On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 3:14 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > We mostly assess that which can easily be measured rather than that which > relates to the important education outcomes.
Yes. We mostly assess that which can be easily measured _by humans_. Imagine how it goes when we narrow that to the paltry bit that computers can assess... and computers spit out cute, glowing 3D rendered numbers. > Bad practice is already entrenched in national curricula, does automating bad > practice (lower order assessment) mean that it can be done in less time, > leaving more time for good practice, or does it further entrench bad > practice? That seems to be the central point in this discussion. I don't have > an answer, but for me, automating lower order assessments would be a low > priority project. I agree with your take on the discussion. But we don't automate bad practice, we make it narrower, hence worse. What we can automate is so narrow that the big numbers that come out of a tiny slice of it will overshadow everything. cheers, m -- [email protected] [email protected] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
