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 g86D9EX06617; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:09:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:09:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <000701c255a6$0d4430a0$09150785@fedu.fukuiu.ac.jp> 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: "Charles Jannuzi" <jannuzi@edu00.f-edu.fukui-u.ac.jp> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:7936] Re: Purpose of the NIFL-ESL List X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2089 Lines: 44 The following is posted simply as this list member's suggestions and comments regarding what David J. Rosen posted. >1. Is the focus of the list adult and family ESL/ESOL (not k-12) ? The point is: why should one focus exclude another? Clearly there is overlap anyway. I certainly don't think one focus should necessarily give one group the right to tell someone to be silent. Perhaps the solution would be to establish a few more lists? Especially given the mismatch between the stated goals of NIFL and NCLE and the limited focus of NIFL-ESL. > > 2. What are the expectations about critiquing/complaining about/railing > against a specific school or program? (On the national electronic list > which I moderate this is not permitted because not everyone has access > to a range of information and points of view about a particular local > program, those responsible for that program are not always subscribers > to the list and, a national/international electronic list is not the > place to address local problem, regardless of how serious they may be. I think Mr. Harrison was criticizing an entire county actually. Even Frederick Countians are entitled to ignore it or respond to the criticisms. While the criticism could have been set up more to provide more context for list participants, it was quite clear his perspective was that of a classroom teacher--often the most revealing perspective. What was needed was a rational but empathetic discussion of what Frederick may or may not have in common with the rest of the region and country. As for people or organizations who are not on the list, as a member of the list, I ask, Why should those who are not on the list limit the possible scope of what we might discuss? I know this list has a conservative (often religious) vs. liberal divide, and one of 'insider' (academic programs, school districts, research agendas) vs. 'outsider' (do we know you?) divide--if past blow ups are any indication. I don't think reinforcing or rehearsing such divides is going to help Frederick's problems. Charles Jannuzi Fukui, Japan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:44:19 EST