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 h41DBFU11057; Thu, 1 May 2003 09:11:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 09:11:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <20030501.090746.6870.0.sophocles5@juno.com> 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: "George E. Demetrion" <sophocles5@juno.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:304] Response to Sherry X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 Status: O Content-Length: 3189 Lines: 73 Dear Dr. Royce: There is absolutely nothing preventing you and others from initiating the discussions you would like to have. The beauty of listserv discussions is that they enable many discussions to flourish simultaneously. Several of have made an argument as to why the current threads are relevant to this list. What we haven't seen is anything remotely resembling a point-by-point counterargument. Nor have the issues which have stimulated this current thread been addressed. Politics are being played out at many levels on the open airwaves and behind the scenes of forces shaping what is and what isn't viewed as publicity legitimate. What's being discussed here has everything to do with professional development. I'm more than a little concerned about efforts to marginalize this discussion by sending us off to the hinterlands. The point is not our capacity to have private discussion among ourselves, but public discussion about issues that matter on the open airwaves. Why are so many people hostile to that? Just change the subject, but please don't inhibit us for pursuing these matters, which are being thrust upon us by various political forces stemming from current DC policy perspectives. If this is all about defining reality (and make no mistake, it is), then I vote for a healthy pluralism even amidst conflicting perspectives then a passive conformity to a broadly-based given political "reality" where other voices are marginalized or repressed. In all seriousness, how about you. Professional development, itself, is impaired in a political culture that seeks to colonize the field of public legitimacy. With respect (and I mean that) George Demetrion On Thu, 1 May 2003 08:38:49 -0400 (EDT) Sherry Royce/C <sjroyce@comcast.net> writes: >Andres: >I recently recommended this list to my professional development >colleagues in Pennsylvania in the hopes that it would deal with ABLE >teachers and trainers' best practices and research related to them. I >find that it has become a rehash of the NLA list which addressed >political and philosophical issues with the same correspondents who >have>apparently more time than practitioners to state their views. That was >the intent of that list and accepted as such. > >I do not find those discussions appropriate for this listserv and as >the>number of resignations indicate a waste of time for professional >development specialists and teachers who have little time but a great >desire to improve ABLE practice. With the current financial situation >in>the field, there are few places to go to network with knowledable >colleagues interested in best practices. This site had and has >enormouspotential if it is left to deal with current problems and solutions >such>as those called for by the US Department of Education's Clearinghouse >for Best Practices (website: http://www.w-w-c.org/topic4.html). > >If you and Catherine and Janet and George want to talk with each other >about politics and philosophy, why not try an AOL chat room? > >Sherry Royce > >Dr. Sherry Royce >Royce & Royce, Inc. >1938 Crooked Oak Drive >Lancaster, PA 17601 > >Tel: 717-569-1663 >email: sjroyce@comcast.net > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:15:08 EST