By Enrique Rojas R.
During
the years it is common that some adjectives face a process of enhancement,
while others, on the contrary, follow an amelioration route. Thus, it is now
common to think of an objective thought as something truthful, balanced,
straightforward while the word subjective we deem as opinionated, imbalanced,
capricious, even fickle.
In
the educational field the inclination towards objective and subjective
evaluations has been typical of different periods and educational styles. The
thing is that subjective
evaluation relies on opinions about intangible characteristics, while an objective performance evaluation depends on
inarguable facts. In other words, objective
evaluation is governed by grading endeavors to calculate quantifiable standards
of quality. Nowadays we have learned that there are times when subjective
evaluation should be used while some other instances call for objective ones. A
factor in evaluation to be considered is the degree of subjectivity, which is
usually a factor in assessments of student work especially when the effort is
performance-based rather than content-based.
The
problem lies in that there is no objective perception of an object. The object
is what or who we observe or refer to. The object is what it is. Any intent of
apprehending it by means of the senses or the mind involves a subject who
effects the perception, making it then unavoidably subjective.
We
tend to think that objective, because of the fact that only admits one possible
answer, is closer to reality, “more truthful,” but this is not necessarily true
because what we consider “objective” tends to be one-dimensional and,
therefore, allows important considerations escape from our appreciation.
Number One is the best?
To
illustrate that, parents and peers generally consider the best student the one
that obtains the higher scores in exams and performance, without taking in
consideration the effort that they made to attain that. We all know that effort
is a very difficult element to measure in a quantitative fashion. But probably
the teacher can observe, subjectively, that there is another pupil with greater
achievements and merits.
So
a subjective judgment involves more elements of judgment and should provide a
wiser decision. But the problem comes when the subject, together with elements
obtained from the object, incorporates components from his own psyche, namely
feelings, inclinations, likes, dislikes, etc. That is what makes the validity
of a subjective opinion quite relative.
So
we should accept as a fact that “objective” assessment does not exist. But
there are courses susceptible to be measured in a more objective manner, such
as the scientifically oriented ones, while it is impossible to gauge
objectively subjects of an artistic nature.
Language
is generally considered within this last category and that includes foreign
languages, naturally. Nevertheless, evaluation of comprehension and use of a
language, English for example, is not restricted to the academic field but also
practiced for other reasons like labor, immigration, international trade, tourism,
aviation and many others. And the institutions providing international exams
have opted for a combination of objective and subjective tests. The first are
necessary because they are associated with a basis of fairness and also because
they alleviate the job of correcting the papers. But the abilities related to
speaking and writing must be evaluated subjectively since they are not based on
unique and unequivocal answers.
Trying to objectivize the subjective
It is in these circumstances when
rubrics become so important. They constitute a scoring guide that is employed
to evaluate the quality of the students’ constructed responses. A rubric has three essential features: evaluative criteria, quality
definitions, and a scoring strategy. Rubrics must help students acquire the
skill represented by the test and each evaluative criterion must represent a
key attribute of the skill being assessed. But the problem subsists: the
teachers have to evaluate criteria anyway, which is in fact complex and
subjective. International examining organizations try to guarantee that all of
their certified examiners grade a response in the same manner. The thing is
that notwithstanding all the training, in the end there will always be a degree
of interpretation of the rubric and valuation of the student response. Will
they eventually manage to square the circle?
Now, your turn:
Are you shattering your brain trying to round the square?
Is evaluating a nightmare for you?
BIODATA
Graduated in Journalism at the PUCP, Peru, Enrique Rojas R. holds a MA in Journalism and MA in Inter American History from Southern Illinois University, USA; an MA in Literature from University of the Americas, Puebla, Mexico, all the coursework for a MA in TEFL at Universidad de Piura, Peru and BA in Education from Universidad Federico Villarreal. He has also obtained Certificates of Proficiency in English both from Cambridge University and the University of Michigan and the Diploma for EFL Teachers from Universidad del Pacifico. He is an Oral Examiner for the Cambridge University exams and has been awarded the title Expert in E-Learning from Asociacion Educativa del Mediterraneo and Universidad Marcelino Champagnat. He has worked as a professor in universities in Peru, Mexico and the United States; as a newscaster and a producer in radio and television stations in the United States and Mexico, and as a writer and editor in daily newspapers of the same countries. He has been in the staff of CIDUP for 19 years teaching English and Spanish specializing in International Exams, English for Business, ESP and Teacher Training. He has been a speaker in every Congress of English for Special Purposes organized by Centro de Idiomas de la U.P. He is also a member of its Research Area.
