The Editor, Sir:

I was interested to see 'The truth about school-based assessment' explained by Professor Stafford Griffith in The Sunday Gleaner of April 26, and I am happy that the concerns raised about the integrity of such assessment, to which he was responding, have stimulated discussion among his MEd students. I trust, however, that some of these students will have been raising questions such as the following:

Is 'formative assessment' not nor-mally used for the development or improvement of teaching material and methodology, or to assist learners in developing their skills, rather than as a part of a final (or summative) examination which assesses the level of proficiency reached as a result of a course of study?

School-based assessment (SBA) certainly may be used to extend the evaluation beyond the limits of an examination paper, to include research-based activities and practical projects, but should these not demonstrate the candidate's unaided work in every case? And if it is not possible to ensure equal conditions for all candidates, should the matter really be treated any differently from the same candidates 'getting unequal assistance' in the examination room?

If, as Prof Griffith states, "teacher input in guiding students on a continuous basis is necessary and legitimate for SBA assignments", how can this kind of SBA be reasonably included in the summative grading of candidates exposed to widely differing levels of guidance?

CXC standard

The professor points out that the Caribbean Examinations Council makes a point of using "a CXC-appointed moderator to remark a sample of assignments previously marked by the class teacher", after which, when necessary, "an adjustment is made to all marks awarded by the teacher to bring them in line with the CXC standard."

We can assume, I suppose, that the consistency or otherwise of the teacher's marking is not significantly different from that of any CXC-appointed marker of anonymous scripts, and it might be equally comforting if we could accept that candidates never benefit or suffer from the bias of the class teacher who knows exactly whose paper he is marking. After all, as the professor says, "the Council depends on the teacher to follow fair and equitable practice".

In his conclusion, Prof Griffiths hopes that his explanation will help "to develop an awareness of how existing practices may be improved and enhanced to assure the integrity of this important component of the CXC examinations". Is he not here conceding that the integrity of the SBA component of the examinations is indeed questionable?

Standardisation

The professor avoided addressing two related matters that had been raised in the item to which he was reacting. First, is the question of the new Caribbean Certificate of Secondary Level Competence (CCSLC) examinations, whose SBAs account for 50 per cent of the final mark, but are not monitored for standardisation by CXC. (This, by the way, is the examination which was advertised - in the Youthlink magazine of July 1 last - to target young people who dreamt of becoming lawyers!)

The other issue concerns the lack of integrity perceived in the management of some CAPE SBAs and some coursework exercises at colleges and universities. I trust that the professor has not yet had cause to doubt the originality of any of his MEd students' term papers. Should the need arise, he will probably find himself utilising the services of such Internet sites as www.dustball.com/cs/plagiarism.checker.

I am, etc.,

Peter Maxwell

plcm07@yahoo.com