WRITING ASSIGNMENT, UNIT 7
Standardized
Testing
In 2015, I was invited to select a group
of outstanding students in science and mathematics for the nationwide grand
competition called Emsat. It means a
standard test in science and mathematics, in which a large group of students
participated, who are outstanding state-level Emsat, at the same time and the
same exam was evaluated and the results appeared through the team of the
Emirates College of Educational Development.
The purpose of state education
officials was to design standard tests in essence to be objective measures that
evaluated students based on similar content of questions, and this exam is
conducted under almost identical test conditions, and they are classified by a machine or blind
resident and means not knowing the students. The state then began to circulate
such examinations to the students of the twelfth.
“Its purpose is to provide a specific
and non-filtered measurement of what it knows and take other standard exams for
students 8th, 9th and 10th. Professional Development Resource was mentioned
that “The role of assessment is exhibited in the concept map. Harding and Beech
(1991, as cited in Brady and Kennedy, 2010, p. 174) promote that assessment
should serve the interests of the student, teacher, parents and society.
McInerney and McInerney (2006, as cited in Brady and Kennedy, 2010, p. 174)
provide a list of the purposes of assessment that reflect this
interrelationship of individual and societal purposes. Eisner (1993, pp.
224-225) recommends five functions of assessment based on accountability and
society’s interests These functions are endorsed by Groundwater-Smith and White
(1995, as cited in Brady and Kennedy, 2010, p. 174)” Professional Development
Resource
positives
and negatives of Standardized Testing
positive
of Standardized Testing
The
evaluation system provides an important principle for planning students' education as individuals, and students as individuals or groups
identify learning needs (Griffin & Nix, 1991).
Evaluation
is an inseparable part of the teaching and learning life cycle that can provide
originality, motivation and feedback to the learner (Brown and Abeywickrama,
2010).
Evaluation tasks must be correct, realistic, meaningful and relevant to
real-world applications to make learning outstanding and happy (Stigens, 2002). 21st, enriching educational experiences
(Gagnon, 2010).Therefore, the evaluation process in any work is a good way to
know mistakes that are avoided or positives are identified and are built upon
and the skills of the twenty-first century are achieved in the educational
process, especially in curriculum building and impact measurement through the
evaluation process.
Huebner
A.J., & Betts, S.C. (1999) mention
that “Specifically, FGE provides a constructivist-based process of negotiation
among stakeholders which in theory: (1) attempts to help them reach consensus
about their reality or to recognize discrepancies; (2) is educational because
it provides stakeholders with the opportunity to incorporate others’
perspectives of the construct into their own; and (3) is empowering because the
entire process is built on negotiated stakeholders’ constructions of the
evaluand. Including the views and concerns of all stakeholders in this process
is valuable because, in addition to contributing to empowerment, stakeholder
input helps to define the context. The basic process includes (1) identifying
stakeholders; (2) examining stakeholders’ claims, issues and concerns about the
construct; and (3) seeking consensus among stakeholders via discussion,
negotiation, and interchange. The actual negotiation process of achieving
consensus is what drives the FGE model because it is through this process that
opportunities for empowerment and education arise. Specifically, during the
first phase of the process, each stakeholder group is queried regarding their
initial ‘claims (favourable remarks), concerns (unfavourable remarks) and
issues (areas of potential disagreement)’ regarding the evaluand (Guba and
Lincoln, 1989). These claims, concerns and issues are representative of
stakeholders’ constructions of the evaluand. Building an evaluation based on
stakeholders’ constructions is empowering in and of itself because it allows
the stakeholders to define the outcome” ( Huebner A.J., & Betts, S.C.,1999,
P342)
A specific level of settlement was
attempted during the next phase of the process, in which the needs and issues
of each stakeholder group were presented to others. During this phase of the
process, educational opportunities arise. The Team Of Parties model assumes
that when stakeholders provide other information, they will be open to shifting
the structure of their tricks, allowing consensus among stakeholder groups. The
final phase of the process is dedicated to resolving issues that have not
achieved consensus among the groups. Specifically, this phase facilitates
discussions between stakeholder groups in an attempt to reach a final
consensus. In theory, the consensus among stakeholders is the goal; however,
from a practical point of view, it is clear that this goal is not always
possible. We tend to agree with Laughlin and Broadbent's assertion (1996) that
"the suggestion that the new inflation alone will generate a change in
construction is naïve" (p. 291). However, working towards the goal of
consensus becomes the key (Sweson, 1991). That's why 21st-century skills are
achieved in the evaluation process as well.
Negative of Standardized Testing
From
UNESCO report was mentioned that” Perhaps one of the most important and tragic
dangers arising from standard tests is what UNESCO confirmed in 2015:
"Measuring
progress towards achieving these goals begins with an assessment of learning,
determining whether students are acquiring the required knowledge and competencies
and whether the system provides students with appropriate education to obtain
these results. While evaluation will be
vital to this process, there is a high double risk that systems and their
partners will continue to rely excessively on tests to advance their
reforms. First, most major tests do not
reach all students and focus on a few subjects - primarily reading,
mathematics, and sometimes science - with the common result of narrowing the
curriculum and other distractions to the education process. Similarly, with rare exceptions, these tests
neglect the broader range of personal competencies, such as the acquisition of
new knowledge using a variety of methods, and the practical application of the
basic knowledge and techniques that students learn at school. The second risk is the continuing failure to
coordinate evaluation with other key functions of the education system -
perhaps the most prominent of which is the curriculum, which instead operates
in relative (if not complete) isolation. To be of high quality and relevant,
and informed by real improvements in the public education system and its
results, the evaluation must be in full and practical harmony with the system's
curriculum, teacher training and support, texts and materials, planning,
budgeting and all other departments.
This report explores ways in which evaluation is vital to education and
presents ways in which it can be effectively linked to other key education
functions to move the national system forward until 2030. " (UNESCO, 2015, P3)
On
the other hand, students who cannot get the required rate during the evaluation
period will stop their future projects and their future will change completely.
References
:
UNESCO
(2015). Student learning assessment and the curriculum: issues and implications
for policy, design, and implementation.
Current and Critical Issues in the Curriculum and Learning. pp. 1-29.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002354/235489e.pdf
.
Professional Development Resource. (n.d.). http://preserviceteacherresource.weebly.com/assessment-role.html
Griffin,
P., & Nix, P. (1991). Educational assessment reporting: New approach.
Marrickville, NSW, Australia: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Group (Australia) Pty
Limited.
McMillan,
J. H. (2004). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective
instruction. Pears Education Inc.
Gagnon,
L. (2010, June). Ready for the future: The role of performance assessments in
shaping graduates’ academic, professional, and personal lives. Retrieved from
Central Queensland University online library.
McMillan,
J. H. (2004). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective
instruction. Pears Education Inc.
Stiggins,
R. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment for learning. Phi Delta
Kappan, 83(10), 758-765. Retrieved from
http://electronicportfolios.org/afl/Stiggins-AssessmentCrisis.pdf
Huebner
A.J., & Betts, S.C. (1999). Examining fourth generation evaluation
application to positive youth development.
Evaluation 5(3), pp.340-358. http://www.stes-apes.med.ulg.ac.be/Documents_electroniques/EVA/EVA-GEN/ELE%20EVA-GEN%207467.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment