Return-Path: <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j9BI7mG03617; Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:07:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:07:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <001901c5ce90$073e40e0$1b01a8c0@riral.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Howard Dooley" <hdooley@riral.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1282] RE: Seeking Studies of APL, CASAS, EFF X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2884 Lines: 77 I hope anyone who replies to Tom Sticht's request will post to the listserv, or Tom will keep us up to date with what he uncovers. This discussion around whether standards-based education is more effective for more learners or not is one that recurs around here. I for one am not convinced that it is ... Or isn't, and am very interested in data that supports either statement. Howard, Project RIRAL -----Original Message----- From: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-assessment@nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Marie Cora Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:01 PM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1278] Seeking Studies of APL, CASAS, EFF Dear List Members: The following post/request is from Tom Sticht. Thanks, marie cora __________________________________________ In Search of Evidence for the Effectiveness of Standards-Based Approaches to Adult Basic Education Tom Sticht Years ago the federally sponsored Adult Performance Level (APL) study developed content standards (competencies), curricula aligned with the standards, and an APL assessment of the competencies. APL was implemented widely throughout the US. Similarly, the California sponsored CASAS has produced a system of content standards (competencies), curricula materials keyed to the standards, and an assessment system aligned to the standards. In a report [Sticht, T. G.; McDonald, B. A.; Erickson, P. R.(1998). Passports to Paradise: The Struggle To Teach and To Learn on the Margins of Adult Education. El Cajon, CA: Applied Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences, Inc., (available online at www.searchERIC.org] colleagues and I looked at twenty years of data and reports on the implementation of CASAS in California and could not find any data suggesting that this standards-based approach was any more effective in affecting retention, learning or achievement of goals than the "traditional" approaches. Most recently, another federally sponsored effort, EFF, has produced content standards, curriculum guides, and work toward assessment as another government sponsored effort to develop an integrated content standards, curriculum, assessment aligned instructional system for adult basic education, secondary education, and ESOL. I am interested in finding case studies in which either APL, CASAS, or EFF integrated programs are compared in experimental or quasi-experimental (treatment, convenience comparison group)research designs to "traditional" or "conventional" programs to determine if these integrated models are more effective than "traditional" programs in improving student learning as assessed by pre- and post-tests of the curriculum and/or on generic tests such as the TABE, ABLE, etc. If anyone knows of such studies, or any other studies of one ABE program versus another, I am interested in learning about them. Thanks, Tom Sticht tsticht at aznet.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:54 EST