Hi Eugenio,
 
Thanks so much for your post.  You are talking about the standard
Opportunity to Learn (OTL), and it is a very real and important
standard.  Perhaps the most important one, but unfortunately in ABE, the
one that commands the least resources.  It is true that even the
mechanisms that strive to be the most fair, are always going to be
limited by their environment.
 
What do others have to say about this piece of the equation?
 
For a good, succinct reading on standards-based reform including a
discussion of OTL, see:
 
A User's Guide to Standards-Based Educational Reform:  From Theory to
Practice
by Regie Stites
http://www.ncsall.net/?id=352
 
marie
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of Eugenio Longoria Sáenz
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 9:47 AM
To: 'The Assessment Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [Assessment] Legitimacy of alternative tools
 
I do not really agree with either statement.  
 
I agree that the first statement is not addressing outcomes and that
standardization is about input.  However, I disagree with the words
“equal opportunity” in the second statement.
 
Educational inequality and the achievement gap are very real things.
Regardless of standardization of input, there is still the issue of
equal opportunity which translates to access to the same resources,
qualified teachers, adequate learning environments, supportive social
structures (family, friends, work, etc.).  
 
It is not about the standard, it is about all the other stuff in society
that we have not taken care of.  Not too long ago all people were given
the right to vote, but the trick was that they had to prove they could
read and write, and not to long before that they had to be property
owners (I hope you know where I am going with this).  Well, we have not
gotten rid of the vote because this is fundamentally important in a
democratic society, but we have fought to equalize and in some cases
eliminate some barriers to the right to vote completely.  Standards are
not the problem; we should not have to get rid of them.  It is the
inequality and the prejudices motivated by race, economics, and social
position that continue to be a problem.       
 
I guess what I am saying is that our fight against the standard is
misdirected.  We should fighting to eliminate those things that are
keeping many from meeting the standards.  
 
I hope I made some sense, I tend not to many times.
 
 
Eu- 
  _____  

From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of Marie Cora
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 8:56 AM
To: cook.sandra at northlandscollege.sk.ca; 'The Assessment Discussion
List'
Subject: Re: [Assessment] Legitimacy of alternative tools
 
Hi Sandra, thanks so much for your post.
 
You said:  “To standardize is to say that all students are learning at
the same rate/pace.”  This is not correct.  
 
To standardize does not speak to the outcomes of the students’ learning.
It speaks to the inputs of developing a test that tries to be fair to
all students.  A standardized test precisely will NOT take into
consideration differing rates or pace or anything else – because if it
did, then you would start introducing bias.
 
A correct statement would be:  “To standardize is to say that all
students are provided an equal opportunity to demonstrate their
knowledge, skill, or performance.”
 
marie cora
Assessment Discussion List Moderator
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of Cook.Sandra
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 3:00 PM
To: 'The Assessment Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [Assessment] Legitimacy of alternative tools
 
Hi, 
Well my opinion is that assessment should pertain to the task at hand
and be outlined as such.  Whether you are using a Rubric or checklist.
To standardize is to say that all students are learning at the same
rate/pace.  If your assessment is based on things like content, effort,
use of certain language (depending where your students are, then you
will be assessing each individual student on what they are capable of.
That is what makes a portfolio such an effective tool in evaluating
individual students.
 
Thanks,
Sandra Cook
Northlands College
Technology Enhanced Literacy
 
  _____  

From: assessment-bounces at nifl.gov [mailto:assessment-bounces at nifl.gov]
On Behalf Of Marie Cora
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 10:52 AM
To: Assessment Discussion List
Subject: [Assessment] Legitimacy of alternative tools
 
Hi Bruce and everyone,
 
Bruce, you said:
 
“I think putting forth the strengths and legitimacy of tools such as
portfolios, outcome checklists, holistically scored writing samples, etc
is a good way to go.”
 
This sounds like a very good path to go down to me.  I think people
would have a lot to say and share about alternative tools, their uses,
and their strengths.  It would be a great exercise to list them all out
and discuss the strengths, uses, and limitations of each one.
 
What questions do folks have about alternative assessments?:  using
them, seeking them out, developing them, whatever area most intrigues
you.
 
What can folks share with the rest of us in terms of “the strengths and
legitimacy” of alternative tools such as portfolios, checklists,
analytic/holistic scoring, rubric use, writing samples,
in-take/placement processes?
 
Are any of the tools you use standardized?  Not standardized?  Do you
think that this is important?  Why or why not?
 
Are any of the tools used for both classroom and program purposes?  
 
I have other questions for you, but let’s leave it at that for right
now.  Let us hear what your thoughts are.  We’re looking forward to it.
 
Thanks,
 
marie cora
Assessment Discussion List Moderator
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/assessment/attachments/20060203/c6c80dba/attachment.html