Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h43CJUU14414; Sat, 3 May 2003 08:19:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 3 May 2003 08:19:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3EB1BA91@gsemail> Errors-To: alcrsb@langate.gsu.edu Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: cubanso <cubanso@gse.harvard.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:2567] Re: research question X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: WebMail (Hydra) SMTP v3.62 Status: O Content-Length: 4581 Lines: 93 Daphne, I think what I would do is give the husband a brief "courtesy call" back acknowledging his calls, and tell him you have a policy of only dealing with the participant themselves, not other adults, unless there are some extenuating circumstances by which the designated research participant is unable or disabled from conversing with you (of course this is legalese and there are other ways to tell him). Also I would explain the role and importance of confidentiality in the research. This way, it isn't portrayed as a "personal" issue about her or him, but a research one. Since the bottom line is to keep the woman participating in the program (and it sounds like she is not at the moment), and it sounds like she may be staying out as a result of the invitation (but we don't know this for sure), a courtesy call briefly explaining confidentiality, might open the door to her coming back. I think her participation in the research should be secondary. It may be that participating in the study is just too difficult or threatening for her at the moment. I am glad you brought up the issue of recruiting research participants. This is a complex dilemma. Sondra and THEN to participate in the research if she can, >===== Original Message From nifl-womenlit@nifl.gov ===== >Daphne, I am supportive of women's rights and equality of treatment >under the law and I would not interact with her husband if I thought >the purpose of it was for him to exercise control over her. Assuming >that the woman is able to understand for herself and able to >communicate with you, and assuming that you cannot just continue to >ignore his phone calls, I'd let him know that you respect the right >of confidentiality with all students and cannot discuss her with him >unless the two of them would care to come by for a joint >consultation. //I have an analogy for you. Part of my working week >is spent as Executive Director of a small ballet company and school. >Every now and then we get a young woman (legally of age) who >auditions on her own for admittance to the company, and then suddenly >a father calls us and starts laying down demands and otherwise trying >to interfere. We make it clear to the student and the parent that we >will deal only with the student if she is to remain with the company. >It'll be interesting to hear what you decided to do and how it worked >out. Gail S > >>As many of you are aware, I received an NICHD/NIFL/OVAE sponsored >>grant to study the effectiveness of different reading instructional >>approaches with adults who read between the 3rd and 5th grade >>levels. In a previous post I mentioned, that as issues came up, I >>would share them for feedback with this group. >>Something recently came up and I invite feedback. >>We screen students who are interested in being part of the study, by >>administering a few reading tests. If they read within the required >>range (3rd -5th grade) we invite them to be part of the study. >>Potential students are given my telephone number to call if they >>have any questions/concerns. One day, when I returned to my office a >>few hours after screening a student, and telling her that she had >>qualified, I hear a message on my voice mail from her husband >>wanting me to call him back to tell him about the program. I didn't >>know what to do. I did not ask nor receive permission from this >>student to talk to anyone about her. I decided not to call and to >>try to talk to the student and ask her what she wanted me to do. For >>a few days I looked for her at the adult literacy program and she >>was not in attendance. In the meantime, her husband called everyday, >>leaving a voicemail message for me. >>Before I tell you my concerns about calling/not calling her husband, >>and before I tell you what I did, I am wondering if anyone feels >>like sharing what your concerns may be if any, and if you would have >>called him back. >>Daphne >> >>Daphne Greenberg >>Associate Director >>Center for the Study of Adult Literacy >>MSC 6A0360 >>Georgia State University >>33 Gilmer Street SE Unit 6 >>Atlanta, GA 30303-3086 >>phone: 404-651-0127 >>fax:404-651-4901 >>dgreenberg@gsu.edu > > >-- >Gail Spangenberg >President >Council for Advancement of Adult Literacy >1221 Avenue of the Americas - 50th Fl >New York, NY 10020 >212-512-2362, fax 212-512-2610 Sondra Cuban NCSALL, National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy Harvard University, Graduate School of Education 101 Nichols House, 7 Appian Way Cambridge, MA 02138 (617) 495-1712 sondra_cuban@harvard.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:17:47 EST