With so many opportunities to discuss and viewpoints available, SHARE! Where do you stand? Post in the comment box!
Well, as our professors say, "try to be current with the news". Anything older than 5 years I try to explain to my students that it is outdated and needs to be reevaluated as legitimate research or archived history (to an extent obviously). Unfortunately, yes for large-scale testing this is current and still being practiced today. I think it is important to recognize that after this 2011 document came out (two years later or so) there was a discussion paper that was addressed to the public school boards association in which a number of issues were brought up with areas for improvement on the part of the association's.
The following pieces of information were recognized and brought up as concerns on the teachers' behalf in "Discussion Paper: EQAO and Large-Scale Testing in Ontario" (2013); equity and accessibility; OSSLT; Integration of Technology and Emphasis on HOS; Diagnostic Assessment; Student Well-Being; and The Public Positioning on EQAO Results. What these are each essentially discussing are the areas in which teachers know that are areas of differentiation and focus for teachers in everyday lessons. Teachers understand that these are important things to consider when even not in testing situations, therefore in the testing situations these things are even more important.
Granted, the EQAO is not meant to be a detrimental experience for students, however sometimes it very much ends up feeling like that. The EQAO results do have a serious impact on the way that people view schools, students and teachers in some regards and the way that the data collected from the EQAO is collected/shared needs to be carefully considered.
This is the 21st century, however far behind BC is from Ontario in regards to large scale testing, it is a talking point that BC does offer students assistance (technology) during their large-scale testing. Technically all students must to use it, but nonetheless its there. British Columbia has said that they are stepping down from their large scale testing, and they aren't lying (technically). The reality is this, with thousands of students applying to university, they need to ensure that the people who are graduating these students are actually teaching the future generation the things they need to know in order to be successful.
I think there really is something to be said for this profession and our professional judgement in regards to the integrity of the teaching profession. The fact is that there are teachers who make mistakes and who students who maybe get through on a fluke, how is an entire province supposed to audit every single student, teacher and graduate transcript (without discrimination nonetheless). I think what we need to really be talking about here in order to effectively make change and to see change is to focus on an integral element/talking point. Rather than just looking at all students and facing a problem that is too big for bureaucracy, focus on the students who are suffering the most from this. Teachers, schools and administration need to consider how the large scale testing is impacting ELL in our communities. Based on the idea that (in BC at least) the large scale testing "used to" directly impact the mark using a differentiation mark of 25 percent, what would that be doing students who are learning English as a second language late in their student career? Granted, Ontario's large scale testing has long since surpassed the ferociousness of BC's but still, the OSSLT is fairly powerful on a student's further education decision-making.
With the ideas I have put forward, I would propose that the teachers collect the data and have shipped to a big data warehouse in which it is audited by interns and then filed for inspection based on population sizes or literacy levels (whatever the school board's "theme" or "goal" might be of that year). The assessments done may be best done as in class "community projects" that are graded using a community impact rubric for each classroom. Teachers would need to have proposals in before the year begins and arrange this as a mandatory project that all students need to participate in (Grade 12). Grades 9-11 will be conducting testing based on criteria set out by the board and approved by the individual department heads of each school (before the beginning of the year) possibly as a professional development/Collaborative Inquiry day.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a post I shared in the first decade of the 2000's)
What are the challenges in
assessing ELLs? What are your thoughts on large-scale testing? Why is it
essential that Assessment For, As and Of Learning is implemented when
assessing ELLs? List some examples of how you supported ELLs with Assessment
For, As, and of learning? How can you reflect the diversity of the classroom
within your assessments?
Well, as our professors say, "try to be current with the news". Anything older than 5 years I try to explain to my students that it is outdated and needs to be reevaluated as legitimate research or archived history (to an extent obviously). Unfortunately, yes for large-scale testing this is current and still being practiced today. I think it is important to recognize that after this 2011 document came out (two years later or so) there was a discussion paper that was addressed to the public school boards association in which a number of issues were brought up with areas for improvement on the part of the association's.
The following pieces of information were recognized and brought up as concerns on the teachers' behalf in "Discussion Paper: EQAO and Large-Scale Testing in Ontario" (2013); equity and accessibility; OSSLT; Integration of Technology and Emphasis on HOS; Diagnostic Assessment; Student Well-Being; and The Public Positioning on EQAO Results. What these are each essentially discussing are the areas in which teachers know that are areas of differentiation and focus for teachers in everyday lessons. Teachers understand that these are important things to consider when even not in testing situations, therefore in the testing situations these things are even more important.
Granted, the EQAO is not meant to be a detrimental experience for students, however sometimes it very much ends up feeling like that. The EQAO results do have a serious impact on the way that people view schools, students and teachers in some regards and the way that the data collected from the EQAO is collected/shared needs to be carefully considered.
This is the 21st century, however far behind BC is from Ontario in regards to large scale testing, it is a talking point that BC does offer students assistance (technology) during their large-scale testing. Technically all students must to use it, but nonetheless its there. British Columbia has said that they are stepping down from their large scale testing, and they aren't lying (technically). The reality is this, with thousands of students applying to university, they need to ensure that the people who are graduating these students are actually teaching the future generation the things they need to know in order to be successful.
I think there really is something to be said for this profession and our professional judgement in regards to the integrity of the teaching profession. The fact is that there are teachers who make mistakes and who students who maybe get through on a fluke, how is an entire province supposed to audit every single student, teacher and graduate transcript (without discrimination nonetheless). I think what we need to really be talking about here in order to effectively make change and to see change is to focus on an integral element/talking point. Rather than just looking at all students and facing a problem that is too big for bureaucracy, focus on the students who are suffering the most from this. Teachers, schools and administration need to consider how the large scale testing is impacting ELL in our communities. Based on the idea that (in BC at least) the large scale testing "used to" directly impact the mark using a differentiation mark of 25 percent, what would that be doing students who are learning English as a second language late in their student career? Granted, Ontario's large scale testing has long since surpassed the ferociousness of BC's but still, the OSSLT is fairly powerful on a student's further education decision-making.
With the ideas I have put forward, I would propose that the teachers collect the data and have shipped to a big data warehouse in which it is audited by interns and then filed for inspection based on population sizes or literacy levels (whatever the school board's "theme" or "goal" might be of that year). The assessments done may be best done as in class "community projects" that are graded using a community impact rubric for each classroom. Teachers would need to have proposals in before the year begins and arrange this as a mandatory project that all students need to participate in (Grade 12). Grades 9-11 will be conducting testing based on criteria set out by the board and approved by the individual department heads of each school (before the beginning of the year) possibly as a professional development/Collaborative Inquiry day.
No comments:
Post a Comment