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 i1F2VUI01463; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:31:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:31:30 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5534DBE6-5F5E-11D8-BFFA-00039381D39E@comcast.net> 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: David Rosen <djrosen@comcast.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1030] Light, not heat X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 1908 Lines: 42 Andres and Tom, If you want me -- and very likely other NIFL-AALPD readers -- to pay attention to your arguments, please use reason and cite evidence. Abjure ad hominem arguments, sweeping generalizations, sarcasm, and shouting (capitalized words are considered shouting in the e-list environment.) Tom, concisely, what are your arguments, and what is your evidence, especially scientifically-based evidence which you may have for your arguments about reading and spelling as they apply to adults. What scientifically-based research on adults is the basis of your (and Robert Sweet's) arguments? Are you arguing, for example, that the reason that _all_ adults in America cannot read is that they did not have as children (and now as adults do not have) teachers who were well trained in phonics methods? (If not all? Then how many, what percent? What's your evidence?) Andres, are you saying that phonics-based approaches will not be of significant help to dyslexic adults who have difficulty decoding words, or are you saying that this is just one group of adults who have reading difficulty and that there are others? Lay it out for us. What are the various causes of adult reading difficulty? What's your evidence? And please, if you can, tell us what you think the implications of your arguments are for staff development, the focus of this list. How should we be "training" teachers of native English speaking adults who cannot read at all or who are reading at NALS Level 1 for example? Should the training be different for teachers of adults who are learning English, SPL 1-3, for example? What should teachers of adults know and be able to do to help adults who can read (who have decoding skills, some automaticity, and a fairly good vocabulary) but who cannot read well, or critically? Shed some light, please. Thanks, David J. Rosen djrosen@comcast,net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:39 EST