However, if concepts of evaluation are separated from concepts of enforced standardization, evaluation can be a means of defining and promoting learning from the standpoint of particular students and communities. Evaluation methods can be devised to maximize the space for diverse program structures and teaching methods. There are ways of thinking about gains in literacy as those made when individuals reach personally defined goals — writing a story, getting a driver's license, becoming competent at using certain documents in a workplace or other setting — whether or not they gain at the same time the kind of literacy that is measured by standardized tests. It is even conceivable that community organizations could make similar definitions not of individual but of community-relevant goals. What is not yet clear is whether such informal, student-centred evaluation practices will prove a defensible "accountability" of programming accomplishments — whether thinking about assessment in relation to individual or community goals can extend to ways of aggregating such gains to report on overall program achievement; and whether it can allow the kind of unifying framework that would make it easy for students to move from one program to another with some assurance of their placement.

The question of program evaluation is closely related to student performance testing. Some provinces have developed evaluation instruments that allow for a narrative reflection on program principles and achievements.¹⁶⁶ Again, the question is whether such methods can establish the credibility that would deflect restrictive program evaluation procedures — whether those are based on numbers passing a standardized test, numbers going on to further education or training, numbers gaining employment, or other indexes that would have the net effect of excluding certain potential students.

Curricula

Like evaluation procedures, curricular definitions can sharpen and extend the orientation of students and teachers, or can blunt their indigenous sense of purpose. Curricular models restricted to an "upgrading" concept are likely to blunt as often as they sharpen. But less restrictive models are possible. Curriculum guides, for example, from Québec¹⁶⁷ and British Columbia¹⁶⁸ are learner-centred in tone, and call for teaching based on the needs, participation and life situations of students.