Greetings everyone,

I feel the need to comment on theory and practice in assessment (and education in general).  The design of most (if not all) assessments is initially informed by theories or hypotheses.  Hypotheses either precede the design of assessments, or else emerge in the course of investigation (non hypothesis research).

There are key principles that assessment design must follow or establish, such as content, construct, and criterion validity, as well as test reliability.  By way of example, "non-cognition" is a construct.  The very principles I am referring to would discard that construct if it were determined to be invalid, unless research is intentionally skewed to hide (or smokescreen) the invalidity.

The only reason I am mentioning this is to clarify that the discussion about cognitive vs. non-cognitive skills was not intended to frustrate any subscribers. It was a long and tedious one, and perhaps appeared irrelevant and even obscure to practitioners who need to assess their students here and now and are looking for immediately available and practical guidance.

That said, I do hope that those who use standardized tests appreciate that they are in all likelihood the products of just these kinds of discussions. However, they don't usually occur on discussion lists, but among test designers and research participants (namely, students just like the ones we are teaching).

I sincerely hope that the world of research steps down from its "ivory towers" of academia to a place where research and practice intersect with meaningful interactions and cooperation between the two.

Thanks,

Michael

 
Michael A. Gyori 
Maui International Language School 
www.mauilanguage.com



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/assessment/attachments/20091010/28580570/attachment.html