[NIFL-4EFF:1851] Re: What does a transparent approach mean?

From: Regie D Stites (regie.stites@sri.com)
Date: Fri Oct 19 2001 - 19:15:51 EDT


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 f9JNFo018134; Fri, 19 Oct 2001 19:15:51 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 19:15:51 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3BD0B40B.2153280C@sri.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: "Regie D Stites" <regie.stites@sri.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1851] Re: What does a transparent approach mean?
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; U)
Status: O
Content-Length: 4461
Lines: 94

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------2D6A6242EDF339BA11F245D5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Andres,
It's true that "transparent" is a somewhat confusing metaphor (and also jargon).  However, the point of this term, like any other
metaphoric jargon (how do you like "bootstrap"?)  is to make a complex idea easier to understand.  I think the reason that people have
used the term "transparent" instead the simpler "clear" or "understandable" is that they want to convey a more complex concept than
these simpler terms typically do.

When something is "transparent" we can see through it.  When we say that one of the aims of EFF is to support a "transparent approach
to education" we mean that we think good education is "see through" in many ways.  For example, a learner should be able to "see
through" an instructional placement process (interviews, assessments, etc.) and see a direct connection to what they will be learning,
how they will be learning it, and how learning will help them achieve life goals, etc.  All of these things (intake processes,
goal-setting, connections between goals and instructional content, connections between learning strategies and the knowledge, skills,
and abilities that adults need to fulfill their roles as workers, parents, community member, and on and on ...) need to be made clear
and understandable.  But to say that we want education to be "clear" and "understandable" doesn't quite mean as much as to say we want
it to be "transparent."

To give a more specific example, the term "transparent" is often used to signify a quality of good assessment.  When we say that a good
assessment is transparent we mean that the student and teacher both have the same understanding of why a test is being given, what the
test is measuring, and how the test results will help to mark learning progress and/or set goals and plans for more learning.  So to
say that a test is "transparent" is to say not only that it has a clear purpose, a clear process, and a clear outcome but that teacher
and learner have a shared understanding of the purpose, process, and outcome.

By the way, I agree that EFF can be confusing.  It's a complex and still developing system.  EFF has many different audiences and there
is always room for improving clarity in communications - sometimes by matching the message to the audience.  Some degree of confusion
is inevitable (and not always a bad thing if it makes us struggle to understand).  If "transparent" doesn't convey the message we
intend, we should find another way to do so, but not at the expense of the complexity of the message.  Complex problems require complex
solutions.  Education (and not just education) is full of failed reforms that were based on overly simple ideas that were simply stated
and simply understood.

Regie Stites
EFF Assessment Consortium

AndresMuro@aol.com wrote:

> clear, uderstandable.
>
> Ironic, that they try to use this metaphor to signify clarity aand the metaphor itself is not understood.
>
> I, hate it. I don't know why people don'y just say clear.
>
> Andres
>
> In a message dated Fri, 19 Oct 2001  4:09:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Spacone, Ronna (Contractor)" <Ronna.Spacone@ed.gov> writes:
>
> > Here's a question that a subscriber with temporary technical difficulties
> > asked me post:
> >
> >     I am interested in different ways people could explain the use of
> > the word "transparent" as   used in the EFF framework. If someone saw
> > "purposeful and transparent approach to     education" and asked, "What
> > does transparent mean?" what would you say?
> >
> > Ronna
> >
> > Ronna G. Spacone
> > NIFL-4EFF Moderator
> > Ronna.Spacone@ed.gov
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

--------------2D6A6242EDF339BA11F245D5
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="regie.stites.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Regie Stites
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="regie.stites.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:Stites;Regie
tel;fax:(650) 859-3375
tel;home:(510) 339-8905
tel;work:(650) 859-3768
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.sri.com
org:SRI International;Center for Education and Human Services
adr:;;333 Ravenswood Avenue - BS188;Menlo Park;California;94025;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:regie.stites@sri.com
title:Educational Researcher
x-mozilla-cpt:;-12960
fn:Regie Stites, Ph.D.
end:vcard

--------------2D6A6242EDF339BA11F245D5--



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:30:20 EDT