In what most surely be the most famous statement by David Coleman, the architect of the Common Core standards, he said that “no one gives a s— what you think or feel.” In place of personal motivation, Coleman stresses cool intellectual analysis of text and problems in the Common Core. Fiction, which might dwell too much on emotion, takes a back seat to informational text.
But this is wrong, says blogger John Chase. Even in the world of business, employers find that their most valued workers are engaged in their work. They bring passion to doing it well. The best places to work have a “soul,” and they strive to keep their workers engaged and purposeful.
He writes:
“K-12 education programs that claim to prepare students for college and careers should be focused more on cultivating a wide array of social and emotional competencies that are transferable workforce skills rather than continually testing a narrow set of measurable Math and ELA skills.
“Learning should be a self-directed journey of discovery. Students should be “free to learn” as they explore their interests and pursue their passions rather than simply following a map and predetermined path to each Common Core learning standard….
“Learning should be passion-driven rather than data-driven and focus on the needs of students rather than the needs of the tests. Classroom activities should provide numerous opportunities for students to connect with their dreams, feelings, interests, and other people rather than demand students read closely and stay connected to text.”
My comment:
We are driven to learn by interest and passion and purpose, not by the soulless collection of test scores, credits, and points. We learn best when we want to learn, not because we are ordered to learn. That which we do by mandate is soon forgotten. That which we seek and find becomes ours forever.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
” Learning should be passion-driven rather than data-driven and focus on the needs of students rather than the needs of the tests.”
I am in total agreement with this post. Thank you, Dr. Ravitch, for sharing it and your thoughts, as well.
In the above quote one could substitute the word “Teaching” for “Learning” and the simple but powerful truth would still be preserved.
I find it very disturbing that, in my district, when teachers speak out on issues of concern they are labeled as “too passionate” by some in leadership positions.
It has occurred to me that this attempt to marginalize the passionate individual is probably rooted in fear; passion cannot be controlled.
readingexchange: you lead off a good thread.
I wish I had written what you wrote.
😃
Oops! I forgot. Nobody gives a smidgeon of fecal matter what I think or feel [see comments by chemtechr below]. Yet the self-styled leaders of the “new civil rights movement of our time” spend inordinate amounts of time getting their egos massaged and their thoughts broadcast far and wide—out of all proportion to their originality, practicality and applicability. So what the self-proclaimed “education reformers” think and feel IS important. Got it…
Thank you for your comments.
😎
“In the above quote one could substitute the word “Teaching” for “Learning” and the simple but powerful truth would still be preserved.”
Quite correct RE. TAGO!
I use the phrase the “teaching and learning process” to describe what should go on in community public schools (although not limited to them) as those two go hand in hand, are like peas in a pod, and/or are different sides of the same coin.
“Passion cannot be controlled.” Beautifully stated. And i think this very true, passion is one of the only things that politics, and the opinions of others cannot touch or control. a similar tactic was used back in the days of kings and kingdoms, the powerful would keep the surfs (the more powerful by both strength and numbers) fearful in order to hold their power. But all it takes is one surf to rise above the rest, and rally the rest to stand and fight, and an uprising will begin. someday soon I hope beyond hope that one of the “Too Passionate” will stand up above the heads of others, and lead education to a form and function that means more than dots labeled on a sheet of paper.
Corporations want student to read informational text because it’s “fact based.” Once students have the idea that all text is fact based then it becomes much easier to manipulate the reader. The other emotional and social skills to which refer allow for interpretation and that is bad for drones to think independently of the corporate line. A thinking society tends not to be happy filling little cubes and wants to be out of the box.
How ironic that David Coleman, who majored in English literature and philosophy, would boldly state that “no one gives a s— what you think or feel.” Perhaps what he really meant to say was ” I only give a s— what I think or feel.”
I wonder how many people will have the opportunity to follow their passion and study subjects such as literature, philosophy or music and art, considering the costs of higher education and the emphasis on STEM.
Reformers like Coleman send their children to private schools. You can be certain that no private school teacher or administrator in his or her right mind would ever say, or think, that these students’ opinions were worth “sh*t.” In fact, these children are taught to believe that what matters to them is what is, or should be, important to everyone. These children are being taught to assume power as future leaders, whose judgments about everything is exactly what matters most in public life. Imagine a teacher of George Soros’s children, or Charles Schumer’s children, or Rudoloph Guiliani’s children, or Caroline Kennedy’s children,(all of whom went to Trintiy school in Manhattan) giving these kids a mediocre grade because they voiced their opinion about some subject. Imagine the teachers of Obama’s children and Larry Summer’s children, all of whom attend Sidwell Friends in Washington, telling these kids that their opinions are “worth sh*t.” (They’d be looking for work at Walmarts the next day.)
So, what your kids think ain’t worth “sh*t,” but their kids’ ideas guide our future. This difference is what Reform is all about. Crony capitalism, hard at work for America.
Well said Steve! We must bring this important perspective to the upcoming discussions with College Presidents on Long Island.
Steve Cohen: absolutely fundamental to this thread.
One or both of Michelle Rhee’s girls go to Harpeth Hall. Under “50 Reasons”:
[start of excerpted quotes]
1. Our Mission: To teach girls to think critically, to lead confidently, and to live honorably.
9. Athlete, scientist, artist: At Harpeth Hall you can be all three.
17. Our graduates find success in a variety of professions. Our impressive alumnae list includes doctors, accountants, architects, teachers, attorneys, engineers, community volunteers, authors, musicians, and actors.
20. Confidence: Instilled here every day.
21. Girls dance, sing, paint, act, and play music in comfortable theaters, studios, and auditoriums.
34. Encouraging young minds: A middle school where seventh graders build robots one minute and investigate current applications of constitutional amendments the next.
42. State standouts: Our cross country and track teams have won more state championships than any other school in the state whether public or private, single-gender, or co-educational.
43. At Harpeth Hall, students want to sit at the front of the class.
44. Inspiration. Our visiting author and artist series allows students to witness the accomplishments of those who dared to follow their dreams.
46. Choices, choices, choices! More than 30 upper school clubs, formed by girls for girls.
47. Harpeth Hall gives each girl the space and encouragement she needs to chart her own course.
49. No objection: Our girls have won five first place championships in the citywide Mock Trial competition.
[end of excerpted quotes]
Link: http://www.harpethhall.org/podium/default.aspx?t=151749
So for OTHER PEOPLE’S CHILDREN [the vast majority of students] their thoughts and feelings don’t count. But when it comes to the self-styled leaders of “education reform”—as you put it so well!—THEIR OWN CHILDREN ”are taught to believe that what matters to them is what is, or should be, important to everyone.” So genuine teaching and learning environments for the few and Centres of EduProduct Delivery of low-level skills and docility for everyone else? Rigging the system to advantage a select few at the expense of the rest?
😒
I think this describes a two-tiered education system. Has anyone informed the owner of this blog? I think she would like to know…
Thank you for your comments.
😎
I agree with your observations.
Krazy,
If memory serves, the owner of this blog sent her children to the Dalton School, so I think she probably does know about expensive private schools.
Did you have a point, TE? The owner of this blog, unlike Michelle Rhee, isn’t trying to foreclose those options for everyone else’s children. As soon as Diane starts supporting “no excuses” “drill and kill” schools for everyone else’s kids, then maybe you have a point. Please hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
Dienne,
Krazy asked the question ” I think this describes a two-tiered education system. Has anyone informed the owner of this blog? I think she would like to know…”
My point was that it is unlikely that the owner of this blog needs to be informed about the difference between elite private schools and public schools when she sent her children to The Dalton School. Do you think she needed to be informed?
Dienne: thanks for the clarification.
I started holding my breath waiting for Dr. Raj Chetty to give 30-year-olds equal billing with 28-year-olds in his “research” but I was getting blue in the face and, I’m not ashamed to admit it, a little lightheaded…
Ok, back to my CCSS ‘closet’ reading. This time I’m taking extra batteries so in case someone doesn’t care what I think and feel shuts the door on me, my flashlight is ready to go…
😎
All of the classes I have taught in history or government have as a final deliverable a “final, fun project” for which the requirements are simple
1. You may NOT do an essay or a research paper
2. You must do AT LEAST 4 hours of work
3. Show me that you learned something
I also tell them to “have fun”
I do this in part because I am a firm believer in multiple intelligences, at least so far as allowing students to demonstrate learning and understanding in non-traditional ways.
Students may work together, but then the work must demonstrate the equivalent of 4 hours per student of independent work.
By the way, that only gets you to a B level.
I grade holistically, looking for content, accuracy, imagination/presentation (this includes not having typos or broken links if a computer application, etc), and effort (have they done work that represents at least 4 hours of work?).
Most students do far more than 4 hours of work.
Many students get extra credit, both because of the effort they have done
I get really imaginative ideas.
Inevitably some students will do the minimum, but most take some aspect of what we have learned and go into a fair amount of depth, or do something demonstrate a sense of the breadth of what we have studied
In non-AP classes, I will do several mini-projects along the way to give them a sense of how they can do this, but unfortunately I do not have the time in AP to do that (this project is after the AP and state exams).
We should remember that not all of our students learn best by writing traditional essays, and I have found when given a certain amount of freedom my students blossom.
They also have the freedom of selecting the topic, which allows them to focus on something that interests them.
Some are able to connect what we are studying with passions from other topics or from personal interests.
We should be teaching students how to take what interests them and/or the skills that most concern them and use those as tools to help them make sense of the material/skills we believe we should be helping them develop in order to be life-long learners.
Instead increasingly we are narrowing education for too many to little more than cramming predigested facts in, regurgitating on multiple choice questions which can be answered by a process of elimination without providing a reasoning process, and what writing we require being formulaic.
Students begin their schooling eager to learn.
By middle school – if not earlier – they are already learning to ask “will this be on the test?” because if it is not, why bother?
Should not we be helping them to grasp how things relate to them?
If teaching them history, have them do history. Have them explore their own family history, or the history of their neighborhood, or of their church/synagogue/mosque/temple, etc.
Do things that stretch their way of looking at things, so that they can learn to organize materials in different ways, because how we organize often shapes what we understand.
I will be in a new school this year, at age 68.
I will be teaching a subject I have never before taught – AP Econ.
In my training to teach that course, what was emphasized is what is tested. And certainly I must prepare my students for the AP test.
But even now our economic understanding is being challenged. Traditionally economic models argue that raising minimum wage will probably cause an increase in unemployment, Yet those communities/states that have raised their minimum wage recently have seen an increase in employment. Should not my students explore current economic data to see if the traditional frames of economics are in fact in need of tweaking?
How does economics affect them, now and in the future? How can I help them see the topic not merely as something dry to be regurgitated on a high stakes exam, but as one way of looking at the world and trying to make sense of it?
In other words, how can I best be a teacher, someone who is not sage on the stage (which since I last formally studied economics in 1967-68 is highly unlikely for this topic) but as someone who can facilitate their learning how to learn and apply in what for most of them will be a new domain?
The best learning occurs when students are stretched beyond their comfort zone, but not so that they are totally at sea.
The deepest learning occurs when students are engaged.
How does what we are doing to education even consider those two ideas?
I wonder.
I was a very good student – I’m great at figuring out what the teacher wants and delivering it in whatever form the teacher wants – test, essay, research project, etc. Your assignment would have scared the hell out of me.
Wish I would have had a teacher like you.
You sound like an excellent teacher!
“I also tell them to ‘have fun'”
When I hand out a test or quiz to the students I say to them, “Have at it and have fun”. At first they think I’m nuts but they quickly come to understand. And I let them know at the beginning of the year that the tests/quizzes “count” only for around 20 % of the grade and I totally de-emphasize grades as a motivating concept, unfortunately it is a “game” we have to play. Most classes have a too serious of an attitude/environment.
I have always believed that David Coleman’s statement reveals far more about him than about anyone else. What he’s saying is that, throughout his upbringing, nobody gave a s—-what he had to say. And so now he has the ultimate chance to get everyone giving a s— about what he has to say through the national curriculum.
I really do think it’s that simple.
What? The serfs have souls? Quick, call in the armed guards!!! (Snark)
You’ve come closer to the truth than anybody else here, Eleanor.
Here is a sinister little news story out of Wisconsin. Seems the district admin decided to “weed” the school library collections instead of letting librarians do it, and stripped thousands of books as “out of date” …or not aligned with Common Core or something– http://wisconsindailyindependent.com/8000-books-removed-from-racine-public-school-libraries/
Is this true?
Calling Beowulf out of date misses the point, doesn’t it? The article doesn’t mention Fahrenheit, but it should have been the first book to go from the looks of things. Crazy scary.
One of the few places where some student autonomy survives is the library, where students can choose books for independent reading (even if their homework assignment every night specifies a minimum time they are required to read and record in a log, as in my children’s school). Even the Common Core requires research, and teachers could allow students some latitude in identifying topics that genuinely interest them. But all that would be gone if the library collection were stripped of variety. Or if (to be truly paranoid) some vendor got the district to pay for some type of pre-packaged, “up-to-date, curriculum aligned” pseudo-collection. Of course, there are also many schools where the librarian is gone. Yes, this story from Racine is true, and evolving — http://journaltimes.com/news/local/librarians-concerned-over-removal-of-books-at-unified/article_c58ce08e-66d3-520c-a60f-6aec92491401.html
I had this type of discussion with colleagues over the years. The “answer” is individual and varied. I found that the views about “what works” also varies with the child and the family from which he/she comes.
I, personally, liked the years when we used a numeric grading system with 4 being “exceeds goals”, 3 being ” on target”, 2 being “succeeds with assistance”, and 1 being “does not succeed even with assistance”. It targeted the students’ needs very closely, but it didn’t give %age grades.
Some teachers and parents wanted grades until they realized that this form of grading/rating isn’t an “average” but an endpoint, an achievement level…that the student has mastered the skill.
Some never did “buy in” because they wanted a badge of honor to show off to their friends and put in their scrapbooks and Christmas letters.
To me, the goal of educational objectives in elementary schools should be the eventual mastery, not an accumulated average of tests along the way. What does the average of scores mean, except for the students who succeed from the first day? The kids who struggle have difficulty in digging themselves out of a hole created by a “bad test score,”. In the end, what does that achieve? Is it any wonder that some kids lose interest?
Yet, some feel grades are “motivators”. Depending upon the mindset of a particular family, that may be the case. It works for a time, but doesn’t guarantee anything at all.
We seem to push a competitive need for success in our culture. Some thrive on beating, outdoing, conquering everyone else in order to ” prove” superiority. This has its place, but when the need to be best or first involves stepping upon others or cheating or manipulating to “win” at all costs, it is simply wrong and unhealthy. Look at the demise of the band leader at the Ohio State Marching Band. So what that they are TBDBITL. Look at what lengths they went to in order to create a culture of “excellence”. Kids who accept any kind of intimidation and secrecy about such incidents just to be a part of this band have bought into this vile culture. They are proud of it. They like being exclusively great. The same is true of many fraternal organizations. Hazing, intimidation, sexual harassment, secrecy, and bullying rule the day. My son is can excellent trumpeter. He went to college at age 17 and was approached to join the band fraternity. When he said ” no” he was shunned. He wasn’t a “game player” and saw through their crap. He had gotten the Fine Arts scholarship from high school but he dropped out of bad because of this.
Grades are often this same competitive game with outcomes just as false. I do think that technology lends itself to continuous progress rather than grades. But overuse of technology eliminates much of the socialization process and the development of community and common goals.
Learning and education mean different things to different people. One size doesn’t fit all. One test doesn’t determine any longstanding truth. We need to find a direction for education and our society.
John Chase provides a vision for a “world class education” when he writes:” Learning should be a self directed journey of discovery.” There are many pathways for students to follow that lead to self directed learning, inquiry and discovery. The over emphasis of testing in the USA creates multiple barriers to this vision. Four of my grand children attended the same 4th grade class in the last 8 years. The oldest had creative writing 4 days per week. His sister had 3 days per week. Her younger brother had 2 days per week. The youngest who finished grade 4 one year ago, had creative writing only one day per week. My oldest grandson completed first year college at a highly competitive university this year with an A average. So what is the pathway to college ready and what is a world class education? Certainly, Race to the Top architects, New York State and Pearson test designers have no vision that includes self directed learning.
I interpret David Colman as saying students should be able to make an argument in support of a position. Simply stating a position without having the ability to justify it is not persuasive to others.
Yes, clearly that was his point. I *think* many here understand what he was trying to say. But I cannot make a good argument to support that.
FLERP!,
It looks like many who post here in fact do not think that was his point at all, so not having an argument to support your position is certainly understandable.
No, that’s not his point at all. Common Core requires formulaic manipulation of text, but has nothing to do with persuading anybody. The algorithm that scores it doesn’t give a shit what you think or feel, and does not think or feel anything in response.
“State a position” or “What technique does the author use to support his position in line 43?” don’t justify any point.
Knowledge is gained via self discovery, which includes emotions.
Information can become meaningful and processed into knowledge when learning is inspired via self discovery.
I question much of your projected authority as unfounded.
Philip – are you responding to chemtchr or TE? I don’t think you and chemtchr are in disagreement, so I don’t really get your last sentence.
If one looks at the recent English Common Core Regents exam in NY, one will find lots of questions that require students to identify literary techniques authors use to convince an audience of some idea, but very little opportunity for students to present their own intepretation of the meaning or significance of so-called important documents, whether or not students base their intepretations in text or not. What you believe Coleman is saying may be a good point–who is against teaching kids to base their critical judgments in evidence?–but it is not what Coleman is saying. He is against promoting students’ own critical judgment about the material they are asked to read–which is a crucial skill kids who go to private schools learn.
Just look at how he and other Reformers dismiss judgments about weaknesses in Common Core Standards that are based in the evidence of the text! Reformers are not interested in serious debate based in evidence; they want compliance, not critical discussion. From VAM to the standards themselves, Reformers are threatened by evidence and critical discussion of their proposals.
It would have been easy to say just that, but he didn’t.
Temple University in Philadelphia has announced that it is making SAT and ACT tests optional. You can find the article in philly.com. In the article is mentioned that the Gates foundation is funding a grant to aid students entering that way to succeed??? I wasn’t sure how to forward the article to you. Thanks for all you do. Diane Payne Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:02:30 +0000 To: dpayne34@msn.com
My institution has never required ACT or SAT scores for admission. Students who achieve a C average over a set of high school classes are automatically admitted. If a student fails to get that 2.0, a sufficiently high SAT or ACT score will also automatically admit the student (as will graduating in the top third of the class based on unweighted GPA).
So as more universities continue to make the CC aligned SAT optional maybe parents will catch on and realize that GPA is more indicative of college success . Perhaps the SAT will be a thing of the past and as head of the college board people really won’t give a s-it about Coleman and what he does or thinks. Or maybe they will think that his CC aligned SAT help to put it to rest.
At my institution at least, ACT scores are a better predictor of college performance than high school grades for Pell eligible students. In part this may be because there is a much wider range of ACT scores (16-36) among students than high school GPA (3.2-4.0).
Coleman’s whole enterprise presents a dangerous split, but it isn’t between thinking and feeling. Notice he actually says, “People don’t really give a shit about what you feel, or what you think.” Thinking and feeling, both, are outside his box.
His “college ready” CC doesn’t just stamp out expository writing of a personal opinion, though. It outlaws connected thought
The higher order critical thinking essential to my discipline doesn’t connect with Coleman’s universe at all. Somehow, I must deliver the discipline of chemistry to my students, as a working instrument in their own hands. I use emotionally stirring and judgement-laden examples of medical, industrial, and environmental applications, but a surprising number of my students come back to see me with degrees in chemical engineering, rather than journalism.
Two years ago, I was required to bring a primary source to an all-day professional development on Common Core for history and science teachers. We were to assigned use Coleman’s monstrous green guidebook to generate CC aligned writing test prompts with our source.
I brought a real-time, online discussion forum by nuclear engineers, of the Fukushima reactor disaster as it unfolded. Every standard in the state framework for nuclear chemistry was addressed with clarity and urgency. Nonetheless, application of the CC rubric produced idiotic, relentlessly superficial writing prompts, which precluded the application of any thought or feeling whatsoever, as well as circumventing the vital subject content.
The dichotomy isn’t BETWEEN thought and feeling. His corporate sponsors don’t see value in teaching judgement, purpose or power.
David Coleman, like Bill Gates, is an example of Aspergers Syndrome, which is increasing in our technological society and creating an imbalance….Coleman has advanced intellectual development, but a deficit of social and emotional development. In other words, he is an “adult child”. His impulsive and compulsive behaviors were conditioned in childhood, and will continue to influence his behavior in adulthood. This is a characteristic of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which most likely developed from growing up with parents who were the same. (Disorganized Attachment Disorder in Childhood).
Adaptability is what determines a persons success and well being in life, and that is determined by social and emotional development. Coleman, Gates, and other Narcissistic robots like them who perceive themselves as superior and “voices of authority” for learning, are leading our society into a dark place.
Dictators come in all shapes and sizes…..What we are seeing in people like Coleman, Gates and the 1% is called The Dark Triad: It is a combination of Narcissistic, Sociopathic, and Machiavellianism behaviors conditioned in childhood by Narcissistic parents.
People with those characteristics are now in demand as CEO’s, as well as government and the military. That is why we are becoming a dystrophic society.
…pardon typo si vous plait….make that dystropic society!
….dystopic…….drat that auto correct….!
This pop diagnosis of some projected “Asperger syndrome” on a group of business representatives is really baseless and harmful.
The features of the Common Core Coleman is defending didn’t come out of his psyche. They’re a predictable result of backwards engineering the Common Core to a drive machine scored testing and marketing empire.
thx
chemtchr, my opinion is that of observed behaviors, and not a pop diagnosis. Am I not entitled to an opinion without “put downs” ?
“The right of the people to opine without being put-down shall not be abridged . . . “
Many of the 1% (and those who seek proximity to their power) do not appear to have a soul. A soul is related to spirit.
When they function like robots, rigid in social interactions and relate to others only with intellect, but without spontaneity, humor, and vitality, like Coleman and gates, they have lost their spirit (soul). Aspergers function almost exclusively in their cognitive brain since their affective brain is repressed.
We are seeing this Dr Jekell Mr Hyde Syndrome taking over in government, corporations, and the military.
(Dissociative Disorder usually co-occurs with extreme Narcissistic Personalities).
Personality disorders cannot be cured; however, they could be prevented if children were given environments that nurtured their social and emotional development.
McKinsey & Co. and USDE and the fans of Rhee think that “top talent” is the only thing that is needed. The definition of “talent” is graduating in the upper third of the class from an elite university and on the job-performance that consistently produces more than a year’s worth of growth, meaning gains in test scores.
Talent, also means being able to teach and manage 100-150 students in 90 minute sessions, with a supporting staff of 3-5 others teachers and aids, including not yet certified beginners who work for $20,000 a year in an job environment where everyone works longer days, has fewer vacation days, has no job security unless you produce higher test scores in three out of every five years, is organized as a pay-for performance plan with a bonus for working in hard to staff subjects and schools, might have a pension plan that takes money from older workers to fund higher salaries and techie schools for younger workers. Not one mention of funding, or the role of a school board in setting policies for recruiting, retaining, and firing teachers.
Now here are a couple of other kickers.
One: This vision of 21st century “professionalism teaching” is being marketed by USDE under the banner of RESPECT: for Recognizing Educational Success, Professional Excellence, and Collaborative Teaching. It was planned as a program to be funded with $5 billion. Congress, of course, is stalled. Even so, the White House has paid teacher “ambassadors” to market the program, and provided them with a marketing “tool kit” to do so.
Two. Several reports on RESPECT portrays the following organizations as participants in, contributors to, and endorsers of the RESPECT project:
American Association of School Administrators (AASA),
the American Federation of Teachers (AFT),
the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO),
the Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS),
the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS),
the National Education Association (NEA),
and the National School Board Association (NSBA).
I am reminded that the Common Core State Standards were marketed as “state-led” and came with a marketing campaign that lulled a lot of people into thinking the CCSS would “close the achievement gap.”
This is another cockamamie attempt reduce the real problems in public education to managerial machinations.
and http://www2.ed.gov/documents/respect/blueprint-for-respect.pdf and a http://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-students-gap/
“Coleman stresses cool intellectual analysis of text and problems. . . ”
Well then I would think he would be quite happy to read Wilson’s “cool intellectual analysis” of educational standards. If I may point out the way Wilson does such a “cool intellectual analysis” in his never refuted nor rebutted “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Have at it and have fun Mr. Coleman!
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
Duane,
If we developed some text-dependent questions (to make sure he reads correctly, I mean closely) and emailed this to Mr. Coleman, do you think he would get the point?
“Coleman stresses cool intellectual analysis of text and problems. . . ”
Well then I would think he would be quite happy to read Wilson’s “cool intellectual analysis” of the testing bible-“Standards for Educational and Psychological
Testing” the supposedly non-fiction work put out by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement in 2002.
If I may point out the way to where Wilson does such a “cool intellectual analysis”: “A Little Less than Valid: An Essay Review” found at: http://www.edrev.info/essays/v10n5.pdf
Well said. Children do not learn except by consent, and they do not consent to learn unless they can question.
What is the purpose of life? The purpose of education? Are children widgets to be prepared for corporate slavery or human beings to be brought to their highest potential as human beings?
What have humanities greatest teachers said about education?
Politicians have degraded the concept of education to identify it as training, getting people ready for the century to come. Yes that is true but how best to do that, by training our children or by educating them. We train animals, we educate people, at least that is what we used to think.
As Diane mentioned earkier , maybe on Saturday, we need to watch the movie “Metropolis” to get a feel for what is happening today!