Educational Testing: To Protect and To Serve

I’ve concluded that you can learn a lot about a field from its conference themes. How it views itself, how it thinks others perceive it, and how it wants others to see it. As my colleagues refresh their Rocky Mountain High at the second of three national gatherings in Denver this conference season, I began to ponder an appropriate theme for educational testing.

A Commitment To Communicate

Andrew Ho, in his NCME presidential address, defended his use of metrics such as weeks, months, and “years of learning” citing what he dubbed as “the accuracy-engagement tradeoff” while asking “Can good communication enable better accuracy and engagement?” My response, as Andrew suggested is the answer to all such questions, is “It depends.”

Are Personalization and Generalization Compatible?

At the risk of overgeneralizing, I am beginning to think that unless we are very careful the current emphasis on personalization is likely to have a negative effect on generalization – long a goal of K-12 education. How can the two concepts coexist, can we achieve better generalization through personalization, or are personalization and generalization, in fact, incompatible?