There is no one size fits all, but is rather a celebration of the humane relationship between teacher and student. An assessment system that transforms classrooms using assessments that respect children, parents, teachers, local schools, and diverse communities.
- The current accountability system is problematic in that it is a top down driven assessment model, one that is dominated by standardized summative testing. One can not assume entities who have no roll in actual instruction can and would advocate for differential instruction for ELL learners, special needs learners, the poor, those students fighting terminal illnesses, or those being abuse. High-Stakes testing entities approach the realities these learners face as non-measurable uncontrolled variables. They are data points ignored. A major problem with High-Stakes is they are more punitive in nature than reward based. One cannot ignore the negative effects of over a decade of a primary punitive system that fails to recognize differential variables.
- My concern with the Smarter Balanced Consortium and Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career frameworks currently being developed is, we have more of the same; standardized test driven framework. The Smarter Balanced Consortium and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career consortium have failed to explain where are the voices of the learners, parents, and teachers in their frameworks? Imagine a medical diagnostic model that did not speak to parents, their family, and their caregiverS’? One cannot imagine such a diagnostic model in medicine, because it would violate the main ethical principles of medicine: do no harm, and beneficence. Such a medical model could not meet the rigor of bringing new medicines or interventions to market without extensive feedback from patients and care givers. If someone tried to by pass these two ethical principles, they would be charge with violating the law, and subject to imprisonment.
- Thus any assessment system not observing the above two ethical principles of (1) Do no harm, (2) A well being component lacks the ability to advocate and act for children, parents and teachers. Where is the humanity in an assessment framework that is unable to advocate personal, social, economic, and emotional concerns of the children it claims to assess?
- Is assessment and evaluation meant to be cold, heartless, and disconnected from primary stakeholders, or should it contain a wellness or instructional component?
- Where is the Court of Appeals for children, parents, teachers, and local schools in this new era of accountability?
- Can an assessment system claiming balanced be rooted in punitive evaluation tools that are linked exclusively in formal standardized measures be balanced and fair?
- Can a balanced and fair assessment framework not take into accounts the voices of children, parents, teachers, local schools, and diverse communities?
Assessment product providers are not dictators of what should be measured. If they want to be viewed as honest brokers than they to become helpful service providers in a balanced assessment system.
If you want to know what the Walking Man listened to on his walk under a Jamaican sunrise...it was
Jesse The Walking Man Turner