Since Test Talk begins with the study of something and extends it to the collection of questions related to that concept, I disagree. The question here was not simply related to the concept, but the ability to identify questions that were asking about the concept. I think that is separate from simply understanding the concept. It reminds me, sadly, of an introductory ed class I took as a freshman from an instructor at UN-L who could best be described in very unprofessional language. He liked to impress upon his class the power of a teacher in a testing situation. The points he strived to make were clear and valid. The means to an end earned him a reputations as a d*&k h...@!d. All semester he bragged about being able to construct a test no one could pass. On the fourth night of finals, in a raining winter storm and days before Christmas, he set out to prove his point. The test, which he had only recently announced would cover the ENTIRE text book (including much that had never been required reading or on the syl.), was intentionally worded in such a convoluted way that it reduced many in the class to tears. Furthermore, after completing the test, no one was allowed to leave. Afterwards, he made his grand and staged appearance (the test proctored until then by someone else) and told us all that he just wanted to make his point one last time. It related to fair testing and the power of the teacher, and how not to abuse it (!!). Anyone in the class who passed the test, even marginally, would get an A and the grade would not count for anyone else. It was, IMO, a cruel way to make his point. Very few passed that damned test. I was one of them. His 'lesson' stuck with me, but not nearly as clearly as the memory I have of the freshman football player--a clever young man who seemed sincere about education and his coursework, a looming figure, a hulk of a man--sitting in that ill fitting chair and shaking in his tears. Disguised cruelty is still cruelty. How does it relate? It simply causes me to understand that knowledge/understanding can be derailed by question structure. It is why I did not see this as primarily a conceptual understanding, but potentially one in which a student in control of a concept would not have a clue that the question related to the concept in the first place.
Lori Jackson M.Ed.Reading Specialist Broken Bow, NE EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me > From: [email protected] > Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:27:08 -0500 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MOSAIC] test strategies > > Test Talk will not help for this focus. > The best way to collect sentences about cause effect is to research text > structure. > Maxine > > > In a message dated 2/22/2010 7:47:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > > I would think that this would begin with a discussion of cause and effect, > leading into beginning to list the kinds of questions associated with > cause and effect. I am wondering if the book Test Talk might be helpful to > you. > > > Lori Jackson M.Ed.Reading Specialist > Broken Bow, NE > > > > > > > EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD > Join me > > > From: [email protected] > > Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:31:08 -0500 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [MOSAIC] test strategies > > > > Have any of you developed ways to help students understand questions > that > > are asked in science? I am particularly interested in questions worded > > using the passive voice such as: What conclusion can be drawn from > this > > diagram? The __________ was caused by_____. > > Maxine > > > > > _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
