Re: portfolio assessment

Eugene Matusov (ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu)
Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:33:57 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0292_01BE66F3.ACC91D20
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0293_01BE66F3.ACD244E0"

------=_NextPart_001_0293_01BE66F3.ACD244E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Michelle, Brad, and everybody--

Can you call me "Eugene", please? I can't stand "Professor Matusov" =
because I feel that "Professor Matusov" so limits me as a whole person. =
It makes me a representative of my institution or something else but I =
don't need to represent anybody except myself in this communication. I =
also don't want that my voice should be privileged in any way by adding =
the label "Professor." However, if you don't feel comfortable calling =
me "Eugene," of course, you can call me "Professor Matusov" (in the =
latter case, I'll try to make translation of my name for myself :-)

Michelle and Brad, thanks a lot for your very thoughtful and informative =
message. I really like it not only because I fully agree with it :-) =
but because it is full with keen observations on very practices that we =
were talking about. You wrote,

>I think in our culture we are so obsessed with the "product" that the =
process is not valued,=20
>and even when we pay "lip service" to it, we all know the product is =
"really" what's important.=20
>I think I can speak for a number of my classmates in citing the current =
marking system at=20
>our university as an example - the primary emphasis and value is put on =
final "grades" -=20
>if it were not then we would not still be operating on this system. So =
what happens is that,=20
>as students, we focus on the final product - a meaningless letter A, B, =
C etc. How absurd!=20
>don't you think?=20

Absolutely. And as it often happens absurd injures an cripple people. =
Students systematically getting poor grades become handicapped in the =
subject area and even some practices.

>So why is it we have such glaring inconsistencies between theory and=20
>practice even at out institutes of "higher learning"?=20

This is $1,000,000 question. In my view, the answer lays not in =
analysis of specific instructors (or in demonizing them) but in an =
analysis institutional and communal relations. For example, think what =
would happen with an instructor who starts giving all his/her classes =
"A" on a systematic basis? (I'm running this experiment in my =
institution now)

I personally feel that grading is something to do with economy that =
requires certain degree of educational failure and success. I was =
teaching in a California college when then Governor Pete Wilson abruptly =
cut class size in California public elementary school. We (i.e., =
instructors of Ed college) got a message that we should be more =
nurturing with our students (read "give less poor grades") while before =
the message about rigor of the program (read " more poor grades and =
tough exams). I have a few other observations but I don't know if =
anybody did any systematic research on this issue of relationship of =
grading and economy labor demands.

>How are we as participants in this=20
>hypocritical system supposed to take all of this academia seriously =
when we are told one=20
>thing but treated the opposite way ourselves?=20

Oh, gosh. What a question! I'll tell you -- I'm scared. You probably =
asked me from point of view of a student, right? Coming from the former =
Soviet Union, I really believe in underground survival through =
underground smuggling of desired practices. We pretended to do things =
for authorities to pass their judgment and did what we thought we had to =
do secretly. Try to learn not for grades while publicly pretending that =
you are doing that for grades (usually it is stated the other way =
around). I don't know if it is right advice. Actually I met an =
elementary school teacher here in Delaware, who told me that she =
smuggles teaching in her classroom (observing her teaching I believed =
her).

I think there is an even much more difficult question if you ask your =
question from point of view of the instructor because by using =
"hypocritical system" (as you eloquently call it), the instructor does =
not only cripple him/herself but also the students. I can't make any =
advice on that because it involves moral choice, instructor's personal =
circumstances, and so on. (It is always easy to say what "3rd person" =
(i.e., "he", "she", "they") should do but more difficult to say about =
what "1st and 2nd persons" (i.e., "I," "you," "we") should do).

>What happens is you have a group of future teachers who think "Yeah, =
this crap is all fine and=20
>dandy, but when I get into 'the real' world, I'm going to take the path =
of least resistance and teach=20
>what I see is really valued in our 'Grade A' culture; because that is =
what the parents want given=20
>the governement is telling them our kids are being "beaten" by the =
Japanese, Chinese, and=20
>whoever else they fear is going to take our future jobs away! =
Competition creates fear, and our=20
>whole economic and political systems are competitive; so when people =
are scared they just want=20
>the security of a short-term fix - an "A+" will give me or my kid a =
better chance at getting that job=20
>won't it? And isn't that true?=20

Yes, I also see it as a struggle for resources. I can't understand why =
this struggle has to drive our education.

>Computer companies, law firms, medical schools, engineering firms, =
telecommunication=20
>companies - don't they all want the "top" students - the "AAA+" =
students? That's=20
>why we have cheating.=20

In my vew, cheating is a healthy reaction on unhealthy circumstances. =
But I guess you can easily recognize my Soviet background in this =
statament?! :-)

>It doesn't matter how you get the mark - just get it so that you can =
have a leg=20
>up on the other guy! The process is NOT valued.=20

Well, to be exact, it is another process that is valued namely getting =
ahead in the competition.

>That is the reality of it. That's why we are assigned=20
>numerous meaningless "hoops" to jump through to become teachers - so =
that the university can=20
>say, "Yes, we recommend Brad Lambert for licensing as a teacher in =
Ontario because he took=20
>these courses and got As" or whatever, and this becomes my "negotiation =
tool" so that I can=20
>have some way to feed my family.=20

Sad but true.

>But, whatever does it mean?=20

In my view, it means that you must be a very good conduit of powerful =
stakeholders' will in your future classrooms.

>Does it encourage me to try and=20
>make the world I live in a better place? No.=20

But who said that the powerful stakeholders view it as the priority for =
you?!

>All of us (students) know that this is merely another=20
>form of assessment completely divorced from practice. The real learning =
will take place in the=20
>classroom - where "embedded reflection" will be truly helpful and =
useful. =20

Yes.

>Anyway, I am venting,=20
>but I just find it very difficult to reconcile theory and practice when =
it cannot even be reconciled=20
>in the institutions who are advocating it.=20

In my view, this situation indicates a big problem with both the theory =
and the practice of formal education.
=20
>And so, I will - as I expect many of my classmates will -=20
>continue in the "status quo" until universities start "practicing what =
they preach". "Do what I say,=20
>not what I do" has never been an effective teaching tool. Just as kids =
value what you do and not=20
>simply what you tell them, so it is with adults.=20

When you become a schoolteacher you will become one of us, "Teacher =
Michelle" or "Teacher Brad!" (This is me, "Professor Matusov," who is =
talking) Look for you kids who may say, "Why is Teacher Lee or Teacher =
Lambert preaching one thing but practicing another thing?" What makes =
you think that you will escape it? What about the district =
requirements? Administration pressure? Parents' expectations? Kids' =
previous school expereinces? Your own traditional teaching/learning =
background?

>That's why I believe in Social Learning Theory - the=20
>necessity of modelling at least gives the appearance of consistency =
between theory and practice.

I agree that a consistancy between theory and practice can be really a =
plus. Sorry to say but I know very few books that in my view has that =
consitancy. If you want check this one,
Hargreaves, A. (1995). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers' work =
and culture in the postmodern age. New York: Teachers College Press.

Take care,

Eugene
PS I teach a teaching method class for preservice teachers. We have a =
discussion web (covered by a password). Can I post your message on our =
class web, please?
PSS If you want to join our XMCA discussion list check =
http://communication.ucsd.edu/MCA/index.html for what is about and how =
to join it -- it is really cool email list where people discuss issues =
like that.

From: Michelle Lee & Brad Lambert <ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca>
To: Eugene Matusov <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
Cc: XMCA <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
Date: Thursday, March 04, 1999 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: portfolio assessment

Okay! Thank you Professor Matusov for your reply! For my part at =
least, I think I understand better now what you are saying: "embedded =
reflection" as "reflection in action" I understand. I also agree that it =
does not seem to be given the same value as an after-the-fact type of =
reflection; perhaps because it seems more difficult (I am speaking =
personally). I will try and be more conscious of it in my next practicum =
placement. I think we can encourage this type of reflection in our =
students and promote it more in our classes, after all, it happens =
anyway as your example of "driving" illustrates. I think in our culture =
we are so obsessed with the "product" that the process is not valued, =
and even when we pay "lip service" to it, we all know the product is =
"really" what's important. I think I can speak for a number of my =
classmates in citing the current marking system at our university as an =
example - the primary emphasis and value is put on on final "grades" - =
if it were not then we would not still be operating on this system. So =
what happens is that, as students, we focus on the final product - a =
meaningless letter A, B, C etc. How absurd! don't you think? So why is =
it we have such glaring inconsistencies between theory and practice even =
at out institutes of "higher learning"? How are we as participants in =
this hipocritical system supposed to take all of this academia seriously =
when we are told one thing but treated the opposite way ourselves? What =
happens is you have a group of future teachers who think "Yeah, this =
crap is all fine and dandy, but when I get into 'the real' world, I'm =
going to take the path of least resistance and teach what I see is =
really valued in our 'Grade A' culture; because that is what the parents =
want given the governement is telling them our kids are being "beaten" =
by the Japanese, Chinese, and whoever else they fear is going to take =
our future jobs away! Competition creates fear, and our whole economic =
and political systems are competitive; so when people are scared they =
just want the security of a short-term fix - an "A+" will give me or my =
kid a better chance at getting that job won't it? And isn't that true? =
Computer companies, law firms, medical schools, engineering firms, =
telecommunication companies - don't they all want the "top" students - =
the "AAA+" students? That's why we have cheating. It doesn't matter how =
you get the mark - just get it so that you can have a leg up on the =
other guy! The process is NOT valued. That is the reality of it. That's =
why we are assigned numerous meaningless "hoops" to jump through to =
become teachers - so that the university can say, "Yes, we recommend =
Brad Lambert for licensing as a teacher in Ontario because he took these =
courses and got As" or whatever, and this becomes my "negotiation tool" =
so that I can have some way to feed my family. But, whatever does it =
mean? Does it encourage me to try and make the world I live in a better =
place? No. All of us (students) know that this is merely another form of =
assessment completely divorced from practice. The real learning will =
take place in the classroom - where "embedded reflection" will be truly =
helpful and useful. Anyway, I am venting, but I just find it very =
difficult to reconcile theory and practice when it cannot even be =
reconciled in the institutions who are advocating it. And so, I will - =
as I expect many of my classmates will - continue in the "status quo" =
until universities start "practicing what they preach". "Do what I say, =
not what I do" has never been an effective teaching tool. Just as kids =
value what you do and not simply what you tell them, so it is with =
adults. That's why I believe in Social Learning Theory - the necessity =
of modelling at least gives the appearance of consistency between theory =
and practice.
=20
- Cynical, but not beyond being converted - any suggestions?
=20
"I believe; help thou mine unbelief" (Mark 9:24)
=20
----------
From: Eugene Matusov <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
To: ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca
Cc: XMCA <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: portfolio assessment
Date: 1999=A6~3=A4=EB2=A4=E9 AM 09:22
=20
Hi Michelle and everybody-- Let me go through your message and =
address questions you asked.=20

-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle Lee & Brad Lambert <ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca =
<mailto:ezekiel@sprint.ca>>
To: ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu <mailto:ematusov@UDel.Edu> <ematusov@UDel.Edu =
<mailto:ematusov@UDel.Edu>>
Date: Monday, March 01, 1999 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: portfolio assessment
=20
=20
=20
----------
From: Michelle Lee & Brad Lambert <ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca =
<mailto:ezekiel@sprint.ca>>
To: U of O Learning processes in the educational setting Listserv =
<PED3101-L who-is-at mercury.cc.uottawa.ca>
Subject: Re: portfolio assessment
Date: 1999=A6~3=A4=EB1=A4=E9 AM 09:53
=20
Hi everyone!
I agree with Matusov's take on assessment in general - that is with =
regards to the politics of it - but I don't really understand his =
argument against portfolios in particular. First, how can any assessment =
"be embedded in the practice itself?" Doesn't assessment by definition =
imply some type of reflection on the value of a completed process or =
product even if it is only partially completed?=20

Eugene: In my view, there are different types of reflection: some =
emedded and some disembedded and some probably both. There is a type of =
reflection that is embedded in the flow of activity or events. For =
example, when I drive a car and talk with my wife, I do a lot of =
decision making reflection on how I drive but this type of reflection =
and decision amking is embedded in the flow of events and I may not even =
notice it. Our culture, unlike many others, is not very good on =
recorgnizing importance of embedded type of reflection or =
reflection-in-action. Often we expect reflection to be out-of-action. =
And we (our culture) often value this type of reflection as the only =
possible (and the only visible).=20
Or, doesn't it imply some type of objective or "outside" perspective =
even if it is simply the learner stepping back and looking at the =
practice? Maybe I don't understand Portfolio assessment the way Matusov =
does. Anyway, portfolio assessment seems to be the most fair type of =
assessment I am yet to come across, especially if learners can be =
encouraged to choose their own best loved efforts and submit those =
against assessment criteria which they helped establish (e.g., rubrics). =
What better way is there to engage young learners in a reality they will =
most certainly face as adults seeking employment? And, in asking this =
question I think I see my biggest objection to Matusov's e-mail - he =
doesn't appear to offer any alternative.
Eugene: I did it but in another email. My alternative is to realize =
that so called thrust for assessment does not inherently come out of =
learning/guiding processes but it is a tool of negotation among =
communities-stakeholders for getting resources and support. Realization =
of this fact may lead to different solutions like involving all parties =
(including students) in designing this tool of negotation and expecting =
that this tool of negotation to change with changing the negotiation. =
Anohter implication can be protecting of learning/guiding processes from =
negative side-effects of such negotation tool as divorced assessment =
including protfolio. Let me give, probably, the most bizzare form of =
portfolio assessement of a teaching process is putting video camera in a =
teddy bear to assess how good the babysitter is with your child. On =
smaller scale, in the less bizzare froms of portfolio assessments, the =
survallance and recording of "mistakes" is still there (as well as =
creating a competition). These are negative side-effects. As =
recognized as such, I think it is possible to deal with them (to =
counter-act) by shielding learning/guiding processes as much as =
possible, knowing that the assessment has another important role (i.e., =
negotiation tool). There are porbably some other implications as well.
=20
And so Professor Matusov, we may have not been privy to all of your =
correspondence - could you please enlighten us as to how you think =
assessment should take place in our schools and ultimately our =
workplaces?
Eugene: I'm not sure that I'm "enlightening" anybody (maybe, on the =
contrary, obscuring) but I'm ready to share my thoughts :-) As one of =
educational stakeholders (i.e., as an educator myself, as an =
academician, as a student of Spanish, as a parent, and, finaly, as just =
plain folk), I'm against using divorced assessment for creating (or =
better to say contributing to creating) failure and disabilities in =
students as, I believe, it often occurs now. Divorced assessment can be =
used, for example, to check possibility for discrimantion or some other =
important goals (including accountability). But such "indangarious =
species" as learning and guiding should be preserved. As to workplaces, =
it depends on workplace -- many of workplaces do not have any divorced =
assessments. Many of those that have know that "their bottom line" is =
not assessement but profit or some other "inherent" criteria.=20
What do you think?
Take care,
Eugene
=20
Thank You - Brad Lambert - University of Ottawa
----------
> From: Barbara Graves <bgraves who-is-at UOTTAWA.CA>
> To: Multiple recipients of list PED3101-L =
<PED3101-L who-is-at mercury.cc.uottawa.ca>
> Subject: Re: portfolio assessment
> Date: 1999=A6~3=A4=EB1=A4=E9 AM 06:59
>=20
> Hi Everyone
> For your interest, The following response was sent to a discussion =
group on
> learning and schools by Eugene Matusov an educational researcher =
currently
> at the university of Delaware. He presents a provocative and =
interesting
> take on why he is against portfolio assessment.
>=20
> barbara
>=20
> >Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:59:48 -0800 (PST)
> >X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: procmail set sender to
> >xmca-request who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu using -f
> >X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: Processed from queue
> >/usr/spool/mqueue/xqueue
> >Reply-To: <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
> >From: "Eugene Matusov" <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
> >To: <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
> >Subject: RE: portfolio assessment
> >Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:55:26 -0500
>=20
> >> Eugene,
> >>
> >> Can you tell us more about why you're against portfolio =
assessment?
> >>
> >> Charles Nelson
> >> c.nelson who-is-at mail.utexas.edu
> >>
>=20
>=20
> >
> >There are several reasons that I don't like any form of =
predefined
> >assessment in general and portfolio in specific. First, my =
general reasons:
> >
> >1) I think the only "authentic" assessment of learning is that is =
embedded
> >in the practice itself and can't be separated from the =
participants, events,
> >and contexts. When people learn how to speak, to ride a bicycle, =
to become
> >lovers, to tease others, to report on neighbors to the =
authorities (you name
> >it :-) they do not need any "assessment" of their learning. When =
a child
> >learns to read at home, parents know the progress by simply =
perceiving how
> >the child participates in the reading activities: whether s/he =
asks to read,
> >enjoys reading, tries to read him/herself, ask to go to the =
library, talks
> >about the books, tells stories, and so on.
> >
> >2) Any form of inscribing so-called "learning progress" can be =
(potentially?
> >no, actually!) very harmful for the learners by focusing (i.e., =
constructing
> >the focus) on learner's mistakes, monopolizing the definition of =
learning
> >(and non-learning), imposing learning agendas, creating =
disabilities.
> >
> >3) The need for assessment separated from the activities =
themselves is not
> >inherent in learning (as we saw) but in a specific form of =
negations of
> >communities involved in formal education. I have a strong claim =
that any
> >assessment divorced from the activity itself (from its flow) is =
harmful for
> >the learners (newcomers) on way or another (or at least, so far I =
couldn't
> >find any counter example or argument). I can relax my claim a =
bit if we
> >stop searching for "the authentic assessment" (see below).
> >
> >4) Current formal education represents a rather unique situation =
of learning
> >when many people- and communities- stakeholders are not directly
> >present/involved in the learning/guiding processes with the =
students.
> >People who provide kids (i.e., parents), people who control =
resources (state
> >and federal government, districts, boards, taxpayers, business, =
politicians,
> >colleges) are not in the classroom themselves.
> >
> >5) Assessments divorced from the activities are nothing more than =
"boundary
> >objects" of power struggle between education stakeholder =
communities. I my
> >view, there are mainly two players known: government and =
businesses.
> >Parents, college professors, taxpayers are small fish. Currently =
government
> >has much-much more power of control (like a diffuse monopoly) =
than anybody
> >else but businesses in US are getting more and more now (there is =
a momentum
> >building). The issue of assessment is the issue of getting =
resources (cf.
> >current discourses on accountability and quality). The teacher =
is viewed as
> >a conductor (i.e., slave) of the most powerful stakeholders. It =
is
> >difficult for a slave to teach kids to be free (but, of course, =
not
> >impossible).
> >
> >6) It will be much better for learners if all educational =
stakeholders will
> >realize that their thrust for assessment divorced from the =
practice and
> >learning processes is a power and negotiation tool that is NOT =
inherently
> >rooted in the learning processes.
> >
> >7) If this realization happens, people may start thinking how to =
protect
> >learners and learning processes from the assessment so needed by =
the
> >stakeholder communities of practices for their own negotiations. =
Also they
> >may start expecting that the divorced assessment is a very =
dynamic object
> >reflecting a current distribution of power and a state of =
negotiation among
> >them (rather than the "authentic assessment" -- if you want real
> >authenticity, engage with real people, i.e., students).
> >
> >As to why I don't like portfolio assessment is specific:
> >
> >1) It seems to be another way of exploitation of teachers by =
colonization of
> >their time. It also another way to make teachers guilty.
> >
> >2) To have any meaningful portfolio, it should become a means of
> >communication among educational stakeholders rather than a tool =
of
> >"authentic" learning assessment.
> >
> >3) I believe that it is communication creates its tools rather =
than tools
> >create communication. I was really impressed by Yrjo Engstrom's =
work on
> >medical records (i.e., "portfolio assessment of patents' =
disease") in
> >Finland. He showed very convincingly that without institutional =
support of
> >communication among doctors, medical records are not very useful =
(if not
> >harmful).
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >Eugene
> >
>=20
> Barbara Graves
> Faculty of Education
> University of Ottawa
> 145 Jean-Jacques Lussier
> Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5
>=20
> email: bgraves who-is-at uottawa.ca
> phone: (613) 562-5800 ext 4106
=20
=20

------=_NextPart_001_0293_01BE66F3.ACD244E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">

Hi Michelle, Brad, and = everybody--
 
Can you call me "Eugene", please?  I = can't=20 stand "Professor Matusov" because I feel that "Professor=20 Matusov" so limits me as a whole person. It makes me a = representative of my=20 institution or something else but I don't need to represent  = anybody except=20 myself in this communication.  I also don't want that my voice = should be=20 privileged in any way by adding the label "Professor."  = However,=20 if you don't feel comfortable calling me "Eugene," of course, = you can=20 call me "Professor Matusov" (in the latter case, I'll try to = make=20 translation of my name for myself :-)
 
Michelle and Brad, thanks a lot for your very = thoughtful and=20 informative message.  I really like it not only because I fully = agree with=20 it :-) but because it is full with keen observations on very practices = that we=20 were talking about.  You wrote,
 
>I think in our culture we are so obsessed with the = "product"=20 that the process is not valued,
>and even when we pay "lip service" to it, we all know = the=20 product is "really" what's important.
>I think I can speak for a number of my classmates in citing the = current=20 marking system at
>our university as an example - the primary emphasis and value = is put=20 on  final "grades" -
>if it were not then we would not still be operating on this = system. So=20 what happens is that,
>as students, we focus on the final product - a meaningless = letter A, B,=20 C etc. How absurd!
>don't you think?
 
Absolutely. And as it often happens = absurd=20 injures an cripple people.  Students systematically getting poor = grades=20 become handicapped in the subject area and even some = practices.
 
>So why is it we have such glaring inconsistencies between = theory and=20
>practice even at out institutes of "higher learning"? =
 
This is $1,000,000 question.  = In my view,=20 the answer lays not in analysis of specific instructors (or in = demonizing them)=20 but in an analysis institutional and communal relations.  For = example,=20 think what would happen with an instructor who starts giving all his/her = classes=20 "A" on a systematic basis?  (I'm running this experiment = in my=20 institution now)
 
I personally feel that grading is something to do = with economy=20 that requires certain degree of educational failure and success.  I = was=20 teaching in a California college when then Governor Pete Wilson abruptly = cut=20 class size in California public elementary school.  We (i.e., = instructors=20 of Ed college) got a message that we should be more nurturing with our = students=20 (read "give less poor grades") while before the message about = rigor of=20 the program (read " more poor grades and tough exams).  I have = a few=20 other observations but I don't know if anybody did any systematic = research on=20 this issue of relationship of grading and economy labor = demands.
 
>How are we as participants in this
>hypocritical system supposed to take all of this academia = seriously=20 when we are told one
>thing but treated the opposite way ourselves?
 
Oh, gosh.  What a question!  I'll tell you -- I'm = scared. =20 You probably asked me from point of view of a student, right?  = Coming from=20 the former Soviet Union, I really believe in underground survival = through=20 underground smuggling of desired practices.  We pretended to do = things for=20 authorities to pass their judgment and did what we thought we had to do=20 secretly. Try to learn not for grades while publicly pretending that you = are=20 doing that for grades (usually it is stated the other way around).  = I don't=20 know if it is right advice.  Actually I met an elementary school = teacher=20 here in Delaware, who told me that she smuggles teaching in her = classroom=20 (observing her teaching I believed her).
 
I think there is an even much more = difficult=20 question if you ask your question from point of view of the instructor = because=20 by using "hypocritical system" (as you eloquently call it), = the=20 instructor does not only cripple him/herself but also the = students.  I=20 can't make any advice on that because it involves moral choice, = instructor's=20 personal circumstances, and so on. (It is always easy to say what = "3rd=20 person" (i.e., "he", "she", "they") = should do=20 but more difficult to say about what "1st and 2nd persons" = (i.e.,=20 "I," "you,"  "we") should = do).
 
>What happens is you have a group = of future=20 teachers who think "Yeah, this crap is all fine and =
>dandy, but when I get into 'the = real' world,=20 I'm going to take the path of least resistance and teach =
>what I see is really valued in = our 'Grade A'=20 culture; because that is what the parents want given
>the governement is telling them = our kids are=20 being "beaten" by the Japanese, Chinese, and
>whoever else they fear is going = to take our=20 future jobs away! Competition creates fear, and our
>whole economic and political = systems are=20 competitive; so when people are scared they just want
>the security of a short-term fix = - an=20 "A+" will give me or my kid a better chance at getting that = job=20
>won't it? And isn't that true?=20
 
Yes, I also see it as a struggle for = resources.  I can't understand why this struggle has to drive our=20 education.
 
>Computer companies, law firms, = medical=20 schools, engineering firms, telecommunication
>companies - don't they all want = the=20 "top" students - the "AAA+" students? That's=20
>why we have cheating. =
 
In my vew, cheating is a healthy = reaction on=20 unhealthy circumstances. But I guess you can easily recognize my Soviet=20 background in this statament?! :-)
 
>It doesn't matter how you get = the mark -=20 just get it so that you can have a leg
>up on the other guy! The process = is NOT=20 valued.
 
Well, to=20 be exact, it is another process that is valued namely getting ahead in = the=20 competition.
 
>That is the reality of it. = That's why we are=20 assigned
>numerous meaningless = "hoops" to=20 jump through to become teachers - so that the university can =
>say, "Yes, we recommend = Brad Lambert=20 for licensing as a teacher in Ontario because he took
>these courses and got As" = or whatever,=20 and this becomes my "negotiation tool" so that I can =
>have some way to feed my family. =
 
Sad but true.
 
>But, whatever does it = mean?
 
In my view, it means that you must = be a very=20 good conduit of powerful stakeholders' will in your future=20 classrooms.
 
>Does it encourage me to try and
>make the world I live in a better place? No.
 
But who said that the powerful = stakeholders view=20 it as the priority for you?!
 
>All of us (students) know that this is merely another
>form of assessment completely divorced from practice. The real = learning=20 will take place in the
>classroom - where "embedded reflection" will be truly = helpful=20 and useful. 
 
Yes.
 
>Anyway, I am venting,
>but I just find it very difficult to reconcile theory and = practice when=20 it cannot even be reconciled
>in the institutions who are advocating it.
 
In my view, this situation indicates = a big=20 problem with both the theory and the practice of formal = education.
 
>And so, I will - as I expect many of my classmates will - =
>continue in the "status quo" until universities start = "practicing what they preach". "Do what I say,
>not what I do" has never been an effective teaching tool. = Just as=20 kids value what you do and not
>simply what you tell them, so it is with adults.
 
When you become a schoolteacher you = will become=20 one of us, "Teacher Michelle" or "Teacher Brad!" = (This is=20 me, "Professor Matusov," who is talking)  Look for you = kids who=20 may say, "Why is Teacher Lee or Teacher Lambert preaching one thing = but=20 practicing another thing?"  What makes you think that you will = escape=20 it?  What about the district requirements?  Administration=20 pressure?  Parents' expectations? Kids' previous school = expereinces? Your=20 own traditional teaching/learning background?
 
>That's why I believe in Social Learning Theory - the
>necessity of modelling at least gives the appearance of = consistency=20 between theory and practice.
 
I agree that a consistancy between theory and practice can be = really a=20 plus.  Sorry to say but I know very few books that in my view has = that=20 consitancy.  If you want check this one,

Hargreaves, A. (1995). Changing teachers, changing times: = Teachers' work=20 and culture in the postmodern age. New York: Teachers College = Press.

Take care,
 
Eugene
PS I teach a teaching method class for preservice=20 teachers.  We have a discussion web (covered by a password).  = Can I=20 post your message on our class web, please?
PSS If you want to join our XMCA discussion list = check http://communicatio= n.ucsd.edu/MCA/index.html=20 for what is about and how to join it -- it is really cool email list = where=20 people discuss issues like that.


From: Michelle = Lee & Brad=20 Lambert <ezekiel@sprint.ca>
To: = Eugene=20 Matusov <ematusov@UDel.Edu>
Cc: = XMCA=20 <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Dat= e:=20 Thursday, March 04, 1999 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: portfolio=20 assessment

Okay! Thank you = Professor Matusov=20 for your reply! For my part at least, I think I understand better = now what=20 you are saying: "embedded reflection" as "reflection = in=20 action" I understand. I also agree that it does not seem to be = given=20 the same value as an after-the-fact type of reflection; perhaps = because it=20 seems more difficult (I am speaking personally). I will try and be = more=20 conscious of it in my next practicum placement. I think we can = encourage=20 this type of reflection in our students and promote it more in our = classes,=20 after all, it happens anyway as your example of "driving"=20 illustrates. I think in our culture we are so obsessed with the=20 "product" that the process is not valued, and even when we = pay=20 "lip service" to it, we all know the product is = "really"=20 what's important. I think I can speak for a number of my classmates = in=20 citing the current marking system at our university as an example - = the=20 primary emphasis and value is put on on final "grades" - = if it=20 were not then we would not still be operating on this system. So = what=20 happens is that, as students, we focus on the final product - a = meaningless=20 letter A, B, C etc. How absurd! don't you think? So why is it we = have such=20 glaring inconsistencies between theory and practice even at out = institutes=20 of "higher learning"? How are we as participants in this=20 hipocritical system supposed to take all of this academia seriously = when we=20 are told one thing but treated the opposite way ourselves? What = happens is=20 you have a group of future teachers who think "Yeah, this crap = is all=20 fine and dandy, but when I get into 'the real' world, I'm going to = take the=20 path of least resistance and teach what I see is really valued in = our 'Grade=20 A' culture; because that is what the parents want given the = governement is=20 telling them our kids are being "beaten" by the Japanese, = Chinese,=20 and whoever else they fear is going to take our future jobs away!=20 Competition creates fear, and our whole economic and political = systems are=20 competitive; so when people are scared they just want the security = of a=20 short-term fix - an "A+" will give me or my kid a better = chance at=20 getting that job won't it? And isn't that true? Computer companies, = law=20 firms, medical schools, engineering firms, telecommunication = companies -=20 don't they all want the "top" students - the = "AAA+"=20 students? That's why we have cheating. It doesn't matter how you get = the=20 mark - just get it so that you can have a leg up on the other guy! = The=20 process is NOT valued. That is the reality of it. That's why we are = assigned=20 numerous meaningless "hoops" to jump through to become = teachers -=20 so that the university can say, "Yes, we recommend Brad Lambert = for=20 licensing as a teacher in Ontario because he took these courses and = got=20 As" or whatever, and this becomes my "negotiation = tool" so=20 that I can have some way to feed my family. But, whatever does it = mean? Does=20 it encourage me to try and make the world I live in a better place? = No. All=20 of us (students) know that this is merely another form of assessment = completely divorced from practice. The real learning will take place = in the=20 classroom - where "embedded reflection" will be truly = helpful and=20 useful.  Anyway, I am venting, but I just find it very = difficult to=20 reconcile theory and practice when it cannot even be reconciled in = the=20 institutions who are advocating it. And so, I will - as I expect = many of my=20 classmates will - continue in the "status quo" until = universities=20 start "practicing what they preach". "Do what I say, = not what=20 I do" has never been an effective teaching tool. Just as kids = value=20 what you do and not simply what you tell them, so it is with adults. = That's=20 why I believe in Social Learning Theory - the necessity of modelling = at=20 least gives the appearance of consistency between theory and=20 practice.

- Cynical, but not beyond being converted - any=20 suggestions?

    "I believe; help = thou mine=20 unbelief" (Mark 9:24)

----------
From: Eugene Matusov = <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
To: ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca
Cc: XMCA <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
Subject:=20 Re: portfolio assessment
Date:=20 1999¦~3¤ë2¤é AM 09:22

Hi = Michelle and=20 everybody--  Let me go through = your message=20 and address questions you asked.

-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 Michelle Lee & Brad Lambert <ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca = <mailto:ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca>>
To: ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu = <mailto:ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>=20 <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu=20 <mailto:ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>>
Date: Monday, March 01, 1999 9:59 = AM
Subject: Re: portfolio=20 assessment



----------
From: Michelle Lee & = Brad=20 Lambert <ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca=20 <mailto:ezekiel who-is-at sprint.ca>>
To: U of O=20  Learning processes in the educational setting Listserv = <PED3101-L who-is-at mercury.cc.uottawa.ca>
Subject: Re: portfolio assessment
Date:=20 1999¦~3¤ë1¤é AM 09:53

Hi=20 everyone!
I agree with Matusov's take on assessment in general - = that is=20 with regards to the politics of it - but I don't really understand = his=20 argument against portfolios in particular. First, how can any = assessment=20 "be embedded in the practice itself?" Doesn't assessment = by=20 definition imply some type of reflection on the value of a completed = process=20 or product even if it is only partially completed?

Eugene: In my view, there are different types of = reflection:=20 some emedded and some disembedded and some probably both. =  There is a=20 type of reflection that is embedded in the flow of activity or = events. For=20 example, when I drive a car and talk with my wife, I do a lot of = decision=20 making reflection on how I drive but this type of reflection and = decision=20 amking is embedded in the flow of events and I may not even notice = it. Our=20 culture, unlike many others, is not very good on recorgnizing = importance of=20 embedded type of reflection or reflection-in-action. Often we expect = reflection to be out-of-action.  And we (our culture) often = value this=20 type of reflection as the only possible (and the only visible). =
Or, doesn't it imply some = type of=20 objective or "outside" perspective even if it is simply = the=20 learner stepping back and looking at the practice? Maybe I don't = understand=20 Portfolio assessment the way Matusov does. Anyway, portfolio = assessment=20 seems to be the most fair type of assessment I am yet to come = across,=20 especially if learners can be encouraged to choose their own best = loved=20 efforts and submit those against assessment criteria which they = helped=20 establish (e.g., rubrics). What better way is there to engage young = learners=20 in a reality they will most certainly face as adults seeking = employment?=20 And, in asking this question I think I see my biggest objection to = Matusov's=20 e-mail - he doesn't appear to offer any alternative.
Eugene: I did it but in another email.  My alternative = is to=20 realize that so called thrust for assessment does not inherently = come out of=20 learning/guiding processes but it is a tool of negotation among=20 communities-stakeholders for getting resources and support. = Realization of=20 this fact may lead to different solutions like involving all parties = (including students) in designing this tool of negotation and = expecting that=20 this tool of negotation to change with changing the negotiation.=20  Anohter implication can be protecting of learning/guiding = processes=20 from negative side-effects of such negotation tool as divorced = assessment=20 including protfolio.  Let me give, probably, the most bizzare = form of=20 portfolio assessement of a teaching process is putting video camera = in a=20 teddy bear to assess how good the babysitter is with your child. =  On=20 smaller scale, in the less bizzare froms of portfolio assessments, = the=20 survallance and recording of "mistakes" is still there (as = well as=20 creating a competition).  These are negative side-effects. =  As=20 recognized as such, I think it is possible to deal with them (to=20 counter-act) by shielding learning/guiding processes as much as = possible,=20 knowing that the assessment has another important role (i.e., = negotiation=20 tool).  There are porbably some other implications as = well.

And=20 so Professor Matusov, we may have not been privy to all of your=20 correspondence - could you please enlighten us as to how you think=20 assessment should take place in our schools and ultimately our=20 workplaces?
Eugene: I'm not sure that = I'm=20 "enlightening" anybody (maybe, on the contrary, obscuring) = but I'm=20 ready to share my thoughts :-)  As one of educational = stakeholders=20 (i.e., as an educator myself, as an academician, as a student of = Spanish, as=20 a parent, and, finaly, as just plain folk), I'm against using = divorced=20 assessment for creating (or better to say contributing to creating) = failure=20 and disabilities in students as, I believe, it often occurs now.=20  Divorced assessment can be used, for example, to check = possibility for=20 discrimantion or some other important goals (including = accountability).=20  But such "indangarious species" as learning and = guiding=20 should be preserved.  As to workplaces, it depends on workplace = -- many=20 of workplaces do not have any divorced assessments.  Many of = those that=20 have know that "their bottom line" is not assessement but = profit=20 or some other "inherent" criteria.
What do you think?
Take care,
Eugene

Thank You - = Brad Lambert -=20 University of Ottawa
----------
> From: Barbara Graves = <bgraves who-is-at UOTTAWA.CA>
> To:=20 Multiple recipients of list PED3101-L <PED3101-L who-is-at mercury.cc.uottawa.ca>
> Subject: Re: portfolio = assessment
> Date:=20 1999¦~3¤ë1¤é AM 06:59
> =
> Hi=20 Everyone
> For your interest, The following response was sent = to a=20 discussion group on
> learning and schools by Eugene Matusov = an=20 educational researcher currently
> at the university of = Delaware. He=20 presents a provocative and interesting
> take on why he is = against=20 portfolio assessment.
>
> barbara
>
>=20 >Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:59:48 -0800 (PST)
>=20 >X-Authentication-Warning: weber.ucsd.edu: procmail set sender = to
>=20 >xmca-request who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu using -f
> >X-Authentication-Warning:=20 weber.ucsd.edu: Processed from queue
>=20 >/usr/spool/mqueue/xqueue
> >Reply-To: <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
>=20 >From: "Eugene Matusov" <ematusov who-is-at UDel.Edu>
>=20 >To: <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
> >Subject: RE: portfolio = assessment
>=20 >Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:55:26 -0500
>
> >>=20 Eugene,
> >>
> >> Can you tell us more about = why=20 you're against portfolio assessment?
> >>
> = >>=20 Charles Nelson
> >> c.nelson who-is-at mail.utexas.edu
>=20 >>
>
>
> >
> >There are = several=20 reasons that I don't like any form of predefined
> = >assessment in=20 general and portfolio in specific. First, my general = reasons:
>=20 >
> >1) I think the only "authentic" = assessment of=20 learning is that is embedded
> >in the practice itself and = can't be=20 separated from the participants, events,
> >and contexts.=20  When people learn how to speak, to ride a bicycle, to = become
>=20 >lovers, to tease others, to report on neighbors to the = authorities (you=20 name
> >it :-) they do not need any "assessment" = of their=20 learning.  When a child
> >learns to read at home, = parents=20 know the progress by simply perceiving how
> >the child=20 participates in the reading activities: whether s/he asks to = read,
>=20 >enjoys reading, tries to read him/herself, ask to go to the = library,=20 talks
> >about the books, tells stories, and so on.
> = >
> >2) Any form of inscribing so-called "learning=20 progress" can be (potentially?
> >no, actually!) very = harmful=20 for the learners by focusing (i.e., constructing
> >the = focus) on=20 learner's mistakes, monopolizing the definition of learning
> = >(and=20 non-learning), imposing learning agendas, creating = disabilities.
>=20 >
> >3) The need for assessment separated from the = activities=20 themselves is not
> >inherent in learning (as we saw) but = in a=20 specific form of negations of
> >communities involved in = formal=20 education.  I have a strong claim that any
> = >assessment=20 divorced from the activity itself (from its flow) is harmful = for
>=20 >the learners (newcomers) on way or another (or at least, so far = I=20 couldn't
> >find any counter example or argument).  I = can=20 relax my claim a bit if we
> >stop searching for "the=20 authentic assessment" (see below).
> >
> >4) = Current=20 formal education represents a rather unique situation of = learning
>=20 >when many people- and communities- stakeholders are not = directly
>=20 >present/involved in the learning/guiding processes with the=20 students.
> >People who provide kids (i.e., parents), = people who=20 control resources (state
> >and federal government, = districts,=20 boards, taxpayers, business, politicians,
> >colleges) are = not in=20 the classroom themselves.
> >
> >5) Assessments = divorced=20 from the activities are nothing more than "boundary
>=20 >objects" of power struggle between education stakeholder=20 communities.  I my
> >view, there are mainly two = players=20 known: government and businesses.
> >Parents, college = professors,=20 taxpayers are small fish.  Currently government
> >has = much-much more power of control (like a diffuse monopoly) than=20 anybody
> >else but businesses in US are getting more and = more now=20 (there is a momentum
> >building).  The issue of = assessment is=20 the issue of getting resources (cf.
> >current discourses = on=20 accountability and quality).  The teacher is viewed as
> = >a=20 conductor (i.e., slave) of the most powerful stakeholders.  It=20 is
> >difficult for a slave to teach kids to be free (but, = of=20 course, not
> >impossible).
> >
> >6) It = will be=20 much better for learners if all educational stakeholders = will
>=20 >realize that their thrust for assessment divorced from the = practice=20 and
> >learning processes is a power and negotiation tool = that is=20 NOT inherently
> >rooted in the learning processes.
> = >
> >7) If this realization happens, people may start = thinking=20 how to protect
> >learners and learning processes from the=20 assessment so needed by the
> >stakeholder communities of = practices=20 for their own negotiations.  Also they
> >may start = expecting=20 that the divorced assessment is a very dynamic object
> = >reflecting=20 a current distribution of power and a state of negotiation = among
>=20 >them (rather than the "authentic assessment" -- if you = want=20 real
> >authenticity, engage with real people, i.e.,=20 students).
> >
> >As to why I don't like portfolio = assessment is specific:
> >
> >1) It seems to be = another=20 way of exploitation of teachers by colonization of
> >their = time.=20 It also another way to make teachers guilty.
> >
> = >2) To=20 have any meaningful portfolio, it should become a means of
>=20 >communication among educational stakeholders rather than a tool=20 of
> >"authentic" learning assessment.
>=20 >
> >3) I believe that it is communication creates its = tools=20 rather than tools
> >create communication.  I was = really=20 impressed by Yrjo Engstrom's work on
> >medical records = (i.e.,=20 "portfolio assessment of patents' disease") in
>=20 >Finland.  He showed very convincingly that without = institutional=20 support of
> >communication among doctors, medical records = are not=20 very useful (if not
> >harmful).
> >
> = >What do=20 you think?
> >
> >Eugene
> >
> =
>=20 Barbara Graves
> Faculty of Education
> University of=20 Ottawa
> 145 Jean-Jacques Lussier
> Ottawa, Ontario K1N=20 6N5
>
> email: bgraves who-is-at uottawa.ca
> phone:=20 (613) 562-5800 ext 4106


=
<= /BLOCKQUOTE> ------=_NextPart_001_0293_01BE66F3.ACD244E0-- ------=_NextPart_000_0292_01BE66F3.ACC91D20 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; name="Eugene Matusov.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Eugene Matusov.vcf" BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:Matusov;Eugene;; FN:Eugene Matusov ORG:University of Delaware;School of Education TITLE:Assistant Professor TEL;WORK;VOICE:(302) 831-1266 TEL;VOICE: TEL;WORK;FAX:(302) 831-4445 ADR;WORK:;Willard Hall 206D;School of Education;Newark;DE;19716 LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=3DQUOTED-PRINTABLE:Willard Hall 206D=3D0D=3D0ASchool = of Education=3D0D=3D0ANewark, DE 19716 URL: URL:http://ematusov.eds.udel.edu EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:ematusov who-is-at udel.edu REV:19990305T153357Z END:VCARD ------=_NextPart_000_0292_01BE66F3.ACC91D20--