Abstract
I discuss the contributions of Harvey Siegel, Francis Schrag and Randall Curren to this volume. Their articles cast in bold relief the relation of High Stakes Testing to the goals of education, the nature of mind and the demands of justice. I argue that the connections are deep, but that the considerations these authors raise do not show that High Stakes Tests are in principle unacceptable. Rather, they show that we need to be exceedingly careful about how our assessments are constructed, how the results are interpreted, what we take them to reveal and what we do with the results.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Davidson, D.
(1980 ) ‘Mental events’ ,
Essays on Action and Events , pp. 207 -225 .
Oxford : Clarendon
.
2.
Davidson, D.
(2001 ) ‘Radical
interpretation’ , Inquiries into Truth and
Interpretation , pp. 125 -139 .
Oxford : Clarendon
.
3.
Davis, A.
(1998 ) The Limits of Educational Assessment .
Oxford : Blackwell
.
4.
Elgin, C.Z.
(1996 ) Considered Judgment , pp.
208 -220 .
Princeton : Princeton University Press
.
5.
Quine, W.V.
(1960 ) Word and Object , pp.
26 -80 .
Cambridge : MIT Press
.
6.
Quine, W.V.
(1961 ) ‘Two dogmas of
empiricism’ , From a Logical Point of View ,
pp.20 -46 .
New
York
: Harper Torchbooks.
7.
Quine, W.V.
(1981 ) ‘On the nature of moral
values’ , Theories and Things , p. 55 .
Cambridge : Harvard University Press
.
8.
Ryle, G.
(1949 ) The Concept of Mind .
New York : Barnes & Noble
.