[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: A request for assistance



Hmmm. Its not on the front page.     http://www.nifdi.org/about-di
mike'



On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 5:38 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am not seeing any cases here where Engelmann, who is behind a lot of the
> direct instruction game, still, is quoted as saying that play is useless if
> not bad for poor/different kids although it might be find for the
> loquacious middle class.
>
> There has to be a smoking gun out there on their website or some public
> presentation.
> mike
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 1:24 PM, William Blanton <blantonwe@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ageliki,
>>
>> You might take a read of some of Madeline Hunter's writing. Attached is
>> two
>> bibs on direct instruction. You might also take a look an Ken Goodman's
>> argument against direct instruction. Another interesting challenge against
>> direct instruction is Cole's idea of basic literacy activity rather than
>> basic liter skills.
>>
>> BB
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Ageliki
>> >
>> > There was an approach called DISTAR - Direct Instruction Systems for the
>> > Teaching of Arithmetic and Reading.  Their claim - 70's and 80's was
>> that
>> > this was the best way to teach working class children. But this was
>> formal
>> > instruction at K-6 or so. I cannot think that this could be moved
>> > downwards. You can see examples on YouTube, noticing just what the
>> > materials look like.
>> >
>> > Preschool children are building up repertoires of vocabulary and so on,
>> and
>> > this could hardly be done in a formal way. Reading stories and
>> information
>> > books would be done in Shared Reading formats.  That's the best I can
>> do,
>> > but I look forward to other views.
>> >
>> > Bereiter..
>> >
>> > Carol
>> >
>> >
>> > On 16 August 2014 16:11, Ageliki Nicolopoulou <agn3@lehigh.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Dear XMCA community,
>> > >
>> > > I'm looking for a piece of information, and I wonder whether someone
>> on
>> > the
>> > > XMCA list has it at their fingertips.
>> > >
>> > > I'm writing something that deals with Vivian Paley's storytelling and
>> > > story-acting practice. Among other things, that activity is an
>> example of
>> > > child-centered, play-based, and constructivist approaches to early
>> child
>> > > education--the kinds of approaches that have been getting squeezed
>> out by
>> > > preschool practices that exclusively emphasize teacher-centered,
>> didactic
>> > > transmission of specific academic skills by direct instruction.
>> > >
>> > > A lot of people think that pushing down didacted/academic teaching
>> > > practices into preschool education is a good thing in general.
>> However,
>> > > there are some people who might be willing to concede that more
>> > > child-centered, play-based, and constructivist might be OK for young
>> > > children from educated middle class families ... but that they won't
>> work
>> > > for poor and otherwise disadvantaged children. THOSE kids need direct
>> > > instruction to transmit "basic skills", and giving them anything else
>> is,
>> > > at best, a distraction from giving them what they need for school
>> > > readiness.
>> > >
>> > > My problem is this.  As we all know, a lot of people think that, and
>> they
>> > > say it in conversation, and they make written arguments that rest
>> > > implicitly on that premise. In fact, this outlook is very widespread
>> and
>> > > influential. But I've found that very few of them seem to be willing
>> to
>> > > actually SAY it explicitly in their published work. I'm talking about
>> > > academics and policymakers. There are pro-direct-instruction websites
>> > that
>> > > say it pretty straightforwardly. But journals want academic citations
>> in
>> > > articles, so I'm trying to find one.
>> > >
>> > > *So does anyone out there know of any published work where someone
>> > actually
>> > > SAYS that in writing?  That is, that more child-oriented, play-based,
>> and
>> > > constructivist preschool practices (however they actually describe
>> them)
>> > > might be OK for young children from educated middle-class homes, but
>> are
>> > > useless or even harmful for poor and disadvantaged kids, who need more
>> > > teacher-centered, skill-based direct instruction?*
>> > >
>> > > I figured it couldn't hurt to ask.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Ageliki Nicolopoulou
>> > >
>> > > ________________
>> > > Ageliki Nicolopoulou
>> > > Professor of Psychology & Global Studies
>> > > Personal Webpage:
>> http://lehigh.academia.edu/AgelikiNicolopoulou/About
>> > > Departmental Webpage:
>> http://cas.lehigh.edu/CASWeb/default.aspx?id=1430
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Carol A  Macdonald Ph D (Edin)
>> > Developmental psycholinguist
>> > Academic, Researcher,  and Editor
>> > Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa
>> >
>>
>
>