- Are all populations represented in the data to be collected?
- What are the implications of this data for the school community?
- How might my measures be biased?
- How can I compensate for my biases?
- Are the data both qualitative and quantitative?
- Are all populations represented in forming the evaluation questions? In interpreting the
resulting data?
- Do some assessment approaches yield inequities?
- Are we using more ethnography/ evaluation methods deeply sensitive to cultural contexts?
- Who has access to learning resources/opportunities (e.g. AP
courses vs. "dumbed-down" courses)?
- Is there between and within group disaggregation (e.g., within
the "Asian" student category alone there may be important equity
issues)?
- Are we considering curriculum content?
- Are we promoting "asset mapping" (transforming the deficit
characteristics into asset characteristics such as recognizing
multiple languages as an asset rather than as learner deficits)?
- How can we examine our own beliefs and values with regard to
equity?
- Does the evaluation work itself model equity?
- Are we gathering data that yields information on outcomes disaggregated by race, gender,
SES, etc.?
- Have we addressed and researched culturally based learning style
differences?
- Are we presenting the perspectives of "others'" cultures?
- Are evaluation results used to explain and support complacency
and low expectations about poor performance by certain student
groups--or, will it spur action and concern?
- Does our evaluation process involve students and parents?
Source: Systemic Evaluation Proceedings, June 13-15, 1996.
Published by Education Alliance Press, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.