[etni] NBA etc [longish posting - sorry!]

**** ETNI on the web http://www.etni.org.il   http://www.etni.org   ****

Dear all -

I've been following the latest development of the NBA debate with a 
feeling of great bemusement. Deja vu. I've read it before: three blind 
men come across an elephant and decide to feel the elephant to determine 
what sort of creature it is, etc.

When educators of such caliber (and we all know Ronald and Avi have been 
around for a long while) say things so drastically different, the first 
reaction is, hey folks, are you sure you're talking about the same thing?

And then I think, there must be something wrong with the method these 
two people use to study the object in question. This is where the 
parable comes into play. However, neither one can be suspected of vision 
impairment when it comes to English. I wonder what fundamental 
difference makes them view NBA with such polarity.

And, of course, I agree with those who believe the discussion could 
benefit from a better approach than the one adopted by Avi when he calls 
us "gripers"... An apology is probably due here. I recognize others' 
right to adopt and defend NBA; I want my right to deny and fight it, in 
its current form, to be recognized as well. And let's do it in a 
civilized manner, OK?


Now, regarding the NBA itself. On the one hand, rubrics and projects are 
certainly a huge leap forward. On the other, the whole point of testing 
reading comprehension is to find out whether - and to what extent - the 
reading passage in question has been understood. Pure reading 
comprehension should not include any productive skills. The whole TOEFL 
world uses one method for it: read the passage and tick/circle the 
correct answers to a number of multiple-choice questions. True/false is 
ok, too. The rest is no reading-comprehension testing per se: fill-in 
(mini-clozes) and open-ended questions test other things, like grammar 
and vocabulary and usage (subcategorizational restrictions, for 
example). I'm not saying these skills should not be put to test - but it 
makes little sense putting the two together and calling it "access to 
written information." Not to mention the new question types and formats 
that do not test English at all - they test IQ, inferencing, analytical 
skills, critical skills, whatever. This is why we suddenly need answer 
keys: we see a question like that and we say to ourselves, I wonder what 
sort of answer the guy who has written this test expects me to give.


Your expectation that the ministry will experience a sudden attack of 
guilty conscience and will admit the '04 Module E disaster is hardly 
realistic. The moment someone up there admits it, crowds of angry 
graduates and their parents will either storm the ministry building 
demanding a "factor" - or will just sue the ministry (and, just to 
remind you, the only way of doing it is to go to the High Court of 
Justice) - which is exactly what the ministry guys do not want to 
happen, as it will cost quite a few of them their jobs. The new Pope 
will bless gay marriages before this happens.

The same refers to the whole issue of the NBA. Accepting our criticism - 
or merely our suggestions - would mean making us partners in the 
process. This is exactly what the ministry will want to avoid. They 
don't need partners - they need control.

To give you a clearer perspective, I'd like to invite you to visit the 
website of our Hungarian colleagues

www.examsreform.hu

Here's what it says, in case you'd rather suffice with a quotation:
=============================================================

Project Philosophy
Testing is about ensuring that those tests and examinations which
society decides it needs, for whatever purpose, are the best possible,
that they represent the best in not only testing practice, but in
teaching practice, and that the tests reflect the aspirations of
professional language teachers. Anything less is a betrayal of teachers
and learners, as is a refusal to engage in testing.

=============================================================

See? Others implement changes too. But... Feel free to compare it with 
how it is done here, and make your own conclusions.

I also want to encourage you to download Detailed Requirements and Test 
Specifications from

http://www.examsreform.hu/Media/Specifications.PDF

and compare it with NBA for clarity. How these guys manage to survive 
without calling Reading Comprehension "access of information from 
written text" is just beyond my comprehension.

Next. Many say NBA has increased the amount of work while the pay has 
not changed. Let me translate this into some applied economics. This 
means that we make less per hour. Have you been able to figure out 
exactly how much? No? Let's give it a try. If you teach full-time, you 
work a 50-hour week (your regular 24 contact hours + roughly an equal 
amount of time spent on preparation, grading, teaching enhancement, 
meetings, etc). 200 hours a month. If you make NIS 5000, this is NIS 25 
an hour. A cleaner gets 30.

Where do we go from here? Some quit (a very wise move, if you can find a 
job that pays more than 25 shekels an hour; most do); others say, hey, 
if they think they pay us a wage let'em think we do them a job. And 
start the game called "screw the system" (pardon my French). No wonder 
the standard of English has lately deteriorated: not everyone will kill 
themselves year after year for 25 shekels an hour. Some will just go 
through the motions.

Another consequence of this creeping salary erosion is the fact that 
teacher turnover is so high,  and that language proficiency of some of 
them is so horrendously low. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Present 
company excluded.

Knowing my ability to trample over so many people's toes in one brief 
posting, you appreciate my political correctness, I hope.

Gripingly yours -

Lev

#####  To send a message to the ETNI list email: etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx   #####
#####  Send queries and questions to: ask@xxxxxxxx    #####

Other related posts: