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 j3GGmIG19443; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:48:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:48:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <BAY103-F14D8E1D1DE09CD8368B5C0C5370@phx.gbl> 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" <gdemetrion@msn.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2976] Re: the centrality of EFF X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 8129 Lines: 140 Thank you Andrea, Let me take another shameless opportunity to state that my primary objective in relation to the book is to encourage people to read it, comment upon it, critically or otherwise, and then to engage in as an extensive discussion upon it as the topic can bear. A couple of broad-based comments: First, I did seek to cover a wide swathe of topics over a 20+ years on a range of issues that are still in circulation. If there was a single inspiration for this book it was Juliet Merrifield's NCSALL report Contested Ground, in which I have been commenting on in one way or another (mostly implicitly) ever since I read it. As her text was a report and mine is a full-scale monograph (both valid in their own ways) I sought to flesh out a great deal, her historical sketch through the paradigmatic framework that you had laid out in your earlier message. Both Merrifield and I have commented upon the contested ground. Both in our own ways seek a common framework that would be needed to underlay any serious and successful effort to move the field from the margins to the mainstream with all the ambiguity noted that the latter term signifies. One of the key differences is that while Merrifield points to the centrality of across the board dialogue to achieve such commonalities of purpose (which I don't dispute), I argue that the matter cannot be effectively resolved without a reconstruction of the politics of literacy (which I don't think Merrifield would dispute) to provide a framework to such an arduous task. While EFF moved in that direction it didn't complete the task in identifying a coherent politics of literacy, which might have failed in any event given the high degree of pluralism and conflicting perspectives that govern discourse on this topic. Second, given the nature of the issues, their interrelated complexity and my insistence on bringing strong academic arguments to the discussion, not as an end, but as an instrument of analysis, I realize the text as a whole may be a heavy read for some. Consequently, some may get discouraged by the overall density of discourse, and thereby not take on the task of reading the book as a whole argument, which it is. Having said that, depending on where one's interests lie individual chapters can be read with profit. At the same time, I am seeking to make a broad analysis of the temper of our times vis-a-vis the cultural politics of adult literacy education, so that at least in my mind, there is a coherent structure that underlies the entire book. You had mentioned the importance of the NLA listserv in this book, and for that matter so is the NIFL-EFF at least for chapter 8. More fundamentally, there would have been no book without the NLA, as the initial drafting started with an analysis of several threads on the knotty issue of accountability. The narrative grew, in effect, by seeking context to make sense of those threads, in which the issue of accountability itself eventually became subordinated to the more fundamental topic of the politics of literacy. As evident to many, the listservs vastly extend both the nature and type of discourse that shapes public discussion of adult literacy education. One might say on a list what one would never say in an academic journal, and both types of communication represent what I view as valid public discourse in their own realms. As mentioned previously, I view the lists as an ongoing practitioner-based inquiry forum. In their cumulative impact, they represent one of the richest repositories of primary resources available for understanding the subtlety and richness of the field-- repositories, especially at the archival level. These repositories, in turn, get rarely studied in academic forums in which my book, hopefully, can serve as a prototype for many other books and articles that would be enriched by such analyses. Given all this, my objective is to be read by both the practitioner-based and research communities. To facilitate that objective, this is what I propose: What was born on the lists (this book in this case) let come to public discussion on the lists (one or several). Is there a question, comment, critical or otherwise, let it be put on the list. Are there some areas in the text where folks are feeling bogged down, identify where on the list and I will do my best to attempt to clear up whatever point or statement seems unclear, which other readers could do as well. Does someone have another viewpoint? If so, put it on the list and let's discuss. Are there some critical issues being raised in the text that beg of further resolution? Let those be noted and discussed. In short, I've spent about 3 years writing at least what I consider this broad-based study on a wide range of critical areas linked to adult literacy. Many of these topics have been raised in one fashion or another on this and other lists. In that respect, the book was really 8 years in the writing in which I spent 5 of those years in the trenches raising the issues, along with many others, on the various lists. Given this journalistic (so to speak) as well as academic background this book seeks to break through a lot of canonical assumptions about the authorial voice of say, the distanced academic writer. Surely, that voice is present in Conflicting Paradigms, but the voice is also present of the first person list participant, so that in this book (as is true in my listserv postings) I seek to blur the genres of what is viewed as canonically legitimate of both an academic text and a listserv posting. So let's try to understand this book via the mediums it seeks to embody. Whatever may be difficult in terms of comprehension, given the metaphor through which we operate, "literacy," there are a variety of ways to break through any problems of meaning when it comes to understanding this book, which I sought to summarize in the preface, and in a larger way, in Chapter 1. Given the various means of communication open to us especially, because of the lists, words in a book do not have to stay on the page, but can be lifted from it right here onto this stage, so that what may seem imponderable in one context can become quite clear in another when issues are examined in a dialogical encounter. Because I have been a full participant on the lists for years, I may perhaps feel freer than some to break through these artificial categories of "practitioner," "researcher," "theorist," and just raise and explore issues as they come, and work out the communication modalities in the process. In short, what is a text, who is an author; these questions are also part of the subtext of Conflicting Paradigms in Adult Literacy Education, which can be ordered most directly through the publisher at (https://www.erlbaum.com/shop/tek9.asp?pg=products&specific=0-8058-4624-7). The short answer, at least in terms of this book, is none other than that same person who has spoken on these and other list airwaves for the past 8 years. In short, traditional boundaries can, and IMHO, need to be freely crossed, lest orthodoxies of various sorts, say on who is a practitioner, who is a researcher, who is a theorist, what is a text, who can say what, where, become all too prevalent, a tendency all too disconcertingly real even as we speak. At least in part, the vitality of the pedagogy and politics of adult literacy hang on the willingness to engage in such experimenting on the nature and format of the written word and the seeking and articulation of "voice" wherever it may become manifest. George Demetrion ----- Original Message ----- From: AWilder106@aol.com Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 8:42 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2973] Re: the centrality of EFF So go ahead,George, be shameless! I think you found some key issues to present in your book, and your use of the NLA list serv was very effective. What I really admire is the fact that your book exists--that is a lot of hard work. Andrea
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:21 EST