Words are important for the sake of clarity of expression, and should be used properly (my current pet peeve is the universal overuse of the term "absolutely").  
 
And I agree with Jeffrey Fantine that being too wordy can lead to confusion.  But I also see that excessive attention given to "wordsmithing" can detract from an issue and make us overly worried about anything we say. Criticisms of the use of the term "lurker" is one previous example that comes to mind.  In the case below, "improve" is seen as having a negative context, that something is wrong.  I see "improve" as implying that something is not perfect, not static and can get better, and not one of these characteristics is normally deemed a criticism.  Professional athletes who have completed spectacular seasons will be the first to tell you that there is still room for improvement in their performance.  Moreover, the word "advance" could also imply that one is lagging behind.  And on we go (or can't go) because we get mired in trying to be perfectly politically correct with each word used.
 
Submitted respectfully,
 
Allan French
ESL Instructor
South Seattle Community College
afrench at sccd.ctc.edu
 

-----Original Message-----
From: professionaldevelopment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:professionaldevelopment-bounces at nifl.gov]On Behalf Of jeffrey A fantine
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:39 AM
To: The Adult Literacy Professional Development Discussion List
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 1781] Re: AALPD: Please post feedback byDec. 7th



PD Peeps: 

I've been reflecting on the AALPD PD Standards, as many of you have, and would like to share the following comments (I, like Mev, did not read the entire discussion to date, so some of this may have been said already): 

1. I think the committee did a great job of drafting these standards - probably because they are very similar to the PD standards developed by the National Staff Development Council and I've always liked theirs: <http://www.nsdc.org/standards/index.cfm>. 

2. In the heading of the table under "standards," it reads "PD that improves the instruction and learning for all adult learners." I suggest, "PD that advances the field of adult education" or something other than the deficit model (in other words, not using the word "improves") - PD is necessary for any field, and it's never ending - so let's not suggest something is being done wrong by using the word "improves" - maybe something like, "PD that ensures appropriate adult education services are provided in order that all adult learners meet their goals." - or "equips," or "allows for" ... 

3. My personal opinion is not to make them too wordy - which ultimately tends to make them confusing and attempt to tackle too much. I would suggest making them very short and explicit: 

For example 
Quality PD is PD that: 
1. builds knowledge and skills. 
2. is based on research. 
3. is flexible, varied and ongoing. 
4. is driven by data, relevant stakeholders, and a written plan. 
5. accommodates all learners. (although this should be an indicator for #1 or #6 depending on what is meant here) 
6. practices what is preached. (models adult learning theory) 
7. is supported by leadership. 
8. fosters collaboration. 

Column 2 is where we should elaborate on each one of these with indicators. I may be the only one on this list that prefers fewer words, but as the saying goes, sometimes less is more... 

If you do keep them relatively the same - I would consider combining #'s 3 and 4. 

-J 


--On Thursday, December 06, 2007 12:25 PM -0500 "Taylor, Jackie" <jataylor at utk.edu> wrote: 


> http://www.aalpd.org/AALPDStandardsandIndicatorscombined11-06-07.doc 




Jeffrey A. Fantine 
Director, Literacy Center 
College of Education 
Ohio University 
340 McCracken Hall 
Athens, OH 45701 
800-753-1519 
Fax: 740-593-2834 
www.ohio.edu/literacy 

"You must be the change you want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/professionaldevelopment/attachments/20071207/804bda81/attachment.html