In light of the uneven track record of previous test - driven reforms, wary educators might reasonably ask, Will better high -
stakes assessments really change anything?
Not exact matches
«It's totally something that is now becoming pretty core to the
assessment even though the probability of anything
really dramatic happening probably is still quite low, because both sides know how much is at
stake,» he said.
What is
really at
stake is a fair judgment on modernity, an
assessment, a fine discrimination of both its nobility and ethical allure, on the one hand, and its self - destructiveness, and self - flattening and demeaning tendencies, on the other.
Why should teachers adopt new technology when the high
stakes assessments their students sit
really don't build upon or fit that learning experience?»
In the end, the high -
stakes test is the definition of what we think successful education stands for, for better or worse, and I think it's still an open question whether the next generation of
assessments will
really match our aspiration to encourage rigorous, deep thinking rather than the rote - like product from the testing regime.
Instead of this minor concession, the nation
really needs an indefinite moratorium on high -
stakes tests and consequences to allow the development of new
assessment practices that actually support learning and teaching.
What
really concerns me is the delusion that it is fair for content to be learned and applied during a high -
stakes assessment.
But the bad news is that our paltry support of innovative curriculum development and our reluctance to
really change our high -
stakes assessment systems means that students and teachers will continue to focus on low - level kinds of learning.