I found it interesting when the book pointed out on page 281 how students are viewed today – not as “vessels into which knowledge is poured…[but] active constructors of their personal knowledge and understanding developed from a variety of social and educational experiences.” In other words, rather than simply pouring facts for them to memorize, we need to be able to help them figure out the answers to problems. The challenge, then, is to determine how to gauge what has been learned. The simple answer is a multitude of assessments during a lesson, though which and how many assessments is a bit more complicated.
Second, the idea of diagnostic testing and preassessments sounds like a great idea. I’ve heard of it before, but have never personally had an instructor utilize this tool. Often I consider the students as a tabula rosa, the blank slate not knowing any of the materials that they will be learning, or at the very least, but in doing that, I am doing the students a disservice. I had a chance to check an elementary text used by our 6th grade students and found just what they had learned in terms of history. I was pleasantly surprised to see that they do have a solid background. By giving them a preassessment, I can measure what they’ve retained from that class to their present grade.
Finally, on page 286 the text says that when using technology in a course, there should be instruction “about the technology.” A question I often ask myself is, what is the purpose of including the technology in this lesson and what benefit will it offer the students? I recently had students in my junior/senior Sociology course use a spreadsheet to catalog responses to a survey. Roughly 10% had any experience with the program at all. They also weren’t sure why the spreadsheet program might be useful in cataloging the information. As a result, I spent some time instructing them what the program was and why researchers might utilize the program for cataloging data. It was nice to see the students see a new side to the usefulness of the program.
As for implementation, I believe the pre-test will be an initial step, especially in my Sociology course. It will give me an understanding of what the students are familiar with and will also give them an idea of what we will be covering in greater depth. Second, when I do use rubrics - and I often get at least ideas for them from http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php?screen=NewRubric, - I’m going to make sure that the students better understand how they will be used. I’m conducting a webquest with my eighth graders this week, and they need to know how the rubric will fit into the grading of their finished paper.
The area that concerns me most relates back to the opening of the chapter, where the example is given of the teacher, Mrs. Blake on page 281. She stated her goals for World History for the year were for “students to become information seekers, analyzers, and evaluators.” I’m not sure, given the grading systems that are used and the focus on state standards how that can be evaluated. It’s easy to tell if a student understands the material and learns it from traditional tests, but how does one grade a student on proper analysis?
Bryan, in this day and age when assessment rules, you might find it very interesting to try a pretest or presurvey for one of your units in your class. Then compare the scores after a posttest or survey. You will have proof that your teaching enhanced learning! I have used a presurvey and post-survey for knowledge of the content of a technology class. The survey asked that the student circle a lickert scale with their knowledge at that time. I saved the paper survey and at the end of the class, I had students place dots on the lickert scale for each question. They were amazed at their own learning and I had proof of their learning when compared to their class grade at the end. Interesting to try and there are so many variations that you can try.
ReplyDeleteJoan