History and Context for Assessment
Since the mid-70s CUNY has had an institution-wide one-shot 50-minute writing test called the WAT and a separate reading test called humorously the RAT. Originally designed as a placement test for sophomores seeking to move to the upper division, it has evolved into an entrance requirement taken by high school seniors and returning students. The WAT is used as an exit criteria for students in remedial writing courses, and as a graduation requirement for students in community colleges. CUNY central is currently developing a new version of this test that will include three parts: reading comprehension MC/grammar MC/a one-hour writing sample.
Those who fail it will not be allowed to attend a senior college in the CUNY system, although it should be noted that there are ways around this limitation (a certain score on the NY Regents Exam or on the SAT will supercede the exam). Also, there are special programs for some underprivileged students.
What is interesting is that the test is being developed by CUNY faculty, some of whom have a composition and rhetoric background. (This is exactly how we got the original WAT, which was hijacked after its development to become an entrance requirement.) No one is objecting to this new test because the fact is that it is a big improvement over the WAT. However, at all the meetings I went to, no one even talked about alternatives to this type of standardized test. Portfolios never came up. They are not even on the map.
I found this rather astonishing since the State is spending major dollars on trying to improve the synchronicity between the high schools and the public colleges. It would seem that a portfolio of a student's high school work (maybe even including the newly created exam, see the "and/both" discussion above) would be one way to increase the connection between high school and college.
I bring all this up not just to answer Carl's question, but to point out that assessments of all kinds seem to be so context specific. The college does not accept the high schools' interpretation of who is literate. The private school does not accept the definition from another school. Individual departments have separate and differing standards. If it is possible to judge student literacy via a standardized exam then how come different institutions and different depts. within the same school system (university, discipline) have not come up with a standard measure. Hamp-Lyons and Condon suggest that standardized testing is not scientific because humans make up the questions and determine the answers. Testing is anything but standard: the number and kinds of tests we have seem to prove this point.