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 fBRJk6025674; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:46:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:46:06 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <005501c18f0e$fecc4ac0$cd607b83@educ.kent.edu> 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: "Dianna Baycich" <dbaycich@archon.educ.kent.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:62] Assessment Article X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 541 Lines: 16 Hi All, There is an interesting article in the Nov-Dec 2001 issue of Assessment Update about norm referenced and criterion referenced assessment. The author, John Biggs, makes several arguments against using norm referenced assessment. If anyone has read it I'd like to hear your comments. 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:33:24 EST