------=_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">
Hargreaves, A. (1995). Changing teachers, changing times: = Teachers' work=20 and culture in the postmodern age. New York: Teachers College = Press.
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 <
Subject:=20
Re: portfolio assessment
Date:=20
1999¦~3¤ë2¤é AM 09:22
-----Original =
Message-----
From:=20
Michelle Lee & Brad Lambert <
To:
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 =
<
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 =
<
> To:=20
Multiple recipients of list PED3101-L <
> Subject: Re: portfolio =
assessment
> Date:=20
1999¦~3¤ë1¤é AM 06:59
> =
> 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
> >X-Authentication-Warning:=20
weber.ucsd.edu: Processed from queue
>=20
>/usr/spool/mqueue/xqueue
> >Reply-To: <
>=20
>From: "Eugene Matusov" <
>=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
> >>
>=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:
> phone:=20
(613) 562-5800 ext 4106