[AAACE-NLA] "Over what period of time..."

[Marie Cora]

Hi Debbie,

Regarding your grant to increase hours of instruction from 3 to 6:  do
you suspect that your adult students simply cannot spend this extra time
away from their busy lives going to the program?  Does the grant
stipulate that the extra hours must be spent "inside the classroom"?  Or
could you find ways to increase the hours using the students' own
schedule outside of class?  For example, could the extra hours be used
for some type of outside homework, project, etc. that enhances their
learning in the classroom?  I'm thinking of:  "keep a log for when and
for how long you read to your children during the week" or "collect all
the materials that you have read this week and bring them to class
prepared to talk about them" - these types of activities.

Marie Cora


-----Original Message-----
From: aaace-nla-bounces at lists.literacytent.org
[mailto:aaace-nla-bounces at lists.literacytent.org] On Behalf Of Debbie
Yoho
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 10:13 AM
To: aaace-nla
Subject: Re: [AAACE-NLA] "Over what period of time..."

As usual, our colleague David Rosen offers sensible, reasonable and
practical suggestions to at least move forward, in this case in regard
to
"duration and intensity".  I think we can all agree that there are
innumerable variables that impact the effectiveness of instruction; in
the
end, people like me, who want to resist standardizing anything we do,
must
compromise in an era when the professional judgement of educators is no
longer credible to funders, the federal government, or even many of our
colleagues. I could actively support a standard of at least 5 hours per
week for a minimum of 20 weeks because it would be a definite
improvement
over the status quo.  If we must reach general agreement within the
field,
and we must, about what constitutes good practice, this suggestion seems
authentic to me, especially because it is based on professional wisdom
and
experience, if not "scienfitic proof".
 
I reiterate my concern, however, that applying good practice to
accountability standards results in stratifying learners so that some,
perhaps many, are in effect denied service. Some are "winnowed out",
given
inadequate funding that is unlikely to ever be sufficient.   For
example,
we recently obtained a grant specifically designed to increase intensity
from our usual 3 hours per week to 6 hours per week.  The majority of
our
learners have been unwilling or unable to commit to this expectation,
and
we are convinced the reason has little to do with instructional
practice.
No doubt the grant will not be renewed.  I suppose this discussion could
evolve into an argument over whether a little education is better than
none.  Regardless of what values we have as teachers and learners, the
prevailing culture is that resources should be concentrated where they
will
quantifiably "do the most good", and some, perhaps many, are not to be
included.  While I and others shall continue to "cry foul", I realize
very
well that we are whistling in the wind.  

This list is about "advocacy".  Sometimes that means compromising
cherished
values in order to create a united front to achieve a specific gain,
such
as amending the NRS standards.  Other times advocacy means "crying foul"
in
the hope that somewhere, someone will hear, and where there is one,
there
may some day be many. Incremental change is better than standing still.

"Turning Pages into Possibilities",  Debbie

Deborah W. Yoho
Director, Turning Pages
    a community service of Volunteers of America Carolinas
   formerly the Greater Columbia Literacy Council
2728 Devine Street,  Columbia, SC  29205
803-765-2555   Fax  803-799-8417   dwyoho at earthlink.net



_______________________________________________
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