[NIFL-4EFF:1225] EFF and Systemic Reform

From: Regie Stites (regie.stites@sri.com)
Date: Thu Oct 19 2000 - 12:46:40 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id e9JGke905843; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:46:40 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:46:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <39EF2336.507E3656@sri.com>
Errors-To: rgspacone@aol.com
Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: Regie Stites <regie.stites@sri.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1225] EFF and Systemic Reform
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
Status: O
Content-Length: 5409
Lines: 121

A number of the questions that have been posted to the list ask about
the mechanisms through which the EFF standards and assessments can
contribute to improvements in instructional quality and outcomes.  These

questions were asked at the program level, but I would like to begin my
response by working down from the systemic level.  One of the key
strengths of EFF is the foundation that it offers for standards-based
reform of the adult language and literacy educational system.  I
described the components of an ideal model of standards-based systemic
reform in the article I wrote for Focus on Basics.  Here's a snippet
from the conclusion of that piece:

"According to the ideal model of standards-based reform, all forms of
standards -- content, performance, and opportunity-to-learn -- should be

aligned.  To bring practice closer to the ideal, we must somehow connect

EFF, NRS, and NAAL as well as state level standards.  This will not be
easy, but will offer many benefits.  First, coherent content standards
can provide a clear vision of what every adult should know and be able
to do.  Performance standards and related assessment matched to this
vision provide the tools for individual learners, literacy programs, and

everyone to monitor progress toward goals.  Opportunity-to-learn
standards may be especially critical for a system of education (adult
literacy) that is chronically underfunded."

I wrote the FOB article with applications of standards and assessment in

large-scale accountability and reporting systems in mind.  But I would
argue that effective alignment of learning goals and instructional
objectives (which can be described in a generic way by content
standards) with measures and expectations for learning outcomes (which
can be described in a generic way by performance standards) is a key
indicator of educational quality at all levels.  Another way to put this

is to say that teaching to the test is not a bad thing, as long as the
test in question measures knowledge and skills that learners (and
others) recognize as important goals for learning.  Opportunity-to-learn

is also a critical piece of the quality equation at the program level.

A good system of educational standards should support teaching and
learning in at least three ways.  Content standards should help to
clarify
long-term learning goals for learning and to situate particular learning

objectives on a pathway leading to long-term goals.  Performance
standards
should help to establish milestones on the pathway that both teachers
and learners can use to mark progress and plan further learning.
Opportunity-to-learn standards should help to develop a better
understanding of the time and resources that teachers and learners will
need to make reasonable progress toward learning goals.

Debbie Tuler asked about what pieces of the EFF framework should be
used for what purposes.  My general response is that the EFF role maps,
standards, common activities, and eventually performance continua and
benchmarks of performance are part of an integrated framework that
can help teachers to align learners' goals with curriculum design and
teaching practices and with measures of learning progress.  Admittedly,
this
is a tall order for the teacher and the fact that curriculum and
assessments
used to inform instruction are poorly aligned with the standardized
tests
used for external reporting and accountability makes the job even
harder.
To improve on the current 'misaligned' system, progress needs to be made

at both the program level and the systems level.  As indicated by Ronna
Spacone's question, substantial investment in staff development is the
starting point for alignment at the program level.  Staff development
should
provide teachers with the models, support, and guided practice they need

to be able to apply the EFF framework to aligning learning goals with
teaching
practice and with measures of learning at the program level.  At the
same
time, work is needed at the level of accountability systems to better
capture
results that matter.

Regie

Regie Stites, Ph.D.
Education Researcher
Center for Education and Human Services
SRI International
Menlo Park, CA
e-mail: regie.stites@sri.com
voice: (650) 859-3768

EFF has only recently begun the long and hard work of developing an
assessment framework (elaborating performance continua for each
standards,
establishing benchmarks for levels of performance, selecting and
developing
tasks to measure performance on the standards, and combining all this
into
a qualifications framework). In this context, I would respond to Sue
Barton's question about "the most pressing public policy issues
affecting the implementation of EFF into a program" by saying that the
first priorty should be garnering broad-based support (and involvement)
for developing an assessment framework that supports measures of
meaningful results in adult learning and establishes reasonable
expectations for resources needed to support such results.  Beyond this
the
other public policy supports that need to be in place to make EFF work
at the program level include accountability structures that are aligned
with
learners' goals and program curricula, expanded professional development

opportunities for teachers, expanded access to high-quality learning
opportunities for students, and the resources and political will to make

all this possible.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 29 2001 - 15:04:16 EST