When the decision was made to revise the standards, it was based on what
we had heard from our teachers.  They had done some reflective thinking
- what's working, what's not, what do we think about it, what do we need
to do differently.   There was now more research and evidence available
about adult learning than existed in 1998.  We had teachers apply to
work on the revisions, just as we had them apply to work on the
development, so we had people who were really interested and who had
worked with these tools.  

As for process - we surveyed the field about the standards in each of
the content areas; we took their feedback; we broke into teams of 6-10;
we looked at the research and the evidence; we looked at resources that
had become available..  We discussed and argued and came to agreement
and wrote for 2 1/2 days; left, reviewed, came back several weeks later,
reviewed, discussed,argued agreed, wrote some more, left, reviewed.  In
all a revision to one content area took about 10-15 days stretched over
2 to 3 months.  I will say that by the end of 2 1/2 days, your mind is
rather frazzled, so when we left, we gave ourselves "homework" as well
as some "away" time.  We had a marvelous facilitator who, when she first
started in '98 was not familiar with adult education, but was willing to
and did learn about it.  She helped keep us on task, was familiar with
the process of writing standards, helped find some of the research and
resources, was able to help us be clear in what we were writing and
provided gentle but fierce critiques of our products.  She learned from
us, and we from her.  She brought an objectivity and perspective from
outside adult education, which ensured that our product would speak, not
only to adult educators, but to K-12, higher ed people, funders,
decision-makers, politicians.   

Is it worth it?  We believe so.  There is a real richness of material
for content, proficiency and sample activities.  The standards provide
guides and flexibility, and best of all they come from the field.  This
is not the Department of Education imposing the standards, rather
teachers and learners who have said "what does the adult learner need to
know and be able to do"(content); what does it look like when the adult
learner"knows" it and what would be some evidence of that progression of
"knowing" (proficiency), and what would be some contexts that a teacher
and learner could use for this learning (sample activities). 

In the end, I would say, that if you go through the process of
developing standards and use them, you can't help but think about
revising them.  Because if that thought doesn't cross your mind, I would
bet that the standards have sat on shelves and not been used.    

-Miriam 

-----Original Message-----
From: contentstandards-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:contentstandards-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Aaron Kohring
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 6:10 AM
To: The Adult Education Content Standards Discussion List
Subject: [ContentStandards 83] Re: What are States doing with Standards?

Miriam,

Thanks for sharing information with us on Arizona's Standards.

Can you say a little more about what led to the decision to revise the
Standards?  And what was the process you went through to revise them?

Thanks,
Aaron

At 08:27 AM 3/28/2006 -0700, you wrote:


>Arizona has had Content and Performance Standards for Adult Education 

>since 1999.  The process started in 1998.  We have standards in 

>Reading, Writing, Math, Science, Social Studies, Citizenship, ESOL 

>(renamed ELAA- English Language Acquisition for Adults in 2005), and we



>added Technology in 2005.  We've also revised the standards (except

>Citizenship- waiting for the new test from USCIS, and Technology - 

>they're new enough.)  The fact that we've already revised our standards



>should be a hint to others.  They need to be living documents that 

>respond to teacher and learner feedback, and you have to have the 

>leadership that will support the fact that they are dynamic and those 

>dynamics need to be continuously looked at and, when necessary, time, 

>talent and the field need to be involved in updating and revising.

>

>Renee Sherman talked about the Standards Warehouse and the guide that 

>was developed.  The guide should be "must reading" for states 

>undertaking standards development.  I wish we had one when we started.

>And the warehouse itself is so valuable.  The taxonomies related to the



>content areas allow you to see how various states have addressed ideas,



>concepts and skills in those content areas.  No small accomplishment!!

>And it's almost as if this conversation about content standards has to 

>be aligned to the conversation that is happening on the assessment 

>list, because assessment should be aligned to standards.

>

>-Miriam Kroeger

>Arizona

>

>-----Original Message-----

>From: contentstandards-bounces at nifl.gov 

>[mailto:contentstandards-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Aaron Kohring

>Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 6:55 AM

>To: AE Content Standards

>Subject: [ContentStandards 80] What are States doing with Standards?

>

>Greetings all,

>

>After reflecting on postings from the past week on National Standards, 

>I reviewed questions that subscribers have sent to me about Standards, 

>in general.  The most common question appears to be: What are States 

>currently doing with Standards?

>

>What is the process that States have gone through when developing or 

>creating Standards, adopting or adapting existing Standards (such as 

>Equipped for the Future or other Standards), or combining/linking 2 or 

>more sets of standards?  What have been the major challenges in this 

>process?  What have been the benefits?  What changes have you seen in 

>your adult literacy programs as a result of the process?

>

>Are any States willing to share with us?

>

>Thanks,

>Aaron

>

>

>Aaron Kohring

>Coordinator, LINCS Literacy & Learning Disabilities Special Collection

>(http://ldlink.coe.utk.edu/)

>Moderator, National Institute for Literacy's Content Standards 

>Discussion List (http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/Contentstandards)

>Coordinator, Equipped for the Future Websites (http://eff.cls.utk.edu/)

>

>Center for Literacy Studies, University of Tennessee EFF Center for 

>Training and Technical Assistance

>Phone:(865) 974-4109 main

>            (865) 974-4258 direct

>Fax:   (865) 974-3857

>e-mail: akohring at utk.edu

>

>----------------------------------------------------

>National Institute for Literacy

>Adult Education Content Standards mailing list 

>ContentStandards at nifl.gov To unsubscribe or change your subscription 

>settings, please go to 

>http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/contentstandards

>----------------------------------------------------

>National Institute for Literacy

>Adult Education Content Standards mailing list 

>ContentStandards at nifl.gov To unsubscribe or change your subscription 

>settings, please go to 

>http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/contentstandards


Aaron Kohring
Coordinator, LINCS Literacy & Learning Disabilities Special Collection
(http://ldlink.coe.utk.edu/)
Moderator, National Institute for Literacy's Content Standards
Discussion List (http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/Contentstandards)
Coordinator, Equipped for the Future Websites (http://eff.cls.utk.edu/)

Center for Literacy Studies, University of Tennessee EFF Center for
Training and Technical Assistance
Phone:(865) 974-4109 main
           (865) 974-4258 direct
Fax:   (865) 974-3857
e-mail: akohring at utk.edu

----------------------------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Adult Education Content Standards mailing list ContentStandards at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/contentstandards