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 IAA05189; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:22:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:22:08 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <v03010d00b483dd0430ec@[128.148.147.28]> 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:201] Re: Who's responsible for what? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Status: OR I wonder if the 'truth' (whatever that may mean) lies somewhere in between. I think of EFF as a compelling framework around which to organize, conceptualize and otherwise sort through the various content pieces within adult education / learning. I think Betsy points out a useful caution - that we not impose outcomes (however they're disguised or framed) upon learners, but rather consider how thinking about the three roles might connect to learners' actual goals and to the educational work we do with learners to reach those goals. This is probably too simplistic, but I'm hoping that others, who are using EFF and/or other standards frameworks, will share their views. Janet Isserlis >Betsy makes an interesting point. Do we run the danger of leaving a rather >heavy footprint on the lives of our learners, when we emphasize EFF >performance standards? May we be imposing a class based framework on them, >and could that have the tendency to drive them away? How about turning the >situation around? Suppose you wanted to take a course in some subject, maybe >a graduate level course. The teacher, in introducing the course says, "We >here at Humongous University want to help you learn this subject, and beyoud >that, we want to help you be better citizens, workers, and family members." >How would YOU react to that? rs > > >>From: "The Cornwell's" <cornwell@megalink.net> >>Reply-To: nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov >>To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-fobasics@literacy.nifl.gov> >>Subject: [NIFL-FOBASICS:199] Who's responsible for what? >>Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:19:18 -0500 (EST) >> >> I would leave out performance standards. I never thought I'd hear >>myself >>saying that but lately I've been thinking a lot about the consequences of >>education. It alters power structures in personal and professional >>relationships and it can be downright dangerous. Unlike school children, >>our adult students have to work out the consequences of their new-found >>knowledge in ongoing real-life critical situations. How many of us have >>seen a long-term relationship break up because one partner suddenly >>realizes that the other isn't doing a very good job of managing the >>family's finances? How many jobs have been lost because an employee's >>education makes him or her seem like a threat to co-workers or bosses? >> Because of that, I've decided that I really don't want to be held >>responsible for what my students do with their newly acquired knowledge. >>They have enough to deal with without having the success of my program >>riding on their decisions regarding employment, welfare, children's >>schooling etc. Performance standards might tempt me to interfere in my >>students' life decisions and I don't think either one of us needs that, >>either. >> The thing that got me started on this was an article by John Comings in >>"the Change Agent." (Sept. 1999) His proposal for assessment seemed to be >>very sane and accessible. >> Now I feel like I've put myself way out on a limb. Am I making >>sense to >>anyone? >> >>Betsy Cornwell >>Northern Oxford County Even Start >>627 Waldo St. >>Rumford ME 04276 >>(207) 364-2012 >>cornwell@megalink.net > >______________________________________________________ >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