There was a lot of discussion – but no agreement – about keeping Kentucky’s Writing Portfolios as part of the CATS school assessments during the seven meetings of the Kentucky Department of Education’s Assessment and Accountability Task Force.
One of the many things the group never seriously examined is the very awkward and cumbersome scoring rules that teachers and students are forced to cope with in the writing portfolio program.
If you want to learn a bit more about what is wrong with this process, take a look at the following YouTube video.
Then, talk over this video with your student’s teachers. If that teacher is like the vast majority (69% according to data released to the Assessment and Accountability Task Force), we think you will hear an earful about how the awkward portfolio rules really hamper writing instruction.
Finally, ask your Kentucky legislator to remove this clearly dysfunctional program from the CATS. Our kids and teachers deserve better than this.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Could You Learn to Write With These Rules?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The video is a bit disingenuous. What the video failed to mention is that all the errors cited can be addressed by the teacher before a document is submitted to the "writing portfolio."
That's known as teaching writing. Trying to teach writing on the last document to be submitted to a writing portfolio is a bit late.
Were the types of errors cited in the video found in a writing portfolio paper, that would be the basis for reviewing with the teacher his/her writing instructions.
If the teacher is weak in writing instructions, that would be the basis for recommending (requiring) that a teacher take a college course on teaching writing. This is known as "helping teachers teach."
Too, students should be encouraged to do their writing on a word processing program using its built-in spelling and grammar checker.
Likewise, writing portfolio papers should be scanned into a computer and then run through its spelling and grammar checker to flag errors.
Word processor developers should have available a count and summary of the type errors the spelling and grammar checker detected. This also could be used help students improve their writing skills.
These results could then be provided (printed out, emailed) to the student and teacher to help improve teaching and writing skills.
Hempy is very poorly informed.
Hempy claims, “All the errors cited can be addressed by the teacher before a document is submitted to the "writing portfolio." That isn’t correct.
In fact, one of the regulation sections discussed in the video makes this clear. The relevant language is found in:
703 KAR 5:010 Writing Portfolio Procedures, Section 3, Paragraph 7
“A teacher or other conferencing partner may indicate the type and position of errors (for example, circle errors, highlight mistakes, put checks in margins of lines where errors occur) on student writing; however, a teacher and other conferencing partner shall not correct errors on papers that MIGHT (emphasis added) be included in the accountability portfolio.”
Note the key word in the last phrase of the sentence, MIGHT. A student paper that MIGHT wind up in the portfolio is subject to the restrictive grading rules of this section of 703 KAR 5:010. But, the fact is that any student writing might wind up in the portfolio. So, Kentucky teachers correctly interpret this regulation to apply to all their writing instruction. Hempy doesn’t know the legal requirements, but our teachers do.
By the way, while the video didn’t go into full detail on this administrative regulation, here is another extract from 703 KAR 5:010 Writing Portfolio Procedures, Section 2, that shows Hempy truly does not understand this issue.
“School and District Writing Programs. (1) A school shall provide writing instruction and authentic writing opportunities at all grade levels and shall develop a procedure to collect working folders that include writing pieces at nonaccountability levels for possible inclusion in the accountability portfolio.”
The intent is very clear here. Any student writing, even that created in years when the assessment portfolio isn’t used for CATS (the nonaccountability levels), may later become a portfolio item in a year when the student does participate in the CATS portfolios.
Combined with the requirement from Section 3 of the regulation, the additional regulatory language makes it very clear that the restrictive writing instruction rules apply all the time, not just in years when portfolios are formally collected in the CATS assessments.
In fact, a solid majority of our teachers know a lot about portfolios, including these regulatory mandates that Hempy clearly does not. That’s why 69 percent of Kentucky’s teachers say the portfolios need to be removed from the CATS program. The rules are tying their hands in teaching writing. I agree with those teachers.
Anyway, after 16 years of trying to make writing portfolios work in accountability, if our teachers are still massively unhappy with the program, and if the National Assessment of Educational Progress writing results show our kids still don’t write very well (which that federal test does show), then I would suggest the problem is with the program, not the teachers.
By the way, according to Doris Redfield, the testing expert on the Kentucky Department of Education’s Assessment and Accountability Task Force, no other state still uses writing portfolios for accountability. That includes some states like Vermont that used to do so. These states have learned a lesson Hempy and others have not: using writing portfolios in accountability results in compromises that undermine the real power of this instructional tool.
I am intrigued by Hempy’s suggestion to use computers to substitute for students learning grammar, punctuation and spelling. Kids may, or may not, take the time to learn from automated word processing corrections. Moreover, most good writers who use these aids have discovered that computer writing checking is far from infallible. In fact, I had grammar and spell check turned on when I drafted this response in Word 2003. The program didn’t like the word “nonaccountability” in the administrative regulation quoted above though several dictionaries I consulted have no problem with “non” being attached to any number of words.
I have to assume that Hempy doesn’t do a lot of writing with a word processor or isn’t able to spot the mistakes that self-correction programs sometimes make. These computerized writing aids are powerful, and I use them all the time, but they are not a foolproof way to teach writing.
Overall, Hempy’s comments make it clear he or she does not understand Kentucky’s rules for portfolios. Unfortunately, there isn't anything disingenuous in the video. And, Hempy's lack of knowledge doesn’t mean that portfolios in accountability are doing anything good for the children or the teachers of Kentucky.
Post a Comment