[NIFL-TECHNOLOGY:3139] Re: Cross post: scientifically-based reading research

djrosen@comcast.net

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:17:22 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <E6210556-51EF-11D8-AD17-00039381D39E@comcast.net>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: David Rosen <djrosen@comcast.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-TECHNOLOGY:3139] Re: Cross post: scientifically-based reading research
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Status: O
Content-Length: 2838
Lines: 73

Bonnie,

Thank you for posting this question here,  in the context of technology 
and literacy.

  I would agree that using practices which have been demonstrated as 
effective by sound research makes sense.

The problem is -- and we need to explain this to policy makers  --  
that there is so little sound research in adult literacy,  even less in 
the use of technology and adult literacy, that if our field were 
required to use only practices based on research, we couldn't offer 
much service.  Such a requirement would bring the publicly-funded adult 
education system to a screeching halt....and there would be almost 
nothing that we could do using electronic technology.

I see two implications:

	1) NIFL should continue to disseminate good practices, and to feature 
those which are backed up by sound research. (I am leaving aside the
               question of what sound research is, for now.)
	2) The federal government, through NIFL and through all its education 
research grant programs, should significantly increase its investment in
               adult  literacy research; and in the context of this 
list's focus, we need federal resources for research to answer some 
fundamental, as yet
               unanswered, questions about the use of technology in 
adult literacy.

I invite NIFL-Technology participants who would like to contribute 
their thinking about technology and adult literacy models to the 
discussion on evidence-based adult education to join us for this 
discussion which is beginning in a day or two.  To subscribe, go to:
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/ebae

David J. Rosen
djrosen@comcast.net

On Wednesday, January 28, 2004, at 05:48 PM, Bonnie Odiorne wrote:

> Sorry to cross post, but I think this issue's important for all lists. 
> If
> NIFL is to support adult education practitioners with the field's "best
> practices", how does this impact our work, especially as it concerns
> technology?  In a recent conversation with a legislative aide, 
> apractitioner
> reported that the aide said "that he didn't necessarily see
> 'researched-based' [practice/teaching] as a problem [for adult literacy
> practitioners], as he put it, 'that means you just have studies 
> showing that
> what you do works, and you don't just go doing whatever you want to 
> do'."
> What if "whatever we want to do" involves enhancing reading 
> instruction with
> technology training, as in my program? There has been a thread of
> conversation about reading and the Internet. What direction do you see 
> NIFL
> taking? Do you see limits to your practices here?
>
> Warmest Regards,
> Bonnie Odiorne Ph.D
> Program Faciliator
> Working Smart
> Computers 4 Kids
> Silas Bronson Library Information Technology Center
> Waterbury, CT
> Integrating Technology, ABE and ESL Instruction
>
>
>