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 j3GNCZG23039; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:12:35 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:12:35 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <7f.5c3ded62.2f92f582@aol.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: MWPotts2001@aol.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:2981] Conflicting paradigms and confusing terms: exciting discussion
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5036
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Status: O
Content-Length: 2791
Lines: 64
Colleagues,
Thank you for the exciting and insightful discussion that has been taking
place on the list, beginning with Andrea's commentary on George D's book:
Conflicting Paradigms in Adult Literacy Education and continuing with auxiliary
comments in reference to Andrea's questions about EFF.
Thanks to all of you. Please don't stop now.
In a message dated 4/16/2005 6:02:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
gdemetrion@msn.com writes:
This EFF-like vision in linking the pedagogy of the new literacy studies
to
a politics of progressive reform is the underlying dynamic that is
seeking
to break out amidst the Conflicting Paradigms in Adult Literacy
Education.
These Conflicting Paradigms are so powerfully in place in our
contemporary
setting that they manifest themselves as almost a built-in check in
holding
back the onrushing of the creative energies that are seeking to burst
through throughout the various interstices through which a new paradigm
could take hold--a paradigm rooted in a coherent public philosophy that
speaks with power and convincingness to the exigencies of our reality in
the
contemporary setting in the USA. This public philosophy was largely
missing
in much of the public discourse on EFF in the past decade, but was
presupposed in almost every turn.
Now, George, my brain is mush after two weeks on the road, so I may be
confused here. But as Amy so skillfully reiterates in her message regarding the
history of the EFF project, public philosophy oozes through every pore of the
process of development and the products that resulted from that process.
As the leader of the team that conducted focus groups, which led to the
development of the Parent/Family Member Role Map, I can testify that public
philosophy forms the backbone and the high-rise structure of that map. The same is
true of the Community Member Role Map and the Worker Role Map.
Please enlighten me as to the difference between public philosophy in your
definition and my understanding of it.
You also state
Now, with EFF out of power, but still viable as a coherent framework for
effective pedagogy, it is also incumbent to articulate a
corresponding public philosophy to give the framework the full coherence it is
needed and to better establish it as a more viable
national movement.
By *out of power* do you mean *out of gas*? OR Out from under the umbrella of
power in Washington, DC--NIFL?
Thank you, Diane, for the message that tells us this: Even though EFF no
longer lives in DC, it is alive and well and living in Tennessee.
Again, thanks to all who are contributing to this lively discussion.
All the Best,
Meta Potts, Moderator 4-EFF List
Glen Allen, VA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:21 EST