Return-Path: <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f9VN3o011704; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 18:03:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 18:03:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <LAW2-F62lU5cOBNMCtp0001c567@hotmail.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "susan adorjan" <sadorjan@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:33] Re: question X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 2996 Lines: 85 Assessment is part of curriculum design, and I agree that it is not the only piece. But I fear that with some Even Start outcome and assessment requirements, programs are being designed to show the best outcomes, losing some of the ability to be family centered. It's similar to "teaching to the test" that infects some classrooms. >From: "Gopalakrishnan Ajit (MIDD)" <Ajit.Gopalakrishnan@po.state.ct.us> >Reply-To: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov >To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> >Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:31] Re: question >Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:44:48 -0500 (EST) > >"What assessment matters" i.e. reporting/funding requirements is a very >important force. However, I would hope that instructional decisions are not >made solely based on that. > >Assessment to me is part of the process of instruction. > >Ajit > >Ajit Gopalakrishnan >Associate Consultant >Connecticut Department of Education >25 Industrial Park Road >Middletown, CT 06457 >Phone: (860) 807-2123 >Fax: (860) 807-2127 >mailto:ajit.gopalakrishnan@po.state.ct.us > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Don Seaman [mailto:dseaman@tamu.edu] >Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 11:26 AM >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:29] Re: question > > >The reason that thinking is prevalent is that we are playing numbers games >for reporting and funding. Our staff members, at a training session, >presented "It is allowed" which identifies and promotes alternative >assessment procedures. It was received quite well, but many folks in the >audience indicated that they would be evaluated by the numbers they produce >so they probably weren't going to change using tests as their main, if not >only method of assessment. > >At 06:42 PM 10/26/2001 -0400, you wrote: > >I have just come back from a meeting where assessment for ABLE students >was > >discussed in one of the sessions. An observation made by the facilitator >of > >this session (I was facilitating a different session so I couldn't >attend) > >was that the teachers in the discussion group think of assessment as the > >usual standardized tests (TABE, BEST, etc). Only two of the teachers at >this > >session mentioned alternative assessments. Have others found this to be >true > >in the ABLE teachers you are in contact with? What sugggestions do you >have > >for changing the thinking of folks? > >Thanks, > > Dianna Baycich > >OLRC > >330-672-7841 > >1-800-765-2897 x27841 > >dbaycich@literacy.kent.edu > >Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies > >to trying to prove the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly > >succeed and are right. > >H.L. Mencken > >Don Seaman >Texas Center for Adult Literacy and Learning >EAHRD-College of Education >4226 TAMU >College Station, TX 77843-4226 >Telephone: 979-845-5472 >FAX: 979-845-0952 _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:33:24 EST