Hello, Tom!

Yup, it is definitely summer vacation.

I think you are right, too, about putting  the focus on learning.  
Learning is actually growth, up through a series of cognitive steps, 
down which the student falls  when  a new problem to be solved comes 
along.  Growth really does mean going from  the  concrete to the more 
abstract.  Every new problem, it's  the same.  We're all like that when 
we try to solve problems.

Happy summer.

Andrea

On Jul 15, 2006, at 12:53 AM, Woods wrote:


> It must be summer vacation time or something. Otherwise we wouldn't 

> have

> time to contemplate the vagaries of our terminology. Still, this

> discussion has been enlightening for me because it has exposed the 

> roots

> of some of our educational traditions and assumptions. For instance,

> there is the gender issue. There is the idea that children need to be

> treated differently than adults when it comes to educating them. There

> is the idea of "leading" towards greater knowledge, implying an active

> role for a teacher and placing the teacher out in front.

>

> I find these assumptions rather troubling, although they help me

> understand how our present educational system has gotten where it is.

> What I find troubling is that both pedagogy and andragogy are used to

> signify the study of teaching rather than the study of learning. My

> personal philosophy of education defines learning as growth and that

> learning, not teaching, is the most important thing. I prefer to see my

> role as being one of helper, not leader. I can help students shape 

> their

> goals; I can provide resources and experiences that will help them 

> reach

> their goals. But I feel it is extremely important for me, and my

> students, to remember they are not MY goals.

>

> It is so easy to get on the wrong track and begin to try to get the

> student to adopt the teacher's or the institution's goals. It could 

> look

> like enrolling a student in a class that doesn't have enough students 

> in

> it to make it viable. It could look like "teaching to the test" in 

> order

> to show measurable progress. It could take any of dozens of other 

> forms.

>

> The study of teaching automatically puts the activity of the teacher

> front and center. I believe the study of learning puts the focus where

> it belongs, on the learner. It has been my experience that when you can

> center on learning and on the student, it cures a host of ills. Maybe

> the term epistemology, is closer to what I'm after.

>

> Tom Woods

> Community High School of Vermont

>

>  Muro, Andres wrote:

>

>> The discussion about calling the difference between children and adult

>> education different things is purely rhetorical. The question is not

>> about how to name the approach, but to determine what the differences

>> are. It really doesn't matter if we call it pedagogy, andragogy or 

>> adult

>> education. I prefer pedagogy for many reasons. One is that it is the

>> term most accepted worldwide. The other reason is because it is the 

>> term

>> used by Freirians whom I sympathize with. When Freire wrote the 

>> Pedagogy

>> of the Oppressed and subsequently many literacy campaigns were 

>> launched

>> in poor countries, the focus was on adult education.

>>

>> Regarding the differences between children and adults there are things

>> that remain a mystery. We know that the child's brain and the adult

>> brain are different because one is growing and the other fully formed.

>> We know that there is a critical time when children begin to acquire

>> language that is essential in language acquisition. However, beyond

>> that, we know some things may work with children. It is not clear if 

>> the

>> language acquisition processes that work with children apply to adults

>> because there hasn't been much research done with adults. However, we

>> can report from our experience and, scientifically, until our

>> experiences and finding for children are challenged by different

>> findings for adults, I will use some of the findings for children and

>> will try to apply them to adults.

>>

>> For example, the work done by Cummins on native and second language

>> acquisition and Basic interpersonal communication skills and cognitive

>> academic language skills (BICS vs CALPS) has been done with children.

>> However, I have used this model with adults with great success and

>> experiences from others who report on this clearly support Cummins.

>> Essentially the argument is that people can acquire academic skills 

>> in a

>> language after they have basic interpersonal communication skills in

>> that language. Academic skills from L1 can then transfer to L2. So,

>> after learning about this I switched from doing ESL to doing Spanish 

>> GED

>> with our Spanish speaking adults. The result has been that they 

>> quickly

>> acquire academic skills in Spanish and then they can transfer them to

>> ESL.

>>

>> I think that the most comprehensive work on reading acquisition comes

>> from Frank Smith and it is based on children. However, w/o going into

>> detail, I've found most of Smiths work on reading acquisition 

>> certainly

>> applies to adults.

>>

>> Carol Chomsky's five stages of reading acquisition were formulated 

>> with

>> children. In my experience, they certainly apply to adults.

>>

>> Of course, there are sociological, physiological and psychological

>> factors that affect learning. These represent variables that are often

>> not accounted for when studying language acquisition and are variables

>> that are hard to isolate for scientific research. These include 

>> poverty,

>> race, gender, culture, disability, health, relationships, self esteem,

>> resistance, etc.

>>

>> When using a language acquisition model with a group of learners and 

>> it

>> doesn't work, we need to wonder if it didn't work because it wasn't 

>> the

>> appropriate model, or because a variable, not accounted for, 

>> interfered

>> with acquisition. Using one of Kozol's examples, if a child has a

>> toothache and doesn't learn with a given approach, is the approach

>> wrong? Or, maybe it is the fact that the pain does not allow him to

>> concentrate. Another example: If a battered woman is not learning, is

>> the approach a bad one, or the external circumstances are the 

>> obstacle.

>> Finally, considering these sort of variables, are interventions to

>> address these sort of variables elements that needs to be integrated

>> into the approach or are they separate from the approach. To me, the

>> greatest contribution of Freire and other critical pedagogists is the

>> idea that any approach must address variables in context. In fact the

>> intervention for the specific variable is the essence of any  

>> approach.

>> In other words, the intervention for the specific variable may even be

>> more important than the approach itself. However, this is difficult to

>> study scientifically and requires that we step outside the confines of

>> positive science.

>>

>> What do you all think?

>>

>> Andres

>>

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: focusonbasics-bounces at nifl.gov

>> [mailto:focusonbasics-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Andrea Wilder

>> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 6:02 PM

>> To: The Focus on Basics Discussion List

>> Subject: [FocusOnBasics 428] Re: pedagogy/andragogy

>>

>> OK, I want to tuck something in here, it is not quite a response to 

>> Tom

>> because I don't yet have one.  But I will this fall, I hope.

>>

>> The brain comes "online" at regular intervals up to I believe 25 

>> years.

>> A child's brain is very different from an adult's brain.  A lot has

>> been made of the frontal lobe in adolescents--it hasn't matured yet,

>> which "accounts'"f or aspects of adolescent thinking.

>>

>> Beyond this, it seems that the speed of processing may increase up to

>> 60 years of age.  Speed is dependent on the  fatty coating of myelin

>> around the  nerves--fat speeds  electro-chemical impulses.  We "think"

>> using electrochemical neuron hook-ups.

>>

>> Much conscious learning takes the form of puzzle solving.  This is 

>> true

>> of how children learn to raad, I don't know if there is yet a

>> description of how adults learn to read.  I DON'T mean all that stuff

>> about  fluency, comprehension the way it  is usually talked about and

>> measured.

>>

>> I DO  mean the study by Ferreiro and Teberosky, "Literacy Before

>> Schooling."  Andres, you manly fellow, listen up!  The research was

>> done in Buenos Aries, from 1974-1976.

>>

>> Fischer  et al has done studies of adult learning ( students who are

>> adults) and come up with the same puzzle solving data.  Fischer can

>> graph his stuff--computer modeling.

>>

>> Andrea

>>

>>

>> On Jul 13, 2006, at 11:17 AM, Julie McKinney wrote:

>>

>>

>>

>>> Hi Everyone,

>>>

>>> I am passing on this message from Tom Sticht>

>>>

>>> Julie

>>>

>>> **********************************************************

>>> Colleagues: My Google search found that the term andragogy was

>>> originally

>>> formulated by a German teacher, Alexander Kapp, in 1833. He used it 

>>> to

>>> describe elements of Plato's education theory. Andragogy (andr-

>>>

>>>

>> meaning

>>

>>

>>> 'man') could be contrasted with pedagogy (paid- meaning 'child' and

>>> agogos

>>> meaning 'leading'). Following is a long two part note that makes

>>> distinctions between the cognitive processes of children and adults

>>>

>>>

>> and

>>

>>

>>> the

>>> reasons why teaching methods for the former may not be generally

>>> transferable to adults across the years. The first note calls

>>>

>>>

>> attention

>>

>>

>>> to

>>> how the present government activities are pushing adult education 

>>> more

>>> and

>>> more into the mold of childhood education. The second note 

>>> illustrates

>>> with

>>> the National Assessment of Adult Literacy that it is not valid across

>>> the

>>> age range from 16 to 90 years. The human cognitive system changes

>>> dramatically with age and this is one reason why approaches to

>>> education

>>> based on children's approaches are not transferable across the life

>>> span.

>>> As children grow into adulthood pedagogy should be transformed into

>>> andragogy (andra- considered now as meaning "adult" rather than "man"

>>> in

>>> keeping with the idea that language constantly changes and new

>>> functions

>>> are found for old forms).

>>> Tom Sticht

>>>

>>> Part 1. In Adult Literacy Education: Must Andragogy Recapitulate

>>> Pedagogy?

>>>

>>> In many industrialized nations today there appears to be a movement 

>>> in

>>> adult

>>> basic skills education to have andragogy, defined as theories and

>>> methods

>>> for teaching adults, recapitulate pedagogy, defined as theories and

>>> methods

>>> for teaching children. This is suggested by many ideas and actions

>>>

>>>

>> that

>>

>>

>>> are

>>> being initiated in adult literacy education.

>>>

>>> For instance, in many cases adult literacy education is thought of as

>>>

>>>

>> a

>>

>>

>>> "second chance" at learning what should have been learned in the

>>> primary

>>> grades of school. In this case, then, it seems to be assumed that

>>> adults

>>> should be taught the "3 Rs" in the same way that children are taught

>>> them.

>>> Indeed, in the United States the National Institute for Literacy

>>> (www.nifl.gov) includes web pages on the "scientific basis" for

>>> teaching

>>> adults to read that are based primarily on research in the K-12 grade

>>> school system. The focus is on teaching alphabetics (phonics,

>>>

>>>

>> decoding,

>>

>>

>>> word recognition) and reading comprehension in the same way that

>>> children

>>> are taught.

>>>

>>> The U. S. Department of Education has created a National Reporting

>>> System

>>> for adult literacy education that has requirements for programs to

>>>

>>>

>> show

>>

>>

>>> how

>>> adults learning literacy progress upward through levels of 

>>> proficiency

>>> with

>>> each level being about equal to two "grade levels" of proficiency, as

>>> though adults in literacy programs are recapitulating  grade school.

>>> Such

>>> an approach is also found in the United Kingdom with adults in basic

>>> skills

>>> education expected to progress up to the same sorts of skills as

>>> children in

>>> the primary grades acquire.

>>>

>>> Further, adult literacy programs are often asked to measure progress

>>>

>>>

>> in

>>

>>

>>> adult learning in their programs using standardized tests that are

>>> based

>>> on

>>> methods used in measuring progress in the grade schools. In some

>>>

>>>

>> cases,

>>

>>

>>> adult literacy development is stated in terms of gain in reading 

>>> grade

>>> levels, as if adults were going to school for six hours a day for 180

>>> or

>>> so

>>> days a years to make a year's gain in reading or other basic skills.

>>>

>>> One consequence of this belief that andragogy should recapitulate

>>> pedagogy

>>> is that a great misunderstanding of adult literacy education occurs.

>>>

>>>

>> In

>>

>>

>>> particular, there is a tendency for policymakers and funding agencies

>>> to

>>> think that adult literacy education is the same as children's 

>>> literacy

>>> education and that may lead to the idea that, instead of investing

>>>

>>>

>> much

>>

>>

>>> by

>>> way of resources into adult literacy education, we will be better

>>> served

>>> by

>>> "stopping the problem at the source" and focussing instead upon young

>>> children to prevent adult literacy problems.

>>>

>>> However, such an approach fails to recognize that, in thirty years of

>>> trying, and after spending over a trillion dollars in preventing

>>> reading failure in the public schools, recent data from the U. S.

>>> National

>>> Center for Education Statistics for the years from 1971 to 2004 show

>>> that

>>> reading scores for 9, 13, and 17 years old have remained about the

>>> same,

>>> with some up and down fluctuations over the years. So up to now, at

>>> least

>>> in  the U. S., there has not been much success in "stopping the

>>>

>>>

>> problem

>>

>>

>>> at

>>> the source."

>>>

>>> Also, the belief that andragogy ought to recapitulate pedagogy in

>>> literacy

>>> education fails to recognize that while the teaching of basic skills

>>>

>>>

>> as

>>

>>

>>> abstract "skills" may follow the same practices as for adults, the

>>> "content" in which the basic skills instruction is embedded should 

>>> not

>>> be

>>> the same as for children. Over one hundred years of adult literacy

>>> practice

>>> has provided professional wisdom indicating that adults should be

>>> taught

>>> in

>>> a "functional context," meaning that the content used to teach

>>>

>>>

>> reading,

>>

>>

>>> writing, and arithmetic ought to reflect the kinds of daily needs 

>>> that

>>> adults face.

>>>

>>> This showed itself in World Wars I and II during which time soldiers

>>> were

>>> taught to read using materials that embedded basic skills instruction

>>> with

>>> important military information. This type of taking account of 

>>> adult's

>>> functional contexts does occur in many adult literacy programs today

>>> where

>>> materials of importance to adults, such as what to do in case of

>>> spousal

>>> abuse, what kinds of health problems adults might be facing with

>>> themselves

>>> or their children, how to deal with consumer fraud, workplace demands

>>> for

>>> basic skills, and on and on are used to teach literacy.

>>>

>>> The fact that the "content" of adult literacy programs is so 

>>> different

>>> from

>>> that of primary grade children reflects attention to andragogy. But

>>> when

>>> the focus is on abstract "skills" devoid of any particular content,

>>> literacy instruction for adults begins to recapitulate the pedagogy 

>>> of

>>> children.

>>>

>>> There is a need today for adult literacy educators to stand up for

>>> andragogy

>>> and to insist upon the rights of adult literacy students to have 

>>> their

>>> education focussed upon their current life circumstances. There is

>>> evidence

>>> to suggest that this will not only make adult literacy learning more

>>> desirable and palatable for adults, it can also lead to greater rates

>>> of

>>> participation, retention, better learning, and greater transfer from

>>> the

>>> classroom to the world in which the adults live outside the 

>>> classroom.

>>>

>>>

>>> Part 2. Fluid and Crystallized Literacy Assessment and Development

>>>

>>>

>> With

>>

>>

>>> Adults:

>>> Challenges to the Validity of the 2003 National Assessment of Adult

>>> Literacy

>>> (NAAL)

>>>

>>> The disinction between the "skills' and "content" aspects of 

>>> education

>>> has

>>> revealed itself in psychometric research on intelligence over the 

>>> last

>>> half

>>> century. This research has

>>> resulted in a trend to draw a distinction between the knowledge 

>>> aspect

>>> and

>>> the processing skills aspects of intelligence. Beginning in the 1940s

>>> and

>>> continuing up to the 1990s, Raymond Cattell and various 

>>> collaborators,

>>> and

>>> later many independent investigators, made the distinction between

>>> "fluid

>>> intelligence" and "crystallized intelligence." Cattell stated, "Fluid

>>> intelligence is involved in tests that have very little cultural

>>> content,

>>> whereas crystallized intelligence loads abilities that have obviously

>>> been

>>> acquired, such as verbal and numerical ability, mechanical aptitude,

>>> social

>>> skills, and so on. The age curve of these two abilities is quite

>>> different.

>>> They both increase up to the age of about 15 or 16, and slightly

>>> thereafter, to the early 20s perhaps. But thereafter fluid

>>>

>>>

>> intelligence

>>

>>

>>> steadily declines whereas crystallized intelligence stays high" (p.

>>> 23).

>>>

>>> Cognitive psychologists have re-framed the "fluid" and "crystallized"

>>> aspects of cognition into a model of a human cognitive system made-up

>>> of

>>> a

>>> long term memory which constitutes a knowledge base ("crystallized

>>> intelligence") for the person, a working memory which engages various

>>> processes ("fluid intelligence") that are going on at a given time

>>> using

>>> information picked-up from both the long term memory's knowledge base

>>> and

>>> a sensory system that picks-up information from the external world

>>>

>>>

>> that

>>

>>

>>> the

>>> person is in. Today, over forty years of research has validated the

>>> usefulness of this simple three-part model for thinking about human

>>> cognition.

>>>

>>> The model is important because it helps to develop a theory of

>>>

>>>

>> literacy

>>

>>

>>> as

>>> information processing skills (reading as decoding printed to spoken

>>> language) and comprehension (using the knowledge base to create

>>> meaning)

>>> that can inform the development of new knowledge-based assessment

>>>

>>>

>> tools

>>

>>

>>> and new approaches to adult education.

>>>

>>> The International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS), the National Adult

>>> Literacy Survey (NALS) of 1993 and the new 2003 National Assessment 

>>> of

>>> Adult

>>> Literacy  (NAAL) all used "real world" tasks that are complex

>>> information

>>> processing

>>> tasks that engage unknown mixtures of knowledge and processes. For

>>>

>>>

>> this

>>

>>

>>> reason it is not clear what they assess or what their instructional

>>> implications are.

>>>

>>> Colleagues and I used the simple model of the human cognitive system

>>> given

>>> above to analyze performance on the NALS. It was  concluded that the

>>> NALS

>>> places large demands on working memory processes  ("fluid

>>> intelligence")

>>> and that is what may account for some of the large declines in

>>> performance

>>> by older adults. To test this hypothesis, an assessment of knowledge

>>> ("crystallized intelligence") was developed and

>>> used to assess adult's cultural knowledge of vocabulary, authors,

>>> magazines

>>> and famous people.. The results showed clearly that  younger adults

>>>

>>>

>> did

>>

>>

>>> better on the NALS with its heavy emphasis on working memory 

>>> processes

>>> ("fluid literacy") and older adults did better than younger adults on

>>> the

>>> knowledge base ("crystallized literacy") assessment .

>>>

>>> Given the differences between younger and older adults on "fluid

>>> literacy"

>>> and "crystallized literacy"  there is reason to question the validity

>>> of

>>> using "real world" tasks like those on the Prose, Document and

>>> Quantitative

>>> scales of the IALS, NALS, and  NAAL to represent the literacy

>>>

>>>

>> abilities

>>

>>

>>> of

>>> adults. In general, when assessing the literacy of adults, it seems

>>> wise

>>> to

>>> keep in mind the differences between working memory or "fluid" 

>>> aspects

>>> of

>>> literacy, such as fluency in reading with its emphasis upon 

>>> efficiency

>>> of

>>> processing, and the "crystallized" or knowledge base aspects of

>>> reading.

>>>

>>> It is also important to keep in mind these differences between fluid

>>> and

>>> crystallized literacy in teaching and learning. While it is possible

>>>

>>>

>> to

>>

>>

>>> teach knowledge, such as vocabulary, facts, principles, concepts, and

>>> rules, it is not possible to directly teach fluid processing. 

>>> Fluidity

>>> of

>>> information processing, such as fluency in reading, cannot be 

>>> directly

>>> taught. Rather, it must be developed through extensive, guided,

>>> practice.

>>> Though I know of no research on this theoretical framework regarding

>>> the

>>> differences between fluid and crystallized literacy and instructional

>>> practices in adult literacy programs, it can be hypothesized that all

>>> learners are likely to make much faster improvements in crystallized

>>> literacy than in fluid literacy, and this should be especially true

>>>

>>>

>> for

>>

>>

>>> older learners, especially those over 45 to 50 years of a

>>>

>>> Note; For references to fluid and crystallized intelligence  see

>>>

>>>

>> Beyond

>>

>>

>>> 2000

>>> by Thomas Sticht downloadable online at

>>> http://www.nald.ca/fulltext/beyond/Beyond.PDF

>>>

>>> Thomas G. Sticht

>>> International Consultant in Adult Education

>>> 2062 Valley View Blvd.

>>> El Cajon, CA 92019-2059

>>> Tel/fax: 96190 444-9133

>>> Email: tsticht at aznet.net

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Julie McKinney

>>> Discussion List Moderator

>>> World Education/NCSALL

>>> jmckinney at worlded.org

>>>

>>> ----------------------------------------------------

>>> National Institute for Literacy

>>> Focus on Basics mailing list

>>> FocusOnBasics at nifl.gov

>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/focusonbasics

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>> ----------------------------------------------------

>> National Institute for Literacy

>> Focus on Basics mailing list

>> FocusOnBasics at nifl.gov

>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to

>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/focusonbasics

>>

>> ----------------------------------------------------

>> National Institute for Literacy

>> Focus on Basics mailing list

>> FocusOnBasics at nifl.gov

>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to 

>> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/focusonbasics

>>

>>

>>

>>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Focus on Basics mailing list

> FocusOnBasics at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to 

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/focusonbasics

>