[etni] Re: Fwd: re: log versus test
- From: Bari Nirenberg <bnirenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: etni.list@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 12:14:15 +0300
And I beg to differ with you on all points:
> The test only tests the ability to answer according to a preset rubric
> It does not allow for any individual interpretation
>
Let's take a look at the "preset rubric" for HOTS questions. In order to
get full points, the following criteria must be met:
1. Answer is relevant to the question.
2. There is sufficient and fully accurate reference to the text.
3. Answer includes supporting details / examples where necessary.
4. Message is clear
Where does this not allow for individual interpretation? Just have a look
at the answer key -- there are numerous answers to all of the questions and
the list is not exhaustive -- the key specifically states that these are
SUGGESTED answers and that other interpretations are possible and can be
considered correct. True, if the answer is irrelevant to the question and
the information in it is inaccurate, it won't get points, but this is well
beyond the scope of "individual intepretation".
> It does not test English communicative ability as the weighting is
> skewed in favor of answers that fit the format
>
What "format"? I have no idea what you're talking about here.
> That is not a literature exam -that is regurgitation
>
Far from it! It could only be regurgitation if the questions were known in
advance.
> The log is open to misuse and copying- it may seem more creative but
> this is the first year
> There will be a brisk trade in recycled material so that it defeats
> the object of the exercise
>
Not if it's done in class, as it is supposed to be.
> Use the exam to allow students to interpret literature in their own
> words without binding them to fanciful and synthetic catch phrases.
>
What "catch phrases" are you referring to? Students are absolutely allowed
(and encouraged!) to use their own words on the literature exam. There is
no standard way that their answers must be phrased. Again, I suggest you
have a good look at the exam and the key.
> Mark them on their ability to explain their ideas.
>
This is exactly what they're being marked on.
Mark their English not their ability to follow a rubric
>
Again, what does this mean? We shouldn't mark their answers based on
whether or not they are relevant to the question or whether or not the
reference to the text (and NOT the interpretation of the text) is accurate?
That's all that's in the rubrics!
In all honesty, it doesn't even sound like we're talking about the same
test.
Bari
**************************************
** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org
** post to list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** help - ask@xxxxxxxx
** David Lloyd: ETNI founder & manager
http://david.greenlloyd.com
***************************************
Other related posts: