Re: Assessment/Grading p.o.v.

!Maureen Fitzpatrick (mfitzpat@JCCCNET.JOHNCO.CC.KS.US)
Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:04:30 -0500

I'm going a little off here but this reminded me of something that happened when
I was a Residence Hall Director while I was doing my graduate course work. Our
students took a personality inventory that we used to assist us in matching up
roommates. One year, we had a new overlord who insisted that we all file these
forms in our non-existent offices (the top drawer of a dresser in my case).
When we asked him why we would need these forms, he said "So when there are
conflicts and some roommates tell you they don't get along, you can show them
they do!"

Maureen Fitz . . .
From: Bob King <kingbx@HAMLET.UNCG.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 1996 9:11 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list RHETNT-L <>
Subject: Re: Assessment/Grading p.o.v.

Here's where the wicket then gets sticky -- for anyone still following
this argument about standards and assessment

Suppose the computer allows individualized assessment, so that students
could take some personality tests (okay, yes, I'm now welcoming AAACK's!,
but it is kind of interesting that there are diagnostic as well as
evaluative tests) and make a reasoned decision about how they want
to be assessed. They might choose to attend Hampshire College,
or the Citadel, or wherever (if they are "college bound", that is), and
most likely find themselves in a category or "class" of students and
teachers that work for them.

On the other hand, lets say pomo theory has really gotten to us, and we
say that each student probably has a "little Citidel" and a "little
Hampshire" within an overall multiplicity of selves. Then the individual
assessment, in the absence of a singular individual, maybe takes on a
temporal factor -- hmm, this week I'm kind of feeling in need of some
freedom, so I'll drag out my self-assesment software. Next week this may
differ. Ruminations in any case.

Bob King