ASSESSMENT TESTS HAVE GOOD AND BAD POINTS
Editor:
Re: Teachers Union head says standardized tests flawed (Wednesday, Jan. 30, 2008 article.)
I have listened to the British Columbia Teachers Federation's argument against standardized testing for many years. While the article states the Foundation Skills Assessment tests were introduced in 2002, the government has had similar assessment testing for much longer.
As an elementary principal/teacher in the Lower Mainland for most of my career until retirement, I have had ample opportunity to view the tests, to talk to teachers regarding the tests, and to observe students taking the tests.
There are several points made by Mr. Kendrick, a.k.a the BCTF president, that I am in agreement with. The tests do not give an accurate assessment but this needs to be taken in the context as to the learning environment in a particular school. My experience included schools which would be classified as schools of special needs “ low socio-economic area, high student turnover (30-40 per cent in one year “ and some Grade 4 students who had been in 10 different schools by that time.)
In these particular schools, teaching and learning are not the same as in a normal elementary school, if there is such a thing. These assessment tests do not indicate the adjustment in programming necessary for teaching and learning in these situations, nor does it take into account the learning gaps in children who have had many moves, nor does it indicate any strong focus, as Mr. Kendrick points out, of a school emphasizing cultural programming, art, dance, music, gymnastics, and so on. Therefore, I agree with Mr. Kendrick that these tests should not be used to rank schools. I blame much of the ranking on the Fraser Institute, as they promote such thinking.
I also agree that the ranking is unfair. I was in the first school district in the province to provide the traditional school based on Judeo-Christian values. In a way, it is like a private school within the public school system. Then we also have the private school touted by the Fraser Institute. What do both of these have in common? They both demand full parent support. I have always maintained that any school, with full parent support, will match up to any private school. But public school means just that “ a mix of parents and children with a variety of values and opinions of what should take place in a school setting.
In regard to the marking system mentioned by Mr. Kendrick, I question his inference that the teachers doing the marking would only look at the last paragraph of a child's writing. Any good teacher could not, in my opinion, skip over the entire sample, and if this is happening, or being allowed, I would then question the integrity of the marking teachers.
As to the tests' negative effects on the curriculum and narrows its scope, I have my doubts. I have had the opportunity to work with many excellent teachers who have been responsible for the development of the curriculum in this province over the past thirty years, and I doubt very much if the results of these tests narrow the scope of the curriculum.
They may provide some areas of weakness that need to be addressed, but so what? And I repeat “ good teachers do not teach towards the tests or any other tests. Good teachers teach children, not tests. Are all teachers good teachers? Of course not; however, the problem with the BCTF being a union is that a teacher is a teacher is a teacher, and this is simply not the case.
Is there anything wrong in addressing any weaknesses that may show up in the assessment tests? Of course not, but a good school and its staff will be careful not to go to the extreme in one area to the detriment of the rest of the curriculum and learning. Every school is unique, and every school has its own environment and culture. Every school should be able to justify and rationalize its programming because it is based upon the needs of that school, and always with the mandated curriculum as a guide; it therefore should not be threatened by any outside testing. From the government's side, most parents want to know the government sets some standard of learning, whether this is a narrow view or not.
And lastly, Mr. Kendrick states we're all for assessment. Perhaps this should read we're all for assessment we can control.
Irvin Redekopp,rnOsoyoos
OSOYOOS TIMES-February 6, 2008
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR IMPORTANT TO DEMOCRACY
Editor:
Catching up on past issues of Osoyoos Times, I just noticed your footnote about your call for letters to your empty inbox. Your call should be a valued reminder to the society that makes up the Osoyoos and areas economy and to other communities.
A reminder, that democracy and a sustainable economy, entirely depends on understanding of the social, economic and ecological issues facing society. Understanding produced by research, and emerging in society through social activism and a free flow of information, vigorously discussed.
This is the reason why democratically governed mixed monetary economies as in Canada, U.S., Germany, Sweden, France and so on depend on a constitution, such as our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees society freedom of expression, freedom of the press and of course academic freedom.
In spite of all its flaws and hodgepodge, or as Churchill put it, democracy is the worst form ofrngovernment except all the others that have been tried, I trust everyone in Canada, and for sure those of us that have had experience of other governments, appreciate the privileges to live in a democratically governed economy such as Canada.
It also means to recognize that a constitution itself doesn't guarantee democracy, because it doesn't guarantee that the society that makes up a democratically governed economy as Canada will use their rights and freedoms.
It doesn't guarantee that the society that makes up the economy will participate in the democratic process, nor that society will increase understanding by investing in relevant research, establish arnfree flow of information, through newspapers and other media and publish research papers, or opinion and letters to the editor.
It doesn't guarantee that the members society elected to government now will act in the bestrninterest of the society at large.
Already in the early democracy of ancient Athens, people discovered that democracy is no guarantee against abuse, and the problem is not the abuser and their followers, but is people'srncomplacency and by standing.
The same problem humanity discovered in the thirties in Germany, and sadly rediscovers over and over again, as in Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Kenya, etc. and next?
Democracy depends on understanding, but without social activism and participation in the democratic process, new ideas, research and understanding has little value for society.
My concern is whether mankind will invest early enough the resources in to relevant research required to early enough invent the life-sustaining processes it needs to survive, as it faces the challenges of the future.
Therefore, in addition to the standard of our universities research, the value for society can be measured by the role academically educated citizens play in the society and by the social activism they exhibit, that which reflects the ethical values of that university.
Editorials and letters in newspapers, and its contents is an indicator (and one I am using in myrnresearch) of the level of social activism in society's participation in the democracy and the level of understanding in society of the social, economic and ecological issues facing humanity and also reflects moral and ethical values. Certainly, a lack of social activism in society and letters to the editor is not because there is a lack of social, economic and ecological issues in Osoyoos, Okanagan and the rest of the world, to be concerned about and vigorously discussed.
In Osoyoos and the rest of the Okanagan, economic development, and allied analysis planning and control, municipal taxation, would be a cobble of issues to be very concerned about and requires increased understanding and vigorous discussion.
The issue here is that the peril against democracy is not what is said and discussed, but what is not said and discussed.
Conspicuously, Osoyoos' debatable economic development model was not a part of the Mayor's or Council's thoughts last December 2007, and what's to come in 2008. No hint that the Council will consider an independent scientific audit and assessment of the model.
It could of course be an issue for the informal meetings Council now invites people to, andrnconversation is good, particularly if it includes the Town staff, but informal political meetings must not be a swap for formal open letters to the editor, vigorously discussed.
Hence, the lack of letters to the Editor is never a good sign in a democracy.
Therefore, an Editor that is not at ease with an empty inbox and calls out to society for letters, is an Editor for a newspaper that recognizes it is not only a business. It is a public trust with an overriding responsibility to the society it serves, to stand on guard for thee for democracy. When society snoozes, the press keeps an eye out for thee and the Editor calls for letters.
The Osoyoos Times should help all sleep well in Osoyoos, but foremost it should spur interest and increase understanding of the social, economic and ecological issues facing society, hence sustainable economic development.
Kell Petersen,rn Osoyoos
OSOYOOS TIMES-February 6, 2008
