But the Shark ignores the bulk of Gardner's essay, including the most telling paragraph:
It is ironic that the force behind the "single test fits all" is the big-business community. Its members apparently believe the only way to judge whether a student has successfully met learning standards is with a single measuring stick, the high-school WASL. Believe me, none of them uses a single indicator to measure the health of their business. They use a "cockpit" of indicators because they are aware that no single measure is sufficient to evaluate their operations.Sharkansky's other significant error: assuming the WASL is objective. It ain't. On the highest-scored portions, student answers are graded by humans on a rubric, and right answers aren't enough to earn a high score.
"California Dreamer," a commentator on Sharkansky's site, puts it well:
I feel really strongly about clear and strong academic standards, and objective testing to see how well those standards are being met. But I really hate the WASL. It costs something like $60 a student to grade, while tests like the ITBS test cost under $3. The WASL shouldn't be dumbed down, it should be replaced.And therein lies the problem. It isn't that the WASL is a wrongheaded test, but that it's bulky, time-consuming, expensive, and, ultimately, no better at predicting educational outcomes than grades, SAT or ACT scores, or the ITBS.
Don't believe me? Look at the numbers. Students who didn't meet standard on one section of the WASL averaged a 2.83 GPA in their freshman year of college [pdf]. More specifically, students who flunked the math WASL attained an average 2.7 math GPA in their freshman year. Yet under the current scheme, they'd have to retake until they passed, lose their diploma, or drop out and get a GED.
More coherent thoughts will follow when time permits.
unfortunately the wasl is trying to do too much. We do need a matriculation exam that is real and comprehensive and that ensures that our young grads are equipped to be contributers to our society and who will function responsibly in our democracy, this should include written, oral and practical evaluations and students should probably be aloud to take the individual subjects as their instructors think they are ready so. At the end of their school times they can then concentrate on the parts that are more difficult for the individual student. The wasl needs to be a test of the teacher, school, teaching methods etc. the results of this test can and should be used for promotion, setting salary, retention of what is working well but should not be tied to individual students.
ReplyDelete