COMMUNITY COLLEGE TALK RADIO
Pre K – 12 EDUCATION TALK RADIO
are linked to the right. Just click through……………
LISTEN LIVE OR ON THE ARCHIVES. ALL TIMES ARE EASTERN
LISTEN LIVE TO ANY SHOW AS SCHEDULED BELOW AT
ALL 2013 SHOWS ARE ARCHIVED BELOW OUR NEWS SECTION …JUST SCROLL DOWN
5/10 ASSOCIATION OF CATHOLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES : APPOINTING LAY PRESIDENTS TO CATHOLIC UNIVERSITIES
5/10 COMMUNITY COLLEGES: WITH SPECIAL GUEST DR. BECKY MUSIL OF NISOD WITH A PRE- CONFERENCE PROGRAM
5/13 CITELIGHTER: NEW WAY TO RESEARCH AND STORE NOTES EDUCATORS CHOICE WINNER
5/13 FROM SIIA/EDUCATION DIVISION WHATS HOT FOR CC’S IN ED TECH
5/15 COMMUNITY COLLEGE SUCCESS & COMPLETION WITH THOUGHT LEADER MS. ISA ADNEY
5/20 ANDREA HANSTEIN & DEBBIE HALSEY , PRESIDENT OF NCMPR, COMMUNITY COLLEGE MARKETING &PR PROFESSIONALS ASSOCIATION
5/21 AUTHOR/COMMENTATOR AND SALES CONSULTANT GEOFFREY JAMES ON HOW THE ART OF SELLING AFFECTS HIGHER ED NOON
5/22 AERA THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION 1030 AM
5/23 DISTANCE EDUCATION WITH DETC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DR LEAH MATTHEWS 9AM
5/23 COMMUNITY COLLEGES WITH UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS/AUSTIN’S DR BARBARA MINK 10:30 AM
MAY 27-30 I’LL BE AT THE NISOD CC CONFERENCE IN AUSTIN
NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF HIGHER EDUCATION
( FYI..scroll below this section for 2013 archived shows)
Machine Scoring Fails the Test
Using Computers to Grade Student Writing Shortchanges Students
Urbana, IL– May 2, 2013 — Computers cannot recognize or judge those elements that we most associate with good writing, asserts the new position statement, Machine Scoring Fails the Test (http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/machine_scoring), from the National Council of Teachers of English. Computers can’t assess elements such as logic, clarity, accuracy, effective appeals to audience, different forms of organization, quality of evidence, humor or irony, or effective uses of repetition.
When computers are used to evaluate student writing, students are denied the chance to have their writing assessed for anything but a few limited surface features and teachers are compelled to ignore what is most important in writing instruction in order to teach what is least important. High-stakes assessments that rely on computers to grade student writing are particularly destructive.
Chris Anson, chair of the task force that created the position statement, notes, “We teach students that writing is an invention by humans for human communication. But when we have machines evaluate their writing, we tell students that we think so little about what they’re communicating that we aren’t willing to read and respond to it ourselves.” In addition, task force member Peggy O’Neill explains in this video why the limited kind of writing that machines can score is not the complex writing expected in college and the workplace (http://media.ncte.org/library/video/5af6d25a-9123-431c-83dd-5f8ee82aa70b.m4v).
Computers don’t “make the grade” in the assessment of writing for many reasons, including:
* Computers use different, cruder methods than human readers to judge students’ writing. For example, some systems gauge the sophistication of vocabulary by measuring the average length of words and how often the words are used; or they gauge the development of ideas by counting the length and number of sentences per paragraph.
* Computers get progressively worse at scoring as the length of the writing increases. As a result, test makers must design shorter writing tasks that don’t represent the range and variety of writing assignments needed to prepare students for the more complex writing they will encounter in college and the workplace.
* Computer scoring favors the most objective “surface” features of writing (grammar, spelling, punctuation), but problems in these areas are often created by the testing conditions and are the most easily rectified in normal writing conditions when there is time to revise and edit. Also, privileging surface features disproportionately penalizes nonnative speakers of English who may be on a developmental path that machine scoring fails to recognize.
* Computer scoring discriminates against students who are less familiar with using technology to write or complete tests. Further, machine scoring disadvantages school districts that lack funds to provide technology tools for every student and skews technology acquisition toward devices needed to meet testing requirements.
* Computer scoring systems can be “gamed” because they are poor at working with human language, further weakening the validity of their assessments and separating students not on the basis of writing ability but on whether they know and can use machine-tricking strategies.
* Computers only score as well as humans when the humans are trained to score like the computers (for example, being told not to make judgments on the accuracy of information).
There are alternatives to machine scoring, especially high-quality assessment systems that support teaching and learning, such as portfolio assessment; teacher assessment teams; balanced assessment plans that involve more localized (classroom- and district-based) assessments designed and administered by classroom teachers; and “audit” teams of teachers, teacher educators, and writing specialists who visit districts to review samples of student work and the curriculum that has yielded them.
Machine Scoring Fails the Test includes an extensive, annotated bibliography of research on human and machine scoring of writing.
For more information on this issue or to arrange an interview, please contact
Millie Davis at email@example.com or 217-278-3634
AAUP Issues New Statement on Academic Boycotts
The statement below is available at http://www.aaup.org/news/aaup-statement-academic-boycotts.
The recent decision by noted physicist Stephen Hawking to call off plans to attend a major conference in Israel out of deference to an academic boycott advocated by some pro-Palestinian groups and the vote in late April by the membership of the Asian-American Studies Association to endorse such a boycott have again raised the issue of whether such boycotts violate the principles of academic freedom.
The American Association of University Professors, as an organization, neither supports nor opposes Israeli government or Palestinian policies, although many of our members certainly have strong beliefs on one side or the other. However, the AAUP does stand in opposition to academic boycotts as a matter of principle. Our position was fully enunciated in the 2005 report of Committee A, “On Academic Boycotts” (http://www.aaup.org/report/academic-boycotts). This report established the following principles:
1. In view of the Association’s long-standing commitment to the free exchange of ideas, we oppose academic boycotts.
2. On the same grounds, we recommend that other academic associations oppose academic boycotts. We urge that they seek alternative means, less inimical to the principle of academic freedom, to pursue their concerns.
3. We especially oppose selective academic boycotts that entail an ideological litmus test. We understand that such selective boycotts may be intended to preserve academic exchange with those more open to the views of boycott proponents, but we cannot endorse the use of political or religious views as a test of eligibility for participation in the academic community.
4. The Association recognizes the right of individual faculty members or groups of academics not to cooperate with other individual faculty members or academic institutions with whom or with which they disagree. We believe, however, that when such noncooperation takes the form of a systematic academic boycott, it threatens the principles of free expression and communication on which we collectively depend.
5. Consistent with our long-standing principles and practice, we consider other forms of protest, such as the adoption of resolutions of condemnation by higher education groups intended to publicize documented threats to or violations of academic freedom at offending institutions, to be entirely appropriate.
6. Recognizing the existence of shared concerns, higher education groups should collaborate as fully as possible with each other to advance the interests of the entire academic community in addressing academic freedom issues. Such collaboration might include joint statements to bring to the attention of the academic community and the public at large grave threats to academic freedom.
7. The Association recognizes the right of faculty members to conduct economic strikes and to urge others to support their cause. We believe, however, that in each instance those engaged in a strike at an academic institution should seek to minimize the impact of the strike on academic freedom.
8. We understand that threats to or infringements of academic freedom may occasionally seem so dire as to require compromising basic precepts of academic freedom, but we resist the argument that extraordinary circumstances should be the basis for limiting our fundamental commitment to the free exchange of ideas and their free expression.
In light of these principles the AAUP recognizes the right of individual scholars, including Prof. Hawking, to act in accordance with their own personal consciences. No scholar should be required to participate in any academic activity that violates his or her own principles. In addition, faculty members have to right to organize for or against economic boycotts, divestment, or other forms of sanction. However, an organized academic boycott is a different matter and we are disappointed by the resolution of the Asian-American Studies Association and would instead urge that organization and its members to find other means to register their opposition to Israeli policies.
2013 ARCHIVED SHOWS
4/2 A VISIT WITH NASFAA AND THE CONTINUING SAGA OF SEQUESTRATION AND STUDENT FINANCIAL AID
4/3 LIZ CLARK OF NACUBO ON SEQUESTRATION AND THE BUSINESS OFFICE
4/4 THE NEW RESEARCH SURVEY FROM AACTE, COLLEGES IN TEACHER TRAINING
4/5 DISTANCE EDUCATION WITH DETC’S NEW E.D.LEAH MATTHEWS AND MIKE LAMBERT ,DIRECTOR EMERITUS
4/8 NISOD PRESENTS DR ROBERT EXLEY , PRESIDENT OF SNEAD STATE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, 111 YEARS OF SUCCESS
4/9 KIM GRIFFO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL TOWN AND GOWN ASS’N AND ‘UIU’LINK
4/11 AMERICA’S ENVIRONMENTAL COLLEGE, UNITY COLLEGE OF UNITY MAINE
4/11 HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELING AND COMMUNITY COLLEGES
4/12 APSCU’S NEW TASK FORCE REPORT ON VETERANS AND MILITARY POST-SEONDARY EDUCATION
4/22 BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY, THE FORD FOUNDATION AND INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP GRANTS MAKING A DIFFERENCE WORLDWIDE
4/25 NATIONAL COUNCIL OF TEACHERS OF ENGLISH HIGHER ED REPORT ON PRINCIPLES FOR TEACHING WRITING ONLINE
4/26 CAMPUS SAFETY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH ANNE GLAVIN, CHIEF AT CAL STATENORTHRIDGE & PRES.OF IACLEA
4/29 DR. KAY McCLENNY OF THE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
4/29 A VISIT WITH WALDEN UNIVERSITY; LITERACY EDUCATION ; THE CORNERSTONE OF STUDENT SUCCESS
4/30 DR GARY MAY, DEAN OF THE COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AT GEORGIA TECH: THE URBAN STUDENT AND ENGINEERING
3/4 THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE BACCALAUREATE ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONFERENCE
3/5 NCTM’s ANNUAL MATH EDUCATOR CONFERENCE with Chair, UNLV PROFESSOR DR JEFF SHIH
3/7 THE NATIONAL SOCIETY OF BLACK ENGINEERS; THE STUDENT RUN ASSOCIATION WITH DR. CARL MACK
3/8 UNITY COLLEGE: THE NATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL COLLEGE ON SUSTAINABILITY ON CAMPUS
3/13 ACTE (ASS’N FOR CAREER & TECH ED) ON COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND WORKFORCE READINESS
3/14 DIVERSITY ON CAMPUS WITH PUBLISHER DAVID PLUVIOSE
3.18 SCHOOL AND CAMPUS LEADERSHIP WITH LYNN UNIVERSITY DEAN DR. CRAIG MERTLER
3/19 COMMUNITY COLLEGES WITH DR LARRY MILLER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NISOD
3/27 STUDENT AFFAIRS WITH NASPA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR KEVIN KRUGER
3/28 PHI THETA KAPPA’S DR ROD RISLEY ON THE COMPLETION AGENDA..WILL IT WORK?
3/29 AACRAO’S MIKE REILLY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ON ENROOLMENT, TRANSPARENCY AND THE COMPLETION AGENDA
2/4 WESTERN GOVERNORS UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT ROBERT MENDENHALL AND CAE PREISDENT ( OF THE ‘CLA’) ROGER BENJAMIN
2/5 THE UPCOMING SOUTH X SOUTHWEST CONFERENCE IN AUSTIN AND HIGHER EDUCATION INVOLVEMENT
2/8 TEACHING WRITING ONLINE IN HIGHER ED with DREXEL PROFESSOR SCOTT WARNOCK. FROM NCTE
2/11 A CONVERSATION WITH CLARKSON UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT DR. ANTHONY COLLINS ON COLLEGE COST CONTAINMENT
2/12 MILITARY EDUCATION WITH CCME’S JEFF CROPSEY AND CCME PRESIDENT ELECT ,DR. MICHAEL HEBERLING OF BAKER COLLEGE
2/14 COLLEGE LIBRARIANS AND ACADEMIC REFERENCE SERVICES WITH ACRL PRESIDENT, TEMPLE U’S STEVE BELL
2/19 THE 2012 NACUBO/COMMONFUND REPORT ON ENDOWMENTS WITH NACUBO’S KEN REDD
2/25 COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND TEACHER PREP WITH NACCTEP
2.27 ISA ADNEY, COMMUNITY COLLEGE COMPLETION THOUGHT LEADER
2/28 THE ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES IN TEACHER EDUCATION AACTE
WANT TO BE A GUEST or SPONSOR A SHOW
WANT TO GIVE US FEEDBACK ….OR ASK ANY QUESTIONS?
CALL LARRY JACOBS AT 978 712 8187 OR E MAIL ‘firstname.lastname@example.org