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 i1IL9FI03790; Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:09:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:09:15 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <001601c3f660$b8af5ee0$130101c8@workstation1> 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 Demetrion" <george.demetrion@lvgh.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1074] Designated www.site 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: 4830 Lines: 142 Robert, The National Adult Literacy database (NALD) in Canada might be a good place for that: http://www.nald.ca/fulltext/search/ Tom Sticht and I stateside have placed a lot of documents there Generally, they would simply house your document to which you would refer readers. Perhaps folks from NIFL-Technology or others might have some other suggestions that could be more finely tailored to what you might need. George Demetrion ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Runyon" <rrunyon@mail.unomaha.edu> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 3:28 PM Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1070] Re: Light, not heat > > > > > David > I have an informal report of a qualitative research study I did > entitled "Adults Learning to Read with Recycled Computers." > It's evidence-based "research", based upon "soft" interviewing > practice, and not rigorous in a formal sense. > I'd like to share it with others for their reactions, but I don't > believe this listserve will accept attachments. > Can we refer to designated www site where such documents might be > loaded and consulted by members of this list? > Bob > ___ > Robert S. Runyon, program chair, Literacy Center for the Midlands > (www.midlandsliteracy.org) > Library dean emeritus, University of Nebraska at Omaha > ----------------------- > Home: 2130 South 80th Ave. Omaha, NE 68124-2218 > e-mail: rrunyon@mail.unomaha.edu Tel:402-393-3320 > > > > > > David Rosen > <djrosen@comcast. > net> To > Sent by: > nifl-aalpd@nifl.g Multiple recipients of list > ov <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> > cc > > 02/18/04 06:49 AM > > > Please respond to > nifl-aalpd@nifl.g Subject > ov [NIFL-AALPD:1050] Re: Light, not > heat > > > > > > > > > > > Tom, > > Andres Muro has responded to my request with serious arguments and > citations. George Demetrion has added his own arguments and citations. > I, and perhaps others, would be interested to hear yours. If you > disagree with Andres and or George, what do you disagree with? Why? > What evidence do you have from theory or research? And please, on this > list, connect your arguments and evidence with recommendations for > professional development. > > Thanks. > > David > > David J. Rosen > djrosen@comcast.net > > On Saturday, February 14, 2004, at 09:31 PM, David Rosen wrote: > > > 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 - 09:45:40 EST