I just finished reading the emails related to this discussion.  Personally, I'm not sure I like fast track programs at all although I understand the dire need some of our students are in when it comes to attaining their GED. It's almost as if it's a competition to "complete" the most students, especially when like in NC, we are moving to performance based funding.  The number of GED Graduates has a direct impact on the amount of funding received. If what I've learned is correct, not only does it affect the funding we have at the state level but also at the federal level. With this kind of pressure, programs are bound to feel a strong need to "complete" a student - regardless of how and in some cases to how well educated the student leaves the program.  

That said, I think there is a need for a "fast track" in some cases. It really depends on the needs and goals of the student.  That doesn't mean an instructor should sacrifice "knowledge" for a "test". I agree with Dr. Mumford comments in that students often are in such a hurry to "finish" that they rush and end up not having learned anything. Sometimes that "rush" feeling is prompted by outside factors out side of the school or basic skills program. I've encountered Department of Social Services workers who want a student to finish in X number of weeks or hours and who have no knowledge or understanding that a student may not be academically ready to do so. They don't understand that a student coming into a program at  say a 3.9 or 5.1 TABE level may or may not be able to learn everything they need to know in such a short time span. I've encountered colleagues who commented that if  I was worried about completion numbers and had DSS students in my class, that if I called the social worker they'd pull them out of class and replace them with someone who would finish. For me, it's not all about numbers. I understand and respect the need to meet performance standards as it relates to funding but I'm more concerned with ensuring that my students leave my class with SKILLs not just to pass the GED Test but to make them successful beyond my class whether they go to college or whether they enter the workforce.

Each student that comes into my class has his or her own individual goals and needs. If I know a student does not plan to immediately attend college but rather to enter the workforce,  and depending on the assessment outcomes of instructor made assessment material other than the TABE, I will work to move a student as quickly as he or she demonstrates capability.  I definitely don't want to hinder a student from putting a roof over his or her head or finding a job, at the same time, I want them to be able to move beyond a low paying, low skill minimum wage job. If they don't have a solid foundation academically, even if they are stopping with the GED - they are limited in terms of accessing or attaining their full potential.

AT the moment, it feels like there is no balance and a definite lack of understanding by those that develop state and national policies  for the process and barriers faced by an adult learner.  There seems to be a disconnect between the classroom and the policies themselves. 

We require students to pass the Official GED Practice test. I have found that the Practice Test is a good indicator of a students ability to pass the GED test. My school requires that a student attain a 500 or better on the practice test - this guideline is flexible to some degree.  In the long run, I have been able to see that the stronger a person's practice test score the better he/she peforms on the actual test, not all the time but the majority of the time. Conversely, the weaker a student's practice test scores, the weaker he/she may do.  

While there may be a need to want to see student's "employed" and "completed"  one of the goals should also to develop an "educated citizenry" that can actively shape his or her own future and the lives of those they are around - to educate people to be active participants in their community, schools, churches etc....to educate students to the voices they do have and to teach them to use that voice proactively in their own lives and the lives of their families - it's about giving students the necessary skills to succeed in MULTIPLE facets of their lives.  It's NOT just about "passing the test".  Without real knowledge - without giving our students the skills they need to think critically, analytically etc - we are doing them a disservice.  If all we're after is fast tracking them towards a "GED" certificate - it would seem to me, we're only applying a band aid to the problems associated with low literacy skills.

That's my two cents on the issue.