[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Nevada State Board of Ed Meeting


  • Subject: Re: Nevada State Board of Ed Meeting
  • From: George Sheridan <gsheridan@BOMUSD.EDCOE.K12.CA.US>
  • Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 17:03:16 -0700
  • In-reply-to: <3943D566.2D88A42F@pyramid.net>
  • Reply-to: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List <ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU>
  • Sender: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List <ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU>

Stanley Rabinowitz has voiced a number of criticisms of California's
testing system. But they have been in such diplomatic language that it
would be easy to miss them entirely. During the CTA virtual conference, I
"interpreted" a couple of his statements into plain English and asked him
if that's what he meant. His responses were much more pinted than his
original statements had been. You may find this a useful tactic with him in
the future: listen to what he says, then ask him if he meant what he should
have meant, given the logic of his statements. You'll probably get half a loaf.

At 10:07 AM 6/11/2000 -0800, Michelle Trsuty-Murphy wrote:
<SNIP>
This is the
second year of testing here, and the "new test" is scheduled to come out
in October 2001. (This "new test" is supposedly so hard that up to 90%
of juniors are expected to fail it.)

Meanwhile, the State Board of Education is being fed a crock of manure
regarding the validity of the test. From what I understand, even the
people at WestEd have serious concerns about this test--but I think our
State Superintendent, Mary Peterson, is involved in their board of
directors--so there is no telling what is going on.

<SNIP>

Stanley Rabinowitz from WestEd argued that they needed more specific
"tracking studies" (he brought the up specific "success" of Louisiana in
doing this!). He said that the citizen review committee and the equity
study done show that the test "meets industry standards" (Isn't THAT
scary!) and the differential passing rate is due to a "performance
gap--not a biased test" (I guess this means that disabled kids who are
not receiving modification, and limited English proficient kids are just
stupid--it doesn't have anything to do with any problems with the
test!) He also said there needed to be a "cost-benefit" analysis of
whether it was "cost efficient" to give so many chances to pass the test
to graduating seniors. (He made me, simply, sick to my stomach--like
the future of children should be boiled down to a "cost-benefit
analysis"!!)

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


Post a Message to arn-l:

Your name:

Your email address: (use the exact address you are subscribed with)

Subject line:

Message: