[NLA] Discussion: NIFL and the Big Picture

[AWilder106@aol.com]

Dear George,

I think the NCL adult lit policy as described by Jon Randell is based on what 
can be accomplished at this time.  It seems sensible and well-grounded and I 
hope it works.  By 'working" I mean that NIFL is able to move ahead with 
research on adult literacy, support for learning disabilities, EFF, and other 
ventures that I have only a shadowy knowledge of.

Some points raised by your post of August 1, 2001.

1)  Our wider national context right now includes a financial market fall 
which  affects everyone in the country except those who live by barter in 
areas with adequate rainfall.  Our involvement in various unstable world 
hotspots, a potential war in Iraq, a slow economic recovery here, and 
globalization which will take (as  n example) American jobs linked to autos 
to other countries where wages are lower.  That is, the country has money 
problems and job threats and therefore unemployment and less real income for 
many.

When you write about "core ideals" v. "interest politics," and scold "the fie
ld" for not doing enough or not rising to the challenge, I think you are out 
of touch with the realities that many people in and out of the field are 
dealing with right now.

2)  When you talk about "Bush ideals" I wonder what in heavens name you are 
referring to, on the ground, that I can see that represents "ideals."  
Privatizing social security has just popped up again, in this financial 
climate.  The only ideal I can see at work here is the systematic enrichment 
of investment advisors who would gain by increased business.  

3)  You write about ideals as though they are separate from politics and as 
though this is desirable.  To accomplish ideals you need money, and money is 
power and power is politics.  

4)  EFF--and this is a real question--where is it written that EFF is adult 
literacy's flagship?  Was it created to be a flagship?  I need a little info, 
here.

5)  You need to give specific, concrete, examples of the "balanced theory of 
reading,"  which you then link to a theory you explain, and show how it is an 
advance on other reading theories.  A model of what you are talking about 
would help, specifically for those of us doing research and others who 
struggle in the field.  Reading is the center of what are here for.

6)  Phonemic awareness is at the center of reading skill.  It links sound, 
what we hear, to symbol, the agreed upon symbolic, written code that we use 
for "reading." Everybody in the hearing community who reads has this 
knowledge of sound and code, whether the readers have been *explicitly* 
taught this or whether they have picked it up on their own. (I don't know how 
deaf learners are taught.)

Now, "phonemic awareness" itself has become a code phrase used in different 
learning communities to signify almost opposite meanings. It seems as 
polarizing as "whole language." 

I do not mean to be either a grouch or to open up a large discussion of any 
of the issues I brought up; though others may wish to launch an extended 
conversation, I do not, I have miles to go....and undone work.  I do mean to 
elaborate a bit on what was written in your post.

Andrea


_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org