Monday, November 10, 2008

Voice Your Thoughts

Don't forget to read Education Sector Senior Policy Analyst Elena Silva's latest report, "Measuring Skills for the 21st Century." A teaser:
When ninth-graders at St. Andrew's School, a private boarding school in Middletown, Delaware, sat down last year to take the school’s College Work and Readiness Assessment (CWRA), they faced the sort of problems that often stump city officials and administrators, but rarely show up on standardized tests, such as how to manage traffic congestion caused by population growth. "I proposed a new transportation system for the city," said one student describing his answer. "It's expensive, but it will cut pollution."

Students were given research reports, budgets, and other documents to help draft their answers, and they were expected to demonstrate proficiency in subjects like reading and math as well as mastery of broader and more sophisticated skills like evaluating and analyzing information and thinking creatively about how to apply information to real-world problems.

Not many public school students take assessments like the CWRA. Instead, most students take tests that are primarily multiple-choice measures of lower-level skills in reading and math, such as the ability to recall or restate facts from reading passages and to handle arithmetic-based questions in math. These types of tests are useful for meeting the proficiency goals of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and state accountability systems. But leaders in business, government, and higher education are increasingly emphatic in saying that such tests don’t do enough. The intellectual demands of 21st century work, today's leaders say, require assessments that measure more advanced skills, 21st century skills. Today, they say, college students, workers, and citizens must be able to solve multifaceted problems by thinking creatively and generating original ideas from multiple sources of information—and tests must measure students' capacity to do such work....

New assessments like the CWRA, however, illustrate that the skills that really matter for the 21st century—the ability to think creatively and to evaluate and analyze information—can be measured accurately and in a common and comparable way. These emergent models also demonstrate the potential to measure these complex thinking skills at the same time that we measure a student's mastery of core content or basic skills and knowledge. There is, then, no need for more tests to measure advanced skills. Rather, there is a need for better tests that measure more of the skills students' need to succeed today.

Please join us for a week-long discussion between Silva, Eva Baker, a professor at UCLA's Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, and Paul Curtis, chief academic officer of New Technology Foundation.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Given the costs of those excellent assessments, as well as building up the teaching talent to do it properly, what should our priorities be?

I'd make two suggestions. Obama wants to build on research that says that a large percentage of the Achievement Gap is due to summer loss. As your excellent reports suggests, the technology would be great for summer and after-school enrichment programs. That way poor kids could be first in line for reaping the benefits. I bet that poor and underperforming students who are currently failing would do as well as affluent students.

Secondly, I would compare the costs of these programs that should yield major results with the policies that have been encouraged by NCLB. Add up the costs of all of the Cover Your Ass investments that are required to survive under NCLB, and we would be stunned by the amounts of money being flushed down the toilet. The old-fashioned drill and kill encouraged by NCLB also encourages huge investments in hardware, software, professional development, more drill and kill, CYA remediation after school and in the summer, etc.

Plus, compare the human costs. Old fashioned online packages, that may be little more than an expensive version paper worksheets, are taking the soul out of education. Before long, I bet we have plenty of evidence that they are driving our most vulnerable students out of school, as well as driving teachers out of the profession. Your technology, assessments, and programs could draw human capital into education.

To me, the big thing that prevents us from repudiating NCLB-type accountability, and the failed policies and it encourages, is coming up with the proper sound bites so educators aren't accused of being "soft" on accountability. With your technology and methods, we could "declare a victory and leave."