Society, at least the one I am part of, has a distinct fascination with numbers. We quantify everything (at least 72.4 % of us do). The education world is no different. From the infamous #2 pencil to Bill 33 to TQS 5 (hopefully 6 one day) to 30 students per class to the 71 minute periods, everything has a number. Heck, one of my students even asked the other day if he could use the hall pass to “Go number two”. At what point did a bowel movement need a number? In the past, people would hunt animals, gather food and build fires. Over time, these same humans started to build cities and invent amazing technology. One day, a Mayan, Egyptian or Indian (depending on your source) decided to count using numbers. We have never looked back. Now, we use numbers so much that people suffer from arithmophobia (fear of numbers). We are anticipating a Numeric Plague soon and Bond, James Bond is undergoing a formal name change to lose his 007 status. Even Sesame Street’s Count Dracula has checked into a mental institution. It has gone too far. I am intrigued by this need to quantify and rank every last bit of our, on average, 80.7 year life. Can the education system function without this level of quantification?
In the BC education system, teachers submit grades based on a A, B, C+, C, C-, F scale. Of course, each letter grade translates to a certain percentage. For instance, an A is reserved for a student who has achieved 86% or better. Actually, 85.5% as we can round up. This begs the question, are teachers accurate enough in their assessment to distinguish an 86% student from an 85% one? Personally, I have switched over to a standards based grading system that is simply put into categories (Exceeding Expectations, Fully Meeting Exp., Minimally Meeting Exp., and Not Yet Meeting Exp.) as I feel it better informs the student as it provides feedback on where they are without quantifying it. In many skills based courses, you can either do something or you can’t. For example, in Physical Education, you can either do a lay-up and score or you can’t. I would assume then this would equal a 100% or 0% score. Score = Fully Meeting. Miss = Not yet meeting. But what about a beautiful layup without scoring, could that equal a minimally meeting expectations? Ideally, everyone in the class would be able to perform the skill. However, when I finish assessing the objectives using this system, I still need to enter my grades using the historic letter grade system that is transferred into a percentage in the electronic student information system. How can we possibly change our assessment system when the ministry requires a certain percentage? How can they change their system when they have pressure from post-secondary systems to assign a percentage to every prospective student? I can’t blame the institutions though as parents share the same mindset. During parent-teacher interviews, I have explained to parents how their child is doing in my class by outlining where their writing, reading, and oral communication skills are at and what they could work on improving. I show them exemplars of their work and ask the student what they feel their strengths and weaknesses are and then the parent simply replies, “What percentage is he at?” Change takes time.
Doll claims that “in a modernist frame, evaluation is basically used to separate winners and losers”(1993, p. 173). Why do we accept losers? Shouldn’t everyone be expected to succeed before moving on? Would we accept that a doctor got 51% on how to perform a certain surgery? I am a Level 2 First Aid attendant at my school and have to be certified every three years by passing a written and practical test. The scary part is that I only need 70% to pass. 70%! I hope you feel safe when I walk up and say, “I know First Aid, I can help…unless of course it was part of the 30% that I didn’t know, in which case, good luck!” Do you feel safe knowing this? So why do we pass students when we assess them as only demonstrating 50% of the outcomes? Doll states that, “grades are a way of measuring the ‘deficit’ between the canon presented and the canon acquired” (1993, p.172). So we are in essence just measuring what students don’t know. I am saddened at realizing how little we expect from our students. Sure we can’t expect 110% as that is reserved for athletes being interviewed after a game and describing how they play and hopefully for my grade on this reflection.
The next interesting part of grades and quantifying learning is the need to rank. We can’t just have everyone smiling after they do a lay-up. We want them to measure up against Sally since she got 10 in a row. Now she is the ideal norm that others strive to equal. Norms-referenced assessment is still found in many classrooms. There needs to be a switch to the criterion-referenced testing in which the student’s performance is compared to specific behavioural objectives rather than sorting the students (Eisner, 1985, p.123). If all my students meet an outcome, shouldn’t they all get a passing grade? What would happen at your school if a teacher submitted the grades with everyone getting 100%? Would people marvel at their teaching skills or ridicule their assessment tools? The Fraser Institute uses their data from standardized tests like the Foundation Skills Assessment to create report cards for school performance (Fraser Institute, 2011). So they have the ability to rank the schools in BC. Can they honestly say that they can assess and rank schools authentically? (check out video) There are so many factors to consider and I can’t remember a time when Fraser Institute people came to my school to interview students, teachers and administrators. I don’t recall them sitting in on classes or immersing themselves in the school atmosphere. No, they are able to rank with mere test scores. That seems rather subjective to me. What happened to triangulating evidence of assessment using products, conversation and observation? I would never rely on just test scores to evaluate something. Some people don’t work well under high-pressure test situations. So aren’t we really assessing their ability to take a test? Evaluation should be communal and interactive and used as feedback (Doll, 1993, p.174). Conversations with a student about their learning are ideal and can involve other parties as well. Doll mentions using dynamic social communities to help the individual through the critiquing process rather than relying solely on the teacher for feedback (1993, p. 174).
Do numbers make life easier for people? Does it prepare students for life after school? Does school really mimic life? We pass people through the education process based on a number on their birth certificate rather than their skills. I am happy that we have kindergarten so that not every stage of school is a number. The educational objectives state what the student should learn before moving to the next level rather than stating that when they turn 12 they may move to grade 7. Assessment and evaluation and the consequent reporting are difficult processes that take many forms across society. Contrary to what the Jackson 5 say, it is not as easy as 123. I don’t get to see the report card of my grocery store clerk, doctor, or police officer but I assume they are all passing with 51%. That is good enough for me as it is good enough for my students. I know I have exaggerated and made a few (14 to be precise) sweeping statements in proving my point that maybe education relies on numbers and ranking too much and that maybe we have an outdated system. When assessing this piece please notice that it has 1352 words – I think that is deserving of an 18 out of 20, or 90%, as long as I am in the top 85 percentile of the class I will be happy.
References:
Doll, William E. Jr. (1993). A Post-Modern Perspective on Curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
Eisner, Elliot W. (1985). The Educational Imagination on the Design and Evaluation of School Programs. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Fraser Institute. Retrieved from:
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/report-cards/school-performance/overview.aspx
Goodson, Ivor F. (1994). Studying Curriculum: Cases and Methods. Toronto: OISE.
No comments:
Post a Comment