Return-Path: <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id VAA19204; Sun, 12 Dec 1999 21:06:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 21:06:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <19991213020139.7741.qmail@hotmail.com> 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: "ralph silva" <silva_ralph@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FOBASICS:198] EFFstandards X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: OR In Regie Stite and Sondra Stein's excellent articles, we can follow the history of adult standards development, and get an idea of the inherent problems in standards based learning. What strikes me most concerns the three identified EFF standards; content standards (what adults need to know), performance standards (how much they need to know, and how we measure that), and opportunity-to-learn standards (how we facilitate learning so that there is access and equity). Regie talks about the early demise of OTL standards, and the co-mingling of content standards and performance standards. Here's my question. Are we moving toward a situation in which the careful and painstakingly developed EFF standards will turn into just another set of rigid results check-offs? How do we keep that from happening? Here's another. If you had to eliminate one of the EFF standards categories; content, performance, or OTL, which one would you choose? Why? rs ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 21 2000 - 11:03:59 EDT