[NIFL-AALPD:311] Sustained PD

From: Amy Trawick (atrawick@charter.net)
Date: Thu May 01 2003 - 10:56:25 EDT


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 h41EuPU15065; Thu, 1 May 2003 10:56:25 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 10:56:25 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <004b01c30ff2$0354d7a0$8bcdc418@pavilion>
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: "Amy Trawick" <atrawick@charter.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:311] Sustained PD
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 6181
Lines: 142

For those of you who are interested, I'd like to bring up another thread of
discussion.  (I do appreciate the other thread and am learning much from it.
Please continue!)

Here's the thing:  Effective instruction in any skill area (reading, math,
etc.) requires a wealth of knowledge about both 1) how people learn that
skill and 2) how to *teach* that skill.  Development of the knowledge and
skills to address the wide range of abilities (related to any skill) typical
in an adult ed classroom requires study, practice, reflection, feedback,
etc.  We KNOW that change is not going to happen in a one-shot workshop.
YET, we also know that, especially now, we do not have the funds to support
long-term professional development.  (I see this as a huge advocacy issue by
the way--how can we be held accountable for using research-based practices
and meeting reporting requirements when funds are not provided to access the
training--over time--we need in order to do these things?)

So, I'd be interested in hearing from those responsible for professional
development at the program, regional, or state levels ideas related to the
following:

1)  Although funds are limited, some programs and states are finding
creative ways to provide long-term staff development around a topic of
interest.  One way is that, instead of providing a hodge-podge of
workshops/PD opportunities on a variety of topics throughout the year, a
decision is made to streamline and focus efforts on one issue in order to
provide the intensity over time to bring about sustainable changes in
practice.  I know of several programs (including those who participated with
me in the EFF Reading Project pilot) who focused their PD attention this
past year on reading.  I've also heard of particular state PD systems who
have streamlined their PD offerings in order to provide focused leadership
around reading.    I think we would benefit from hearing from programs and
states who have attempted similar focused PD over time (not necessarily
related to reading):  Why did you do it?  How did you do it?  What have been
the results?

2)  Whereas my own passion involves reading, I am quite aware that there are
other issues that practitioners want and need PD about.   What gets lost in
focusing the majority of a program or state's PD efforts around one issue,
in particular, for a period of time?  What are ways you have found to
address other PD needs while still providing an in-depth focus on a major
topic?

Thank you!

Amy

Amy R. Trawick
Coordinator, Equipped for the Future Reading Project
North Wilkesboro, NC
336-667-1910
atrawick@charter.net









----- Original Message -----
From: "George E. Demetrion" <sophocles5@juno.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 9:10 AM
Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:304] Response to Sherry


> 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