Hindsight is 20/20

As Long as it's Utilized

The war that America currently finds itself engaged in permeates through the media as a constant, pressing issue. It represents a conflict that some say could have, should have, or would have been obviated had American government officials considered history rather than selfish, short-term motives. Although not as frequently in the public eye, education similarly presents a burning concern across the nation, especially in our own state of Rhode Island. Paralleling the war, the problems and hassles Rhode Island's education system now faces could easily have been avoided with a simple review of past failures of comparable programs.

Recently, I acquired a report from the RAND Corporation entitled "Can Portfolios Assess Student Performance and Influence Instruction? The 1991-92 Vermont Experience." Mr. Michael Sentance, one of the Secretary of Education's regional representatives, referred me to the report through this insightful article also regarding portfolio systems. It is important to note that, however non-surprising it may be, Vermont's portfolio system was poorly planned, poorly implemented, and subsequently failed. (bells should be ringing... familiar bells)

After reading a good portion of the report, I realize what it truly represents. First, even though it tells a story of failure, I know the report possesses bounds of evidence to support our side of the story. However, by doing this, the report details the grim realities of the Vermont experience, which almost frighteningly parallel the dilemmas we are dealing with in our schools every single day.

Over the course of its one-hundred and seventy pages, RAND’s report comprehensively outlines both the positives and negatives of Vermont’s system from its very inception. In what I have reviewed so far, I feel that these following quotes characterize the most compelling excerpts in the report:

"The most serious problem was continuing confusion on the part of many teachers about the purposes of the... portfolios and the proper practices to use to implement the assessment system."

"The rater reliability of portfolio scores in both mathematics and writing was very low."

"Most teachers felt they were unprepared to use the portfolios on at least some occasions."

"...evaluation of validity was hampered by the lack of a sufficiently clear definition of the attributes the portfolios are intended to measure."

"Teachers also raised concerns about the lack of information from the state and the rapid speed of the reform."

"...the portfolio assessment generated some negative attitudes on the part of teachers and principals. Both groups perceived the time and resources demands to be burdensome."

"...the partial success attained to date has come at a high price in time, stress, and money."

All of these shortcomings are uncannily similar to the continuing complaints from students, parents, teachers, administrators, and others in Westerly and around Rhode Island.To imagine that the Vermont experience transpired roughly sixteen years ago is unsettling. Perhaps Vermont, in its experience, can teach little Rhody a thing or two about education reform.

Hindsight is 20/20, unless of course it is not utilized. And in this case it clearly was not. This report is free of charge (save for shipping charges). I would have a hard time believing that cost would put any substantial dent in the R&D budget for state education reform. The report is clear in its findings. It is as clear as hindsight- 20/20. I sincerely hope that this report can find its way into the hands of the right people. Then, perhaps, they will be able to see clearly as well.