[NIFL-WOMENLIT:2406] Re: students/learners

From: Sylvan Rainwater (sylvan@cccchs.org)
Date: Thu Nov 14 2002 - 14:01:17 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id gAEJ1HX04843; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 14:01:17 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 14:01:17 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20021114105917.009f2cf0@mail.aracnet.com>
Errors-To: alcrsb@langate.gsu.edu
Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: Sylvan Rainwater <sylvan@cccchs.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:2406] Re: students/learners
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0
Status: O
Content-Length: 1684
Lines: 37

At 10:03 PM 11/12/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Thanks to Judy and Gail, I think that I will go to a nearby adult
>literacy program and survey the students/learners and find out if they
>want to be referred to as students or learners.<SNIP>


Upon reflection, I find myself preferring "student" and "teacher." As 
someone else pointed out, we are all learners, and if I'm not learning as 
much as I teach, the process isn't working right. "Student" refers to a 
position within some sort of recognized structure, as opposed to just a 
general person out in the world. It signifies that a person has made some 
sort of commitment to enter into a situation where they can learn more.

As for "instructor," that sounds to my ear more like someone is imparting 
instructions, rather than someone who is facilitating a learning process, 
which is more what I think of with the term "teacher." As you can imagine, 
several years ago when I was officially referred to as a "Lecturer" in a 
situation where I was totally co-facilitating a student-led classroom, I 
found it at least laughable.


>  But is this always true? <SNIP>
>In other words, should we always let the person being referred to,
>dictate what we feel comfortable calling him/her? Even if we feel that
>the label they want to be called is either offensive, degrading,
>humiliating, etc?

Well, that gets into a whole other area. I think to some extent this has to 
be negotiated. Anyway, if there's disagreement, there's a lot of room for 
discussion and learning.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Sylvan Rainwater  .  sylvan@cccchs.org
Clackamas County Children's Commission
Oregon City, OR USA



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:45:49 EST