Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.0.Beta5/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id RAA15743; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 17:00:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 17:00:25 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199812082157.QAA09071@tor-smtp1.netcom.ca> Errors-To: lmann@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Ron Lavoie <lavoie@cclb.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:2739] Re: Testing X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 I think that well-desgned tests *can* measure desired outcomes, and furthermore have a beneficial backwash effect on learning. At 07:15 AM 12/8/98 -0500, you wrote: >Your suggestions are all pertinent. Let me throw in another problem with >using tests to measure and report outcomes. > >Improvements in test scores may have no relationship to meeting the goals >set by students or funders (Unless the only outcome set is the test score >improvement. Not hard to achieve: just teach test-taking techniques and >rely on regression toward the mean. I can assure you that your test scores >will improve. Especially in very short courses, like two to three months.) >Most programs and most students enter programs with goals other than test >score improvement. When test score improvement is an issue, it is usually >as a means to an end: earning a GED, passing an Ability to Benefit test. >In all of our programs, test score improvements do not mean anything unless >the basic goal of the student is met. > >Unfortunately, to some, test scores become the goal of the program. Whether >or not students achieve any meaningful outcomes becomes immaterial. A >program is said to be successful if students improve 2 grade levels, even if >not a single real-world outcome is met. Within a classroom, where the >outcome might be an intermediate benchmark, it is easy to use a test score >as a measure. I suggest that the real outcome of a single class might >better be whether or not the student is able to successfully transition to >the next level class. > >Kathleen Bombach >Director >Literacy Programs >El Paso Community College > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jjc1945@aol.com <Jjc1945@aol.com> >To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> >Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 9:39 AM >Subject: [NIFL-ESL:2708] Re: Testing > > >>I am not an ESL specialist, but I am a trained reading clinician and I have >>taught reading and writing and some ESL classes. I have also run testing >>programs in a university, done individualized testing for reading and >writing >>diagnosis, and have written many class exams for the courses I taught. I >want >>to comment on the discussion about why some programs are using particular >>tests. >> >>If you are using a test in your program, it would be good to find the >>technical manual for it and read about the norming population and the >purpose >>for which the company indicates the test is written. If the information no >>longer applies to your program's population (even if it did when the test >was >>adopted for use) you may wish to consider another assessment tool. To get >>your program to change, however, you will have to provide a good analysis >of >>the situation and some suggestions for a better way of doing things. >> >>Many people in education question the use of assessment tools, but as long >as >>we receive public money to perform a public service, we have to live with >the >>rules, and testing is one of the ways to measure what we do. Funders >>understand test scores; people outside the profession rarely have the time >or >>interest to listen to a long explanation about portfolio assessment, or the >>value of qualitative assessment. >> >>Most teachers with whom I have worked find some sense of satisfaction in >>testing if they know the test being used is a valid measure of the teaching >>and learning that goes on in the classroom or tutoring situation. The >choice >>of the test can make all the difference in the world to both teachers and >>students who want to feel that the test they take is a real measure of what >>they can do. And, using a test which has been normed on a general >population >>is not all bad. After all, we live in a big country and a big world. I, >>personally, would want to know that when I pass this test, it means I am >ready >>to compete on the larger scale - not just in your program. >> >>The best way to do this is to find an appropriate evaluation tool that >makes >>sense in terms of time available for testing, and the cost for purchasing >the >>device. Most important is that the test must be relevant in terms of the >>population and the instructional goals you are trying to measure. This is >not >>teaching to the test; it is being careful about the tool you use to measure >>what you do. If you are going to test, you need to be able to explain why: >>not just why you are testing, but why the testing you do is able to help >you >>improve the curriculum you offer so your students make good progress. >There >>may never be a perfect test, but if the tests currently on the market no >>longer meet the needs of education programs, or no longer provide a true >>indication of the students' abilities, then the hue and cry should not be >to >>throw out testing, but to develop a measurement which is better for today. >> >>In every area of education where standardized testing is done, there are >new >>tests coming on the market all the time. I have samples of tests from 30 >>years ago which are no longer used but which provide a good example of what >we >>expected from education programs then compared to what we expect today. >There >>are many reasons for testing. There are also many reasons for making >certain >>that the tests we use accurately reflect what we are teaching and what our >>students are supposed to be learning. The sense of accomplishment at the >end >>of a teaching period, when the students can accurately show what they have >>learned, and the teacher/tutor can beam proudly about the success of the >>teaching, make the choice of the appropriate testing instrument one of the >>most important areas of running an education program. >> >>Okay, there's my two cents. Swing away! >> >>June Crawford >> >> > Ron Lavoie, Information Officer Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks rlavoie@language.ca | http://cclb.org 613-230-7729 (vox) | 613-230-9305 (fax) "Language is the key; La langue c'est le clef."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 13:27:29 EST