Thursday, September 10, 2009

Radio, Radio

I've been thinking, if we're all going to get certified, we'll probably need to know how to talk traditional educator-speak about our standards of quality and what not.

The spectacular Jane Remer thinks we should devise our own tests, before they do it to us:

What Can We Do to Make the Arts Count As Education?

My argument is a version of the old saw, what gets tested gets taught, and if we are smart, we will begin to devise the fair and challenging "tests" ourselves before someone else starts forcing standardized or inappropriate tests on us. We need to sift through our vast collective experience and figure out how to carefully blend quantitative and qualitative methods that will capture the essence of art learning. I believe we have ample, field-tested examples of productive methods using, perhaps, a version of collaborative practitioner research, that we can draw on to design more complex research, assessments and evaluations that won't break the bank.

Over at Education Week, Diane Ravitch, needs no introduction:
So, I grant the good intentions of the groups that hope to create national standards. I know why they want to do it, and I wish them well. At the same time, I am cautious, perhaps even wary, because I see how many terrible state standards already exist and fear that the same dumbed-down, vague blather might be foisted upon the nation and called “standards.”

Also: Elvis Costello - Radio, Radio

1 comment:

kaya said...

Our organization submits our programs to assessments from pre and post surveys to formal observations to thrice yearly power points by TAs for school admin. I know many other orgs to the same. The question is, how do we assemble this data into something "testable"? And how do we prove that "math and science test scores go up" is only one way to test acheivement practically?