HURRAY!
 
Thank you, Mr. Mecham!.  You said it all.  For the past three years, I have worked in two prisons in Iowa, and getting the men to read at a level of speed and comprehension in order to pass the GED test, is my first concern.  I have many high school "graduates" in my literacy classes.  In Iowa, all inmates must be in literacy classes if they cannot demonstrate the ability to read and comprehend at a 6th grade level.  This is the main "standard and benchmark" that I have to work with.  A man must be able to pass the Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) with a 6.0, or he is in literacy class.  A man without a high school diploma or GED must attend GED classes although they can "age out" with staff consent.
 
I taught special education in the public schools for 16 years and have seen the rise and use of standards and benchmarks.  Although these are wonderful guidelines for schools to help their teachers cover appropriate subject matter at different ages to ensure a well-rounded education for all students, I believe that at the adult level, teachers need to test, assess and determine needs and deficits for individuals and proceed from there.  Each of my students is an individual.  Each class is full of individuals working on appropriate assignments for him.  Very rarely do I have a "class" where more than one man is working on the same thing.  I treat my classroom as an old-fashioned resource room where each person is receiving instruction and practice on the skill that he needs to achieve his GED or increase his literacy.  
 
By advocating standards and benchmarks for adult learners, I believe that we will just be adding to the burden of paperwork to "prove" that we are teaching.  Looking at the results of the teaching method is a far better way to examine teaching success and learning.  My students, in the first five months of this year, passed their GED tests with a 96% success rate.  My little "resource" room seems to work fine without standards and benchmarks other than those needed to pass the GED.
 
Gail A. Rinderknecht
Newton Correctional Facility
GED instructor/Des Moines Area Community College
Box 218
Newton, IA

________________________________

From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov on behalf of Mechem, Thompson
Sent: Wed 6/18/2008 8:19 AM
To: specialtopics at nifl.gov
Subject: [SpecialTopics 999] Re: Content Standards: More questions,more answers, more discussion-TM



I suppose in the abstract I have no objection to the Standards and Benchmarks described in the various posts this week, but who are they for? Certainly not the teachers. To take an example from my area of alleged expertise, if students are studying to pass the GED test, then it is the specific skill sets needed to pass the test that must drive the curriculum and the teaching. There's a lot of math you can teach, but what math will actually carry our students towards passing the GED tests? You can't figure that out from any Standards document or Curriculum Frameworks or whatever; you can know that only by learning better what literacy skills and knowledge resonate on the tests (the GED Testing Service helps us with that), and then developing the teaching techniques to bring the students to that level. Our state GED Office and our Professional development unit do a lot of work with Massachusetts GED teachers in this regard. The same principle applies if you are helping Transitions students do better on the AccuPlacer test or preparing immigrants to pass the citizenship test (nice going, Big Papi!) or raising a grandmother's literacy level so she can read the Bible.

Now, it probably takes a higher literacy level to pass the GED tests than it does to graduate from high school, so a successful GED class is certainly going to adhere to any legitimate set of Standards and Benchmarks that a state could come up with. I guess what I am asking of all the faceless bureaucrats (of which I am now one myself, I admit) is to be able to see that for themselves instead of making teachers and program directors jump through hoops with all kind of trumped-up documentary "proof" that they are using the Standards. Just as you can see a gorgeous-looking Lesson Plan without having any idea in the world whether any learning is actually taking place in that class, so the kind of thing often required for Standards-Based documentation, "I have such-and-such Learning Objectives, which correspond to Benchmark 3.1.5 blah blah blah..." doesn't tell you anything about what's really happening in the classroom. I would like the monitors and evaluators to be able to observe a classroom and know for themselves that high standards are being adhered to so that the teachers and program directors can focus on the learning needs of the students with no wasted motion.

Tom Mechem
GED State Chief Examiner
Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
781-338-6621
"GED to Ph.D."


-----Original Message-----
From: specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:specialtopics-bounces at nifl.gov]On Behalf Of David J. Rosen
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:50 PM
To: specialtopics at nifl.gov
Subject: [SpecialTopics 996] Content Standards: More questions, more
answers,more discussion


Colleagues,

Our Content Standards discussion continues through Friday.  I have 
some more questions (see below) for guests and subscribers. I wonder 
if there are some people with questions that they feel are "too 
basic" such as "How do I find out what my state's Content Standards 
are, or if my state even has them?"  No question about content 
standards is too basic. This is the place to ask it.

I want to hear from teachers and administrators who are (or are not) 
implementing content standards. Jon Engel (Thank you, Jon) spoke for 
teachers who might be skeptical. Perhaps there are some teachers who 
are skeptical that would be willing to speak for themselves now that 
Jon has broached this.

Here are three more questions that were sent to me, for our guests 
and others :

"Part-time teachers and planning time:  Teachers tell us that 
developing lesson plans from standards takes more time because they 
have to spend time learning the standards, aligning their activities 
to those standards, and filling out more paper work to demonstrate 
compliance.  What are states implementing standards doing to 
alleviate the pressure on already burdened adult education teachers 
(low wages, low job security, part-time, no benefits, little or no 
prep time, etc.)?"

"National standards: As a standards writer, I was struck by the wide 
diversity of approaches to adult education content standards across 
states (ranging from the very prescriptive and specific to the very 
broad and general).  While I understand we live in a federal system 
in which states can do whatever they deem best for their students, 
isn't there a value in having a broader national discussion about 
what our adult students should be able to know and do in order to be 
successful members of society or, at a very minimum, shouldn't we 
have a common understanding about how content standards are going to 
be used?"

"Assessment:  While states have been encouraged to develop widely 
different content standards, the majority continue to use a very 
limited set of approved standardized assessments that may or may not 
be very closely aligned to those standards.  If due to increasingly 
tight financial constraints states are generally unable to develop 
NRS-approved standardized tests that are aligned with their 
standards, is it reasonable to expect that their content standards 
will have an impact on instruction and student performance?  Do 
teachers really have an incentive to teach from those standards if 
what they are teaching is not going to show up in the TABE or BEST 
Plus or CASAS?  Are there plans to develop such tests?"

David J. Rosen
Special Topics Discussion Moderator
djrosen at comcast.net



-------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Special Topics mailing list
SpecialTopics at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/SpecialTopics
Email delivered to tmechem at doe.mass.edu


-------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Special Topics mailing list
SpecialTopics at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/SpecialTopics
Email delivered to garinderknecht at dmacc.edu


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 10207 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/specialtopics/attachments/20080618/38469582/attachment.bin