Reply to:   RE: [NIFL-PLI] Learner participation in program improvement Our local adult education program has certainly struggled with student involvement in program improvement activities and has come at it from a variety of perspectives. Our intent is and has been to provide learners with input into program policy, but we haven't been as successful as we'd like. While I agree that a "student's main responsibility is to learn," I think that learning occurs in many contexts and that adults should have an opportunity to participate in major program decisions that impact their learning. 
This year, we opened a "class" for adults who would like to be more involved in program policy and operations and we've assigned a staff member to work with these learners to define specific leadership projects. We sent a team of two teachers and two learners to the VALUE training and they came back with ideas related to program improvement and things they'd like to work on. We also talked with them about areas where we'd like to have more student input such as intake/orientation of new students and the development of a periodic student newsletter. This class is still in the early stages, but we do have several learners who want to be a part of this group and a teacher who is willing to help them figure out how they can participate more fully in program leadership. This class isn't for everyone but, in my experience, there are always those student who want, and would benefit from, more involvement in program policy and operations. 
I've also had an opportunity this year to work with our local Head Start Policy Council and it strikes me that this is an interesting model for client leadership. The Head Start Policy Council consists of a group of parents and community members (mostly parents) who meet monthly with staff to participate in local program governance. Most Policy Council's have input into hiring, resource allocation, and major decisions that impact Head Start children and their families. Having attended several of our local meetings, I will say that the parent perspective is not always the same as the staff perspective. This has a plus and a minus. On the plus side, staff and families have an opportunity to engage in important discussions related to program operations. On the minus side, decisions take longer and significant time is spent each year helping new Policy Council members understand program operations.

My own bias as an adult educator is toward creating learning opportunities that allow adults to experience the power of literacy. This doesn't in any way negate, or take the place of, the nuts and bolts of good teaching and learning such as strong content, scope and sequence, and measuring learning outcomes. However, it does suggest that there is also a deeper exploration of how literacy can change an individual life. I have certainly experienced this in my own life and have grown both personally and professionally from talking explicitly with students about the many life changes they have experienced as a result of increased literacy.

Sandy Strunk
Lancaster Lebanon Intermediate Unit 13
Program Director for Community Education
1110 Enterprise Road
East Petersburg, PA 17520
(717) 519-1006

Kim Chaney-Bay wrote:

>Hi, folks.

>

>Last week I asked you about your thoughts on involving learners as part of >the program improvement team.  I've been talking about this over the last >several days with co-workers and other colleagues interested in pi.  One >co-worker noted that it's most important for the learner/customer >experience to be valued as part of the whole program improvement >process.  And that if the learner was to participate as part of a program >improvement team, that the program supervisors/directors should first be >very clear about the overall program issues and goals and make them >transparent.

>

>In thinking about this same issue, another colleague shared these thoughts: >"Program improvement efforts might very well benefit from students' >involvement and vice versa. I don't know. Until now, I've seen students as >primary beneficiaries of program improvement efforts but not as >participants in the process. I think a student's main responsibility is to >learn.  If being involved as part of a program improvement team helps >support that, then I think it's a good idea. (Whether it's practical or >not.) However, I think it's a good idea only if the student's involvement >is integral to their learning plans/goals. As a student or a teacher, with >the motivation, I would see my work on the program improvement team and in >the classroom as one, or as relative parts contributing to a coherent >whole. It's critical for learners to be involved in their own learning >processes but not in their program's improvement process."

>

>I look forward to your thoughts on this...

>

>Regards,

>Kim

>_______________________________________________

>NIFL-PLI mailing list

>NIFL-PLI at literacy.nifl.gov

>To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to >http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nifl-pli

>

>RFC822 header

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

>

> Return-Path: <nifl-pli-bounces at literacy.nifl.gov>

> Received: from relay.iu13.org ([unix socket])

> 	by mail.iu13.org (Cyrus v2.1.16-Lancaster-Lebanon-IU-13-Mail-Services) >with LMTP; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:17:15 -0500

> X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2

> Received: from gabbro.iu13.org (gabbro.iu13.org [172.21.1.73])

> 	by relay.iu13.org (Postfix) with ESMTP

> 	id 1B8DA4701F3; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:17:14 -0500 (EST)

> Received: from literacy.nifl.gov (literacy.nifl.gov [192.188.111.2])

> 	by gabbro.iu13.org (Postfix) with ESMTP

> 	id 7A21830076; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:17:10 -0500 (EST)

> Received: from literacy.nifl.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1])

> 	by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id iAB49jR09585;

> 	Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:09:45 -0500 (EST)

> Received: from mxsf24.cluster1.charter.net (mxsf24.cluster1.charter.net

> 	[209.225.28.224])

> 	by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id iAB435R09532

> 	for <nifl-pli at nifl.gov>; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:03:05 -0500 (EST)

> Received: from mxip03.cluster1.charter.net (mxip03a.cluster1.charter.net

> 	[209.225.28.133])

> 	by mxsf24.cluster1.charter.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id

> 	iAB42wqx011406

> 	for <nifl-pli at nifl.gov>; Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:02:58 -0500

> Received: from 24-158-192-165.chartertn.net (HELO Default.utk.edu)

> 	(24.158.192.165)

> 	by mxip03.cluster1.charter.net with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2004 23:02:58 -0500

> X-Ironport-AV: i="3.86,135,1096862400"; > 	d="scan'217,208"; a="426839974:sNHT18642342"

> Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20041110225713.023148e0 at pop.utk.edu>

> X-Sender: kchaney at pop.utk.edu

> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1

> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:13:35 -0500

> To: nifl-pli at nifl.gov

> From: Kim Chaney-Bay <kchaney at utk.edu>

> Mime-Version: 1.0

> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:09:33 -0500

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

> X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.4

> Cc: > Subject: [NIFL-PLI] Learner participation in program improvement > X-BeenThere: nifl-pli at literacy.nifl.gov

> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4

> Precedence: list

> Reply-To: Program Leadership and Improvement Discussion List ><nifl-pli at nifl.gov>

> List-Id: Program Leadership and Improvement Discussion List

> 	<nifl-pli.literacy.nifl.gov>

> List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nifl-pli>,

> 	<mailto:nifl-pli-request at literacy.nifl.gov?subject=unsubscribe>

> List-Archive: <http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/nifl-pli>

> List-Post: <mailto:nifl-pli at literacy.nifl.gov>

> List-Help: <mailto:nifl-pli-request at literacy.nifl.gov?subject=help>

> List-Subscribe: <http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/nifl-pli>,

> 	<mailto:nifl-pli-request at literacy.nifl.gov?subject=subscribe>

> Sender: nifl-pli-bounces at nifl.gov

> Errors-To: nifl-pli-bounces at nifl.gov

> X-Content-Scanned: by IU 13 eMail Scanning

>