[NLA] "breaking news"

Thu Jun 13 13:00:21 EDT 2002

Hello Eileen and Andrea:

One problem lies in our failure to distinguish between

(1) the field of theory development and

(2) the field of applications of theory--teaching.

Teachers are mediators of theory into the moving field
of the individual classroom and specified student.   They
"match" generalized theory(ies)  to a field where there
is "no fixed data" (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics).  We
know when we do this well, but it's not theory development.
Nor is theory development good teaching.

Neither teachers, theoreticians, statistician nor policy
makers should expect theory or numbers to do the job
of teaching.  For teachers, It's to expect too much of
theory or statistics; and for theoreticians, statisticians
and policy makers, it's to subvert the art of good
teaching.  Archie speaks of this in his recent kind
note about Tom Stitcht.   I would say the same thing.
Tom Stitcht is doing fine and hearted work; but he fails
to understand the basic differences between teaching,
numbers gathering, and the important shifts going on
in educational theory.

Why do our policy makers not listen to our teachers?

In part, because our theoreticians, statisticians,
and subsequently our policy makers, fail to understand
the import of what happens on the individual level when
we are speaking of the applications of educational theory
rather than (1) natural science or (2) statistical science.

The classroom is not a laboratory, a factory or a calculator--
it's a **conversation between conscious persons**
who each count for something in a political community.

In a laboratory, the import is rightly on the theory where the
individual data is used and discarded for theory development.
In statistics, the import is rightly in the norm where the
deviation is ignored.

In educational theory and in the classroom, the import is
exactly reversed:  The import is in the individual student.   In
teaching we pay attention to the details and to each
individual student--"No Child Left Behind"?  This applies
also to adults where teachers and educational theory are
concerned?

Teachers know this.  Archie knows this.  Adult students
know this--all on an intuitive level.  Some theoreticians in
educational theory are coming to understand this great
difference, and to make changes in their theoretical
developments about this.

Theoreticians and statisticians who have not made the
theoretical "jump" to understand this great difference (in
movement of import within the arena of the data-to-
results relationship) do not know this and continue to
develop ideas and harp on "data" with a complete
disregard for new thinking that is trying to make
theoretical developments to account for this
difference--my guess is mostly out of fear of change,
an ego investment in old ways,  and a most unscientific
closure of mind.

Many policy makers, on the other hand, smell the great
political shifts that would occur with a new understanding.
Many have a monetary and political stake in making sure
this difference is not taken up because the present
"mess" suits their political, economic and classist
(even racist in some camps) agenda:

Don't listen to teachers.  What do they know.  They are
only dealing with individuals ("anecdotes") and have no
understanding or relevance to theory or statistics, and
therefore, to policy-making.    Archie is a nice and
man and makes us sigh and cry, but what does he have
to do with hard science and cold statistics?   In the
present attitudinal "air:" --  NOTHING.

The change that is needed is at the "titanic" rather than
at the "deck chairs" level.  And from what I can tell, too
many people have their heads in the sand, and just keep
the harangue going as before, regardless of the
cogency of the arguments to the contrary, for any real
change to be showing itself on the horizon anytime
soon.  Maybe in the next generation we will be able to
see a degenerate complex of ideas for what it is.   But
I don't see it happening now--only the clashing of deck
chairs.

Regards,

Catherine King
Adjunct Instructor
Department of Education
National University
San Diego, CA

----- Original Message -----
From: Eileen Eckert <eileeneckert at hotmail.com>
To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 3:32 AM
Subject: Re: [NLA] "breaking news"

> In response to Andrea: It is because practitioners have day-to-day
> experience to guide them that I believe they should be doing--and
> disseminating the results of--research. The answer you get depends in
large
> part on the question you ask, and practitioners ask some extremely
important
> and practical questions. As you said, Andrea, it's not a matter of
> either/or.
>
> As for your statement that no one in their right mind would ignore the
> opinions and observations of practitioners, isn't being ignored in policy
> decisions exactly what many on the list are complaining of? So
> legislators/policymakers aren't in their right minds...big surprise.
Sounds
> like you're saying practitioners' observations/opinions alone SHOULD be
> enough to convince anyone in their right mind that all practitioners'
> observations/opinions are well-reasoned, valid, and "true" without our
> having to offer any evidence to support them. How do you make a judgment
> about what position to take when several practitioners disagree and they
all
> offer observations (but nothing else) to support their opinions?
>
>
>
> >From: AWilder106 at aol.com
> >Reply-To: nla at lists.literacytent.org
> >To: nla at lists.literacytent.org
> >Subject: Re: [NLA] "breaking news"
> >Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 22:19:07 EDT
> >
> >Eileen,
> >
> >What Tom has developed through experience and research of many sorts is
an
> >extremely large (to my observation) data base, a trained mind, and
devotion
> >to a goal--he likes to solve puzzles and he really wants everyone to be
> >literate.  He will also dig in his heels until he comes up with an answer
> >that seems reasonable.
> >
> >What he doesn't have (recently) is fine grained, classroom observation
and
> >experience. (Maybe he is also teaching and not letting us know....)
People
> >in
> >the field have first hand experience, those who work everyday with adult
> >learners.  It isn't either/or, it's lots. Policy needs many voices, but
> >those
> >voices have to be identified as to where they come from (local, state,
> >national; public, private) and what their experience is, and what in
their
> >experience may account for their different views.  No one in their right
> >mind
> >would ignore the opinions and observations of those who work with adult
> >learners every day.
> >
> >It seems to me that workers in the field require access to larger data
> >bases
> >though, themselves; they can hook up with others and make their opinions
> >and
> >different experiences known.  They can refine their observations and test
> >out
> >different variables; we all benefit. The nla list helps with the
> >connections.
> >
> >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
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>