Janet,

Very good questions--

What i am understanding about David's  curriculum is that it would 
consist of units that could be plucked from the air..What are the 
strength of EFF?  What are the strengths of David's curriculum?  
Upsides and downsides to each?

How is success measured?  What values are enhanced?

Who puts up the money for each?

How about grassroots support?

Andrea

On Mar 20, 2006, at 9:57 AM, Marie Cora wrote:


> Dear Colleagues,

>

> The following post is in response to comments made by David Rosen on 

> the

> Assessment Discussion List on Sunday, March 19 regarding standards and

> on-line performance assessment.  Thanks, marie

> ----

>

>

> all

>

> A bottom-up, field (practitioner and learner) - represented set of

> standards?  Sounds like EFF, no?  What am I missing here?  We have this

> rich, useful resource in EFF.  Are we talking about starting over?

> Something different?  Don't we have this already?  Aren't some of us

> building on it?

>

> Janet Isserlis

>

>

>>>

>>> 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.

>

> David Rosen

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

>

>

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

> 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

>