Public or Private Assessment?

I have recently begun another paper through Open Polytechnic (NZ). We were originally to post a number of items to our blog and then submit a copy in word format for assessment. However, many of the class felt uncomfortable with posting their personal reflections on-line for all to see. We are now provided with the option to use the "learning journal" feature of Moodle; we now have a private space to cement our thoughts before we decide what to make public. Whilst I think it is beneficial to have a bit of a personal reflective space, I have found the greatest value in reflection is where we open it up to other people to comment on our reflection.

One reason we were given for the change in requirements is that the journal is a piece of assessment. I still see no reason why we cannot use a connectivist approach for formal assessment. The main problem, as far as I can tell, is that traditionally we were required to consider only the work of the individual student. Yet, this isn't really preparing our students for the real world. Most often, we are required to work as part of a team and our outputs are "marked" as one product; our individual input into the work are of less important than the entire team's output. I also have a problem with only individual assessment in that it does not teach co-operation but individualism.

The Scientific Turn in Educational Research

Recently, educational researchers seem fascinated with the type of knowledge science creates. The acme of educational research is to create universally generalisable theories leading from quantifiable, replicable results. In other words: application of the scientific method. Yet this seems ludicrous: taking the trappings of one system and uncritically applying it to another. Many projects ignore the philosophy of science and purpose of science - to create a specific type of knowledge for a specific endeavour - and apply the tools to projects for which they are not suited. For example, the double-blind trial is suitable for analysing knowledge creation but not in examining what happens to students when we teach. The latter case has so many variables - how the tutor is feeling, what they are thinking whilst they teach, what they have read, how the students respond to the lesson emotionally etc - that the requirement of reproducibility becomes absurd.

I can see why educational research has taken on the tools of science. In one sense, it is an attempt at gaining authority. Yet, this highlights another fact: the hegemony of the scientific method eclipses all other epistemologies. In other words, our society currently values those knowledges which were created through the scientific method almost the the exclusion of all others. Educational research, it seems, in a vain grasp at being "taken seriously" has taken the trappings of this method and applied it uncritically. I am not advocating that such approaches are unsuitable for educational research but that the techniques we employ in researching education should be matched to our project; no matter what techniques or methodologies we use we should choose critically -rather than by default.