[etni] Re: Fw: re: theory vs. practice (re: Oral Bagrut)
- From: Rivka Lewenstein <rlewen@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: maxinetz@xxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
I agree 100% with everything Maxine said. I, too, have my reservations about
the objectivity, or lack of it, of the oral - and written - Bagrut exams. Among
the many unpleasant situations that I and other teachers I've discussed the
oral test with have encountered when testing or having my students tested
orally are:
- A tester who was just not objective, and gave a top student (who spoke
fluently and without a single mistake) a low score, just because "the one
before her was much better" ...
- A tester who asked questions which were WAY above the students' level - while
it's true that you are not limited in subjects, I do think that testers have to
use sense and sensitivity in these things.
- Testers who didn't follow the rubric and gave grades based only on fluency
and not on accuracy (Giving students much higher grades than they deserve is
also not good, in my opinion).
- Testers who didn't know how to test students on their projects, and left the
students in a total state of bewilderment as a result (because they were fully
prepared to give a presentation, and were not given a chance to do so.)
- Teachers who didn't properly prepare their students for one or more
components of the exam, and then got angry when their students didn't get top
marks.
- Teachers who pressured the tester to change marks.
- Unpleasant / unconducive testing conditions.
And much more ... Is there anything you DON'T recognize here??? Mind you,
that's not to say that all or even most testing situations have been like that.
We've had wonderful testers in school over the years, and I've also enjoyed
(yes, believe it or not, enjoyed) testing in most of the schools I've gone to.
But it's always nerve-wracking beforehand - not knowing who will be testing, or
where you'll be testing, and how the testing will proceed.
Despite all that, as Maxine said, there's no better way of doing things at the
moment. (At least as far as I can see.) And we MUST continue having a test if
we want students to recognize the importance of speaking. I can say that from
personal experience, having taught in several schools where students did not
take the Bagrut. (They took a different test instead, but that did not include
an oral test.) These students generally couldn't open their mouths, and even
when teachers agreed that speaking was important, they didn't really follow up
on that because they were so busy preparing for the written exam. Even my weak
3-pointers speak better than some of the advanced students in those schools...
All the best,
Rivka
Maxine wrote:
The question is how you make the situation more tenable. Even on the
written Bagrut senior examiners have a lot of work to do closing the gaps
created between the grades of two examiners on the same test: that after
meticulously preparing an answer key, revising it after meeting with the
examiners at a general meeting before checking begins, revising it again and
again as unforeseen problems crop up. Even with the most carefully crafted
rubrics and carefully thought out questions, discrepancies are inevitable
because we are all individuals who interpret things differently (in the
jargon of the HOTS that's called Different Perspectives ;-)) ). The
only way to avoid such subjectivity is to move to multiple choice exams a la
the Psychometric Exam. Is that what we want? It occurs to me that the
SAT exams now have an essay component and it would be interesting to find
out if the exam committees there have devised a way of avoiding the kinds of
discrepancies we have.
So if on a WRITTEN exam there are such gaps how do you possibly avoid them
on an Oral exam? The only way of doing that, in my opinion, is by having
a national bank of Oral Exam testers. That would mean that is all they
would do for two months - testing pupils 18 hours a day every day from March
to May. Sounds like lots of fun. I'd agree: IF they pay me 10,000
shekels an hour and accommodate me in the Hilton while I'm doing it ;-)) and
then send me, all expenses paid, on a trip to a country where I will hear
NO English for two weeks.
As others have said, eliminating an Oral exam is sending the message that
Oral skills aren't important. If it's not on the test, teachers will
neglect it. None of us want pupils that can answer an Unseen but can't
speak a word of English.
-----------------------------------------------
** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org
or - http://www.etni.org.il **
** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx **
** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **
-----------------------------------------------
Other related posts: