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 g1C2IDu16702; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:18:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:18:13 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <sc6834cc.085@mail.jsi.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: "Andy Nash" <andy_nash@jsi.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2041] Re: learning about learning X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 5.5.5.1 Status: O Content-Length: 1955 Lines: 38 Just a thought prompted by this Feb. 1 posting by Kirk Baker on student expectations of learning: ". . . understanding the common preconceptions about education in the students' home cultures is an important part of helping students to become self-directed learners, whether in ESL, incarcerated programs, or basic skills/GED. Doing activities around this that incorporate some of the skills required for these programs - including those identified by the EFF standards - can also lead for a chance for the instructor to share what approaches are valued in adult education today, and why. Explicit explanations, with supporting documentation, of why group work, student-centered activities, and student participation in content focus can conclude activities on how students view education and why." When I was teaching ESOL, I tried to make my own thinking explicit so that students would understand why I was teaching the way I was. We talked about teaching and learning a lot. When students requested traditional methods, I would sometimes say, "I'll teach the way you're asking me to teach for a week and then the way I think best for a week, and then we'll talk about it." What happened is that we all got a chance to examine the strengths and limitations of our preferred approaches. In our discussion, the rule was that we weren*t allowed to express opinions without saying why we had them. We usually came to some compromise (more games than I would have liked, more unscripted conversation than they had expected, etc.), born of everyone being heard and being part of the decision. Through these discussions, the students became clearer and more articulate about their learning (metacognition) as they developed a greater awareness of the alternatives. And they were more open to tryng new (to them) approaches because other students - not me - spoke up for them. Andy Nash New England Literacy Resource Center/World Education EFF Staff
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:45:26 EST