Morris816
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2013
- Messages
- 832
Paraphrasing the title of an interesting article at The Atlantic.
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/07/what-would-mark-twain-have-thought-of-the-common-core/374114/
This part really drew my attention:
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/07/what-would-mark-twain-have-thought-of-the-common-core/374114/
This part really drew my attention:
The first "anchor standard" for writing at the grade 11–12 level declares that students will "write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence." This goal will be assessed by Pearson, one of America's three largest textbook publishers and test-assessment companies. Pearson will, at least in part, be using the automated scoring systems of Educational Testing Services (ETS), proprietor of the e-Rater, which can "grade" 16,000 essays in a mere 20 minutes.
Les Perelman, a retired M.I.T professor, has earned a reputation for exposing the flaws of what he calls "robo-grading." In an April interview with The New York Times, he claimed that ETS privileges "length and the presence of pretentious language" at the expense of truth, stating, "E-Rater doesn't care if you say the War of 1812 started in 1945." He watched the e-Rater return high scores after he submitted nonsensical passages—for instance, the claim that "the average teaching assistant makes six times as much money as college presidents ... In addition, they often receive a plethora of extra benefits such as private jets, vacations in the south seas, starring roles in motion pictures." These sentences hardly adhere to the stated goal of "valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence" of claims. Perelman observes, "Once you understand e-Rater's biases … it's not hard to raise your test score."