1994 Fools: review: alt.test
Article: 7 of news.groups.reviews
Path: oracle!gatekeeper.us.oracle.com!sgiblab!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!quip.eecs.umich.edu!jimj
From: Janus@oracle.org
Newsgroups: news.groups.reviews
Subject: review: alt.test
Date: 1 Apr 1994 14:55:50 GMT
Organization: canus vulpes mutual aid society
Lines: 41
Sender: Loki@valhalla.org
Approved: trickster@first-people.org
Message-ID: <2nhclm$rak@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: quip.eecs.umich.edu
Summary: alt.test is for discussing new assessment strategies
Keywords: testing, assessment, Title XVI section 401, alternative, education
Originator: jimj@quip.eecs.umich.edu

Newsgroup: alt.test
Moderator: eliza@
Description: Discussion alt alternative assessment methods
Related-Groups: misc.test,de.alt.test,misc.test.moderated
Keywords: testing, assessment, Title XVI section 401, alternative, education
FAQ-Location: anon-ftp
Reviewer: April I. Sourire
Review-Date: 1 April 1994

Education should be about learning, rather than benchmarking 
against standardized tests.  Unfortunately, with the complementary
goals of increased teacher and district accountability and standardized
curricula, there has been pressure on many educators to "Teach to the
Test".  The most egregious examples, of course, are Preparation for the
SAT type courses, but this problem manifests itself even at the
elementary school level.

Naturally, there has been a backlash against assessment methods which
measure only a student's ability to take a particular test, rather than
his or her ability to perform genuine tasks in a more normal environment.  
Portfolio assessment is perhaps the best known alternative, but certainly 
not the only one, and suffers from some disadvantages of its own.

alt.test was created as a forum for discussing the use and creation
of situated assessment methods which more closely represent a student's
functional ability.  Input is welcome from both researchers and
teachers using these methods in the field.

The group does retain something of a mailing list flavor -- almost
any post can expect to generate several replies.  We encourage
participants to keep as much of the discussion public as possible,
but acknowledge that in many cases, particularly those where privacy
concerns are raised, it will fall to the original poster to
summarize emailed responses.

Mail questions about this review to Dr. Piaget, formal-stage@
Ask about other groups in either news.groups.questions or 
alt.i.really.need.to.check.the.date.  Mail reviews of other groups
and mailing lists to grouprev+@pitt.edu, but please remember that they 
will not be posted today.