Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id e9VIdr922990; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:39:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:39:53 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <LAW2-F37yqwdpOTziwi00004579@hotmail.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:275] questions about strategies X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 3299 Lines: 53 I was impressed by Kathleen's description of the process used by the Community Education Program to do what is traditionally considered intake. It also raised some questions for me about how system-wide requirements can affect the services and environment programs offer. From the description of a portfolio-based process of documenting knowledge and skills, and of not testing students unless they will enter certain programs, and even then not until they've had practice in test-taking, it sounds like Texas is not requiring up-front testing of all adult literacy learners. Is that the case? Here in Washington, ABE/GED and ESL are offered by both community colleges and community-based organizations, and everyone who receives state or federal money is required to use the CASAS Appraisal system to place students in classes. In Connecticut we had to use the entire CASAS system, appraisal and pre-posttests; fortunately, Washington does not appear to be heading in the direction of mandating that! The requirement that we assess students with the CASAS before placing them definitely constrains how programs do intake. Kathleen is right that giving a test such as the CASAS at the first meeting is intimidating to the students, though we've tried to organize "orientations" to ameliorate that fear and focus on what the program and college as a whole have to offer, and on the student's chance to explore options and be supported in setting and reaching goals. At the program level, how can we meet funders' requirements for accountability without scaring away students? How do we meet students' needs so that they want to continue with us and at the same time get the data and test scores we are required to keep? This question focuses on intake at the program level, but it seems to me that issues such as this pervade many of our programs and point to a fundamental schism between the individual and group needs of the people our programs serve and the systemic bureaucracy of accountability, commercial/standardized tests, and check-boxes on reporting forms. I don't think there has to be a schism; I think it comes from traditional thinking and lack of anything more than lip-service at the state and federal levels (often at the local level too) when it comes to support for real student-centered learning and assessment. Sorry if this is rambling; I'm not even sure how to frame the question, I just know that accountability to a legislature or its representatives is not the same as accountability to learners, and despite the rhetoric, we seem to be sacrificing the latter to the former. I think this relates to our discussion of poverty, racism, and literacy in that those who decide to whom and how we should be accountable represent the perpetual elite, and by focusing our attention on satisfying the accountability demands of lawmakers, employers, and other indirect stakeholders in adult basic education, we are less likely to focus on and truly work in solidarity with the people we "serve." _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:47:29 EST