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 f4UIPSf12717; Wed, 30 May 2001 14:25:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:25:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <Pine.A32.3.96.1010530120935.9691A-100000@acad.umm.maine.edu> 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: Bonnie Fortini <bfortini@acad.umm.maine.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1638] Re: a question for facilitators X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 5186 Lines: 84 Some points I try to keep in mind when working with EFF and students (whether they are beginning literacy students or ABE tutors or EFF facilitators) include the following: 1. EFF comes from the students and the grassroots, not from "on high," and it is applicable to everyone to some degree or another, 2. EFF is not a course to be taught (though it could be if one wanted to) but more a toolkit for life that can be used in developing curriculum, instruction, assessment, and evaluation, 3. EFF can be used in pieces, overtly and covertly; it exists in all of our best practices and can remain invisible, or be teased out if doing so serves the purpose of the moment (which could happen before, during or after the learning) 4. EFF has been part of being a functioning adult in our society for a long time, we've just only recently articulated it and put it into graphic format (which helps some people access the information and inhibits others) and been consciously determined about it. Perhaps a couple of examples would be useful here. The first concerns the level of acceptance and understanding I encounter when "using" the wheel with a group of adults at the local sheltered workshop. We don't "use" it on a regular basis, but not too long ago a problem cropped up that the class had definite views on (it was a public accessibility issue) and they decided it was appropriate to write a letter of complaint. They had done this before, several times, and had received a response if not a solution. This time, as the letter writing focus settled over the group, we brought out the wheel as a way to be sure we covered everything we needed to do to make this an effective letter. Not all the students can (or will ever) read, so the 16 standards were read aloud, and judged as being needed or not. They decided that some of the standards would be needed in the course of working together on this project [we've reworded some standards for comprehension sake, so plan, work with each other, speak clearly, listen carefully,and watch closely were needed for the group to work well] , some would be needed in writing an effective letter [write what you mean so people understand, plan, think it over, find answers and decide]. They also decided that if they were successful they would be advocating and influencing (those concepts were understood as worded). They knew they were acting as citizens of the community and felt they would be acting under all four of the broad areas of responsibility shown on the Citizen Role Map. There is still no sidewalk or sineage where they want it to be, but they have not given up on their project. Another example came at a recent workshop for a local alliance of education and business people who are hoping to effect some major changes in education and economic development here in an economically depressed (and distressed) part of the state. The facilitator was familiar with EFF as it clearly outlined and represented all the "requirements" she regularly teaches to students overseas (Asia) who are working to improve their educational (higher) levels and employment opportunities. At the end of the workshop she put up an overhead of the skills wheel and pointed out all the standards areas we had just utilitzed during the workshop. It was not part of the process, per se, nor was it germane to the specific activities we had done, but it fit as a chance to check ourselves to see not only if we had neglected any area that would have helped our effort that day, but also to remind us of how we need to continue our approach if we are to effect positive systems change for our area. A final example was at another workshop of that same alliance where we turned to the worker role map to come up with wording to describe the kind of employees we hope our work will foster the development of, county wide. Straight from the role map we chose "employees who are effective, adaptable, and highly motivated." I usually encourage tutors and facilitators to become familiar with the framework (including the wheel), the broad areas of responsibility on the role maps, and the skill/process components of the content standards. I also encourage them to investigate rubric building and scoring, and to look for ways they are already using these tools in their work. We have incorporated the short list above into our intake process so that we "initiate" the students into the basics of EFF as they get to know what we are about and what they can expect to get from working with us. This tends to lead to goals being more personally meaningful to students because they (the goals) attach to larger purposes. I don't know if this in anyway adds to this discussion strand or further confuses the issue. I hope that people who are stuggling with EFF will pick just one part, something that is most meaningful to them personally (How well to I execute the 16 standards myself? How well do I perform the role indicators of the worker role map as an adult education teacher? How can I build an assessment template that will let me and my student measure her listening skills?) and have some fun with it. Good luck, Bonnie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:30:02 EDT