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 hAIKpWm04754; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:51:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:51:33 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <000c01c3ae13$8e44efc0$130101c8@workstation1> 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: "George Demetrion" <george.demetrion@lvgh.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2613] Re: query X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 14080 Lines: 300 Thanks very much Marcia, and yes, you have posted to the list, which is fruitful for a broader discussion that might better enable various folks to think and work through the issues. First, let me say that it is heartening to hear that you are able to utilize EFF with beginning level students. That is important information in itself in helping the field to get a better sense of the various context in which EFF is effective and perhaps not effective. I'm still concentrating on the overriding issue of organizational culture as a major underlying issue. That's a very untested speculation on my part, one that appeals to my current way of thinking. In terms of your program, I'm wondering if you could talk (on the list) about some of the specifics of how you have utilized EFF; the relationship of the Framework to instructional materials, goal setting, and teacher development in your program. As you have time, some description the ways in which you brought EFF in, why, and something about its impact would also be helpful in shedding important context on this initiative. You have paid instructors. We're working with volunteer tutors. There is a fair amount of what Tom Sticht refers to as "turbulence" in our program even as there is a lot of creativity. Today, one of the tutors forgot to show up. I started with the materials he uses,a literature anthology. We read several poems about autumn that included a discussion of symbolic word meanings and imagery. We also worked on the students reading the passages with the intonation that the authors probably intended. I then found a selection of passages from our student anthology collection that was poetic-like in its narrative flow. The students (and I) enjoyed that spontaneous lesson a great deal. It was materials-based. The interactive engagement with the text, enhanced by the supportive group process, was high. Though utterly unplanned (as I did not intend to teach), I believe that the students not only experienced an enjoyable, but an insightful learning experience, which they conveyed to me. This is a question to the list: Say that in different ways, something of what I described about the interaction of tutor selected materials and student engagement throughout the learning process is characteristic of a dominant pedagogical style of our program--a program that is not, for the most part, goal driven or student-centered in the sense that students select or play a major role in choosing the instructional material. Say also, that, given the nature of our program, that this pedagogical style is an authentic reflection of our context that provides reasonable satisfaction for most students and most tutors most of the time. Say also, given the nature of our particular context, which includes my extremely right brain style, a substantial EFF overlay might simply be too much of an imposition, which does not adequately account for the "turbulence" in the program. Of course, I don't know that, but that remains a lurking suspicion that is not easy for me to shake. Say that at least, there's something to this apprehension. The question is, where does that leaves me in terms of appropriating EFF? I wouldn't assume there's a singular answer here. Moreover, the answer would depend >in part< on the extent to which I'm willing to push my experimentation with the Framework for the purpose of realizing something of value through any such effort.. I've been working on something else for a while and had put the EFF project done for a few weeks. I think I'm committed enough to it to get back into it in some capacity, though I remain uncertain as to its viability in our context. Perhaps others who are utilizing, thinking about, or having difficulty with EFF will discuss something of their experiences. There are a lot of underlying issues involved. I think it's valuable for us to be looking at them in a public format. (Note, I've kept all the chains of the previous discussions on this message to help keep the broader discussion intact). George Demetrion ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marcia Anderson" <manderson@newcastle.k12.pa.us> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2611] Re: query > Hi George, > > I hope I'm not replying to the entire list but I may be. I've been out > recuperating from surgery so am just reading your thoughts regarding using > the EFF framework with lower level students via tutors. > > Although we have a small number of tutors we provide most of our instruction > in small groups with paid instructors. We've found that lower level > learners often understand EFF much better (and quicker) than higher level > learners. They are so able to understand the roles and the standards and > take ownership very quickly. There are so many uses for this framework with > these individuals because it allows them to determine their goals and they > seem to take more responsibility for their own learning. In addition it > appears to be simple for them to transfer their learning from one role to > another. > > I don't want you not to consider using EFF with lower level students. > > Marcia Anderson > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "George E. Demetrion" <socrates555@juno.com> > To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> > Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 7:56 AM > Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2594] Re: query > > > > Thanks to everyone for the excellent feedback. > > > > It's obvious that there are some programs that are similar enough to ours > > in which EFF has been successfully implemented. That knoweldege, itself, > > is important data, regardless of problems that others may have had either > > (a) in implementing EFF, or (b) in determining whether the framework fits > > their educational, programmatic, and organizational structure. While > > briefly introducing EFF to one of our tutors who has a very solid grasp > > of how systems and organizations work, he emphasized the importance of > > identifying and articulating the benefits of what EFF potentially could > > bring to the program. That identification I will be doing, along with an > > analysis of the barriers and problem in a force-field analysis of costs > > and benefits. > > > > As part of that information gathering process, anyone thinking of moving > > forward with EFF in volunteer literacy programs would do well to listen > > closely to the collective experience of Jenny, Taylor, and Caroline. As > > a start (and I think it's worthwhile to have this discussion on the list, > > perhaps with more in-depth probing off-list), let me pose a query both to > > these folks and obviously anyone else who would care to respond: > > > > In terms of program implementation, how has EFF shifted what your > > students and tutors do together in their sessions? More specifically (and > > perhaps speculatively), can you talk about the shift in emphasis from a > > program where a wide range of instructional materials on various life > > themes (related to the instrumental, human interest, cultural, and > > aesthetic (fiction) has been the basis for both an emphasis on reading > > development and engaged discussion on a variety of themes (our program), > > to one that would be more problem focused (I presume) based on a clearer > > focus on goals for which the EFF model would ideally fit, in particular, > > for a small group setting organized on approximate reading levels (We no > > longer provide one-to-one tutoring). > > > > In your thinking can you include what would remain the same in terms of > > curriculum and instructional focus as well as what would likely be > > different? > > > > In bringing this out, if I thought the model we are working on (where a > > wide array of materials and themes are presented and tutors (mostly) > > choose what to work on, was working exceedingly well, I wouldn't be at > > this point in my re-thinking. To be sure, when this model works well, > > especially with our more gifted tutors who particularly like this format, > > there may not be much to change--though even with these folks an > > effective presentation of the EFF framework might well enhance what they > > are doing. > > > > The more perplexing issue is among tutors who may not understand > > contextual-based instruction well and who equate literacy predominantly > > (or exclusively) with reading and don't see the value in linking > > instruction to critical areas in people's lives. We discuss this (of > > course) in our training and the recommended materials that I have > > organized (or created) are linked both to levels and to the key topics of > > employment, family, civics, health, culture, and learning to learn. > > There are also a lot of other texts available and what often happens is > > that tutors become comfortable with two or three (and in some cases one!) > > sources, so that the reality is that instruction becomes material rather > > than content driven in the dynamic sense in linking up with areas that > > students are powerfully interested in. To be sure, there's some middle > > ground here in our student-generated texts, the News for You, the human > > interest stories, materials on culture, etc., and creative tutors do > > wonders with these resources. Even still, others seem to be at a loss, > > which may be linked to not quite having the connection between what they > > are seeking to accomplish in their sessions and what students want and > > need. And of course, everyone wants reading and that is always a > > bottom-line focus, to which obviously, there's much merit, though there's > > more, much more, and it is that which we also want to include. > > > > On a related note, the more improvisational style that I initially > > fostered coming out of models and themes of progressive adult literacy > > education of the early 1990s, where I cut my teeth, confronts a general > > quest for more structure that seems more pervasive in the current area. > > I personally think the tension between improvisation and structure is an > > important dynamic tension that I want to honor, to which I think EFF has > > the potential of helping us to realize, perhaps in a more creative way > > than that which is currently the case for us. > > > > I also have a sense that any serious implementation of EFF would require > > some significant changes in (a) tutor training and staff development and > > (b) curriculum design that would require some serious and sustained > > commitment on our part. That, combined with a lingering apprehension > > that EFF might very well represent an overshooting of what we could > > reasonably accomplish in our context. Obviously, stages of > > implementation and some experimental initiatives are important bridges in > > the mediation of such a shift, which in any final analysis, may remain > > partial (to a few of our groups or site), or perhaps program wide. > > > > Let me stop at this point. > > > > George Demetrion > > Literacy Volunteers of Greaterv Hartford > > george.demetrion@lvgh.org > > socrates555@juno.com > > > > > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:17:18 -0500 (EST) "Jenny Ransone" > > <JRansone@jcplin.org> writes: > > >Hi all, > > > > > >I coordinate a volunteer based library literacy program and I have > > >been > > >working with EFF in my program since 1999. EFF is imbedded in my > > >tutor > > >training and all other aspects of the program. I have to disagree > > >with > > >the comment about EFF being a "more structured" approach. I think in > > >many cases the difficulty in tutors grasping the intent of EFF is that > > >it is NOT very structured. EFF offers the framework. Everything else > > >is fluid and student centered. > > > > > >If you would like more information about how we incorporate EFF into > > >our > > >program, let me know what aspects you are most interested in and I'll > > >do > > >my best to address your questions and concerns. > > > > > >Jenny > > > > > >Jenny Ransone > > >Program Coordinator > > >Adult Learning Center > > >Johnson County Public Library > > >401 South State Street > > >Franklin, IN 46131 > > >(317) 738-4677 > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Taylor Willingham [mailto:taylor@austin-pacific.com] > > >Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 8:28 PM > > >To: Multiple recipients of list > > >Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2591] RE: query > > > > > >George, > > > > > >I think that your learning will be very useful. I spoke with the > > >Director of a volunteer-based literacy program about EFF and her > > >response was, "Our learners are at too low of a level to really use > > >EFF." This, of course, flies in the face of my own experience and what > > >I > > >believe EFF is about. I'm out of the direct service provider business > > >so > > >I didn't have any concrete examples to dispel her bias, but it would > > >be > > >nice to point to other programs that have an entirely different > > >experience! > > > > > >Taylor > > > > > >Taylor L. Willingham > > >Austin-Pacific Consulting Co. > > >P.O. Box 1255 > > >Salado, TX 76571 > > >254.947.3793 > > >866.215.0843 (National Issues Forums) > > >taylor@austin-pacific.com > > >www.texasforums.org > > > > > >.Connecting people, ideas and communities... > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Thomas, Catherine [mailto:CThomas@uws.org] > > >Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 4:55 PM > > >To: Multiple recipients of list > > >Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2590] RE: query > > > > > >George, > > >Cleveland Reads would be very interested in your initiative. We feel > > >strongly that EFF offers meaningful strategies to promote learner > > >achievement. However, I know that tutor training incorporating EFF > > >will > > >require a different kind of tutor orientation piece and therefore will > > >require a block of time on our part. We're not there yet but it's in > > >our > > >future plan, which is why I am enthusiastic about your project. > > >Catherine > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:14:48 EST