Kind of sad that I'm too lazy to draw other characters beyond cartoon rabbits, but to be honest, trying to express some of my ideas in graphic format takes A LOT of time. I do enjoy it, but yeah, not as quick and easy as I remember it being. This week was another chapter of Cooper, and I have to be honest, I was pretty surprised we're already at chapter 9 of 10, and not only that, that I've actually almost read AN ENTIRE textbook. This is definitely a first for me (I don't count novels and literature) and I have to say, some parts were a little long and laborious, but overall, not the worst experience of my life. I am a little skeptical about how much I will retain, since I can't remember any of those initial big ideas of assessment, but its definitely a nice resource to have available to look back upon. Okay, chapter 9 focuses on grading and reporting. The majority of it just makes sense and seems like house keeping issues, finding enough evidence for grading, how to calculate and weigh marks, mostly logistical and practical issues around marks. I'll focus on some of the issues or topics that stood out and seemed interesting/odd to me. Cooper advocates that students need at least 2 or more anchors or sample work so they can properly understand what is expected of them. Okay, that sounds reasonable, but is there a best way to present that information? Is showing a level 1 piece and a level 4 piece better? Showing the extremes? Or is showing 2 level 3 pieces better? Should they be the same level to show consistency, but originality or diversity of work? Also, you need to allow for students to surpass the anchors and expectations, does that mean they should also be able to drop below the rubric? Can they score less than 1? I was told not to have rubrics which show zero learning whatsoever, but isn't that possible? Doesn't that need to be accounted for? I have a longstanding problem understanding the mentality and reasons behind the different forms of assessment in grades 1-8, and then in 9-12. It seems that students in 1-8 cannot fail, are not held back, and are graded on the same rubric, but on a different expectation/performance level. Why have that system in place until grade 8 (I've seen students reading at a grade 3 level in grade 8, but on an IEP, so they still score relatively well) and then have them fail in grade 9? Doesn't that create a situation where a lot of students will not be at the grade 9 level when they enter high school? Will they still have IEP's when they are not being judged to a different level anymore? I know we have the streams in high school, but this still seems like a huge shift, and from my viewpoint, not a good one. Here is my comic depiction of this situation simplified: I guess this seems extreme, however I know a lot of the students I'm working with now will face this reality next year. Is that not a disingenuous model of education?
I also have a hard time accepting that we should not factor in zeros into grades. Yes, a student not completing an assignment is not an accurate image of how much they have learned, but it is an accurate image of how much they've demonstrated they know, which is how we assess them in the first place right? By assessing their demonstration of their learning, via written work, presentations etc. So if they demonstrate zero learning, why ignore that and pretend that they might have known the information and estimate a mark based on other work? It's almost rewarding students who decided to skip an assignment and have higher marks on other ones. Do we not calculate zeros on EQAO testing? If I have a math test and leave some answers blank, should they not count towards my final knowledge? Maybe I'm just old fashioned and like things the way I experienced them, but that seems to make sense... right? It seems Cooper is more willing to rely on extrapolation of how he feels a student might be doing, or anecdotal evidence, rather than factor in those zeros, which sometimes can be legitimate. I mean, what if a student has a zero because they don't know, having missed too many classes or refusing to participate, should we be guessing how much they might know in some hypothetical world? I guess I have a similar issue with extreme scores. I can understand how they might reflect on a bad day or a one time situation, and not the entire unity of a students learning, but that is just one possibility. What if the extreme score is the final assessment of the term, and isn't a fluke, but rather shows a student has forgotten what they previously knew or no longer knows how to use that information? Shouldn't that score be the new norm then? Should that take precedence over the previous trend? As a final note, I thought the whole idea of report cards unnecessarily boring. Why is it that we can develop (this is the nerd in me) pages and pages in tons of books on stats for fictional characters in video games or comics, and not find an exciting way to present report cards? If I approached report cards like a turn based RPG, where characters level up skill points and develop over time, it would be WAY more interesting to see in a chart or graph or image. Why can't the information be presented in that kind of fashion, providing more detailed comments, information and feedback? Sounds a lot better than looking at a boring grid or inputting data into a software program. I have to admit, my issues and concerns in this chapter, like the past few, are nothing new. I seem to be hung up on the same issues and I already know they aren't black and white topics that can be easily addressed. These are those "every teacher has their own approach" kind of things, which is somewhat lame and annoying, but part of reality. Anyways, enough of my whining, until next time :) ~Peter
1 Comment
Alaa
10/16/2015 12:54:15 pm
Peter, I love your drawings.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
September 2016
Categories |