NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED215001
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1981-Jul-9
Pages: 291
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: 0
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
Minimum Competency Testing Clarification Hearing (July 9th, 1981).
National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.
Barbara Jordan served as the hearing officer for three-day adversary evaluation hearings about the pros and cons of minimum competency testing (MCT). This report is the complete transcript of the second day of proceedings. The pro team, lead by James Popham, began by presenting representatives of four states (Florida, California, Texas, and Illinois) to describe the MCT programs now operative in their states. These witnesses emphasized the major positive effects resulting from high quality MCT programs: effects on student achievement and self-concept, cirriculum and teaching, and public perception of schooling. In addition, Morris Andrews, Executive Secretary of the Wisconsin Education Association, described his organization's support of MCT in his state. Finally, Robert Ebel argued that MCT is valid and reliable. The con team, led by George Madaus, focused on the technical limitations of minimum competency tests. Mary Berry testified that MCT could not solve the problems of quality in education. Robert Calfee, Robert Linn, Nathan Quinones, Roger Farr, and Mel Hall provided testimony on technical testing issues such as test validity, test bias, and setting the cutting score. The remaining testimony was from parents and school personnel expressing their opposition to MCT based on personal experiences with it. (BW)
Publication Type: Opinion Papers; Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.
Identifiers: Adversary Evaluation Model; California; Florida; Illinois; Texas
Note: For related documents, see TM 820 265-268.