Return-Path: <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id e9HEds917909; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:39:54 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:39:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <39EC65BF.C89A117C@clinic.net> Errors-To: rgspacone@aol.com Reply-To: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Donna Curry <donnac@clinic.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-4eff@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-4EFF:1219] Question for Regie Stites X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I) Status: O Content-Length: 644 Lines: 19 Good morning, Regie. Thank you for your offer to respond to our questions. My question is about assessment. When I work with teachers, I find that they are often so concerned with the NRS leveling issue that they forget about all the informal assessment opportunities they have on a day-to-day basis. I try to encourage them to involve their learners in the assessment process, but this does not lead to "validity" in assessment. When does a teacher need to be concerned with "validity" of assessment instruments? When should a teacher encourage his or her learners to become active participants in the assessment process? Donna Curry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 29 2001 - 15:04:16 EST