Return-Path: <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i4BBf7m15396; Tue, 11 May 2004 07:41:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 07:41:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <20040511.073604.6398.0.socrates555@juno.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "George E. Demetrion" <socrates555@juno.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:541] what is considered valid representation X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 Status: O Content-Length: 6261 Lines: 156 Perhaps this message I placed on the AAACE/NLA list has some bearing on our discussion here. The message was a response to a recent mesage by Tom Sticht in which he made reference to the information in the following link: http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/Database/basicskillsupdate.html#dries For our purposes here, perhaps it is the manner in how representation is discerned that is of critical importance. That, in turn, may depend on whether one needs a certain selective standardized set of data for each student, or whether, if the object is program evaluation, whether some type of sampling might do that would include in-depth infomation on an appropriate segment of students in a program. The matter of research paradigms or some blending thereof, then, would be related to what counts as legitimate representation and the grounds by which that is to be established. Granted, that unless there is some substantial change in policy, this is all academic, though I think the theoretical discussion on the various ways that representation can be conveyed remains important in itself as part of the broader (and longer term) work of establishing a sound intellectual infrastructure to ground adult literacy practice. As argued below, the policy issue requires some fundamental addressing of values, along with a more discriminating understanding of social scientific research, which in my view can't be sharply divorced from critical discussions in philosophy and cultural and social analysis. How exacting social science can be in relation to a field like adult literacy education, is, in my view, an important part of what requires more intricate attention, to which, I think, the postpositivists have helped in moving this work along. George Demetrion __________________________________________________________________ ----- Original Message --- From: gdemetrion@msn.com To: aaace-nla@lists.literacytent.org Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 7:33 AM Subject: [AAACE-NLA] policy orientation in England not that different than inthe US? In reading Tom's message and skimming through the content on the link, I continue to be confirmed in my own view is not that adult literacy education has no impact on the lives of participating students and their families, but rather, what counts, at least in the policy arena and media is relatively short-term concrete impact, which can be reduced to some version of what is perceived as effective functioning. While, of course, such impact is one important result (actual and potential), to reduce what becomes viewed as legitimate expenditures of resources to such a category misses a great deal of the many ways (actual and potential) that adult literacy has positive effect not only within the lives of participating students and their families, but in the broader culture and society as well. The issue is not so much impact, though more work on tracing the intermediate and longer-range influence of adult literacy through a variety of methodological means is always needed. On that score, I would place extensive case study, including collective and comparative studies of participating individuals at a higher level of prominence than such research currently holds at least in policy circles. The issue turns on what counts as viable representation as the case studies cannot merely stand on their own. I argue that it is only a mathematical assumption that equates representation necessarily and exclusively with statistical uniformity. Clearly, that is one form of representation, which, as I understand it, requires rigorous control of independent variables (and only a few), which in terms of the interacting influences of adult literacy on and within the lives of individuals is not so easily separated at all. The temptation then is to forego scientific rigor and push the qualitative pole which states something to the effect that "this can't be quantified into some statistical report." The challenge, in my view, is to be as logically and empirically rigorous as possible while accounting for the complexity and diversity of that which is being studied. Maximum coherence with the data is how Nicholas Rescher describes the challenge in his important Philosophical Reasoning: A Study in the Methodology of Philosophizing. Thus, on the view that I'm proposing, 100-200 very well developed longitudinal case-study analyses that at least reasonably take into account the diversity and range of the field under study would go a long way toward addressing the issue of representation in a manner that does justice to the complexity of the issues involved. That does require a shift in values, first, in defining the parameters of legitimacy in what counts as research, and second (and more importantly), some sustained policy and public commitment to adult literacy education even at some very basic levels, even before "all" the data is in. I place "all" in quotes, because any such assertion that "all the data" can ever be discerned, never mind collected and analyzed is a misplaced assumption in my view. The issue is less data and impact, though questions surrounding these are always important. I believe the underlying issue is that of values in terms of what is viewed as what counts both in terms of legitimate research and what the society and culture deem as priorities. There is much that is happening in our culture emanating from high places that is not grounded in rigorous scientific analysis as defined by the positivist and neo-positivist research traditions. Without a sustained grappling with these broader issues, efforts at situating adult literacy in current dominant paradigms of research and policy will continue to be highly problematic, however important that work is as part of the agenda of what adult literacy advocates (advocates as broadly speaking) do. The other part is to challenge the dominant paradigms toward the reconstruction of research and policy that gives adult literacy more of a fighting chance to stand on its own merits, both in terms of current impact and potential impact should conditions become more favorable in providing broader support for this important aspect of the nation's educational system. George Demetrion
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:15 EST