Hence, it is recommended that special attention be given to restructuring courses for persons with lower levels of education to make them shorter. It is suggested that each module should have "some take home value." It was determined that income does not play as important a role in determining either the propensity to enroll, the number of hours contracted for, or the educational institutions in which adult students enroll. The policy implication of these findings is obvious: Additional subsidies to adult education are not a high priority item. The only possible exception to this generalization is the need to increase training opportunities for young, poor Americans. They are least likely to be trained by employers, and depend a great deal upon public moneys to cover their training costs. (Author/HD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC