Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h26DpuP01614; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 08:51:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 08:51:56 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <000201c2e3e6$fa05e9f0$0000a398@girlscomputer02> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "sissy kegley" <skegley@us.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:8747] RE: NIFL's Policy X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2334 Lines: 66 I am in agreement with Ujwala's well-articulated message. Having heard from the moderators and others that this topic had dragged on long enough, I thought it was best to remain silent. But to reiterate, I believe Ujwala has made some important observations. Sissy Kegley skegley@us.net 301-588-4333 -----Original Message----- From: nifl-esl@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-esl@nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Ujwala Samant Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 7:51 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-ESL:8745] RE: NIFL's Policy >>Is your sense of proportion a bit skewed here? Are your priorities straight, given all that is going on in the world right now? I ask that you moderate and lead discussions and stop censoring the list. It's that simple. Also, you might all be a bit more honest about what happened instead of dumping on one person who became upset (he didn't use words like 'asinine' or 'troublemaker', two others did). The individual became upset at the whining, upset at the dishonesty, and upset about the censorship. At least that is what he said in a post offlist. << I am inclined to agree with you. I think the censorship and banning has been arbitrarily done. All the initial exchanges seemed inflammatory from one direction, and the responses were always polite. Then came the arrogant, rude replies which went unchecked. That unfortunately seems to be the tone of any debate that includes politics, on or off line. How people can imagine that all they do is teach a language without the context of politics, given our population, is either an expression of naiveté or an expression of their ostrichlike tendencies. We talk Freire and do something entirely different in our practice. We critique academics for not being in touch with reality, and then turn around and do exactly the same thing. We are not teaching high school students English as a subject, as one does Spanish or French. We're teaching adults to speak the language of power, the language that will help them negotiate this new culture, which especially in today's world, is rife with political innuendo. Or are we teaching discrete, isolated skills sans context? Language teaching is not some sanitised K-12 scenario where we teach grammar, history in sequences, with no connection to the reality of learners' lives. regards Ujwala Samant
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:15:47 EST