David and All, 
Since this is the final day of our discussion, I wanted to take a minute
to share some thoughts.  First, what have I learned through this
experience?  
Mostly, I have learned that the approaches, attitudes, and purposes for
having  content standards are extremely different from state to state,
administrator to administrator and teacher to teacher.  All of whom have
legitimate points worth considering.

In Oklahoma the reason we chose EFF standards as our foundation was
because EFF offered not only standards from which we could start and
expand through the Curriculum Frameworks, but other tools (role maps, 4
purposes of learning, teaching/learning cycle, etc.) that made up a
teaching and learning system we have found to be of value in aligning what
happens in the classroom with students, at the local program level, and at
the state level.  This system provides direction as we determine how best 
(professional development, materials and resources, allocations, teacher
planning time, etc.) to support this process.  From the beginning we asked
ourselves "just what is it we want to see happen by implementing this
process?"  Thus, we started with written objectives for students,
teachers, directors, and state staff.  Each year we revisit those
objectives, and when necessary, we have rewritten, adjusted, added to, and
even tossed out. It is truly an ongoing process that involves all
stakeholders.

I also wanted to mention that I have not heard much about individual
student goal setting except for obtaining the GED or NRS program goals of
which we are all held accountable.  In Oklahoma, as I'm sure happens
everywhere, the public connects adult education with "getting your GED." 
As you all know, we are much, much, more and we work hard to get this
message out.  Only about 15-18% of the students enrolled in our classes
entered at a level that makes obtaining a GED a realistic goal within the
time they are usually willing to invest in the class.  Therefore, teaching
students about setting goals and the goal setting process is an essential
part of our instruction.   Actually, it should be the foundation of
instruction that determines which standards may need the most focus.  I
know, the teachers tell us all the time, "but they just want their GED." 
Yes they do, (even if they are functioning at an ABE Beginning Level) and
you should respect that goal, support that goal, and encourage that goal;
BUT, in the meantime, let's look at all the other goals you might
accomplish while working on the skills you need to obtain a GED.  And
guess what, the skill set referred to as the "specific skill set" needed
for the GED, well, that skill set also includes the skills you need in
everyday life - they just look different. Our goal setting policy states
that both program goals and personal student goals are addressed in the
classroom.  

 When students start considering personal goals such as health issues,
dreams of a career or job they want, attending a parent-teacher conference
and not feel intimidated, build or create something, read a novel and
comprehend its meaning, plan summer activities for a family that has
little money for such, estimate the cost of taking a trip to see a
relative, write a complaint letter, or express an opinion about a local
election topic, and they start to look at the skills they need in order to
do these things - they start to see connections between learning skills
that will  make life better now as well as move me toward passing the GED.
 As you take students through the goal-setting process, even those that
are determined that all they want is a GED, start to expand their
thinking, their vision, and their confidence about what they really might
be able to accomplish - today, tomorrow, and well beyond passing the GED.
Isn't that what we should be doing?  Someone said earlier in the
discussion something about if you teach to the standards, and I would add,
teach in the context of student goals, then the tests take care of
themselves.  I agree and am seeing that happen - especially in the area of
math skills.  

In our content standard training for math, our trainer, Donna Curry, hit
this issue head-on when teachers kept talking about "all they (students)
want is enough math to pass the GED."  We started looking at the skills
found on the GED and then started asking the question "what does that look
like when you use it in real life?"  Then, we looked at skills students
were already somewhat comfortable using in real life (hobbies, cooking,
health issues, construction, etc.) and turned it around to ask the
question "what might that skill look like on a test?"  Hmmm....same kinds
of skills.  Sometime students have more skills then they realize, they
just can't show it on a test.  This may sound really simple but it was
really, really enlightening not only for students but for teachers who
were not really comfortable with their own math skills much less teaching
math for the GED.  Similar activities happen in the reading and writing
training.  We never forget about the GED - but - we certainly want
teachers and students to think way beyond any test and directly into their
own lives so that wherever they are when they enter (functioning level),
they will leave at a much higher level and with skills that make an
immediate difference in what they know and are able to do in life.

Standards-based instruction requires planning on the part of teachers and
students.  Our intent has never been to create more paperwork.  Though
lesson plans do make us accountable for why and what we are teaching in
the classroom.   Still, it is not about paperwork.  It IS about students
moving forward in their lives to be productive members of society and
achieving their personal goals.  It IS about providing teachers and
students tools, structure, focus, guidelines, road maps, whatever you want
to call it, that assist the process of achievement in the most effective
and efficient manner.  Thanks to Karen Greer from Texas for her comments
as a teacher.  She is correct when she says that standards "are very
necessary and need to be the basis of good planning."  The "curriculum" or
context in which you teach to the standards should be coming from the
lives and goals of our students.  You can address program goals without
ignoring individual personal goals and vice versa.  Our EFF teaching and
learning system, of which content standards are the foundation, is
designed to do both without sacrificing the creativity and individuality
of teachers or students.

Thank you for this incredible opportunity.  I respect the wisdom and
experiences of all contributors and wish my colleagues continued future
success.  I think the one thing I consistently find in the field of adult
education is that we are all passionate about what we do.    I hope
everyone has a great week-end.

Pam  


Pam Blundell, Assistant Director
Lifelong Learning Section
Oklahoma State Department of Education
2500 North Lincoln Blvd. Room 115
Oklahoma City, OK 73105-4599
405-521-3321
1-800-405-0355
pam_blundell at sde.state.ok.us