I think David has a good, basic overall plan here.  I wouldn't say the 
plan is top-down either.  I think it recognizes that there is push today 
to be able to look at success across states and throughout the country, 
and for that we need a way to connect our local efforts into a national 
system.  Think globally; act locally -- as always the best politics and 
the best basis for a system of adult ed.  But my sense is that, right 
now, funders are in favor of such a national system, but most 
practitioners are not.  Because, really, the benefits of such a system 
are largely for the funders, policy makers, and big-picture people; for 
the instructor and learner in the classroom, what is the impact of it?  
How does it matter that what I need to learn and am mastering to get a 
job in RI is also what someone needs to learn and master to enter a 
community college in AL?  It may be interesting, but what does it matter?

I also think that many of the standards, curriculum and assessment 
pieces already exist.  If one has the time -- and right now it takes 
time, believe me -- to peruse and ferret the web, you can find a wealth 
of excellent curricula that is the start of a "comprehensive, 
modularized [curriculum], available in generic as well as 
work-contextualized units, in English".  Much of it "available in free 
online in units that teachers could download and use in their 
classrooms, that tutors could use with their one-one-one or smallgroup 
instruction".  We use several items for our EL Civics, ESL listening and 
ABE math curriculua that are from the web.  The weakest link for us is 
"material in self-instructional formats that adult learners can use 
directly online."  There's a lot of print stuff that's been transferred 
to the web, put it's not exciting or constructivist enough to engage 
self-directed learners, unless they are high level readers and highly 
self-motivated.

So, I think we could get there more quickly than we might think, but 
only if most of us really want to get there at all.

 From a sincere, big-picture kind-of-guy,
Howard D.






 
David Rosen wrote:


>Assessment Colleagues,

>

>Marie wrote:

>  

>

>>What do we need?  National standards?  Is that the most important  

>>thing that will help combat these issues?

>>

>>A different way to capture learning?  What would that look like?   

>>Remember that the needs of the funder and public are quite  

>>different than the needs of the teacher and student – and both are  

>>legitimate needs.

>>

>>What are your thoughts on these issues?

>>    

>>

>

>Ignore for the moment the current political political realities, and  

>consider just the merits and faults, not the practicalities, of what  

>I propose, a national System of Adult Education and Literacy which  

>has three aligned components: National Curriculum Standards, (Free)  

>National Curricula, and Standardized Assessments.  Such a system  

>could have other components, but for now, I suggest we look at these  

>three.

>

>1. Sets of national curriculum standards for: a) adult ESL/ESOL/ELL,  

>b) ABE (including adult basic education) c) ASE (adult secondary  

>education/GED/EDP/ADP) and d) Transition to College programs ,  

>developed through a process which is widely respected by the field.  

>(Some would argue that we already have that in Equipped for the Future.)

>

>2. National curricula developed based on those standards and  

>available for states to adopt (or adapt) as they choose.  The  

>curricula need to be comprehensive, modularized, available in generic  

>as well as work-contextualized units, in English but also bilingual  

>in Spanish and possibly other languages.  It needs to be available  

>free online in units that teachers could download and use in their  

>classrooms, that tutors could use with their one-one-one or small  

>group instruction, and in self-instructional formats that adult  

>learners could use directly online.  (Yes I know how big a task all  

>this is.)

>

>3. Standardized assessments developed against the national curriculum  

>standards (tests, but also performance-based, direct assessments)  

>which have a high degree of validity for measuring the national  

>standards.

>

>Some might think that what I propose is too top-down.  I would argue  

>that it could be very bottom-up if the field -- and adult learner  

>leaders -- are/have been/will be well-represented in setting the  

>standards, and if the modules can be be selected to meet specific  

>learner goals and contexts as well as to the standards.  A national  

>curriculum could be made up of a database of thousands of units of  

>instruction (modules, learning objects) which could be very easily  

>found and in minutes organized/reorganized to fit learners' goals and  

>contexts.  An adult learner or a group who need to improve their  

>reading skills and who are interested in the context of parenting  

>could easily access standards-based modules on parenting issues with  

>reading materials at the right level(s).  A teacher whose students  

>worked in health care and who needed to improve their math skills  

>could quickly find and download materials/lessons for using numeracy  

>in health care settings. A student who wanted to learn online and who  

>wanted a job in environmental cleanup work could access standards- 

>based basic skills/occupational education lessons in this area,  

>accompanied by an online career coach and and online tutor.  These  

>examples just hint at the complexity and sophistication of what I  

>propose, and will have some shaking their heads at the cost.  But,  

>consider that if this is a national curriculum, the costs of  

>developing such modules have the benefits of scale, that those  

>curricula could be widely used -- and freely available.  (Sorry  

>publishers, this could eat into your profits.)

>

>There is more, but I'll stop with this.

>

>Okay, let the questions and brickbats fly.

>

>David J. Rosen

>djrosen at comcast.net

>

>-------------------------------

>National Institute for Literacy

>Assessment mailing list

>Assessment at nifl.gov

>To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/assessment

>

>  

>