|
|
Interversity Quotes"I think it's time to ask the Standardistos: Where's the test for compassion? For honesty? For curiosity? For moral commitment? Until they can answer, let's tell them to shut up." —Susan Ohanian (One Size Fits Few: The Folly of Educational Standards) Interversity ProjectsEchoes of Orwell:The purpose of this webforum is to promote a lively discussion among students and faculty alike about George Orwell's 1984 and the parallels or echoes found in today's society. |
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Push for 'value added' - or valueless addition?
The push for so-called 'value added' testing is, I think, growing. See this piece by Tom Toch of Education Sector at http://www.educationsector.org/analysis/analysis_show.htm?doc_id=336629 He notes that Sandy Kress who helped design NCLB is for it. Indeed, there is research suggesting that value added is likely to be more fair. Toch is also correct that a major obstacle is the shared political illusion that all children will score proficient by 2014. He notes many of the harmful side effects of this approach. Ironically, Toch also authored for Ed Sector a report showing how weak most state tests are, in substantial part because states won't pay for better tests. That argument is not in this piece. Aside from numerous technical problems and that it is nearly impossible to understand the technology without a substantial statistical background, the deep flaw in "value added" is the lack of value being added: the extant designs rest on current standardized, mostly multiple-choice tests. While some of value is measured, much of what is measured is included because it is easy to measure even if not very important; and great amounts of what is important is not measured. Worse, with such tests are used for high-stakes purposes, whether used as NCLB does or in a value-added scheme, the result is narrowing instruction to teach to the test. This phenomenon has been reported in numerous studies - the only questions are how severe it is and how intense its effects are by different sorts of schools - the evidence is that it is more common and more intense in schools that have lower scores (e.g., mostly serving low-income kids). For those willing to accept a dumbed-down education for poor kids, this is fine. For the rest of us, beware valueless addition. Monty Monty Neill, Ed.D. Executive Director FairTest 342 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02139 617-864-4810 fax 617-497-2224 monty@fairtest.org http://www.fairtest.org Donate: https://secure.entango.com/servlet/donate/MnrXjT8MQqk
Post a Message to arn-l: |
eric |