NIE Clarification Hearing: The Negative Team's Case.

Abstract

The National Institute of Education hearing on minimum competency testing (MCT) provided a unique oppor tunity to explore the assumptions on which MCT policy is frequently based and to focus on the effects of that policy on students, teachers, and U.S. education in general. In this paper I shall outline the case developed and presented by the nega tive or con team at the hearing. Space does not permit me to comment on the case presented by the pro team, nor does it permit reflections on what happened at the hearing or in the evaluation process itself. The case that was developed and pre sented at the hearing was truly a team ef fort.* From the outset, team members were quite concerned about the connota tions associated with the adjectives negative and con, which were used to describe our team. These labels proved to be a burden. Despite the fact that the limits of the hearing and the definition of MCT under debate were narrowly drawn, the team labels conveyed to many an im age of opposition to all forms of MCT and ? worse still ? an anti-testing image.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.