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 eBF2BF906730; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:11:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:11:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20001214210803.00a38ee0@postoffice.worldnet.att.net.> Errors-To: rgspacone@worldnet.att.net Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Ronna G. Spacone" <rgspacone@worldnet.att.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1291] Fwd: RE: EFF Reading Group #2 Discussion X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Status: O Content-Length: 5662 Lines: 106 >Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 18:18:56 -0500 (EST) >Reply-To: djt9u@virginia.edu >Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov >Sender: nifl-4eff@nifl.gov >From: Debbie Tuler <djt9u@virginia.edu> >To: rgspacone@worldnet.att.net >Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1290] RE: EFF Reading Group #2 Discussion >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) > >This message was submitted by Debbie Tuler <djt9u@virginia.edu> to list >nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov. If you forward it back to the list, it will be >distributed without the paragraphs above the dashed line. You may edit the >Subject: line and the text of the message before forwarding it back. > >If you edit the messages you receive into a digest, you will need to remove >these paragraphs and the dashed line before mailing the result to the list. >Finally, if you need more information from the author of this message, you >should be able to do so by simply replying to this note. > >----------------------- Message requiring your approval ---------------------- >Sender: Debbie Tuler <djt9u@virginia.edu> >Subject: RE: EFF Reading Group #2 Discussion > >--------- >Ronna wrote: > >Since I asked you to read using the EFF Standard "Read With Understanding", >let's start by discussing your reading process. What was it like? >Did this reading activity require you to carry out each one of the >components? >In general, how did the process of using the components of skill performance >work for you? >What was it like to use the standard to focus on what your own performance >looks like? >---------- > > For me, the reading process felt very conscious, as if I had greater >awareness of what I was doing, than when I often read. I wouldn't say that >the reading activity "required" me to use all components, but that I made a >conscious effort to try to use all components because I was using the >standard to guide my reading. For me, the activity involved more >forethought, at least on a conscious level...it's hard to explain, but in a >way I felt like I was slowing down a process that might often happen faster >and more automatically, in order to "see" what I was doing while I read. >That also made the reading a bit harder (conscious thinking is hard to do), >especially the first component (identify purpose - I don't always articulate >a purpose for reading, even tho I have one), and the last two components of >the Reading Standard (analyze, reflect, and integrate) - again, I'm not sure >if that's because I don't do it well or because it was hard to slow down and >observe a process that for me has become "fluent". > I also noticed that the components of performance do not include coherently >discussing and/or articulating our analysis, reflection, etc. (communication >standard, I suppose), even tho this is how we would judge whether someone >has done these things (anlayze, reflect.) > >---------- >And then Ronna wrote: >Next, I would be interested in knowing what you think about the four key >dimensions of performance. These are the heart of the EFF assessment >framework, and they define the continuum of performance for each of the 16 >standards. > >Ladies, please think about using the components of performance and the >dimensions of performance together in order to align and focus planning, >teaching, and assessment, that is, to facilitate instructional activities >that address all components of an EFF standard and include opportunities for >students to build knowledge, fluency, independence and range. > >How might this affect what you teach and how you teach? >How might the four key dimensions and the critical components of performance >affect the way you think about teaching? >---------- > > Trying to hold the pieces together and use them together was also a >challenge...I think I would have done better to cut up the book so I could >have the components and dimensions easily in front of me at the same time! >But a few things stand out for me: > In terms of teaching, the components and dimensions together lead me to >holistic perspective - rather than teaching components of reading >sequentially, I see them all happening at the same time; development >(progress) is in terms of the dimensions of performance (and the level of >difficulty of the reading passage) rather than in terms of components. > In my program now we are working on the question of when and how to >transition students from one class (level) to another - how do I know that >someone is ready to move up, and how can I articulate that to the teacher >whose class I want to move the student in to. For assessment, the >dimensions of performance provides key language for articulating this. This >is critical for us now, because even though we have identified different >grammar and language competencies for the different levels, a large part of >what distinguishes a student in one level from a student in another level is >not what tenses or what vocabulary they know, butthe range, independence,and >fluency of performance. These dimensions provide the structure for what to >look for and what to express both to students and other teachers. They move >us away from a content focus (grammar, vocabulary) to a performance focus - >the grammar and vocabulary (content, structure of the language) is the means >to an end (expressing ideas, opinions, etc.), not the end itself. > Finally, the dimensions of performance, along with the components, will, I >think, make it easier or clearer to think about/plan classroom activities - >structuring what we do in the class to move students through these >dimensions of performance. > >-Debbie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 29 2001 - 15:04:20 EST