[NLA] Research in adult literacy education

Wed Nov 20 12:11:14 EST 2002

Ah, Debbie, now I understand your frustration.  
Working with researcehrs from medicine is much different than working with researchers from the social sciences. I understand the expectation for "rigorous" experimental design in medical research, but social science research is a different kettle of fish. And evaluation is not the same as reesearch.  Although they employ several of the same methods, the purposes are quite different.  Ultimately, this is a huge policy issue.  If we shun, fear, or even demonize education research and evaluation, we automatically silence ourselves in public policy debates and render ourselves invisible to policy makers.  I could be wrong, but I don't think we want that. 

Sheryl Gowen, Associate Professor
Research, Measurement and Statistics
Department of Educational Policy Studies
Georgia State University
Atlanta, GA 30303-3083
sgowen at gsu.edu
404.651.1152
fax 404.651.1009
>>> dwyoho at earthlink.net 11/20/02 11:50 AM >>>
Andrea: I shall not offer any particular names in this public forum, as we
are committed to avoiding what could be construed as personal attacks. I
think a lot of my frustration is coming from my intense work the last five
years in the area of health literacy, and conversations I've had with
people in the health professions. In medicine, treatment is entirely based
on research that requires the strictest adherence to the scientific method.
I'm glad it does--I personally place my own health in the hands of Western
medicine. But applying scientific processes to research in education is
fraught with all kinds of problems already discussed on the NLA. In
addition to medical practitioners and medical researchers, I've also run
into this point of view in my tenure as a special education teacher,
especially in the field of learning disabilities. Now I'm hearing the "call
for rigor" among adult educators at the policy level in my state.

I value science and struggle hard to deal with my own prejudices and
pre-dispositions to listen to what science has to offer, trying to open my
mind as far as possible to discover what might be applicable to my chosen
field. I think the frustration shows up when I rarely find scientists
willing to make the same reach in my direction from their point of
reference.

On a positive note, I have met some doctors and other researchers in the
medical field who feel that medicine is as much an art as a science, and
who listen as intently to me as I do to them. They are forging new
collaborations and looking hard at policies and at their own behavior to
determine how to serve patients with reading difficulties better. 

As I write this I'm wondering if by now our moderator has sighed, "What's
this to do with advocacy?" Well, advocacy is as much about promoting a
point of view and a set of values as it is about working to bring about
specific changes. In this Information Age, the voices of humanitarians,
philosophers, idealists, artists, educators, etc. are beginning to sound
downright quaint. Not here, I hasten to add. Perhaps the NLA list is one of
the few places where warm and fuzzy values might still be offered for
consideration. Perhaps this is why our conversations often stray from the
practicalities of advancing the cause. We have precious too few forums. 

Deborah W. Yoho
Moderator, NIFL-Health Discussion Group
Executive Director, Greater Columbia Literacy Council
2728 Devine St. Columbia, SC 29205
803-765-2555 dwyoho at earthlink.net

Deborah W. Yoho
Moderator, NIFL-Health Discussion Group
Executive Director, Greater Columbia Literacy Council
2728 Devine St. Columbia, SC  29205
803-765-2555    dwyoho at earthlink.net

> [Original Message]
> From: Deborah W. Yoho <dwyoho at earthlink.net>
> To: <Awilderast at aol.com>
> Date: 11/20/2002 10:39:31 AM
> Subject: Re:  [NLA] Research in adult literacy education
>
> Andrea:  I shall not offer any particular names in this public forum, as
we are committed to avoiding what could be construed as personal attacks. 
I think a lot of my frustration is coming from my intense work the last
five years in the area of health literacy, and conversations I've had with
people in the health professions.  In medicine, treatment is entirely based
on research that requires the strictest adherence to the scientific method.
I'm glad it does--I personally place my own health in the hands of Western
medicine.  But applying scientific processes to research in education is
fraught with all kinds of problems already discussed on the NLA.  In
addition to medical practitioners and medical researchers, I've also run
into this point of view in my tenure as a special education teacher,
especially in the field of learning disabilities. Now I'm hearing the "call
for rigor" among adult educators at the policy level in my state.
>
> I value science and struggle hard to deal with my own prejudices and
pre-dispositions to listen to what science has to offer, trying to open my
mind as far as possible to discover what might be applicable to my chosen
field.  I think the frustration shows up when I rarely find scientists
willing to make the same reach in my direction from their point of
reference.
>
> On a positive note, I have met some doctors and other researchers in the
medical field who feel that medicine is as much an art as a science, and
who listen as intently to me as I do to them.  They are forging new
collaborations and looking hard at policies and at their own behavior to
determine how to serve patients with reading difficulties better. 
>
> As I write this I'm wondering if by now our moderator has sighed, "What's
this to do with advocacy?"  Well, advocacy is as much about promoting a
point of view and a set of values as it is about working to bring about
specific changes.  In this Information Age, the voices of humanitarians,
philosophers, idealists, artists, educators,  etc. are beginning to sound
downright quaint. Not here, I hasten to add.  Perhaps the NLA list is one
of the few places where warm and fuzzy values might still be offered for
consideration.  Perhaps this is why our conversations often stray from the
practicalities of advancing the cause.  We have precious too few forums.    
>
> Deborah W. Yoho
> Moderator, NIFL-Health Discussion Group
> Executive Director, Greater Columbia Literacy Council
> 2728 Devine St. Columbia, SC  29205
> 803-765-2555    dwyoho at earthlink.net
>
>
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: <Awilderast at aol.com>
> > To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
> > Date: 11/19/2002 4:34:55 PM
> > Subject: Re:  [NLA] Research in adult literacy education
> >
> > Dear Debbie,
> >
> > Not to add any more to your woes, but who are the "science-based"
people you 
> > talked with?  Academics?  Government researchers?  Policy people?
State?  
> > Federal?
> >
> > i am not really uncomfortable with the replicability of research;
however, 
> > there is darn little for adults. Any idea how the "rigor" people you
talk 
> > with suggest you handle that?
> >
> > How would you feel about volunteering for a pilot study?
> >
> > Thanks for your frankness, it is helpful to have some idea of what you
are up 
> > against  it sounds like quite a lot.
> >
> > 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

_______________________________________________
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