[NLA] flying behind radar

[Catherine King]

Colleagues:

I "second" George's comments about the problem of
policy makers not only disregarding EFF, but the
possibility of that disregard being rooted in the 
de-ligitimation of both constructive and liberation
research methods that EFF has its methodological 
feet in.

Though brilliant statistics have their place, they are
modeled on the data of the natural science; whereas
interpretive-constructive and liberation methods are
developed with humans-as-data in mind.

All three methods are appropriate depending on the 
kinds of questions we want answered.  None are worth 
anything without researchers participating in self-critique 
and peer-review from ALL sides.  And "hard" statistics
**used alone** always overlook the human element, as 
well as the researchers' dialogal import on the research
subjects, not to mention overlooking the implicit point of 
view of the researcher--the view that imports on the very 
form and nature of the questions that are being asked of
human data.  Sometimes this doesn't matter; but at other
times, it is devastatingly destructive in the import of its 
oversights. 

For all the good statistics do (and they do), the fuller and
more comprehensive (and therefore more real and true) 
view is represented by EFF, its  methods, and its writers' 
willingness to inquire about the depth and quality of human 
life, as well as the researchers' import on that research.

If unwitting policy-makers are indeed in the older, 
now-considered-naive mind frame with regard to one-horse 
methods, then EFF will be, and probably has been, shut out 
at the starter's gate even by those who have the best 
interests of AELS in mind.

Regards,

Catherine King
----- Original Message ----- 
From: George E. Demetrion <sophocles5 at juno.com>
To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 9:12 AM
Subject: [NLA] flying behind radar


> Colleagues:
> 
> Has anyone from MA or elsewhere heard from Senator Kennedy's office about
> the field's concerns on the NIFL board nominees?  The sense that I'm
> getting is that this is a non-issue for the Health, Education, and Human
> Services Committee, if I have its name right, perhaps the most liberal
> committee in the Senate that include the likes of Dodd, Wellstone,
> Harkin, and Clinton.
> 
> If that is the case, that would be most unfortunate.  My sense is that
> Kennedy brokered a compromise deal with Bush on education to get some of
> what he wanted, financial resources for impoverished urban schools. 
> Perhaps the Committee, not necessarily looking in depth at the underlying
> presuppositions of the Bush-led USDOE, have missed some of the
> ideological undertones of the Department's pronouncements on
> "evidence-based" research, phonics, character education, and the
> promotion of "traditional" U.S. history.  
> 
> Perhaps the Committee had also missed the polemical dismissal of
> educational scholarship in placing scientists in supervisory positions
> over educational proposals seeking funding.  Thus, perhaps the Committee
> only views the compromise as simply agreeing to compulsory standardized
> testing and have missed some of the more deeply rooted Rightward turnings
> of the USDOE. 
> 
>  Perhaps the Committee has missed that the great transformation proposed
> by and for the USDOE reflects a potent neo-conservative ideology
> reflective of the view of Lynn Cheney, .E.D. Hirsch, Jr. and others.
> 
> In any event, perhaps the Committee is missing the connection between
> these factors and the NIFL board nominees, to say nothing of the
> appointment of the next NIFL Director.
> 
> A final observation.  
> 
> Part of the "ideology" that neo-conservative educational policy makers
> critique is that of constructivism.  They do not view the positivistic
> empirical research tradition as ideology but as legitimate (the only
> legitimate) science. Constructivism is not viewed as a legitimate
> research/theoretical position, but a form of  value laden subjectivism
> which has infected the progressive educational establishment. 
> Neo-conservative ideologues seek to eradicate or marginalize such
> influence from public education.  To what exact degree the current USDOE
> is operating under these neo-conservative precepts, I do not know, but in
> reading the documents and reading between the lines, it is reasonable to
> assume that the neo-conservative influence is strong.
> 
> In short, what is up for challenge with the NIFL appointees (Board and
> Director) is the very viability of constructivist-based education, which
> in our field can be codified in three short letters, EFF.
> 
> Though I'm assuming that the Committee members are not necessarily
> informed about these more subtle field concerns, it is important that
> they look beyond the issue of test scores in scrutinizing the ideological
> implications of the Department's proposed great transformation. 
> 
>  It is also important that the Committee take a close look at the
> concerns of the field that NIFL remain focused on adult literacy and
> lifelong learning and that "literacy" does not become defined as
> "reading," but as learning and knowledge that includes a strong focus on
> reading and writing pedagogy, particularly as promoted in the balanced
> theories of reading articulated by Victoria Purcell-Gates and others.
> 
> Of all the committees in the Senate, Senator' Kennedy's should be the
> last one that is hoodwinked by the ideological right parading itself as
> "bi-partisan.".
> 
> George Demetrion
> Sophocles5 at juno.com
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
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