Duren and others,

One important piece that _is_ in our control as professional  
developers is to be sure that the course, workshop, presentation,  
study group or other PD offering is very carefully and clearly  
described.  A good description might include:

1) intended participants' knowledge and experience (An "Excel Basics"  
workshop might describe the intended participants as those "who are  
comfortable using a computer and competent with basic word  
processing, but who have little or no experience using a spreadsheet")
2) what the PD offering is (and isn't) intended to do (e.g. "Enable  
participants to organize a set of numerical data in a basic  
spreadsheet, but not to use formulas other than those which involve  
addition or multiplication")
3) how the offering will be conducted: in a lab, a discussion group,  
as a presentation with opportunities to practice, as an online  
course, etc.
4) the presenter's name and experience
5) what is required of the participants (e.g. "Given a set of data,  
produce a functional spreadsheet with accurate labels and correct  
formulae.")
6) if credit or CEUs are available (or not).
7) referral to other related offerings, if available, which may be  
for more (or less) experienced participants

In addition, if the PD offering requires registration, the  
registration form could be designed so that it requires a signature  
after a sentence that says "I have read the description of this  
(course, workshop, etc.) and believe that it is intended for someone  
with my level of experience."

In the evaluation of the offering you could ask participants to say  
whether it was at the right level and, if not, to review the  
description and indicate how the description could be improved.

I wonder if others have suggestions or additions to what should be  
included in a good PD offering description.

David J. Rosen
djrosen at comcast.net



On Nov 4, 2005, at 11:31 AM, Duren Thompson wrote:


> OK - I'm going to play devil's advocate here. What about the  

> following 2 scenarios:

>

> 1) We offer what is clearly labeled a course in "Excel Basics" or  

> an "Introduction to the Adult Learner" - describing the target as  

> "those new to the topic."  And yet even with that we have a broad  

> range of "skill levels" - one person who is competent in using a  

> computer, but has never used Excel sitting next to someone who  

> still has difficulty using a mouse - or whose keyboarding skills  

> are extremely low.  Or we have a participant with 20 years  

> education experience, sitting next to one who came to AE fresh out  

> of college, or one who has worked several years in Adult corporate  

> training but has no formal Education training?

>

> 2) Funding is provided for only one "workshop/course/training"  

> during this time frame or in this area of the state.  We have a  

> clear request from our statewide needs assessment for help with the  

> topic of "multi-level instruction."  How do we present this  

> material such that the new folks aren't overwhelmed, but the more  

> experienced AE folks feel challenged/get what they need?

>

> [Please note I am truly playing Devil's advocate here - I know what  

> *we* did to solve these issues, but would like to see if there are  

> other ideas out there that we haven't tried or thought of]

>

> Duren Thompson

> Tennessee State leadership Team

> Center for Literacy Studies

>

> At 02:46 PM 11/3/2005 -0600, Chris Francisco wrote:

>> Jeff and All,

>>

>> I completely agree with your statements.  Good on you!

>>

>> peace and love,

>>

>> Chris

>>

>>

>>> This question gets at the heart of "practice what you preach" in  

>>> adult education (at least in my opinion):  the art of  

>>> facilitating multi-level classrooms, integrating the strategy of  

>>> peer tutoring, review and reinforce of learning, building on  

>>> learners' prior knowledge.  These ideas that we suggest be a  

>>> fundamental part of the learning environment for our adult  

>>> learners in basic skills programs should be the same ideas that  

>>> we build our PD around:   build on participants' prior knowledge,  

>>> network and share ideas, engage more experienced participants to  

>>> extend dialogue, or challenge the more experienced participants  

>>> to extend or reinforce what they know (or think they know).  I  

>>> think it's important to know your audience ALWAYS - and never  

>>> plan an event so tightly that it isn't flexible enough to adjust  

>>> to the varied experience of your audience.

>>>

>>> Jeff Fantine

>>> Director, Literacy Center

>>> College of Education

>>> Ohio University

>>> 338 McCracken Hall

>>> Athens, OH  45701

>>> 800-753-1519

>>> fax:  740-593-2834

>>>

>>>

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

>>> Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list

>>> ProfessionalDevelopment at dev.nifl.gov

>>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

>>> http://dev.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment

>>

>>

>>

>>

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

>> Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list

>> ProfessionalDevelopment at dev.nifl.gov

>> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

>> http://dev.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment

>

>

>

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

> Adult Literacy Professional Development mailing list

> ProfessionalDevelopment at dev.nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

> http://dev.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/professionaldevelopment