What constitutes achievement in a field? What constitutes, for example, 'being a physicist'? ... we can't find a list of competences, for example, or course outcomes, etc., that will define a physicist.Very true. Maybe you're a physicist if you think like a physicist ... or think you are a physicist.
Professors typically 'recognize' an A paper. They don't measure the number of salient points made nor do they count spelling errors.Sorry Stephen, this statement is naive and outdated.
What we can expect in an open system of assessment is that achievement will be in some way 'recognized' by a community. This removes assessment from the hands of 'experts' who continue to 'measure' achievement. And it places assessment into the hands of the wider community. Individuals will be accorded credentials as they are recognized, by the community, to deserve them.I guess that's how witch doctors are awarded their M.D.'s :-)
How does this happen? It breaks down into two parts:
- first, a mechanism whereby a person's accomplishments may be displayed and observed (e-portfolios).
- second, a mechanism which constitutes the actual recognition of those accomplishments (reputation).
In still other cases, organizations - such as universities, professional associations, governments and companies - may grant specific credentials. In such cases, the person may put forward their portfolios and profiles for consideration for the credential.Yes, but that totally undermines the first half of your post Stephen! However, UK universities are starting to make to move towards transcripts as proposed in the Burgess Report (pdf). A transcript is not a portfolio, but it's closer to one than a traditional UK degree class.
Yes, this is a very different picture of assessment than we have today. It replaces a system in which a single set of standards was applied to the population as a whole. This was an appropriate system when it was not possible for people to view, and assess, a person's accomplishments directly. No such limitation will exist in the future, and hence, there is no need to continue to judge humans as 'grade A', 'grade B' and 'grade C'.Unless you're trying to pick a brain surgeon for your operation. Reputation just replaces other forms of qualification. Humans always have and always will judge each other. Blair or Cameron? Kennedy or Bush? We do need to crack Assessment2.0, but this post doesn't offer the answers.