[NIFL-4EFF:1860] Re: What does a transparent approach mean?

From: gdemetrion (gdemetrion@msn.com)
Date: Mon Oct 22 2001 - 21:16:28 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 f9N1GS028858; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:16:28 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:16:28 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <001301c15b60$056b7140$d3a92a3f@computer>
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: "gdemetrion" <gdemetrion@msn.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1860] Re: What does a transparent approach mean?
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 2347
Lines: 59

Or, the the underlying dynamics that give shape to EFF will become so
transparent that its existence as a specific system will implode under its
constructivist assumptions.

George Demetrion

----- Original Message -----
From: <AndresMuro@aol.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 6:46 PM
Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1859] Re: What does a transparent approach mean?


> .and some people still like to argue that deconstructionism is B.S.
>
> Andres
>
>
>
> In a message dated Mon, 22 Oct 2001  5:19:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Bonnie Fortini <bfortini@acad.umm.maine.edu> writes:
>
> > I've encountered the word "transparent" before, back in the days when
> > computers were becoming more available and were impacting the
educational
> > system.  At that time computers and computer technology were predicted
to
> > become transparent technology which meant that rather than "clear" or
> > "lacking substance" the technology would be second nature to and for the
> > learner.  It would be a tool to be used to access or manipulate course
> > content.  It would not exist in and of itself.  In effect, the computers
> > we use would "disappear" by not being a barrier or something the
students
> > have to conquer to get to the learning.  I'd like to think that that is
> > what "transparent" will mean with EFF.  Not insubstantial, and not
> > immediately and completely understood by all, but a useful, approachable
> > tool to use in a myriad of settings (curriculum development, goal
setting,
> > instructional methodology, program/personnel review, accountability,
> > evaluation...).  As with computers it will take different people
different
> > ways and amounts of time to reach the point where they can use EFF
> > "transparently" and effectively.  But, unlike computers, EFF can work on
> > all platforms (roles, agencies, etc.) and won't require expensive
> > upgrades!  That's not to say there are no bugs in EFF, it is and will
> > continue to be a work in progress which means we can work out the bugs
as
> > we go.  What is exciting about EFF is that we can use EFF to work out
> > those bugs which only makes for greater effectiveness and validity, at
> > least from this practitioner's standpoint.
> >
> > Bonnie Fortini
> > Machias Adult & Community Education
> >
> >
>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 13:30:21 EDT