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 f4H2amf24538; Wed, 16 May 2001 22:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <9d.15722a4f.283492c7@aol.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: AndresMuro@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1591] RE: The K12 School Experiences of High School Dr X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10523 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_9d.15722a4f.283492c7_boundary" Status: O Content-Length: 6934 Lines: 146 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Debbie, I cannot enter a debate about anthropological methods with you because I am not one and you are. Therefore, you certainly know more about me and are right to correct me. Yet, If I "throw around gross generalizations without knowing the full story of the study", it is only because I am responding to the gross generalizations published by FOB. I think that what was published in FOB is harmful as it stands. Again, a clarification of the limitations of the methods and more background about the "full story" may have made the study more digestible. You wrote: "Learning that not all adults with low literacy harbor resistance to schooling, in my mind, in no way undermines progressive pedagogy." While this would be nice to learn, the study simply cannot indicate this. It simply could indicate that there isn't enough evidence to conclude that adults harbor resistance. The problem is that when people read the study, they will read the affirmation. that you made. In addition, they will read it as: "adults do not harbor resistance against schooling" With that in mind, those programs that choose to address resistance will be seen as extreme, since Reder, from NCSALL found that there is no such thing. You wrote: "especially in the Frierian interpretation, involves adults in naming their consciousness of and resistance to many kinds of oppression, not just school based domination" Unfortunately, many adults do not name anything. They live in a culture of silence where there voices are irrelevant. It would be nice if we can create spaces for adults to consciously name. However, we have already concluded that one of the things that we used to believe that adults may have named (resistance), wasn't so. Therefore, if anyone has attempted to create spaces, as Steve suggests, to address resistance, futile effort, since it appears that there is no such thing. Andres In a message dated 5/16/2001 7:24:18 PM Mountain Daylight Time, DEBBYDAM@aol.com writes: > I hardly think the kind of longitudinal careful interviewing Steve is doing > is rigid objectivist science. I think we need to stop using terms that > polarize research either into ethnographic or quantitative categories. As > Steve has indicated, there are many dimensions to his research. Speaking > as > an anthropologist, I'm not sure that all research identifying resistance > has > been ethnographic or qualitative, for that matter, nor is the latter the > only > kind of research that can uncover resistance. What is bad science is to > throw around gross generalizations without knowing the full story of the > study. Learning that not all adults with low literacy harbor resistance to > schooling, in my mind, in no way undermines progressive pedagogy. The > latter, especially in the Frierian interpretation, involves adults in > naming > their consciousness of and resistance to many kinds of oppression, not just > school based domination. DD > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:29:57 EDT