[Reading-hall-of-fame] Re: Comments on The Myths of Achievement Tests

[PATRICK WILLARD SHANNON]

Thank you Tom.  The GED just went Common Core Standards.  We are in for a very
rough period.  Maybe the Hall of Fame should consider Nick Kristof op ed from
the Sunday NYT.  What can we do?
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 06:14 PM, tsticht at znet.com wrote:
>
2/17/2014
>
>
>As a Group, Adult Educators Are On the Right Track With the GED
>
>
>Tom Sticht, International Consultant in Adult Education
>
>
>In “The Myth of Achievement Tests: The GED and the Role of Character in
>American Life”, the authors argue that adults who obtain the General
>Education Development (GED) high school equivalency certificate are
>actually not equivalent to high school graduates. The 450+ page book
>presents a large amount of data in support of the author’s argument. But it
>was the early pages that first struck me as worrisome. In the very first
>chapter I was struck by the number of references to negative aspects of GED
>certificate recipients that were preceded by the phrase “as a group.” Here
>are some of those references:
>
>
>“On outcomes that matter, AS A GROUP GED recipients are NOT equivalent to
>high school graduates (emphasis in original). (p.4)”
>
>
>“After accounting for their greater cognitive ability, AS A GROUP,
>(emphasis
>added by me), GED recipients are equivalent to other dropouts on almost all
>outcomes.(p.5)”
>
>
>“AS A GROUP (emphasis added by me), GED recipients lack character
>skills
>compared to high school graduates. (p. 6)”
>
>
>“This book shows that, AS A GROUP (emphasis added by me), GED
>recipients
>lack character skills in part owing to their relatively disadvantaged
>family backgrounds. (p.7)”
>
>
>“AS A GROUP (emphasis added by me), GED recipients are as smart as
>high
>school graduates who do not attend college, but they lack character.
>(p.25)”
>
>
>The problem for me was the constant use of the qualifier “as a group” to
>refer to millions of adults who have obtained their GED. This was
>particularly annoying when I studied data figures and tables in chapters 4,
>5, and 6 showing large overlaps in distributions of cognitive and character
>“bell” curves among high school dropouts, GED holders and high school
>diploma holders.  Yet despite these very large overlaps, based on
>differences between group mean scores, it was asserted that “as a group”
>GED holders lack character.
>
>
>In Chapter 6, The Military Experience of GED Holders by Janice Laurence,
>data are presented (Table 6.1) on attrition from the military
>services for
>high school graduates and for GED holders. The data show that across the
>military services “the 36-month attrition rates for GED holders is 45%,
>compared to 28% for traditional diploma graduates.”(p. 271) End quote
>
>
>When I saw this I noted that over half (55%) of the GED holders did
>not
>attrite. This suggests that AS A GROUP, and contrary to what Heckman et al
>stated above on p. 25, it is more accurate to say that GED holders possess
>the character skills of perseverance, persistence, “stick-to-it-ism”, or
>similar labels. Rather than characterizing the GED holder group as lacking
>character because of their 45% attrition rate, they should be characterized
>as showing persistence because most (55%) did not attrite.
>
>
>Given the plethora of arguments against the GED, I was somewhat surprised
>when I read at the end of the book “The GED program should be retained as a
>second –chance option for those who want to turn their lives around.” The
>authors go on to place qualifications on the manner in which the GED is
>advertised, they argue that it should include new assessments of character,
> and there should be limits placed on who is permitted to take the GED.
>
>
>But all in all, Some 433 pages into The Myth of Achievement Tests, using the
>GED as the whipping boy of achievement tests, the authors end up  suggesting
>the use not only of the GED but also the development of new achievement
>tests which include measures of character for both K-12 and young adult
>(adolescent) education.
>
>
>At the end of the book the authors recommend that educational policymakers
>“Recognize that effective adolescent remediation programs should focus on
>promoting character skills. Encourage workplace-based adolescent
>remediation programs that foster character and that recognize the greater
>malleability of character skills than cognitive skills at later stages of
>childhood.”
>
>
>>From the foregoing, it seems that adult literacy educators should keep on
>working with adults to help them get their GED. Numerous studies show that
>adult basic education helps adults of all ages develop both cognitive and
>character skills. At least it shows this when adults are considered as a
>group!
>
>
> Reference: James J. Heckman, John Eric Humphries, and Tim Kautz
>(Eds.).
>(2014). The Myth of Achievement Tests: The GED and the Roll of
>Character in
>American Life.  University of Chicago Press.
>
>
>tsticht at aznet.net
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Reading-hall-of-fame mailing list
>Reading-hall-of-fame at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
>http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/reading-hall-of-fame
>This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may
>contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error,
>please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy
>or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. 
>Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily
>reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
>This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
>may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you
>are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
>University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>