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 f3OLcmf10301; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:38:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:38:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <sae5b97c.039@jsi.com> 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: "Andy Nash" <andy_nash@jsi.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1519] Re: question for facilitators X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.2 Status: O Content-Length: 2260 Lines: 45 Mary and all, Apologies if this message comes through twice (we're having system problems). I have been having a similar experience in workshops. I've come to believe that it's because we're introducing folks to a set of tools before we've spent enough time helping them understand (and embrace) the underlying assumptions upon which we've built our framework. I find that, therefore, their efforts to plan with the standards are kind of mechanistic and contrived. Even though we say that you can't really "get it" until you experiment on your own with the standards, I think we need to do more to help practitioners want to use them - to see them as useful for their teaching and the improvement of the system. I've been talking with other facilitators about developing activities that elicit participants' knowledge of/appreciation for the value of 1) being purposeful, contextual, and constructivist, 2) metacognition, and 3) standards-based reform. Because if you find value in these ideas, then it's a short step to seeing how the EFF standards are uniquely useful to you (and the orientation process might not take as long). If you are not invested in these ideas, then our scenario activities become a case of the participants just carrying out instructions and seeing if they did it right. I hear your VAL activity as being very effective for addressing #1 (above). Susan Finn Miller, in Pennsylvania, has been using an activity she calls "Great Moments in Teaching," where participants name their moments and then identify the key qualities of these experiences (which pretty much end up being that they are purposeful, contextual, and constructivist). Participants discover PCC themselves, and then view the standards with much greater appreciation. Donna Curry and I are thinking about activities that could get at 2 and #3 (all suggestions welcome!). All this reminds me of an old lesson - that preparation is everything. I think that if we do a better job of preparing folks to meet the standards, they will have a much easier and quicker time of getting it. We need some orientation models that don't require a multi-day commitment. Thanks for raising this issue! Andy Nash New England Literacy Resource Center/World Education EFF staff
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:29:53 EDT