To be specific or general? That is the question....
I am pondering the idea of giving specific requirements/instructions for assessments, as opposed to giving vague specifications with room for student creativity and direction. I was taught early on to create rubrics for assessments. The rubrics I was taught to create were always very specific, with criteria for each point value within a category. I've seen other teachers use less specific rubrics, but as a learner, I find them really hard to follow. How can I determine if I have earned 20 points, or 10. If the specifics and a rubric are provided, it is much easier to ensure that the work conforms to the expectations of the instructor, but does that stifle creativity? What if your student works really really hard, believing they are meeting the criteria, only to be awarded with a grade far below what they think they deserved? Will this cause a learner to shut down and give up? Or will they respond to feedback and make an effort to change their work to better meet the instructor expectations? Is it not better to provide more specific criteria before the student gets to a point of frustration, and chance that the learner becomes turned off to a course? It's a tough call...High Stakes Testing
This week, I am reminded how frustrated I am by the high stakes testing that occurs at K-12 level. It is the excuse that so many teachers use to explain why they do not use better means of assessment and teaching. I hear so often "I can't do that, I have to make sure I cover everything that will be on the test." I also hear complaints about the Common Core, and how teachers can't do things, like use blogs, because the standards don't call for reflection (although they do!). I am frustrated because so many teachers use testing and "standards" as their "get out of jail free" card, when in reality, if they were using project based learning and "alternative" assessment methods, they would probably do a better job preparing students for the tests.In the video Comprehensive Assessment, the principal from Indiana says that our reliance on standardized tests will crash as it has in the past, but this video was created in in 2010 (to the best of my sleuthing skills, although the computers being used indicate that it was filmed more like the early 2000s) and we are seeing more standardized tests than ever! Another expert interviewed asks: "The question is do we get at what we are saying we want by using the test to drive this." A third individuals says: "There is no evidence to show that you raise test scores by teaching worse." So, what the heck are we doing? I know some teachers who look at the standards, acknowledge them, but refuse to teach to the test. They are using project based, collaborative learning in their classrooms. If I were in a traditional classroom, I would do the same thing. Teaching to standards is NOT the same thing as teaching to the test. There is no need to sacrifice QUALITY assessment to "ensure" that students can pass the test at the end of the year. If the students are learning the materials and skills, then they will surely do well on the required tests.
Furger also explores the concept of project-based alternative assessments. It was only due to perfect timing that I had an interesting conversation with a co-worker the other day. Last week, he and a fellow math teacher came to me and said they wanted students to do a research project on conics in the real world. They wanted students to research different items in the real world that contained conic principals. Students are researching topics like the orbit of comets, planetary orbits, contact lenses, suspension bridges and others. They have to research a specific item from their topic, create a pamphlet, a presentation and a 3D model of their topic. While not as cool as designing a school for 2050, it's a pretty awesome example of applying mathematical concepts to the real world. And why do the teacher's feel than can do these real-life activities? Because their course does not have a standardized test at the end of the year.... how frustrating! The project, however, is going really well!
Group Projects
Some thoughts on group projects....do I see the potential value? Absolutely, but I have learned that creating the right groups is far more productive than random assignment. I did a lot of reading on creating collaborative activities in Creating Collaborative Communities, and the very best thing I took away was to do a quick personality quiz before creating groups. It is not fun to group a Type A with a Type B, either for the Type A, or the Type B! We Type A's tend to come off looking really bossy! Type B's suffer from our stress.Web 2.0 Tools
This one is short and sweet, I love finding new tools for my tool Box. The past two weeks have had me explore Lucid Chart (for concept mapping), LiveBinders (for collaborative presentation of information), and PowToon as an Audio/Video tool. I was also exposed to Mural.ly by one of my group mates, and though she didn't seem thrilled by it, I am going to take a look anyway! I can't wait to explore the tools presented by the rest of the class!Our ToolBox
References
Edutopia. (2010, August 03). Comprehensive Assessment: An Overview. Retrieved March 23, 2014, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9OBhKzh1BMFurger, R. (2002, January 21). Take a Deeper Look at Assessment for Understanding. Retrieved March 23, 2014, from http://www.edutopia.org/performance-assessment-math
No comments:
Post a Comment