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 f1DF0c915260; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:00:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:00:38 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010213094620.00a40810@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: Ann Marie Barter <abarter@windham.k12.me.us> (by way of "Ronna G. Spacone" <rgspacone@worldnet.att.net>) To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1371] 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: 5284 Lines: 31 I'd like to respond to Jenny Ransone's recent posting where she asks "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?" I have been incorporating project based learning in our ABE and High School Diploma curriculum for the past five years. I cannot speak directly to the difference between secondary ed projects vs. adult classrooms, but I am assuming when you use the term "traditional classroom" you imply teacher-centered where the teacher decides the project, the time frame, and ultimately the criteria for assessment. As part of EFF implementation in our program, I experimented with project-based learning for the first time by having the adult learners brainstorm an activity that would result in something meaningful and valuable to them. They were enrolled in a family literacy program where they were working towards a HSD or GED and also taking a parenting class. They decided that whatever they did should link their skill building in reading/writing with parenting. They went home and each brainstormed ideas and brought them in the next day. They shared ideas, combined a couple, and decided to make a book of activities they could do with their children over the summer. They proceeded to talk about what it would include, divide up work assignments, and make phone calls to get information about area museums, parks, etc. One student brought in a book she had and we gathered other such books to use as a model for organization, design, etc. (this phase of course meant a trip to the library!) I also asked them to create a plan for completing the project which included the steps to complete it and various deadlines along the way. We looked at everyone's individual plan and made a class plan that we hung on the wall and checked off steps as we completed them. Fairly early in the process, Donna Curry (now the Publications Coordinator at the EFF National Center) came to the class and guided us through an activity to help students develop criteria by which they would later assess the final product. We used that guide throughout the project and learners repeatedly referred to it, especially if there was confusion about the direction of the project, or someone trying to move in a different direction from the plan. At this stage of EFF development, we had standards, but the components of performance weren't completed yet, so I was mindful of the skills being targeted and used within the design of the project. Near the end of the project one of the students asked what if the activities really weren't interesting to kids of certain ages? One of the parents had a child at Headstart and we got permission to have an activity day at the Headstart center so the learners in my class could test out some of the games and crafts they had included in the book. They also developed a survey to attach to the back of the book to get feedback from readers. Upon completion, the learners assessed their book using their criteria and they also assessed their individual and group performance using the EFF framework to identify new skills they gained and others they improved. I asked them to write about using those skills outside of the Learning Center and more than one student had included skills they gained in this process on a resume they later wrote with our career counselor. I have since facilitated many other projects with students over the years and these are the elements that I see make them EFF-friendly: 1) The students decide on the project and the plan. I see it as my role to facilitate the process and create opportunities for learners to gain or improve skills throughout the project. They are using thinking, decision-making, math, technology and communication skills as well as the intended outcome of improving reading and writing. 2) The project is relevant and meaningful to the learners' lives. An arbitrary assignment from me would not have resulted in the level of investment, effort, persistence and pride that learners dedicated to this project because they had ownership of it. 3) The target is clear and the steps to get there are obvious and intentional. The EFF framework takes away the need for learners to be telepathic in order to achieve some nebulous goal or figure out "what the teacher wants" in terms of assessment. 4) The activities in the project mirror skills learners require outside of the learning environment. It is easy for learners to see where and how to transfer this skill because the skill is linked to a purposeful task. And finally, Anne Davies says that "the person working the hardest is learning the most". An EFF-friendly project offers the learners the rich opportunity to build all these skills and for the teacher to guide, facilitate, and monitor the process, but not "do" the project. It is a different kind of work for me and it is still work. However, by sharing the work and assuming that the learners are capable of doing it, which they most definitely are, it means I do less. Ann Marie Barter ABE Coordinator Windham, ME
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:29:46 EDT