[AAACE-NLA] nifl, research, advocacy

[Bonnie Odiorne]

As i've posted somewhere buried in the Evidence-based adult ed principles
discussion, I feel that a "scientific model" may work for the practice of
medicine (diagnosis and prescription)but not in the dynamic multifaceted
adult education populations, especially those hardest to reach and teach. A
kind of triage might be going on here that is quite distressing to those of
us who find adult education a kind of calling or mission of meeting the
needs of those most in need of educational resources and the least likely to
find them. There's little that could "standardize" such populations. NIFL
can play a key role here in developing and disseminating the kind of
"best-practice-based" research that we're so urgently in need of. It's my
understanding that adult ed is a stepchild that is singularly lacking in
valid research studies: please correct me if I'm wrong.
Warmest Regards,
Bonnie Odiorne Ph.D
Program Faciliator
Working Smart
Computers 4 Kids
Silas Bronson Library Information Technology Center
Waterbury, CT
Integrating Technology, ABE and ESL Instruction



-----Original Message-----
From: aaace-nla-bounces at lists.literacytent.org
[mailto:aaace-nla-bounces at lists.literacytent.org]On Behalf Of Janet
Isserlis
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 12:02 PM
To: National Literacy Advocacy List sponsored by AAACE
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