Analogies should only be used when they are appropriate and useful. If they only serve to confuse the issue, they ought to be avoided at all cost.
On the topic of developing a self-assessment tool for schools, it was being debated on whether there should be standards. One party (the powerful one) was arguing for no such need. Another party (the logical one) stated that implicit in any measurement is a standard (this is Assessment Literacy 101 btw).
And so an analogy was proposed to argue for the former.
A trained engineer from an Ivy League University used the analogy of a ruler to make her case. She liken the self-assessment tool to a ruler and said that it is fine if School A measures itself and it comes up to a 3 and School B measures itself and comes up to a 5. The measurement is neutral and does not in any way say anything about the two schools.
Pray tell, how does this analogy work? Of course the scale says something about the two schs. It says that School A is 2 scale away from School B and that one is shorter than the other. While the numerical value itself might be neutral in the sense that it does not connote anything, implicit in the use of a ruler is the standard of length. And one will argue that if u apply a ruler to something, u must want to know the length for a purpose for otherwise, why bother measuring?
A humbly-trained teacher from a local university proposes that a more apt analogy ought to be the body temperature of different groups of people. If the point is in saying that not all schools should need to achieve the same score (cf. doppy's argument about the type of students a school can produce is dependent on the cohort of students one receives), then use the analogy that one would expect the body temp of a child to be higher than that of an adult because their makeup is different. Consequently, a same reading will indicate different things for a child and an adult. A high reading for a child might not necessarily denote a fever due to a child's high core temperature. Similarly, a school that measures itself using the tool and arrives at a certain score needs to interpret the score in its context. Wouldn't this make more sense?
I am shocked at how a trained engineer can propose the ruler analogy without realising the logical fallacy. Or am I being too critical again?
On the topic of developing a self-assessment tool for schools, it was being debated on whether there should be standards. One party (the powerful one) was arguing for no such need. Another party (the logical one) stated that implicit in any measurement is a standard (this is Assessment Literacy 101 btw).
And so an analogy was proposed to argue for the former.
A trained engineer from an Ivy League University used the analogy of a ruler to make her case. She liken the self-assessment tool to a ruler and said that it is fine if School A measures itself and it comes up to a 3 and School B measures itself and comes up to a 5. The measurement is neutral and does not in any way say anything about the two schools.
Pray tell, how does this analogy work? Of course the scale says something about the two schs. It says that School A is 2 scale away from School B and that one is shorter than the other. While the numerical value itself might be neutral in the sense that it does not connote anything, implicit in the use of a ruler is the standard of length. And one will argue that if u apply a ruler to something, u must want to know the length for a purpose for otherwise, why bother measuring?
A humbly-trained teacher from a local university proposes that a more apt analogy ought to be the body temperature of different groups of people. If the point is in saying that not all schools should need to achieve the same score (cf. doppy's argument about the type of students a school can produce is dependent on the cohort of students one receives), then use the analogy that one would expect the body temp of a child to be higher than that of an adult because their makeup is different. Consequently, a same reading will indicate different things for a child and an adult. A high reading for a child might not necessarily denote a fever due to a child's high core temperature. Similarly, a school that measures itself using the tool and arrives at a certain score needs to interpret the score in its context. Wouldn't this make more sense?
I am shocked at how a trained engineer can propose the ruler analogy without realising the logical fallacy. Or am I being too critical again?
2 comments:
Oh well. Engineers don't use rulers you see. We use computers. :P
Also, highlight the Town Council Measurement reports as a potential risk of measuring and the need for clarity in communications.
Post a Comment