[AAACE-NLA] nifl, research, advocacy

[Art LaChance]

Janet,

Some of the very best "research" that I've seen has come directly from the
classroom via Practitioner Research projects supported by the State and
organized by state colleges.

>From my personal perspective, research into adult literacy that doesn't
emanate directly from an actual adult literacy classroom over time in
locales like rural GA, middle PA, rural KY, where the student body is
structured IAW federal funding formula ie 80% below approx 8th grade skill
levels in at least one subject, with broad student backgrounds and ages, is
meaningless.
To assume that adult literacy classes in a community college remedial math
classroom is representative of the whole is crazy.   Unfortunately, I
haven't seen very much valid investigation recognized and what has been
published is being overlooked and labeled as anecdotal, apparently because
it doesn't fit into the narrow expectations of the controlling agent(s).

It appears that what the controlling agents are looking for is a remedy for
a problem that has yet to be identified.   The problem is being generated
within the K12 arena and there are multitudes of adult literacy
practitioners literally fixing the problem with techniques that work yet
which may not fit into the narrow confines of accepted practice.   To think
that there is only one method for teaching math or reading is ludicrous, and
to assume that flawed K12 practices should be utilized at the adult level is
likewise.

You must ask yourself if I'm the crazy one or is somebody else looking in
the wrong area with the wrong base assumptions of adult literacy.  If we
knew where the answer was why haven't we remedied the problem ?

What is NIFL's purpose and how will they get there ?  Or not.

Art



Art LaChance
Gilmer Learning Center
Ellijay, GA





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Janet Isserlis" <Janet_Isserlis at brown.edu>
To: "National Literacy Advocacy List sponsored by AAACE"
<aaace-nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 12:01 PM
Subject: [AAACE-NLA] nifl, research, advocacy


> Dear all,
>
> (with apologies for cross-posting, but with keen interest in
> responses from as broad a group of educators as possible c-- this is
> being sent to all NIFL lists.  This list may be a place to ask deeper
> questions and to not only ask, but work towards an advocacy-oriented
> response, or set of responses so that individuals and programs might
> be able to act in ways that enable us to use research in aid of (and
> not as a barrier to) doing the work we need to do.
>
>
> There are many reasons for us to continue to support the critically
> important work of NIFL, including its focus on adult  learning.  In a
> recent conversation with a legislative aide, a practitioner reported
> that the aide said "that he didn't necessarily  see
> 'researched-based' [practice/teaching] as a problem [for adult
> literacy practitioners], as he put it, 'that means you just have
> studies showing that what you do works, and you don't just go
> doing whatever you want to do'."
>
> What are these 'studies'?  What passes for research that informs our
> work, what research 'counts' to legislative people and who will
> ultimately decide what counts for programs that receive federal
> funding?
>
> What do you think about that? If NIFL were to change, to
> provide resources only on scientifically-based reading research
> practices, how  would that impact adult literacy and basic
> education?What does this mean to you?   Do you see that  as posing a
> problem?  What are the implications in terms of our work of all of
> the above - both as professional development workers and as classroom
> teachers?
>
> Janet Isserlis
> _______________________________________________
> AAACE-NLA mailing list: AAACE-NLA at lists.literacytent.org
> http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/aaace-nla
> LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
> http://literacytent.org