Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The GED Scholars Initiative (GEDSI) is a federally funded project of the Ohio Literacy Resource Center at Kent State University (KSU). The Ohio Literacy Resource Center (OLRC) serves as resource center for adult educators and practitioners who provide direct services to adults enrolled in adult basic literacy education (ABLE) classes. The OLRC and the Academic Success Center (ASC), a division of Undergraduate Studies at KSU are the principal partners in the development of the GEDSI. The Initiative is currently being piloted at the Kent and Stark campuses. The GEDSI was established to create and enhance academic, technology, and financial supportive services for GED graduates. This article focuses on females who have obtained their GED and are full‐ or part‐time students at KSU. The women in this study participated in one‐on‐one interviews and a formal questionnaire that included these items: They were homeschooled or dropped out of high school and began a GED program at a later date. The results of this preliminary investigation have led to the establishment of a peer mentor group, a computer lab and technology workshops, a shadowing program for interested GED graduates in the community, and closer collaboration with the GED Scholars at Kent State in the planning for the second year of the federally sponsored Initiative.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Astin

(1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey‐Bass.

Baldwin

(1995). What is the value of a GED? A summary of research. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 416 335.

Chickering

(1969). Education and identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey‐Bass.

Glaser

Strauss

(1967) The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Hashway

R.M.

Baham

Hashway

S.E.

Rogers

(1999). Retaining students in college. Educational Research Quarterly, 1–14.

Hayes

Flannery

D. D.

(2000). Women as learners: The significance of gender in adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass, Inc..

Hock

M.F.

Schumaker

J.B.

Deshler

D.D.

(1995). Training strategic tutors to enhance learner independence. Journal of Developmental Education, 18–22.

Irving

(1999). Falling through the net: Defining the digital divide. Washington DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), U.S. Department of Commerce.

Kopka

Korb

(1996). Women: Education and outcomes. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Ecuation Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

10.

Lederman

M.J.

Ribardo

Ryzewic

S. R.

(1985). Basic skills of entering freshmen: A national survey of policies and perceptions. Journal of Developmental Education, 9, 10–13.

11.

Lincoln

Y.S.

Guba

E.G.

(1994). RSVP: We are pleased to accept your invitation. Evaluation Practice, 13, 179–192.

12.

Ohio Literacy Resource Center . Family literacy fact sheet. Kent, OH: Author. [available online at http://literacy.kent.edu].

13.

Quinn

Haberman

(1986). Are GED certificate holders ready for postsecondary education? Metropolitan Education, 2, 72–82.

14.

Provius

(1969). The discrepancy evaluation model: An approach to program improvement and development. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.

15.

Revenaugh

(2000). Beyond the digital divide: Pathways to equity. Technology and Learning, 20, 38–50.

16.

Rings

Sheets

R. A.

(1991). Student development and metacognition: Foundations for tutor training. Journal of Developmental Education, 15, 30–32.

17.

Rose

(1998). Factors GED students attribute to persistence in postsecondary education. Learning Assistance Review, 3 (1), 40–52.

18.

Rosenthal

(2000). The Clinton‐Gore digital divide proposal. Technology and Learning, 20, 10–11.

19.

Smith

M.C.

Locke

S.G.

(1999). From GED to college: Perspectives, practices, and goals of GED students and GED recipients. Research and Training in Developmental Education, 16 (1), 49–55.

20.

Tinto

(1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45, 89–125.

GED Scholars Initiative at Kent State University “ Inspiring the inspired ”

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References