Thinking about purpose...

Lacy's comment about the idea that audience and purpose being viewed as a constraint has prompted me to think a lot about my own inquiry into the effects of "standardized" writing assignments. There's been a lot of talk at among our Summer Institute group especially about writing assessments. There's a lot of tension about rubrics, writing prompts and how we use writing to assess our students. I'm not sure where I fit in on the spectrum of assessment.

I love writing to enjoy the art of writing. I love the risks that I can take when I write in my daybook and when I am exploring new genres, and I learn a lot from that writing. BUT I have learned a lot from other more academic writing. I have gained a lot from writing research papers--especially when it comes to writing about literature. I think there is something refreshing about producing an "academic" text. I also like knowing what my reader wants to see. When I write in my graduate classes, I write for an audience of two--myself and the professor I am writing for. I know my audience, I know what is expected and I like playing with the content to fit that description. Obviously there are constraints, and some hate that, but I don't. Maybe that makes me weird?

I also recognize that I am a product of Teach for America--a data driven organization. TFA is big on assessment. As a matter of fact, the first thing you have to do is create a standards-aligned assessment. Once you do that you figure out the skills and content that students would need to demonstrate mastery--backwards planning. I never learned that in my education classes, but it has helped me tremendously over the years. Some say "people get fired for teaching to the test" but those teachers were teaching the answer is "a"... In Readicide, Gallagher notes, teaching the to test isn't bad, so long as the assessment is a good assessment. I think rubrics and assessments can measure both growth and mastery so long as they written to expected standards and they are held to a rigorous level. Again, I stress that I am a TFA-alumni and the training I received from them has really shaped me as a teacher.

TFA is so data driven because they have show why they are beneficial organization--especially in areas where they are taking positions from more experienced teachers to go to first year corps members. TFA notes that their mission is to close the achievement gap that marks a distinction between students based on socio-economic factors. Students who fail tests don't go to college, students who never go to college perpetuation the cycle of poverty. That's why TFA is so big on assessment, it is the way to get kids out of poverty...the tests matter, and that's okay, so long as they are good tests. I think the biggest problem isn't that education relies on testing and assessment, but that this process have been outsourced to corporations...but that's another rant for another day I suppose.