This link has been bookmarked by 7 people . It was first bookmarked on 07 Feb 2012, by Will Richardson.
-
17 Apr 14
-
08 Feb 12
-
-
Look, I’m on board that kids should write more, and that learning what a student has learned by having her write is better than having her fill in bubbles for questions she can use her phones to answer if we let her. But here’s the problem: this is more about money than it is about serving kids well. Let’s be honest, while it may be less consistent and more complex, and while it may take more time and money to get it right, human graders have a distinct advantage over machines when it comes to writing: emotion. I love the way the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) puts it:
Automated assessment programs do not respond as human readers. While they may promise consistency, they distort the very nature of writing as a complex and context-rich interaction between people. They simplify writing in ways that can mislead writers to focus more on structure and grammar than on what they are saying by using a given structure and style.
-
-
-
if we value writing enough to make sure every child can do it reasonably well, we should also value the time and effort it takes to evaluate it reasonably well.
-
Here’s what I know will happen once we move to the machines: we’ll help kids learn how to write what the machines want instead of focusing on the power and beauty and uniqueness of human communication.
-
-
07 Feb 12
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.