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 i4KInjm24238; Thu, 20 May 2004 14:49:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 14:49:46 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <Sea2-F36ZCHusMjQHtM0004941e@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: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:563] RE: To Standardize or Not To Standardize X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 6391 Lines: 137 Marie and others, one of the questions was, "What about standardizing the scoring process (not just the criteria)? Should that happen? If not, does it affect the scoring criteria? Would it affect any other part of the testing situation?" Maybe that phrase "testing situation" slipped in there accidentally, but even if it did, I think it indicates the assumption that we somehow internalize that "assessment equals testing." It doesn't always--I wonder what percentage of the assessment we do is done by formal testing? If we were really aware of the amount of informal and formative assessment we do, I bet the ratio of formal to informal would surprise most of us. To answer the question: should we standardize the scoring process? My opinion: Sometimes. I hope that my school will soon standardize both the criteria (rubric) and process for students completing "English Fundamentals" and "English Composition" because we have a huge problem with students completing these courses with very uneven and unstable writing skills. We have a significant number of people who I think fit the basic skills and ESOL catagories served by adult and family literacy, but as many of you know, if someone has graduated from high school they may still be eligible for ABE/ESL but they are less likely to self-identify their need for it. So they go on to college, unprepared in important ways. Standardizing the scoring will not fully solve the problem we have, but I think it's a part of solving it. An even larger part, though, involves informal assessment in the classroom throughout the course. If we have standard criteria that everyone is aware of and that are consistent with the curriculum and valued learning outcomes, and we use those criteria in formative assessment, and we teach students how to self-assess with those criteria, then I think we improve instruction and learning overall. Eileen From: "Marie Cora" <mariecora@hotmail.com> Reply-To: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:562] RE: To Standardize or Not To Standardize Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 11:00:43 -0400 (EDT) Hi all, So Eileen has made a distinction between standardizing the performance conditions and standardizing the scoring criteria. More questions for everyone: Is it ok to do one without the other? Why or why not? What would the effects be of doing one piece without the other? Would there be any effects? What do you think? marie cora NIFL Assessment List Moderator >From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com> >Reply-To: nifl-assessment@nifl.gov >To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment@literacy.nifl.gov> >Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:548] RE: To Standardize or Not To Standardize >Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 16:42:45 -0400 (EDT) > >Marie and all, >Just responding to this part of your message: > >2. Eileen writes: >If you decide that certain characteristics of >performance are >>important, then those become the criteria against which you can judge lots >>of different examples of work. For example, if my faculty group thinks it >>is important that students write with an awareness of the intended >>audience, then we can make that a criterion, describe it at different >>levels, and use it to evaluate performance on emails, postings to the >>discussion board of the online component of our classes, homework, essays, >>a copy of the note the student wrote to her child's teacher, etc., etc. We >>can use real-life writing to assess how well the student meets this >>criterion, and we don't have to standardize conditions to do so. > >My question: haven't you just described (part of) a process for >standardizing the conditions of "awareness of intended audience"? If not, >why not? If yes, why? > >I think we need to distinguish between standardizing the performance >conditions--which this example doesn't do, or address--and standardizing >the scoring criteria. If we were to standardize the performance conditions >we'd address things like: >How much time will students have to produce the writing sample? >How will instructor/proctor give directions? >Will the proctor answer students' clarifying questions during the >performance of the task? >What tools will be available--dictionary, thesaurus, word processor, >spell-check, etc? >Will conditions be different for students with language issues or >disabilities? If so, how? >And more... > >But that's <not> what I'm talking about in the example above. I'm saying >that if we standardize the criteria for what it means to "demonstrate >awareness of the intended audience" then we'd look at any document students >wrote to an audience, under whatever conditions and circumstances, and >evaluate the extent to which the document meets the criteria. The criterion >(or criteria--I thought is was one, but now it seems to have sub-criteria) >might be things like: >1. Uses language, tone, conventions appropriate to the audience. We see >this all the time at the business college where I'm working when students >fill communications to teachers with emoticons, abbreviations, and other >chat conventions, unaware that when your "audience" is your teacher, >prospective employer, or other recipient who is not your chat buddy, you >adjust what/how you write. Do you see what I mean by this? >2. Appearance of the document shows an awareness of audience. You might >write a note to your kids--"Be back at 4. Don't eat all the cookies!"--on >the back of your grocery list, but you probably shouldn't write a note to >your child's teacher, or a memo to your boss, on same. >3, 4, 5. Whatever other criteria you have--I don't have time to write a >whole list. > >Standardizing the criteria you use to score/evaluate a document is >different than standardizing the conditions under which the document is >produced. So, no, I'm not describing part of the process of standardizing >conditions, I'm describing standardizing (agreeing on criteria) for >evaluating the product, under whatever conditions it is produced. > >I'd also welcome hearing from others on this. > >Eileen > > _________________________________________________________________ Learn to simplify your finances and your life in Streamline Your Life from MSN Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0405streamline.armx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:16 EST