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 f5EFB2f21848; Thu, 14 Jun 2001 11:11:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 11:11:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <B74E2129.4757%kappra@earthlink.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: Rick Kappra <kappra@earthlink.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1693] Re: "Terry Kinzel" <horsecp@televar.com>: RE: X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Status: O Content-Length: 7467 Lines: 140 Lisa, I guess my criticism of the training is pretty much in line with what everyone else has already expressed on the list, but I will try to articulate it from my own perspective. on 6/12/01 5:38 AM, LISAL595@aol.com at LISAL595@aol.com wrote: > Rick, > As the Director of the EFF National Center, it is my job to ensure that the > EFF training is as relevant and pertinent to your work as possible. I invite > you to help me do this. So, if you would answer the following questions, > perhaps it will help the list pin point some of the frustrations about our > training, and will help us address your frustrations. > What were your expectations of the training? What did you want to get out of > it? I was hoping to get a clearer idea of the EFF framework, the standards, the purposes, role maps, etc., and learn some ways that I could integrate EFF into my own teaching. > Why didn't it meet your expectations or goals? I felt that what was being taught was EFF as content, both in the way that it was presented to us, and in the suggestions that were made as to how we could integrate EFF into our own classrooms. I found this overwhelming and disruptive. Overwhelming because it is really not possible for me to teach EFF language to beginning level ESOL students (these are real A,B,C beginners), and disruptive because rather than build on what I'm already doing in the classroom, I felt that I was being asked to teach the language of EFF rather than language my students need to survive outside of the classroom. There was no connection made between this language and getting students to reflect on the skills they had practicted. > > What part of the presentation gave you the impression that there is only "one > way" to do EFF? When we were given samples of how EFF could be integrated into an ESL class. One example involved using simplified language from the role maps and having students reconstruct these sentences and then categorize them according to the stated roles. While it may be a good langauge exercise, it was not appropriate for a beginning level class, nor was it relevant to the needs of my students to communicate in real life. Maybe this was just a bad example. But there was really no other connection made between the theory and classroom practice, so I have nothing else to go on. > > How had you been using EFF? (using the 4 purposes and role maps only?) When reading the blue book on my own I felt that I had been using EFF already. I could look at the standards and say, "yes, I have students work on resolving conflict, solving problems, negotiating, etc....", but when I did the training I found that I was not really doing EFF because I was not making it explicit and not teaching the standards and role maps as a package. For example, when I did a lesson on conflict resolution, I did it because there was a need which came from discussions with the students. I didn't do it because EFF told me to. I have never used the purposes or the role maps explicity. I will probably try in the fall when I'm teaching a level 4 (high beginning), but can't see even attempting it at level 1. > > Was it the standards that seemed to be unuser friendly? The standards themselves are great. What I found to be unuser friendly was the expectation that teachers could so dramatically change the way that they teach and instead of teaching language or skills as we are already doing, we are going to be making role maps based not on how our students see their roles, but on how EFF defines them; teaching the standards not in an organic manner which grows out of the needs of the class at that time, but rather in a systematic and artificial manner. I heard words such as constructivist and purposeful being thrown around but never saw these put into practice. When I asked how the activities that we had been shown to integrate EFF were constructivist, the presenters were unable to answer. In retrospect the training itself was neither constructivist nor purposeful (i.e. related to our own program needs). Rather both the training and the sample activities dictated "the way" and the end result was based on the answers in the blue book - so rather than being based on Friere, it all lead to answers which had been pre-determined and could be measured at some point in time (i.e. back to the banking system of education which Friere fought so hard against). And perhaps this gets to the heart of the problem. It seems that EFF is moving towards an assessment piece. But how can you assess something unless it is standardized? So rather than each of us negotiating with our students when, how and why we will be using EFF, or even determining what our own needs, roles and standards are, we are being told that "these" are the answers to the questions that you will be asked, and get ready - because at some point in the future, someone is going to ask them for your program funding. I think one other problem in the training, at least in our case, was that it was done for ABE and ESL instructors. While we are all teaching adults, our needs and the needs of our students are quite different. In many cases ABE students have the language to discuss the standards, talk about their roles, reasons for studying, etc., but often lack the basic skills they need to succeed in those roles. ESL students in many cases lack the above language skills but may in fact have the skills that are required for success as family members, community members and workers, but just not in English. So many times during our workshop, people were saying, "so when I teach them these skills...." I found that to be an incorrect assessment of who our learners are and where they are coming from. My own students in many cases have more of the skills needed to succeed than I do, what they lack are the English language skills necessary to put them into practice. In ESL, I don't think that we will be teaching our students so much how to resolve conflict (this is the only example that keeps coming to mind), but rather giving them the language skills to be able to do it in English. The assumption was that students had no conflict resolution skills at all (nor any of the others for that matter). I would suggest that EFF be looked at more specifically in each of the areas in which it might be used and that a one-size fits all approach to training be replaced with training which is targeted and specific to the needs of the programs, teachers and especially students. I hope that this helps. One final comment - I think that the blue book could also be redesigned to be more user friendly. The size and layout are cumbersome and it is not conducive to being used as a reference book as I think it should be. I just thought I'd throw that out there since so much time and money seems to have been spent in the design. Rick Kappra > > Perhaps the teachers and director at Big Bend, our guest program, can make > some comments on EFF being the only way. And how we, at the National Center, > can be more helpful in helping teachers and programs integrate EFF in a way > that doesn't seem so directed. > > Thank you for raising these issues. I look forward to hearing your response. > > Lisa Levinson > Director > Equipped for the Future National Center > 5766 Shibles Hall > University of Maine > Orono, ME 04469-5766 > 207-549-0926 or 207-581-2604 > LisaL595@aol.com or lisa.levinson@umit.maine.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:30:06 EDT