The
focus of chapter 8 is assessment of the partnering style. The author details many different forms of
assessment including ipsative, peer, and self.
The recommendations tend towards formative and self assessment as better
means, but acknowledges the benefits of all types. The author also points out the oddity of
‘taking away student tools during examinations’. The example given is having math tests where
no calculators are allowed. The author
proposes reversing that, changing the nature of the test to encourage tool use
even with fact based tests (perhaps an efficiency test on obtaining the facts).
Further
the author explores the applications of assessment on the implementation of the
partnering style. This is explored
heavily with teachers, advocating peer and self assessment along partnering
ideals. A spectrum based indicator was
suggested for an example. The author
also provides a context for assessing school administrators, school systems,
and the nation in regards to improvement.
I
found the reading pretty interesting, especially all the options on assessment
and its applications. Moreover, I liked
the parts where questions are asked about what we are actually measuring in
assessment and whether it is apt. The
final section talking about national goals and what it means to be falling
behind other nations was most engaging.
Not all of the clear benefits are identified with the testing approaches
we currently have (obvious statement), but also our goals and our approaches
may not go hand in hand as we might think.
Most teachers would likely agree that ninth grade level literacy is key
to our national educational goals, but the author makes a valid point that that
seemingly basic goal (in our eyes) may not result in what we want. Teaching students to use new technologies may
be a better approach.
I agree, we are getting to caught up in where we rank in this poll or that scale, that we ignore the huge advances we are gaining. For instance Prensky states, "being "behind" truly depends on what you measure." Yes we are behind other countries in lower level blooms type recall questions, what Prensky calls "old-fashioned school stuff," but we are preparing student for the future and not the past. Things like literacy are important but teaching students how to read in the 21st century is different than the past. Incorporating technology is a must for students to be successful in the future. Technology is something they have been around their entire lives and will be for the rest of it. As teachers we must try to teach traditional skills, but use technology to do it in a better way that students will enjoy. This is where the CCSS comes into play, school leaders have realized this are making preparations to support teachers for these reasons.
ReplyDeleteI like the point that students have been around technology all their lives. It is something to be wary of. In many cases the students may know the technology better than the teachers which can offset some of the proper classroom roles. It can be used in good ways, like the book recommends getting students to help teach. However, it can server to reinforce a student's arrogance. Many students claim "I know more than the teacher" already, that can lead to bad learning environments if they find an objective realm to verify that (like the technology). I think it is a mixed bag, but something to keep in mind. The threat of embracing technology and having it directly reinforce adolescent egocentrism hurting the effectiveness of other lessons.
ReplyDelete