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 f47GWJf14924; Mon, 7 May 2001 12:32:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:32:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <A55B7FE71F45D311A3FF0050048233807FE331@exch.windham.k12.me.us> 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> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1570] Re: a question for facilitators X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Status: O Content-Length: 10422 Lines: 251 -----Original Message----- From: Susan Finn [mailto:finnmiller@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 12:46 PM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1564] Re: a question for facilitators In response to Susan Finn's recent posting where she outlines an activity called "Think, Pair and Share", I would like to share a couple of activities I tend to incorporate in trainings I have done around EFF. The first is very similar to Susan's, only instead of asking about a teaching moment, I ask participants to think of a time they successfully learned something. I then ask them to write down what the teacher was doing in their scenario, what they (the learner) were doing, how they know they learned it and what is the evidence that they learned it. (This activity is modified from an activity Patte Bowman at CALL did as a participant at a conference.) After first having the participants write their responses, we talk about their experiences and together create a picture of what adult learning looks like. From there, I introduce adult learning theory/PCC/creating a learning climate - depending on the audience this next step may vary, but I plan it in advance as best I can. Using the participants' own words, I make the segue into the next topic and I find that people catch on very easily, especially since the concept links so well to their personal experience. They tend not to get caught up in the vocabulary as sometimes happens with EFF and immediately start making connections. By using a learning example in this activity, rather than a teaching example, I find that it brings the participants (teachers) one step closer to their learners and also reminds us that the EFF framework is for all adults and not just ABE/GED/ESL students. Another activity I have participants do before introducing the EFF framework is similar. I generally use this with new teachers or tutors. I ask them to write down all the qualities that they feel comprise an effective teacher or tutor. I then ask them to share and we put all those qualities around a graphic on the board or butcher block paper. We talk about them and I ask questions about the importance of those skills in relation to other professions/roles. I then introduce either the skills wheel or the complete framework depending on the group. Again, their own words make the connection to the language and the concept doesn't seem so foreign. I have never done this activity and not had ALL the standards represented in some way, even if it's not the exact same wording. I have also done this with learners and substituted the word "student" or "parent" and had equally good results. My sense is that if we are introducing concepts that rely on an understanding of purposeful, contextual and constructivist then we need to model those in the presentation and not deliver it in a lecture format. Ann Marie Barter, Windham Adult Ed. Windham, ME We structure the activity as a Think, Pair, Share. First we allow time for everyone to write about a wonderful teaching experience they have had, a time when learners were truly engaged in the class. When everyone is finished writing, they each share with one other person, or in small groups. Then we have several people report to the whole group (if time allows, everyone can report). After everyone has shared, the facilitator asks the group to consider what was it about these wonderful lessons that made them so great. What qualities seemed to be common among the lessons? It's helpful for the facilitator to write these on chart paper to later identify themes. The teachers point out such things as the lesson was focused on something the learners really wanted to focus on (e.g., a lesson on conversations in an airport); the lesson was not always part of a plan but came about as a "hot topic" during class; the lesson was immediately relevant to students; the English language learners talked more and their conversations were more authentic than usual; the teacher did not have as much control of what was going on and the students had more control; the topic of writing or discussion touched something deeply personal and meaningful (e.g., writing and talking about someone who has changed your life and affects you even today, culture issues); students were engaged in learning from one another; students were thinking, talking and or writing critically about something important to them in their everyday lives; and adult learners were invited to share their experiences and/or their learning with one another. I've done this activity with three different groups of teachers, and each time, the qualities identified by the group in their wonderful lessons were ideas wholly consistent with Purposeful, Contextual, and Constructivist (PCC) making it really easy to make the case, very concretely, that good teaching --teaching that readily engages students-- reflects these three concepts. I feel like I can help my teaching colleagues to begin to consider these fundamental ideas. However, I am still struggling with the importance of working with the standards and how to think of using the standards myself in an equally concrete way. For certain standards, this is fairly straightforward, it is easy to see, for example, how the communication standards are useful and practical to teaching. However, for some of the other standards, it doesn't seem as straightforward. I have been trying to use the standards explicitly in my day to day non-teaching activities. With the candor that has already been expressed on this list, I hope it is okay to admit that the standards do not always seem immediately and facilely relevant to the tasks I am working on. Often, for example, it seems that some components do not seem terribly relevant and sometimes it seems like I need components from more than one standard (e.g., Plan and Problem Solving) to address a complex real-life work task. This has sometimes made trying to use the standards stiff and unnatural for me, more like an exercise. Even so, I haven't given up; I'm still trying. Any ideas or suggestions will be greatly appreciated. I guess what I am saying is that I first feel the need to know and understand deeply and concretely how and why all the standards are important before I can assist my teaching colleagues. Then I can consider how to connect the powerful ideas of PCC with the EFF standards. What do others think? Susan Finn Miller Southeast Prof. Dev. Ctr. Lancaster, PA --- Susan Rowley <susanrowley@hotmail.com> wrote: > I especially liked Jeanette Baldridge's posting. > > I have found that if EFF isn't introduced in small > pieces, it doesn't take, > unless as Eileen Eckert pointed out, teachers > already share the approach to > teaching and learning. EFF is not traditional > education. Most of the > teachers I know have been educated in colleges and > universities where GPAs > are the goal, and good grades per class the > immediate objective. Sometimes, > depending on the institution, scholarship is > emphasized. > > To switch to a non-traditional approach to teaching > and learning given such > a background is a large undertaking. I was lucky > enough to attend a couple > undergraduate years at a traditional college, then > moved to the School for > International Training. SIT definitely operates in > a non-traditional, even > an EFF-like way. > > When working with introducing EFF in WA State, I > work on goal setting and > establishing measurable objectives. This bit, with > the four purposes is > more than enough. We are accountable to the > Workforce Investment Act which > means we must cover our competencies, assess > progress using tasks and > rubrics and report progress using our state > reporting system. Teachers have > an overwhelming amount to do here, and while we are > committed to aligning > our system with the Framework, we must work in > pieces. It is the only > viable way. > > Susan Rowley > srowley@tcc.tacoma.ctc.edu > > > >From: "Jeanette Baldridge" <ginet_b@hotmail.com> > >Reply-To: nifl-4eff@nifl.gov > >To: Multiple recipients of list > <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> > >Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1528] Re: a question for > facilitators > >Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:18:08 -0400 (EDT) > > > >I'd like to respond to this issue from the > perspective of a workshop > >participant. I go to workshops ( many by now), seem > to understand the > >concept, think it's wonderful, then come back to my > school and can't make > >it > >work. I think there needs to be some truth telling > here, especially in > >regards to this subject, and if it turns out I'm > the only one confused, > >then > >so be it. . . . > >I have been a successfull college instructor for > years and have no problem > >with a college class where the subject is simply > taught. I can't understand > >why this system doesn't work for adult ed. I am no > longer sure what I'm > >supposed to be doing as an adult ed instructor. > > > >I have faithfully read the postings on this list, > but the dialogue has been > >so abstract and theoretical that I've come to the > conclusion that EFF is > >more an intellectual exercise than anything to do > with what is best for > >students. I've down-loaded hundreds of forms trying > to come up with a > >system, but I have found implementing systems with > which to use the forms > >to > >be close to impossible. > > > >Much of what I've heard on this list and in > workshops has to do with > >classes > >and project-based learning, which doesn't work in > our open learning center > >where we work with learners individually. Most of > our learners want their > >GED asap and then they're off to college. No one > has ever been able to tell > >me how EFF fits with GED preparation. Our learners > are not interested in > >role maps nor setting goals other than working on > skills for each GED test > >until they can pass it. Truth be known, they resent > it when we "impose" on > >them anything that does not further their progress > toward the GED. Most > >students already have goals (usually college or a > job), and we are simply > >facilitating their learning so they can achieve > those goals without any EFF > >complications. > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:29:56 EDT