On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 3:14 AM, fors...@ozonline.com.au 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
Hello Tony,
thanks a lot for your comment which is definitely some more great food
for thought (on top of Martin's earlier comments).
I'll have to spend more time thinking about this issue and, more
importantly, talking to the educational folks here at OLE Nepal before I
can start to wrap my
On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 09:57 +0200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
2009/8/19 NoiseEHC noise...@freemail.hu:
- Automatic assessment is snake oil, Bryan is well intentioned but
deeply wrong. See the earlier email at
http://www.mail-archive.com/sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org/msg05584.html
I agree
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Bryan Berrybr...@olenepal.org wrote:
I agree that automatic assessment is no magic cure-all but it does free
teachers from a lot of drudgery in grading worksheets.
I understand your point, and respect your good intentions. I worry --
quite a bit -- about the
