Re: Why does Stratman slander FairTest?

[Deborah Meier <dmeier@ESSENTIALSCHOOLS.ORG>]

It's stuff like the piece below by Arthur Hu that makes me really sad.  (Of
course, why do I still forget to just delete!)  It is not a question of
guts Mr Hu. Your disagreement with FAIRTEST, the Coalition, and other
groups which I am associated with is just that: a disagreement.  A
fundamental disagreement if you will.   Some of us think the SAT does a lot
of damage and is a bad instrument for judging people, making good
predictions for college success, furthering democracy and much else;  some
of us think authentic assessment is the oldest, wisest and most
democratic--and fair--way to assess human competence.  It's the way we
judge people most of the time, when it comes to driving a car, being
selected for the orchestra, being accepted for a job, deciding what article
to publish and on and on and on. Not to mention the way we give PhDs and a
host of other forms of review and assessment.  There are trade-offs in all
approaches, and none solves all problems. The bureaucratic ideal behind
testing has a long and honorable history.  It served and serves certain
ends.  I think that it needs to be used in the most limited way.  But that
does not mean that I think assessment and judgment-making doesn't still
have to take place, and that there needs to be rules for doing so in public
places where the stakes are potentially high.   But this has nothing to do
with "getting some spine".  What a cowardly way to argue.

Deborah

Wow, this is great. We've got the same problem from
>republicans and other people here in washington who
>say that the WASL can be fixed, there's nothing wrong
>with 1209 (to quote Chris Vance, who ran for SPI last
>time around)
>
>I traditionally loathed Fairtests's position on tests
>like the SAT which are actually very good tests for what
>they try to do, then they claim to support "performance
>based" or "authentic assessment" which is the very
>basis for this new generation of assessments which are
>far worse than the SAT and mulitple choice tests because
>they are even more difficult and removed from actual
>instruction and distribution of actual student ability.
>
>Let's see Fairtest get some spine and actually oppose the
>entire idea of progressive standards based reform.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dave Stratman [mailto:Newdem@AOL.COM]
>Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 9:18 AM
>To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU
>Subject: Re: Why does Stratman slander FairTest?
>
>
>Monty--
>
>Wow, what a reaction! Honestly, I did not mean to slander or misrepresent
>FairTest/CARE's position on the Education Reform Act of 1993. I've been on
>these lists for a year and a half, and I thought that you did support it. So
>apparently did the student new to CARE whose question I was responding to.
>If
>you recall, he wrote (5/17/00):
>
>"I am posting now because I would like to know the actual wording of the
>Educational Reform Act of 1993 and which corporate entities were behind it
>and how directly it relates to the creation of MCAS.  Dave Stratman and the
>New Democracy has claimed that this Ed. Reform Act itself is part of a
>corporate strategy for dismantling our public schools.  Experience tells me
>that this is very likely, but reading New Democracy literature has left me
>unconvinced about the Ed. Reform Act and still mostly in the dark about how
>the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education, MassInsight, the Pioneer
>Institute and other corporate forces relate to each other and Ed. Reform.  I
>am trying to figure out the history that led us to where we are today.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
>to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.