[NLA] alternative assessments (a bit of a rant)

[Heide Wrigley]

David, you asked about assessments in a recent cross-post from the
assessment list

As far as I know, Washington State is working with its teachers to develop
assessments that go beyond the standard multiple choice, paper and pencil
test.  It would be nice to hear from someone in Washington on where they are
in the process - 

In Virginia, the Arlington Education and Employment Program is using writing
assessments that include rubrics and anchor essays as part of their
assessment framework. 

At this point, there are a great many states which are mandating that either
a particular standardized test be used (Texas, for example, mandates the
TABE for ABE students and the BEST for ESL students) or publish a list of
approved standardized tests from which programs may choose. 

I think if we are going to have assessment that go beyond the standard
pencil and paper test and come closer to measuring what adult literacy
teaching is all about (being able to use language and literacy for various
purposes), there needs to be state leadership and investment in working with
teachers and programs to make new kinds of assessments a reality.  These
assessments will need to build on some kind of consensus of what's worth
learning and teaching in a partucular environment (work, family, community)
with some sort of goal toward the end (what would we like for differnt
groups of learners to take away from participating in our programs, beyond a
stronger sense of confidence and self-efficacy?).  

In my mind, states should be able to use their leadership monies to work
with programs not just in their state but across states to help develop a
framework that links what we think learners in different kinds of programs
should know and be able to do with assessments that capture to what extent
we are successful in inreasing learners' capacity to use language and
literacy effetively in the contexts that are important to them.  Most
learners do want to know what the important bits are that others know and
what the skills and strategies are that successful people (however defined)
use to navigate life and get ahead and they do want to know if they are
picking these up through the classes (and they leave when they have a sense
that they are not going anywhere, and are just spinning their wheels -though
the classes may be lots of fun)

If we continue to try to be all things to all people who have very different
kinds of goals, the only assessment that makes sense is a learner
self-assessment (did you learn what you came here to learn and more?) along
with some kind of "proof" that validates that assessment (can you show me
what you an do now that you couldn't do before?).  Clearly a time consuming
and labor intensive model.  Deciding to set up a few "special focus"
programs that emphasize  particular aspects of literacy,  try to do them
well, and set clear expecations is, for me, the first step in building an
assessment system that works.  Special focus does not have to mean narrow
competencies, special focus classes could be workshops on getting to know
more about community resoures, visiting places and asking questions,
interacting with guest speakers and writing up a question and answer to
share with other learners (e.g., through an inquiry map).  We could set up
literacy classes that focus on having learners negotiate the print that is
part of their daily lives (signs, labels, bill, annnouncements) and
integrate various ways of building English communication along with reading
and writing skills that are developed through personal narratives, for
example or problem solving scenarios that reflect real life challenges. Then
it becomes much easier to see if we are teaching folks the kinds of things
that matter (not just now, but down the road as people move beyond basic
literacy.  

Having lived through the European model of language instruction, I also see
nothing wrong with having a performance-based language assessment that all
states buy into that is linked to a certificate of proficiency that stake
holders support and that has currency in the market. But since language and
literacy development take time, this assessment should only be given on a
yearly or six months basis and should not be used for program
accountability.  Such an assessment will give adults a chance to show that
they can carry on a basic onversation, present a coherent set of statements
or an argument on a selected topic, summarize a story in writing that they
have heard,  and/or write a short essay.  This is entirely doable, and as
Johan Uvin from Massachusetts has reminded me, the Dutch are currently
developing such a model for adult immigrants (many European countries have
had this assessment approach in place to test foreign language proficiency
in the secondary schools for a long time). 

Oh, and do we have news on how things are going with the EFF assessments? 


cheers

Heide 



Heide Spruck Wrigley
Senior Researcher for Language, Literacy, and Learning
Aguirre International
480 E4th Ave
San Mateo, CA 
94401
Phone: 650 373 4923


-----Original Message-----
From: David J. Rosen [mailto:djrosen at massed.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 10:04 AM
To: nla at lists.literacytent.org
Subject: [NLA] Cross-post from NIFL-Assessment on alternative
assessments


NLA Colleagues,

The NIFL-Assessment post below, a reply to the post below it, raises an
important policy point (one made before on this list by Massachusetts
State ABE Director, Bob Bickerton,) that current federal policy allows
the use of assessments which are not standardized tests if they can be
shown to be valid and reliable. Few states, however, are taking
advantage of that opportunity.  And even if states are developing
alternatives, driven by accountability for numbers, limited in knowledge
about these assessments, and lacking time to use them, practitioners may
fall back on the often easier-to-use standardized tests -- even if they
know these are not valid, e.g. not related to their students' goals.

Does this matter?

Yes. If programs are held accountable to results from standardized tests
which do not fit with what adult learners and programs are trying to
accomplish, then the most important learner gains or outcomes may not be
measured, and successful programs will not shine.  Eventually, if
funding decisions are based on standardized test results which do not
fit curricula designed to meet learner or program goals, programs will
tailor their curricula to the tests, making adult education and literacy
less relevant to students.  It would be unfortunate and ironic that in
the name of increasing standards and accountability -- because we lack a
good set of valid and reliable assessment options for our field --
programs may teach to these tests and, in doing so, may lower their
standards.

In addition to Equipped For the Future (EFF), what states, initiatives
or organizations are developing valid and reliable assessments that fit
adult learners' goals? Is any state actually using such assessments now?

David J. Rosen
<djrosen at massed.net>



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:29] Re: question
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:25:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Don Seaman <dseaman at tamu.edu>
Reply-To: nifl-assessment at nifl.gov
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-assessment at literacy.nifl.gov>

The reason that thinking is prevalent is that we are playing numbers
games 
for reporting and funding.  Our staff members, at a training session, 
presented "It is allowed" which identifies and promotes alternative 
assessment procedures. It was received quite well, but many folks in the 
audience indicated that they would be evaluated by the numbers they
produce 
so they probably weren't going to change using tests as their main, if
not 
only method of assessment.

Don Seaman
Texas Center for Adult Literacy and Learning
EAHRD-College of Education
4226 TAMU
College Station, TX 77843-4226
Telephone: 979-845-5472
FAX: 979-845-0952

At 06:42 PM 10/26/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>I have just come back from a meeting where assessment for ABLE students was
>discussed in one of the sessions. An observation made by the
facilitator of
>this session (I was facilitating a different session so I couldn't attend)
>was that the teachers in the discussion group think of assessment as the
>usual standardized tests (TABE, BEST, etc). Only two of the teachers at
this
>session mentioned alternative assessments. Have others found this to be
true
>in the ABLE teachers you are in contact with? What sugggestions do you have
>for changing the thinking of folks?
>Thanks,
>  Dianna Baycich
>OLRC
>330-672-7841
>1-800-765-2897 x27841
>dbaycich at literacy.kent.edu
>Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies
>to trying to prove the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly
>succeed and are right.
>H.L. Mencken
_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org