tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5776587.post6941399160145699335..comments2023-11-03T04:00:24.785-04:00Comments on Kentucky School News and Commentary: Guskey on Why the ACT is Inappropriate for State-wide AccountabilityRichard Dayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14586435007687942849noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5776587.post-43403730780860883342008-03-18T07:37:00.000-04:002008-03-18T07:37:00.000-04:00Wow!Well, first, Guskey's right...but I don't have...Wow!<BR/><BR/>Well, first, Guskey's right...but I don't have time to go into all of that now. (I'm lecturing on education in antebellum Kentukcy this morning...and need to get my head into that.)<BR/><BR/>In the meantime consider this: NRT v CRT is not an either or proposition. The ACT is normed. It is a NRT...and the benchmarks do not make it anything else. <BR/><BR/>The benchmarks you refer to are not criterion referenced - they refer to the relationship between a student's ACT score and the grades they eventually earn in college. The sample of students used to derive the benchmarks is NOT scientific. It is a convenience sample. In fact, ACT says "there is no guarantee that it is representative of all colleges in the U.S."<BR/><BR/>The ACT exists to help colleges predict which students are most likely to be successful. It does so by weeding out students - using a curriculum (criteria) that the students may or may not have been taught.<BR/><BR/>Here's some homework:<BR/>http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/benchmarks.pdfRichard Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14586435007687942849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5776587.post-34138256272264118022008-03-17T15:07:00.000-04:002008-03-17T15:07:00.000-04:00Here is an open-response question for readers of t...Here is an open-response question for readers of this blog entry.<BR/><BR/>Do you agree with Dr. Guskey's comments?<BR/><BR/>Be careful! This question requires higher order thinking to answer.<BR/><BR/>Consider; now that the ACT provides benchmark scores, is it still just a norm-reference assessment as Guskey asserts, or is it something new -- a hybrid NRT/CRT? What are the implications of that?<BR/><BR/>Also, explain why Dr. Guskey might want to duck this obvious benchmark issue raised by the ACT, the EXPLORE and the PLAN tests. Since all three tests are in use in Kentucky statewide, how do you think Dr. Guskey missed this important testing development?<BR/><BR/>Here are some more thoughts. Can, and should, teachers really take pride in CATS results for their own students? Don't jump on the answer until you read below.<BR/><BR/>The KEA Lobby Team's position paper on Senate Bill 1 says that putting in a test with individual student validity and reliability would enable programs to evaluate teachers using those scores. The union is solidly against that. As a consequence, the KEA clearly implies CATS cannot be used to evaluate classroom teachers because it does not generate sufficiently valid and reliable classroom level scores. <BR/><BR/>Do you agree with Dr. Guskey or the union? Side with the union and you can pretty much forget Guskey's comments about individual teacher's taking pride in CATS scores. Side with Dr. Guskey, and you just might give the legislature a green light to hold you accountable with CATS.<BR/><BR/>Don't you just love these real world open response questions?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com