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 i1HDi6I13931; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:44:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 08:44:06 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <004c01c3f55b$a3afc3a0$0b00a8c0@DDQPYT21> 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: "Art LaChance" <arthur@ellijay.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1044] Re: Light, not heat X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 6388 Lines: 130 After following these various threads for a week or so, I'd like to take this opportunity to ask the field represented here a question related to what I believe to be a critical factor in the delivery of adult literacy services, and something that I haven't seen seriously addressed anywhere in professional development from university or state admin levels, and I don't remember anything published along these lines being presented as a training option by national organizations. I also understand that I may have limited visibility here. But that is also part of the problem - I'm in a classroom weighed down by curriculum delivery and record keeping, management should be concentrating on providing appropriate training for the function rather than shifting the responsibility down to me for developing "what works". As a field we've discussed repeatedly the issue of test anxiety and how it affects assessment outcomes and student progress, or not. And we've discussed the issue of teacher certification and how some see a need and others treat it as some disease. But I think what's being lost in the shuffle is the need for teachers to be more than casually effective with the emotional responses of the adult student. My understanding is that the condition mimicks varying degrees of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). I see the anxiety as a result of a rather influential emotional disruption specific to certain criteria that is most commonly experienced in a "classroom" setting, the controlling conditions for which were initially setup in early childhood and are tied directly to sense of failure, most probably set in place by experiences in family, school, or peer situations. Therein, I believe, lies a problem that affects most adult literacy programs' effectiveness and ultimately funding since the funding formula contains factors like number of students and time spent in studies as well as level completions. If the field received formal training in the student referenced emotional issues we might find our recruitment and retention factors improve. Much along the lines mentioned here by Andres. Since there is no official "certification" of adult literacy teachers or assistants/aides we are able to employ all comers, and that isn't a bad thing, but what takes away from the credibility we do have is that many who become adult literacy teachers have never been in a position to evaluate or teach the academic skills, especially to an adult student who is pretty much overwhelmed with anxiety and fear of failure when confronted with the issue of "testing". We also need to be able to effectively deal with their personal acceptance of not being "ready" to take the GED test. I don't believe the ability to deal with situations like this could be termed a "common sense" factor on the part of the teacher, or in other words make an assumption that because the teacher is in a "help" position they understand the mechanics involved. I fail to understand why, when training of adult literacy teachers is a requirement set out by the funding source, do we as a field continue to train our teachers in those teaching methodologies that 1) didn't work the first time our students were exposed to them, and 2) totally ignore the students' emotional response issues, and/or depend entirely on maternal instinct as a cushion for the student. What we're saying here is that to become fully aware and effective in your teaching you must independently seek out the knowledge, that which you don't understand, and take a college course, other than Psych 101/102, that specializes in such information. The bad part is that our future funding is related directly to our effectivity now. Art Art LaChance Gilmer Learning Center Ellijay, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Rosen" <djrosen@comcast.net> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 5:17 PM Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1042] Re: Light, not heat > Maria and other NIFL-AALPD Colleagues, > > On Monday, February 16, 2004, at 04:20 PM, Maria Rosales-Uribe wrote: > > > I've been reading this back and forth with interest, > > but I must admit that at times I just delete even > > before I read. I joined this list after co-writing an > > article for "Focus on the Basics" and must admit that > > at times I'm confused on the purpose of the list > > serve. Is it staff development? Then what's this > > whole "research" debate on literacy? > > Could you please help me and clarify what is the > > principal purpose of this forum? > > Maria Rosales-Uribe, ABE/ASE Instructor and Resource > > Instructor, City College of San Francisco > > > As I see it some of the passion of this discussion about reading > research comes from attempts by some in Congress and the Administration > to narrow the mission of the National Institute for Literacy to helping > teachers understand and use "scientifically-based" reading instruction > practices. > > " (b) PURPOSE- The purpose of this part is to establish a National > Institute for Literacy to > provide national leadership in promoting reading research, reading > instruction, and professional development in reading based on > scientifically based research by -- ..." H.R. 1261 > > This position assumes that there is an adequate foundation of > scientifically-based *adult* reading research, which some would > question. It also narrowly re-defines adult basic and literacy > education staff development to include only reading. It would > eliminate from the NIFL's role in professional development assisting > adult educators to improve instructional practices in: writing, > numeracy, science, social science, listening and oral communications, > critical literacy -- most of ESOL and adult secondary education -- > transition skills needed for post-secondary education, work-related > basic skills and workplace literacy (how ironic that this might happen > under something called the Workforce Investment Act) computer literacy, > health literacy, and more. > > It is important to discuss on the one electronic list in the U.S. whose > focus is adult literacy education professional development a severe > narrowing of staff development focus in the country's leading national > adult literacy professional development institute. > > David J. Rosen > djrosen@comcast.net >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:39 EST