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 iAULKoF26564; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:20:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:20:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <D74DDBFF74F65945B233D80D11E52C0909229261@cccmail.chemeketa.network> 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: "Virginia Tardaewether" <tarv@chemeketa.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:791] RE: Plateaus and grade levels X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 4207 Lines: 80 There are some similarities in the adult non-readers that I have known. 1) their families did not read at home 2) they were expected to learn to read like everyone else in elementary school so if that method of choice at that time didn't work for them, there were no options available 3) they sat in the back of the class and could not hear what the teacher said sometimes this was due to poor hearing, loud school noises, being of "other" races or "classes", having clothes that smelled, etc. 4) they were allowed to leave school by age 9 to 12 (3rd or 5th grade). Somehow the system didn't track them down or wonder where they were. Noone noticed they were no longer in school, or at least didn't get them enrolled. 5)They all joined the work force at young ages. 6) They had someone who supported/hide their literacy as an adult (read things and filled out forms for them, signed their name) 7)Their families moved and didn't enroll them in the new neighborhood school va -----Original Message----- From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov]On Behalf Of David Rosen Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 11:04 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:790] Plateaus and grade levels Posted for Bruce Carmel: Thanks to all for your thoughts on plateaus and grade level. I think the original question prompted an interesting discussion about assigning grade level to adults in literacy programs. Grade levels are usually determined by a standardized test, so there's yet another discussion. Good discussions to keep having, I say. But back to the original question, paraphrased and elaborated on by me... "How well can an adult non-reader ever learn to read?" I mean real non-readers. That's not people who test at the 3rd grade level. In my experience this means people are of normal intelligence who can usually write their name and some or most of the alphabet, and cannot read simple words in context. For example, in my doctoral research, I interviewed at a man who could not read "cold drinks" on a sign under a picture of a glass of Pepsi. He guessed that it said "big cup." The research I have seen, and I don't think there is much, looks at progess among people who can already read. Didn't NCSALL do some studies of people who tested at the 3rd grade level or something like that? I didn't do an exhaustive re-search so I am not citing anything, but I think I remember that they did not look at real non-readers. When I did my dissertation research, I looked at this question: "Why did adult non-readers not learn to read?" I don't hear that question asked much at all in our field. If I do, the answer is cursory: lack of opportunity or learning disabilities. What's the basis of such an answer? I think we operate as if the adults in literacy programs can learn if they are given the opportunity. Is this so? What is the reason they did not learn in the first place? If it's because they didn't get the chance, then our programs might be effective. But what if there is another reason that they didn't learn to read? What would that reason be? I hear a lot of vague talk about learning disabilities. But many people with learning disabilities learn to read. There is more....Seligman's "learned helplessness" seems like a fit to me. Some people may come to believe that they are not capable of learning to read. I think there is something about constructs of reading held by nonreaders. Adult non-readers to whom I spoke definitely define reading as decoding the letters, not about understanding the meaning of a text. Is that part of their problem? And then there is that whole window of opportunity thing. It's possible that some adults who cannot read could have learned as children, but did not have the opportunity. Have they now missed a window where literacy development is possible or at least much easier? How well can an adult who really cannot read learn to read? I would be very interested in hearing what the field thinks--based on experience or any research of which you know. Thanks from Bruce Carmel ich you know. Thanks from Bruce Carmel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:25 EST