Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by CMAZZA4 on June 13, 2008 at 2:18pm

I think, Clifford, (and this is merely my opinion) that some students just are not test takers. To that end, if they are not test takers but have the ability to apply themselves, work hard and maintain the necessary grade average the school and the students win. I am in the process of studying for the GRE to get into St. Johns which I think is ludicrous. I am not a test taker. I learn through projects. My learning process is attached to the "why" and beyond. I think that if colleges opt to have students take a standardized test as a means of weeding out, they could be missing out on the opportunity of having students who can make great academic achievements without scoring a perfect score on a standardized exam. There is also the issue of a possible coloration of scoring high and having financial means. Many people believe that students with financial means have opportunities afforded to them that lower income students may not. This could include expensive test prep courses, private tutors, software etc. By not using the standardized test as a deal breaker for a student the college has an opportunity to attract a diverse student body with diverse learning styles.

To speak of the GREs as a deal breaker for me, it is very frustrating, that it is assumed if I don't know what a word means I can't achieve a Doctorate in Leadership. I am savvy enough to know that I have a plethora of resources available to me to learn what a word means and how to use it. Isn’t that a more effective way of learning? To learn through context and use it appropriately, then to learn erroneous information and never be able to figure out how to use it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Blanca Duarte Martini on September 4, 2008 at 11:20pm

Hi Christine (and Cliff),
I understand what you are saying and I think it speaks to the heart of what educators think nationally. Test taking cannot be and should not be the only measure of understanding that educators take into account when looking at meeting "standards". This is especially true when the entrance exams that you mention determine whether children will ultimately get the opportunities that say, a college education will give them.
The question of what types of assessments to use to measure understanding is the one that is yet (I think) unanswered by the federal and state governments. It could be because NCLB needs an update, it could be because we are in an election year, it could be because people are afraid to address it too forcefully for fear of retribution. The design of a new set of assessments including the addition of student portfolios to measure growth may mean an incredible amount of work on the design and implementation end. To me, it is something that needs to be done. How to do this efficiently and in a way that includes all students and levels is a conversation that should be had both locally and nationally. Even if you get the most coherent and knowledgeable group of individuals together, and build a plan, it may not be feasible financially, so built into the plan needs to be the flexibility to implement in stages and take advantage of the technologies to help in the endeavor. As technologists, we know how quickly the applications that are available change. Some activities and measurements we thought impossible a few years ago, are totally possible today. Look at the equity issue and the cost of laptops and ultra-mobile PCs.
At the moment I am most curious about e-learning environments and am looking forward to exploring the question of how to address student assessments more deeply through their use. How do you use e-learning environments in the DOE?

• ▶ Reply