Return-Path: <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.0.Beta5/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id KAA11673; Mon, 4 Oct 1999 10:44:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 10:44:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <19991004143923.5967.qmail@hotmail.com> Errors-To: lmann@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: "ralph silva" <silva_ralph@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FOBASICS:142] teaching/funding et al X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: OR Anne's dilemma reflects a widespread sentiment among teachers I know. Let me try to explain the way I see it. Adult ed programs have limited financial resources. Teachers need to spend as much of those resources as possible on direct service to learners(I just can't call them "customers"). Teachers can see outcomes and progress; Improved academic test scores(easy to document), better retention and persistence(not as easy to document to funders, because of learners' changes in situation), improved attitude, appearance, family and social involvement, self-advocacy, etc. etc. etc.(difficult to document in terms funders will accept-do not easily fit into check boxes). Now, when the new RFP comes out, with specific requirements and outcomes, teachers must walk that tightrope between direct service and organizational needs. Maybe learners don't have the time to spend both attending class, and undergoing more assessments, but the central office wants to know when your paperwork will be in, so that the grant money can flow. Help me here, people; is this close? RS ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 21 2000 - 11:03:58 EDT