NLA Discussion: EFF and policy

[Sally Gabb]

Dear all - 

I assume that those familiar with this dialogue realize my point 
in speaking to the dangers of narrowly interpreting EFF.  I am thoroughly 
familiar with EFF, and have led an effort in my agency to integrate our 
curriculum with this useful paradigm.  However, like any piece of written 
material, it is open to misinterpretation, narrowing, etc.  My comments were 
meant to recognize the importance of working with the EFF materials in as 
broad and creative a way possible, not to  in any way dismiss its 
importance.  I stand by my comments - that there is a danger that by having 
three 'roles'. and a heavy emphasis on utilitarian functions, the very 
issues brought up by Richard can be lost, especially when there is pressure 
to be more narrowly accountable. It is indeed our challenge to be sure that 
creativity and spirituality are not sacrificed to these efforts.  

Sal


>From: "Sue Barton" <sbarton at i-plus.net>
>Reply-To: nla at europe.std.com
>To: nla at world.std.com
>Subject: NLA Discussion: EFF and policy
>Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 16:50:28 -0500
>
>Obviously Sally is not familiar with all that EFF is or she wouldn't
>have made this statement:
>
> >...the real issue here, to me, is insuring that a paradigm such as EFF
> >doesn't become institutionalized in a way that narrows the definitions
> >for what we can do creatively in our classrooms, but rather provides
> >enriching and thought provoking guidelines for us as partners in the
> >educational dialogue.
>
>Good job Rich Krawiec in steering the conversation back to common sense.
>
>Sue Barton
>
>Sue C. Barton
>AffilE8ted
>sbarton at i-plus.net
>Radford, VA 24141
>
>
>
>
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com