James Brunson commented on Program Evaluations for Groups 1, 2 and 4
Reminiscence
Program Evaluation
EDAC 634 Group Six
Aaron
Bean – Educator Evaluation #1
Wilisha
Scaife – Educator Evaluation #2
James
Brunson – Paper Writing and Submission
Abstract
Evaluations from two
educators of the Group Six narrative learning program, Reminiscence, are
included in this report. The educators’ roles and positions are described.
Also, each educator answered the following two questions:
1. What
did you like most about the program design?
2. What
do you think should be improved, why, and how?
Group Six team members’
responses to the following questions are also contained herein:
1. Do
you agree with the educators’ evaluations, why or why not?
2. How
would you improve your program design?
Educators’ original
evaluation documents are appended to the end of this paper.
Body
Deringer Dietz is a high school Language
Arts teacher in California with thirteen years of experience. He was
interviewed by Group Six team member Aaron Bean. Mr. Dietz thought the Reminiscence
narrative writing program was interesting and progressive. He admired its
plausibility and accessibility for adult learners, and noted its similarity to
the journal writing that was once common for high school students.
Mr.
Dietz liked the overall idea for Reminiscence and noted especially its
therapeutic potential. He referred to the joy that can be obtained by writing
in order to express one’s thoughts. He suggested caution, however, concerning
grammar and spelling exactness, noting that too much attention paid to
mechanics can inhibit students’ freedom of expression. He particularly
appreciated the guidance provided by the steps of the program, such as use of
graphic organizers and mind maps, and observed that organizational skills for
life can be acquired through use and mastery of such steps.
Mr. Dietz had helpful ideas for
improvement of the Reminiscence program. He focused upon Step 3-Write, and
expressed concern about Reminiscence fundamentally changing the life narratives
of the adult students. Step 3-Write provides for editing and refining of
participants’ narratives. He noted that editing can actually change the context
of a narrative and suggested that vagueness about editing purposes be
eliminated. Mr. Dietz stated that “…good editing is just as important as the
story being told.”
Group Six appreciated Mr. Dietz’
thoughtful evaluation of the Reminiscence narrative writing program and agrees
that vagueness should be eliminated within Step 3-Write, and that assurances
concerning editing being done solely for clarity be provided to adult learners
participating in the program.
Dr. Eva Zygmunt is an Associate Professor
of Early Childhood Education at Ball State University, where she has worked for
over nine years. She was interviewed by Group six team member Wilisha Scaife.
Dr. Zygmunt, in responding to the
question ”What does the evaluator like most about your program design?”, referenced
“The Healing Power of Personal Narrative” (Benatar, 2011) and these sentences,
among others, “To construct a story of our life is to make meaning of it. To
compose memory, emotion, and internal experience, as well as autobiographical
facts, into a story helps us become who we are.” She then went on to connect
Reminiscence to the concepts set forth in Benatar’s work. Facilitating personal
meaning making was one of the significant strengths in the Reminiscence program
in her view.
Like Mr. Dietz, Dr. Zygmunt was
appreciative of the organizational tools the Reminiscence Program provides that
help adult learners be truly reflective in an organized sense, in order to reap
the greatest benefit from the narrative writing experience. She thought that
purposes and objectives of the program were clearly stated and that the
instructional sequencing was logical and appropriate. She thought the
opportunity to share narratives with classmates was especially noteworthy, and
helpful in aiding adult learners in cultivating their individual identities.
Dr. Zygmunt had some suggestions for Team
Six and it’s Reminiscence Program. She suggested researching benefits of
personal narrative and strengthening the authority of the program by
incorporating results in the Reminiscence Program instructional plan. Also like
Mr. Dietz, Dr. Zygmunt recognized the need for more clarity within the program,
especially as it pertains to outlined program processes such as mapping and
voicing.
Team Six is grateful to Dr. Zygmunt for
her review and the expert insights she provided. Team members agree that
authoritative research for the purpose identified above, and more clarity,
would improve the Reminiscence program a great deal.
References
Deringer Dietz Original
Evaluation Document – Aaron Bean’s Invited Educator
1. What is your name, role, and
current position?
My name is Deringer Dietz, I am a
Language Arts Teacher, and teach Language Arts Honors classes at Paramount High
School. I have been teaching public high school for 13 years.
2. Upon your first read, what was
your impression of the program?
I thought the program was an
interesting and progressive idea. Most adults seek avenues to have their voice
be heard, this seems plausible and easy for someone to try. I personally think
this idea reminds of the journal writing students “used” to do in high school,
and that seemed to be some of the most freeing and openly personal stories that
students wrote.
3. What did you like most about the
program design?
Overall I like the whole program’s
idea of writing for the purposes of therapy. It seems, (as adults), we lose the
ability, time, or joy of writing to express our thoughts. This form of
communication is a powerful tool that nowadays seems to get lost in the mix. I
mean people would rather talk about something or themselves rather than write.
When I learned to have students just write, and not be concerned with grammar
and spelling errors is when I read the most intriguing pieces imagined. That
one barrier being lifted gave the students confidence to be a “writer”, and I
feel that is what is being touted in your program.
I also liked the guidance of the
steps of the program. For example, helping the student learn to use graphic
organizers and mind maps, (Step 1), is something students can use not only for
the purposes of writing, but also to help with organization of other avenues of
their life.
4. What do you think needs
improvement? Why? And how?
If there were anything that I would
change, or modify (or would like to know more about), it is Step 3-Write. More
specifically, does Reminiscence change the delivery of the story? You mention
that you help refine reflections, and that you help edit with a critical eye. I
personally know that editing can actually change the context of a story, so if
this is their story to tell does the program edit to fix grammatical mistakes,
or edit to “sharpen” the details of the story? This part seems vague as to how
it will be accomplished, and honestly, good editing is just as important as the
story being told.
Dr. Eva Zygmunt
Original Evaluation Document – Wilisha Scaife’s invited Educator
1. Evaluator role and positions
Dr.
Eva Zygmunt
Associate
Professor
Early
Childhood Education
Ball
State University Teachers College
Dr. Eva Zygmunt is an
Associate Professor of Early Childhood Education in the Department of
Elementary Education at Ball State University.
Her research interests relate to education for social justice,
culturally relevant pedagogy, family and community relations, and poverty. She teaches courses at the undergraduate and
graduate levels in multicultural education, family and community relations, and
creativity. Along with colleagues and
members of the community, she is currently co-directing an immersion semester
for early childhood and elementary education majors, emphasizing community
context as a critical cognizance for educators.
2. What does the evaluator like most about your
program design?
In
The Healing Power of Personal Narrative, Benatar
(2011) states,
“Our stories may
not be our own; we may have adopted the stories of our parents, grandparents,
siblings or some other authority figure rather than developing an account of
our own experience as we felt and perceived it. ….To construct a story of our
lives is to make meaning of it. To compose memory, emotion and internal
experience as well as autobiographical facts into a story helps us become who
we are.”
The Memoir
Reminiscence Writing Program speaks directly to the quote above in its design
to facilitate personal meaning making.
The program is structured in such as way as to encourage the personal
reflection necessary to tailor an organization of the events of our lives in
order to tell our story – and in
doing so – know better who we are. This process privileges our own voice – our
own interpretation of our life events, and how these have shaped the
architecture of our lives.
The purpose and
objectives of the program are clearly stated, and the outlined steps of
reminiscing, voicing, writing, and sharing provide a concrete roadmap through
which to negotiate the process of personal narrative in the program. Of particular note is the opportunity to
share one’s story. The culture of the
classroom community can certainly be enriched through a shared heritage of
stories, which contribute to a collective, as well as individual identity.
3. What does the evaluator think should be improved?
Why? And how?
The
program proposal could be strengthened with the addition of pertinent research
to support the benefits of personal narrative.
Additionally, providing further definition to the processes outlined
would assist the reader in visualizing the process of mapping, voicing
etc. These changes would provide a more
compelling rationale for the program, as well as lend clarity to the steps
integral to the process of personal narrative.
