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 f1D30j920607; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:00:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:00:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010212205209.00a42eb0@postoffice.worldnet.att.net.> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Jane Meyer <meyer_j@ccsdistrict.org> (by way of "Ronna G. Spacone" <rgspacone@worldnet.att.net>) To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1370] re: Project based learning 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: 4226 Lines: 40 On 2/6, Jenny Ransone wrote: "What is the difference between project based activities appropriate for traditional classrooms, for example secondary education, and adult classrooms? Is there a difference, and, if so, what makes them different? In addition, what elements make the project EFF?" Jenny, I think many projects suitable for high school classrooms would also be good for adult classrooms as long as they are purposeful for the adult students. That is do they pertain to real life interests/needs that the adults in the classroom have in their roles as family members, citizens, and workers. Why reinvent when you don't need to. As far as what makes the project EFF: In addition to being purposeful and framed in the context of the roles EFF projects are built around an EFF standard. Our program used project based learning long before we ever heard of EFF. The difference I see now is structure. This is very comforting to students and teachers (and administrators). Before we always wondered were our projects "covering" the right things. Now we use an EFF standard to plan and organize the project. For example we have always taught teamwork by having the students work as a group to do a service project at their children's school (the projects varied from year to year depending on the needs and interests of the group). Before EFF we would just discuss the project and who would do what and give a pep talk on working together as a team and then we would do the project and debrief on how well we worked together. (I see now that we weren't very clear with the students about exactly what it meant to cooperate) Now we show the students the standard "cooperate with others" first and talk about what it means to cooperate The components of performance for the standard tell us that cooperating means: 1. Interact in ways that are friendly, courteous and tactful and that demonstrate respect for others' ideas, opinions and contributions. 2. Seek input from others in order to understand their actions and reactions. 3. Offer clear input on own input and attitudes so that others can understand one's actions and reactions. 4. Try to adjust ones actions to take into account the needs of others and/or the task to be accomplished. As they discuss the standard we have the class develop a checklist to evaluate how well they cooperate. They list ideas from the components of performance of the standard, sometimes rephrasing them in words they understand better. Then we might talk about times in our lives when teamwork has broken down. Why? Which ideas from our list were missing in these circumstances and how did it affect the outcome? We might ask the students to do a little self assessing at this point. Which of these ideas do they do regularly? sometimes? rarely? During conversation usually students will realize something about the way they cooperate. One student once said she thought she cooperated well because she never argued or disagreed. Now she realized that she never gave any input which actually weakened the team process she thought she was strengthening by keeping quiet. We might do some learning activities in the classroom depending on the students needs. Perhaps something on strategies for seeking input such as brainstorming, debate, or voting. Then we would organize and do the project. The debriefing afterwards would focus on the student created list based on the components of performance for the standard for cooperate with others. Now that the students know specifically what they are supposed to do you can imagine the project. You hear students asking a quiet student "what do you think" and you hear students laughing as they practice offering comments that are obviously courteous and tactful. The end result for getting the project done was the same before and after we began using EFF, but how much the students learned about teamwork (which was the whole reason we did the project) was much greater when we framed the project around the EFF standard. So, try looking at one of those projects someone else created through the lens of an EFF standard! Jane Meyer Canton City Schools ABLE meyer_j@ccsdistrict.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:29:46 EDT