Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h3PHlBU28763; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 13:47:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 13:47:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <fc.004c4d1911d818de3b9aca00d5e25647.11d81a1b@umit.maine.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Mary Schneckenburger" <Mary_Schneckenburger@umit.maine.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:256] Just phonics/qualitative research X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Status: O Content-Length: 3066 Lines: 34 I have worked with many adults who had never learned to decode until they came to my class. I have also worked with many adults who had great speaking vocabularies and who could decode but were not using any comprehension strategies. These are the ones who say, “I can read but I just don’t remember what I read,” clearly implying that they think decoding is all there is to reading. Recently I saw Roger Farr, of Indiana State, who said he felt that more poor readers suffer from a lack of understanding of the other parts of reading than decoding shortcomings. At meetings this spring, I have been sharing information about a balanced approach to reading which includes phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. When I work with teachers my goal is to model and share comprehension and metacognitive strategies. Of course, when I model and teach purposeful and contextual teaching and learning, I am suggesting also, that we find out where the student needs work and start from there. Switching topics: I have been taking a class this semester on Naturalistic Inquiry which required a qualitative research project so I have been interested in the discussion about Scientific research. I am just learning, but it is my understanding that both qualitative and quantitative research are scientific (although I realize that for many unfortunately, qualitative research does not seem scientific) and that both are important, serving different purposes. One kind can tell us who and how many or how often, while the other can tell us why or what people think and feel. It seems like both are important and that they can compliment each other. For my class project and also for work, I am doing a qualitative research study on how a group of about 50 teachers feel about a particular model of staff development. While I wouldn’t claim to be able to generalize my findings to all of America, it is possible that some insights would transfer to many other situations. I think my findings are valid and valuable, based on one kind of science. Within my data is evidence of all four levels of objectives, attitudinal, learning, behavioral and results. Regarding an earlier message, it wouldn’t be so hard to interview students to see if they think their teacher’s new workshop-learned techniques make it more likely they will stay in the class or a dozen other variations on teacher learning connections to retention. We don’t need to leave this for “experts”! I liked Eileen’s points that PD isn’t just what is “delivered”, (in my project, much of the learning happened in individual teacher projects) and do we really “develop” others. I consider myself a facilitator and did when working with students also. Maybe developing is like with film, where one draws forth the potential. Mary S Mary Schneckenburger Staff Development Specialist/Project Coordinator Center for Adult Learning & Literacy 5749 Merrill Hall University of Maine Orono, ME 04469-5766 207 581 2498 (office) 207 268 4013 (home) mary.schneckenburger@umit.maine.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:15:06 EST