Preface

I originally wrote Motivation and the Adult New Reader: Becoming Literate at the Bob Steele Reading Center in 1994. Through the intervening years I have made modest revisions in the text. While maintaining the overall structure of the original essay, this current version is a substantial revision of the initial piece. When I took on the project the program's primary sources were limited to a single book of student essays, one volume of a projected three-volume oral history collection, and an instructional log and collection of brief interviews, which are no longer extant. Since that time, an additional collection of student essays was completed as well as the three-volume oral history collection that Literacy Volunteers of Greater Hartford (LVGH) undertook in collaboration with Trinity College, funded through a Connecticut Humanities Council grant. In addition, my colleagues and I completed a two-volume collection of interviews, titled Dialogues in Literacy that specifically focused on the learning history of 19 students. I incorporated data from these sources into this revision. I also freely added sections from my published articles, particularly in Chapters One, Three, Six, and Seven.

In this revision, I focus on four areas. First, I incorporate more extensive case presentation examples of student learning and motivation throughout the study. Second, I include tutor perspectives, particularly in Chapter Seven. Third, I seek to more systematically integrate the work within the educational philosopher John Dewey's concept of "growth" and broader pragmatic theory of knowledge, which has informed my published articles on adult literacy. Fourth, I add a more formal description of methodological issues in the latter sections of Chapter Seven to strengthen the briefer, initial discussion in Chapter One. Stemming from my academic training in the discipline of history, I tend to focus on the content of a study rather than give special attention to methodology. This is premised on the assumption that solid evidence, which speaks for itself, is required in order to make a convincing case. From this perspective, a work should be evaluated on its overall coherence, which includes the validity of the data upon which it is based. While I continue to adhere to this premise, given the importance of methodology in current discussions of educational research, I felt a formal discussion of this topic was warranted.

I am pleased to acknowledge the support of many people, particularly the students and volunteer tutors of the Bob Steele Reading Center, with whom I worked, from 1987-1996. Without their participation the program could not have developed and this study could never have been written. I would especially like to acknowledge the following people for their exceptional contribution to the Center and to the broader work of LVGH: Ingrid Arroyo, Jane Brosnan, Tom Eysmans, Jennifer Fiske, Patricia Franklin, Teri Fuller, Allison Gruner, Doris Anne Hauptman, Cheryl Johnson, Patrick Ladd, Sheila Lehman, Derrick Matthews, Allsion Parks, Judy Pronsky, Maureen Swift, Brenda Rogeveen, , Suzanne Shaw, Sharon Smith.