 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
|
Related Weblinks Assessment in School Systems Our treatment of testing in schools (unit A2) voices a classical theme in all of testing: the tension between small-scale lower-stakes testing and large-scale higher-stakes testing. Scale (in testing) refers to the number of people tested and the consequent logistical management problems. Stakes (or stakedness) in testing refers to the power that the test results have over a person's life; for example, a daily progress quiz recorded by a teacher is low-stakes, whereas a national college entrance examination is high-stakes; sometimes, tests that are labeled high-stakes find uses in individual school-based decision-making. The American Psychological Association has published a thoughtful discussion of that issue, intended for the U.S. context but (we think) relevant to other national systems as well. School systems around the world seem to fall into two general models: centralized and de-centralized. A centralized system seems more prevalent, and when that is the system of a given nation, it oversees school assessment along with many other facets of education. Often these are called Ministries of Education, for example: A few nations are decentralized and cede authority to provincial, state, or local governments. Canada, for example, has a council of provincial ministries (such as Alberta or Prince Edward Island). The United States has a national department of education, and it coordinates with 'SEAs' – state education agencies – such as Illinois or New York. In our work we find that teachers, administrators, and researchers regularly grapple with fundamental questions such as: how does my daily test agree (or not agree) with the most recent edict of my ministry or governmental agency? What if my work is audited by some inspection agency? Why must my work agree with national edicts or guidelines, at all? These questions reflect the classical tension between lower-stakes and higher-stakes testing.
|
|
|
||
