Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@davidekirkland No! Lets act on this!! Now. For many, usually the most impoverished of the world, it is already too late.
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@TheRealPomax Its not so much a class but working with exemplar texts and mentors like you. Workshop your Readme.md file would be class.
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@TheRealPomax you define key terms well, organization is logical. Its information rich without reading like documentation. Its good writing
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis Then lets let meat industry lobbyist handle oversight of the meat inspectors. No conflict there either. Fordham=CCSS lobbyist
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis No. Saying publisher who received grant to do the study also has grants to promote the standards and tesst. #ConflictOfInterest
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis @AssessWell And that is exactly my point. We can't rely on Fordham to be that "critical eye" Look past workers find purse strings
Greg McVerry
Notes February 23, 2016
@TheRealPomax Should teach a class on how to write read.md files on @github. Useful for non-tech folks like me. Learning not documentation
Greg McVerry
Articles February 23, 2016
GitHub made a recent update to their web interface that now makes me believe it is a place every educator belongs. flickr photo shared by Bernie Goldbach under a Creative Commons ( BY-NC-ND ) license You can now create and drag and drop files into your repos. Think of a repo as a cabinet,that holds both files and folders. Attached to your "cabinet" is a clip
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis @AssessWell Just saying an organization paid to advocate for standards and test should not be organization evaluating tests.
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@AssessWell @JennBinis #whatsgood #QualityAssessments Fordham received millions from Gates Foundation to promote #ccss judging tests=biad
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis @AssessWell in your heart of hearts do you think Fordham would have published study that said SBAC and PARCC are bad tests?
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis @AssessWell I would have settled for peer review
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis oops yes, my bad.
Greg McVerry
Notes February 23, 2016
@jennbinis as a side note your ten year reflection of Klein was well written. I enjoyed it.
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@jgmac1106 @JennBinis @AssessWell I am just saying study should have been done by someone with less skin in the game. Not attacking methods
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis @AssessWell because of lobbying efforts from places such as Ed Excellence. They should not be the judge of quality
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@jgmac1106 @JennBinis @AssessWell "We need to prove the tests that we demanded work to prove we need the test we demanded"
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@JennBinis @AssessWell but thetest are because people like Polikoff and Fordham demand them. Its circular logic
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@jgmac1106 @JennBinis @AssessWell Another example of a think tank study not really submitted for peer review as is standard
Greg McVerry
Replies February 23, 2016
In reply to twitter.com ↗
@jgmac1106 @JennBinis @AssessWell Not saying study was bad but to not acknowledge publishers role in shaping debate last decade is silly
Greg McVerry