tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6268754880597709136.post8989950221533955014..comments2012-09-04T22:50:03.503-07:00Comments on Assess This!: Assessment: a blog postShirlee Geigerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14022860653985482326noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6268754880597709136.post-61159837655101026722010-11-02T21:23:17.758-07:002010-11-02T21:23:17.758-07:00Andy Simon, Phil Thurber, thank you for your clear...Andy Simon, Phil Thurber, thank you for your clear and intelligent thoughts.<br /><br />I'm wondering: now what? I have consistently resisted these utilitarian developments, and I do speak out in my SACC meetings to that effect-- but my sense is that there is a general disinclination to protest amongst many of my colleagues (too tired from teaching and assessing to look up, probably). Can some sort of organizing take place, so that we might begin to object? Is this not in fact our duty? What might this protestation look like?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16911307517379080223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6268754880597709136.post-87158224751953383602010-10-14T09:26:01.547-07:002010-10-14T09:26:01.547-07:00Davina - Let’s dig deeper into this. I’ll explain ...Davina - Let’s dig deeper into this. I’ll explain why I think an outcome based curriculum reflects a fundamentally utilitarian philosophy of education, and I hope you’ll explain why you think it doesn’t.<br />An outcome is defined to be something a student can do in the real world as a result of completing a course of study. The outcome must lend itself to quantitative measurement. What is meant by this? I feel certain that earning an income would qualify, but I assume outcomes also include other activities deemed useful to society. I take the emphasis on the “real” world to mean that outcomes have practical usefulness, or practical utility. <br />Academia has traditionally found high value in understanding as the fruit of intellectual endeavor, has found high value in understanding itself quite apart from any utility that may derive from the understanding.<br />Understanding does lend itself to quantitative measurement. That is what we do when we test a student’s mastery of the content of a course. However mastery of course content is definitely not considered an outcome. An outcome must be something a student can do in the real world as a result of mastering the course content, something of practical utility in society. This philosophy of education finds no value in the understanding itself. Understanding takes place in the mind and the soul of the student, not in the “real” world. <br />Since the outcome paradigm doesn’t value things that take place in the mind and the soul but only values things of practical utility that take place in the “real” world, I think it is a utilitarian philosophy.<br /><br />Phil Thurber<br />Sylvania Math DepartmentUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06847913579170115660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6268754880597709136.post-74514130579906471772010-10-12T15:17:16.427-07:002010-10-12T15:17:16.427-07:00Phil - With all due respect, let me offer a refuta...Phil - With all due respect, let me offer a refutation to your final statement. It *does* seem that there's a close fit between utilitarianism and assessment paradigms, but there's no syllogistic tie between the two. It is damned difficult to assess critical thinking (or truth, or beauty, or any of those things that REALLY matter). YES. But there are ways. <br /><br />Please: Dig deeper into this stuff. There are ways to meaningfully think about assessing the important stuff without getting sidetracked into the "Are we meeting employer's needs?" dead end. The danger is, if people who care do *not* dig deeper and do it right, we may have the utilitarian paradigm forced upon us because it's "easier."<br />Davina Ramirez, ESOLD. Ramirezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00541379058393369453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6268754880597709136.post-4955391287491668612010-10-08T15:25:16.524-07:002010-10-08T15:25:16.524-07:00I want to express whole hearted support for Andy’s...I want to express whole hearted support for Andy’s views. As far as I know the faculty played no part in the decision to adopt the outcomes based curriculum. A utilitarian philosophy of education is being imposed on us. A philosophy that is contrary to core values of Academia that go back at least as far as Aristotle. Academia has long held the conviction that the value of the understanding of universal principles and causes is superior to the value practical utility. The paradigm of outcomes and assessment recognizes no value other than that of practical utility.<br /><br />-Phil Thurber<br />Sylvania Math Dept.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06847913579170115660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6268754880597709136.post-29342215220487808112010-10-07T17:57:15.385-07:002010-10-07T17:57:15.385-07:00Andy Simon posts an eloquent and honest examinatio...Andy Simon posts an eloquent and honest examination. I feel there is a general and incorrect assumption in America that teachers, from K-12 through post-docs are job trainers. As a math instructor I am consistently asked "How will I use algebra in my job?". I have my answers, but I believe half of my job is to train students in structured thought. Art classes in part instruct students in application of paint to canvass, but also in how to train students in intuition and in how to see, among other skills. Speech classes include metacognition, distilling salient points, connecting to others... Trade classes include attention to detail, precision, dedication to quality, communication with customers,... I believe we as educators are responsible to our profession to change the perception that a school's purpose is simply to train students to work. I believe we must be clear and specific with students and with ourselves that what is taught and learned within any discipline, if learned well, can profoundly improve who each of us can become.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com