REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE POST A NEW MESSAGE   

  Author  |   Date  |   Subject  |   Thread

RE: NEW QUESTION(3): Assessment and Accountability

  • Archived: Fri, 14 Jun 09:10
  • Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
  • Author: "Faris, Phil" <philf@lecentre.com>
  • Subject: RE: NEW QUESTION(3): Assessment and Accountability
  • Topic: Wrap-up

Testing and Evaluation; So much to think about, so little time. I've perceived in these eDialogs that testing is a very controversial issue that few are happy with.

At DLI years ago, we had senior administrators who were "experts" in testing and evaluation. I was developing interactive tools for the faculty to use preparing "standardized" or objective tests and had lots of time to focus on the nitty gritty of testing and evaluation.

There, I found that the method of item analysis used to validate specific tests was the same one I studied years ago getting my BA in Education: Items which discriminate between students are deemed valid while items which don't are invalid. Pondering this, I spent time writing code that captured and analyzed user (student or teacher) inputs and thought about how such "code" could be used to produce a better measurement of student achievement than items which merely discriminate between the "good" and "bad" students.

In short, I found that PSS (Performance Support System) tools which help the users perform the activities of learning (and teaching) can just as easily "measure" skills, capabilities, competencies and achievment. (I could see the promised land of testing and evaluation just beyond the river.)

Skipping a dozen pages of details, the bottom line is that effective and creative use of Instructional Technology can and ought to automatically provide transparent and continuous assessments of both student and teacher competencies. Now we all know that a. such tools haven't yet been produced by vendors and b. even if they exist, they haven't been used in a Pilot program to determine if this theoretical social benefit could actually be exploited statewide.

Therefore, shouldn't the Master Plan promote R&D; into nailing down this squirming beast we call "testing and evaluation"? And the State has an interest in the truth whereas Ed Schools who already beat the testing and evaluation horse to death have an interest in maintaining the "education mystique". So if the governor and legislature can wrestle control of education back from the traditional bureaucracies who many writers in this eDialog have described as clearly failing, maybe we can solve this problem with a small investement of a few million dollars.

  Author  |   Date  |   Subject  |   Thread

Welcome | Agenda | About Dialogues | Briefing Book | Search