[NIFL-ESL:6839] RE: Tom Sticht's Democracy

From: Mary Hogan (maryhogan@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Jan 08 2002 - 10:31:43 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g08FVh010287; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 10:31:43 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 10:31:43 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <F254GwEUJlWZO8x96Pn000129bd@hotmail.com>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Mary Hogan" <maryhogan@hotmail.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ESL:6839] RE: Tom Sticht's Democracy
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Status: O
Content-Length: 5148
Lines: 107

Although my work is with immigrants, I almost wish I worked with 
African-Americans so that I could learn from you.  It is always a pleasure 
to read your intelligent, well-reasoned postings.


>From: KathleenBombach@aol.com
>Reply-To: nifl-esl@nifl.gov
>To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
>Subject: [NIFL-ESL:6837] RE: Tom Sticht's Democracy
>Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:26:17 -0500 (EST)
>
>Dear Miriam:
>I was not saying anything negative about the ESL list--I enjoy this list 
>very
>much because so many people come from so many directions, levels of
>experience, opinions, histories, etc.
>
>*I was responding to Sticht's article, not the ESL list.*
>
>Mary Ann Flores clearly lets a thousand voices speak, and I appreciate her
>for that. She has a deft hand and is always professional. ESL has many
>postings and a lower moderator-message ratio, and I felt the lists with 
>fewer
>postings overall and more moderator postings were portrayed *in Tom 
>Sticht's
>article* as somehow less democratic. Although the term 'democratic' was 
>never
>defined, we all know that being 'more democratic' is somehow a good thing.
>
>I think *all* the moderators on *all* the literacy lists do an excellent 
>job
>and deserve our never-ending support and appreciation. I am on another
>(non-literacy) list where the moderator is heavy-handed and the list sends
>constant, annoying form messages, such as notifying you when the moderator
>decides to post your message--as if you could not see your own message 
>right
>there on the screen. Very irritating, and much more work for the mderator.
>
>I did attempt to send my message to NLA (I do not know if it went through)
>because that is where the two year old discussion took place and where Tom
>posted his original report. But how could I not send it to ESL, which is
>where I read Tom's posting copied over from NLA? Remember, I am positing 
>that
>smaller lists with fewer postings and more moderator activity are also
>valuable and may be just as or more 'democratic' as are larger lists like
>ESL, but that is not a criticism of the ESL list. It is an intellectual
>criticism of the assumptions undergirding Tom's research.
>
>I am saying that volume of messages or level of moderator activity are not
>good measures of 'democratic' values, nor is the ratio of messages from
>different people a good measure if everyone's messages say the same thing.
>There is an assumption in Tom's piece that a lower ratio of messages from
>each individual participant is inherently a good thing. I do not think that
>is necessarily so. Nor do I think that a list with a higher ratio of
>moderator comments is a 'bad' thing.  In my opinion, the range and
>variability of content as well as ideological diversity matter more in
>measuring how 'democratic' a list is.
>
>But that is just me. I like spirited discussions and I am bored by
>repetition. I prefer one message saying something over ten messages from 
>ten
>people saying the same thing. I like intensity (like the recent
>Massechussett's adverted catastrophe, where I had my heart in my throat as 
>I
>drew parallels with local events and possible statewide events as the
>situation played out), opportunity to become aware of new knowledge and
>experiences (like all the discussion and examples of family literacy
>curriculum on the Family list), disagreement, conflict, and debate, and all
>the detailed expositions that people care to make.
>
>I have tried to start discussions of African-American literacy on most of 
>the
>lists, with very little response. It is hard to talk to yourself in a 
>public
>forum. CAL seems to be the literacy 'think tank' that pays most attention 
>to
>blacks and black language research and issues. CAL.org is where I heard my
>first Gullah, for example, and I recommend that everyone visit their 
>website
>and explore what is available. I do.
>
>I think anyone who lives in Washington DC knows there is more than one
>Washington. I do not think I need to say more. I come from the deep south,
>attended de facto segregated schools in the middle of the demise of de jure
>segregation. I lived in the south that still had 'colored' and 'white' 
>-only
>bathrooms, restaurant rooms, and drinking fountains. I grew up in the south
>when people asked why my sister and I were darker than other family members
>because that was something important to know in the great racial divide. So
>the mysterious lack of robust discussion on African-American literacy is
>something where depth and breadth of discussion matter. This is an example 
>of
>how counts and frequencies do not tell us anything about what list is more
>'democratic', *not* a criticism of the ESL list.
>
> >From the offline postings I have received every time I allude to the 
>Boston
>to DC corridor over the past few years, I seem to be hitting a few nails on
>the head. Sometimes we love and appreciate each other more when we are 500
>miles apart with no bus service.
>
>Kathleen Bombach


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:43:53 EST