Skip to main content

NIFL-ASSESSMENT 2005: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1199] RE: high-stakes te

Archived Content Disclaimer

This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.

Date: Tue Aug 02 2005 - 15:29:32 EDT

Return-Path: <>
Received: from literacy (localhost []) by (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j72JTWG16259; Tue, 2 Aug 2005 15:29:32 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 15:29:32 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <>
Precedence: bulk
To: Multiple recipients of list <>
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:1199] RE: high-stakes testing, state/federal
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0
Status: O
Content-Length: 862
Lines: 11

I may be mangling people's definitions, but here goes.

Standardized means comparable across cases, and outsiders want to know this--how one group performs relative to another group.  Outsiders also want to know that teachers  are taking their job seriously and know  what they are doing.

It seems unfair NOT  to use a standardized test--the same measure for everyone. 

Back to Nancy's dilemma--for a CBO following  ProLiteracy,  judging what a person is doing, how they are doing--there are  regular check-ups--standardized for ProLiteracy students. 

As to the individual  quirks that make up a student's encounters with teaching and literacy-- for the outsider, those belong in the domain of the relationship between teacher and student. They might be useful indicators of ways to enhance program strengths.

Andrea (an outsider for purposes of this email)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:52 EST