AFT for or against high stakes tests?
- Subject: AFT for or against high stakes tests?
- From: Gabie Gedlaman - AZ Standards <gabieg@AZSTANDARDS.ORG>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 16:51:34 -0700
- Reply-to: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List <ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU>
- Sender: Assessment Reform Network Mailing List <ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU>
This past week at a state board of ed meeting in Arizona, the president of
Arizona's AFT blasted the board for using the AIMS test as a graduation
test. They specifically supported using all forms of evaluation along side
each other on which to decide graduation (or promotion in some district's
cases). Lisa Graham Keegan commented to this AFT representative something
to the effect, "Has AFT suddenly changed their stance on tests like these?"
I actually found this rather curious.
What makes me even curious about AFT locally is that (I never knew they were
here, for one--AFT is just not around publicly) the Arizona Education
Association (NEA) recently sent me this info on their stance on testing--a
total disappointment and reason to get AEA members to consider taking on
another union association somewhere else.
> Ms. Gedlaman:
> We support SB 1431, which is the AIMS study committee. We believe that
> issue of AIMS in one that merits a close look by both the legislature and
> State Board. In fact, we think that the committee would function best if
> included both legislative and state board members or appointees.
> We think too, that the date for delayed implementation of AIMS as a
> requirement to 2005, which is the date recommended to the State Board
> be the date in the bill for the delayed implementation, to make things
> consistent. I believe that the election to determine whether or not to
> AIMS has been dropped from that bill, as that is legitimately a decision
> the State Board of Education to determine, and it should not go to a vote
> the public. We should not have the public or the legislature
> such complex issues, based on 30-second sound bites.
> AIMS has flaws, obviously. We think it is best however, to work to
> those flaws, and make it a good test and to continue to address the needs
> students, rather than advocate for its elimination entirely. We do not
> believe that AIMS should be eliminated, but that legitimate issues in AIMS
> must be addressed, and the study committee is an appropriate method of
> The NEA has no position on this matter. It is a state, not a national
> issue/test. The AEA does have a policy and information developed and
> by our Board of Directors which I would be happy to send you, if you will
> me your mailing address. It is not in a form that I can send it by email.
> Thank you for asking.
> Mary Kay Haviland
> Director of Government Relations
WHAT'S WRONG WITH 'HIGH STAKES TESTS' AND THE 'AIMS' TEST IN PARTICULAR?
ADR;WORK:;;1739 E Silver Creek Rd;Gilbert;AZ;85296;USA
LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:1739 E Silver Creek Rd=0D=0AGilbert, AZ 85296=0D=0AUSA
Post a Message to arn-l: