Return-Path: <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j82JQrG29709; Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <BF3E1ED2.43C7%Janet_Isserlis@brown.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Janet Isserlis <Janet_Isserlis@brown.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FOBASICS:1480] expert X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 782 Lines: 18 I¹m not sure that I¹m not saying what everyone else has been getting at in one way or another, but as has been suggested why not just ask people to talk about something they know how to do, or think they¹re good at doing? Expert is a loaded term, and it seems, in order to get at the question you really want to ask, it¹s not necessary. Many people learners, educators among them shy away from the term; others embrace it. It sounds like you really just want to know what people think they¹re good at doing, are competent at, so why not ask them that? Janet Isserlis > > Here's the question. In your > experience, which I suspect is similar to mine, have you seen areas of > expertise > in your students? Do you think the term "expert" would be problematic?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:49:34 EST