I participated in a modified version of Canada Reads with fellow pre-service teachers. You can check out our work here. This is something you could do in an ELA class at any grade level.
0 Comments
Assessment accuracy depends on matching the method to the learning target. Based on things I had been reading on progressive education websites, I had written off selected response assessments as useless because they were artificial and didn’t reflect real-world tasks. This chapter helped me realize that selected response assessments can be very useful and have a place in education. I was surprised but pleased that selected response can even be effective to assess reasoning if the stem is worded along the lines of “choose the best answer” and if the reasoning target involves inference, comparison, or evaluation.
I’m definitely more inclined to use selected response appropriately, especially having seen my TA from PSI deliver an summative test. Most of the test was multiple choice (selected response), which he delivered aurally (said the questions aloud at least once), visually (used PowerPoint slides with the questions written out, accompanied by a picture), and kinaesthetically (the kids used Senteos devices to provide their answer). He also included a constructed response component that required kids to draw, and if he couldn’t discern the meaning of the drawing, he had the kid explain the drawing (personal communication). He even used some of the kids’ names in the questions, which made the test more personal. Furthermore, two of the students who struggled with being able to focus their attention did not do well (despite lots of in-class review), so he had them do the test again on paper in a quiet room to see whether that would make a difference. Additionally, he threw out a question that the majority of the students got wrong, as he realized it wasn’t clear. I think this was the fairest way I’ve ever seen a multiple choice exam delivered. I felt like all of the students had a way to understand the questions and a chance to demonstrate their understanding. I could see myself using a similar approach in my class, and liked the idea of setting up review centres based on learning objectives and having students pick a centre based on reviewing the questions they got wrong. As a high school and university student, if I did poorer than expected (i.e., anything below an A) on a summative test or assignment, I made an appointment with my teacher to review what I misunderstood and to confirm what I could change for next time. I don’t expect that most of my students will do that, and learning is social, so I think a better solution are the learning centres shortly after the exam. To assess reasoning targets accurately, constructed response questions should be scored based on the quality of the applied pattern of reasoning and the accuracy and appropriateness of the information or evidence the student uses. The question must prompt the student to infer, analyse, evaluate, or synthesize, and therefore must be new to the student so as not to test recall. I’ve seen teachers who do a pre-test review using many of the same questions that will be on the exam and thought this was helpful, but now I know that it’s okay for knowledge questions but not reasoning. Sample size is based on the assessment’s purpose (high stakes or low stakes decision? formative or summative?) and method (how many learning objectives does one item meet?), the learning objective (how complex or broad is it? how clear are its content standards?), and the students (how clear is their achievement trend?). The goal is always to gather enough evidence to make a confident conclusion without wasting time and energy (yours and the students’) gathering too much. It’s clear to me that the better a job I do formatively assessing my students, the easier it will be to summatively assess them. In PSI, I did a lot of unstructured and undocumented formative assessment: with questioning, my samples were only sometimes random, and were often small; with observation, my samples were larger but I didn’t feel confident in their accuracy. In PSII, I want to design better formative assessments to ensure that I get a read on each student and document it in a tracking system. I really like the idea of using a test blueprint for designing a summative test, and I wonder whether it can be used for designing multiple formative assessments for my unit. I feel it would help me ensure that my assessments match my learning objectives, that all of the objectives are accounted for, and that I have a decent sample size. I should supplement the blueprint with rubrics and/or exemplars where it makes sense; I think this is especially important as a new teacher, as I have less experience determining reasonable standards. I’ll also need to check for possible item bias and distortion; I think that vocabulary complexity will be my biggest blind spot, and should review my test with a fellow teacher and/or teacher’s aide wherever feasible. Q: The philosophy of self-determination: “…living like other people in the community is not a privilege to be earned, but a right to be enjoyed, irrespective of ability and need.” How does this philosophy apply to the classroom? What are the pros and cons related to full citizenship in the classroom? This philosophy aligns with that of inclusion: all children have an equal right to be physically in the classroom, and have a right to participate and to be accepted in the classroom community. A community is a group of people who have shared interests and who mutually pursue the common good. In a classroom, shared interests may be based on the social culture but also on academic alignment, which is why it’s important to have students working towards the same learning objectives wherever possible and implementing modifications and accommodations based on ability need. The common good in a classroom is for all students to be able to learn together, of which care and acceptance play a big role. Thus, students should learn to take responsibility for their learning, but also to take responsibility for each other. This involves being open about one’s needs, but also being willing to use one’s abilities to help others and to achieve the learning objectives. Ultimately, having an inclusive community that supports the philosophy of self-determination better ensures that all students can reach their full potential because it does not artificially and prematurely limit their level or type of participation in society. Instead, they are given the support and tools (physical, mental, emotional, and social) they need to ensure the fullest participation possible to make them contributing members of society.
I appreciated the opportunity to read directly from the reports from the Department of Indian Affairs and to see how government officials prioritized and talked about issues related to Aboriginal education. While reading Aboriginal Education in Canada: A Plea For Integration by Friesen & Friesen during ED2500 was extremely helpful in framing historical development and contemporary challenges and opportunities, seeing the documents first-hand and then sharing and discussing as a class was really beneficial.
I also appreciated the overview of Niitsitapiisini and Blackfoot values. I recall being fascinated by Friesen’s comparison of Aboriginal (mostly Stoney) values with Biblical teachings, noting that the Aboriginal way of life aligns more closely with many of the principles Jesus upheld and modeled. Wherever possible, I think it makes sense to adopt and highlight those values and practices that transcend cultures. At the same time, I think it’s also important to welcome diverse views and practices and to navigate these as a class, since our Canadian democratic ideal is to do so and because I have come to value unlearning my assumptions, having my beliefs challenged, and generally existing in tensions. I found this article way too short and high level. Perhaps this is because I’ve already done a considerable amount of research in this area, but I feel that doing some reading from Walking Together might have been more beneficial. That said, there were a few things that stuck with me from this article.
“Respect (in Ojibwe terms) means knowing that we are sacred and that we have a place in this world.” I like this definition of respect. I guess I feel it aligns with my understanding of Imago Dei and my belief that the Creator has us all here for a purpose and that His/Her desire is to see us unified. The discussion of Bravery reminded me that I should be more familiar with the contributions of Aboriginal people throughout history and today. I think I can draw on my Opa for some information: he came to Canada from Germany because he respected and admired the Aboriginal people of Canada based on what he’d read, and he has tons of biographies on various chiefs and other key figures. I do make a point of following CBC Aboriginal and I’ve read, watched, or listened to pretty well everything in their 8th Fire series. I just need to remember to bring stuff like that into the classroom! I introduced my grade fours to A Tribe Called Red and Mary Youngblood last semester. Q: Reflect upon the psychological report and working through the creation of an IPP for a SEN. What questions do these documents raise for you as a future teacher? How will you go about learning more about these two critical documents in order to support a SEN?
Having a psychological report for a SEN is extremely helpful. It reinforces to me that I absolutely cannot fly solo as a teacher, and I need to collaborate not only with other teachers, but also with other professionals who have expertise in areas I don’t. With all students, but especially with SEN, I need to build a working alliance with the school’s guidance counsellor, nurse, educational assistant(s), and with the student and his/her family. I also need the support of the students in my classroom, and possibly their families, in order to ensure that all students in my classroom feel genuinely accepted and able to participate. Without the trust built to share helpful information and strategies, as well as to work through problems and issues that will undoubtedly arise, I think I would be completely overwhelmed. While I appreciate the in-class practice with reading a psychological report and creating an IPP, when I get into the field, I will likely offer a veteran teacher dinner in exchange for walking through the first few together. This person will have experience using the district’s version, and will know the appropriate channels, the help or lack thereof I can expect from the principal, and what to do if/when the report comes back from the ‘quality assurance’ person working for Alberta Education. It’s also good to have a second set of eyes on the document before it goes to the parents for signing. I find I learn best through on-the-job mentoring, and it’s a strategy I used in my previous work experience. That’s Plan A. Knowing that teachers are busy people, it behooves me to learn as much as I can. I’ve already spent some time in the previous weeks perusing the Inclusive Education Library and the Making a Difference literature, and I will continue to do so. I find both resources most helpful for strategies specific to a subject area; it simply helps me frame it so that I can see it in my mind and put it right into my lesson plan. I especially like that they identify universal, targeted, and individualized strategies. In PSII, I will make a point of asking my TA to review any students’ IPPs. I think seeing a variety will help me understand better how to design and really personalize the IPP. I’d also like to identify what may be common to most SEN’s IPPs and determine what goals and strategies I might employ for instruction, management, and assessment of all of my students. I really enjoyed the case study exercise we did to help us identify gender stereotypes, generalizations, and assumptions, as a way to challenge our own understanding of gender performance. I found it helpful to have Jane note that pitting boys against girls has been shown to be damaging. I feel like I already have fairly progressive views on gender construction and performance, but I’d like to get more information on this so that I can explain to others why I’m (not) doing what I’m doing. The discussions we had on concerns about men’s intentions in being teachers (based on assumptions about their sexuality and self-control) and showing students affection were very eye-opening. It made me realize how representations of statistics in the media, the portrayal of masculinity and homosexuality in the media, and societal interpretations of both contribute to prejudice, fear, and violence. The thought that comes into my head is that we need to be “as wise as serpents, and as gentle as doves.” Trust is so vital to our relationships with one another. I need to be trustworthy as a teacher, colleague, and human being.
I really like the perspective that this author adopted on the issue, and feel that I’d like a similar discussion on the issue of “true femininity.” Having been part of a more conservative Christian community for a while, I’m no stranger to James Dobson-esque understandings of, and arguments for, traditional gender roles. I hurdled my way through feminist philosophers, and queer literary theorists, and post-structuralists during my first degree, which helped challenge many of my assumptions (yay!). I’m married to a wonderful man whose favourite colour is purple, who works in a position in an oil company typically filled by women, sings in a choir, and dreams of staying home with our (future) young kids while I continue in my teaching career. He also watches UFC, plays soccer and computer games with his friends, drives aggressively, and enjoys a good beer and steak.
So, I often think of him and of the philosophers when issues of “what masculinity really is” arise. I especially like Wallace’s questions, “Whose interests are served by preferred forms of masculinity?” and “How are these forms linked to particular social, political, ideological, and economic interests?” I think these are the right kinds of questions to be asking about any kind of identify representation or construction that has a normative purpose. I also liked how Wallace tackled the issue of ‘boys’ literacy issues’ by emphasizing that technology is expanding what we mean by literacy and that many boys are adept at technological literacy (coding and drafting design come to mind). I am still frustrated by how much emphasis there is in the education program at U of L on print-based literacy (reading and writing words on a page). There seems to be only lip service to the other kinds of literacy. I’m struck by this odd misconception that has crept into modern society—boys don’t like poetry or fiction—considering my historical survey lit classes demonstrated how male-dominated both fields were, both in readership and authorship. Finally, I appreciated knowing that simply having a male teacher in the classroom does not make a significant difference for boys—that all students need excellent teachers regardless of gender, and that students need to be exposed to a wide variety of gender performances and constructions so that they are not unintentionally (or intentionally) marginalized. Q: 1) What other components of learning [other than process] could be addressed via differentiation? 2) Select one of Lenee’s activities and provide a justification of how it could be used in multiple ways for numerous students according to their learning needs. 3) Create your own [evolving] definition or belief statement regarding differentiation.
After hearing Lenee speak so highly of Carol Ann Tomlinson, I decided to look up her work. She notes that teachers can differentiate through content (adjust the level of difficulty while ensuring that all students meet the same learning outcomes), product (variation in how students demonstrate their understanding), affect (presumably this means varying the means of hooking, motivating, and otherwise engaging students) and learning environment (spacing, wall displays, lighting, furniture, materials, equipment, and technology). Lenee’s game Hockey Times is versatile for effective DI. The game—which involves friendly competition and a mix of luck and skill to win—serves as a hook and continual motivator. Hockey symbols may be replaced with whatever the kids are most interested in or are currently learning about in other subjects (e.g., animals, foods, provinces).The game can be used to teach addition, multiplication, and fractions, providing different levels of difficulty. Kids can play the game individually or as pairs, where the one who is stronger works through the math problem aloud, and the weaker partner listens to the stronger partner and completes the colouring component. The social component may also help both students with learning and problem solving, based on Vygotsky’s theories. The game involves listening, speaking (if working in partners), writing (filling in squares), and viewing (identifying and matching symbols to colour the correct squares), so students have multiple ways in which to engage in problem solving and learn. Lenee also mentioned that once the kids have played the game a number of times, it is easy for them to set up and play on their own, so the activity could easily become a sponge activity to reinforce concepts, or something done in learning centres. If it’s difficult for students to quickly remember the patterns or operations, they could be given an addition or multiplication table to reference while playing. Alternatively, the teacher might have students call out all of the answers to “how can we make 24?” Differentiation primarily involves building a trusting and meaningful relationship with each student and, where possible, the student’s family. Likewise, it involves helping the students to develop trusting and meaningful relationships with each other, and to understand that fair means everyone gets what they need to succeed. From these relationships, I am able to identify and work with my students’ interests, strengths, and needs. Using the principles Universal Design for Learning, I aim to plan multiple ways for students to receive instruction and demonstrate understanding so that all students are capable of learning and confident in themselves as learners. I came away from watching the video “Putting on the Glitz” feeling like society had completely failed women and girls. It broke my heart to hear the mothers and the pageant organizer justify the pageants, the expectations they put on the girls, and the alterations of the girls’ appearances. They are clearly blinded to (or in denial about) the lie they’re perpetuating to their daughters, to each other, and to themselves: you are not worthy, and you are not enough, just as you are. I continue to be horrified and saddened that women compete against each other and slander each other, often about things that they cannot change (like their appearance). It may be more common for men to kill each other physically with weapons, but we kill each other psychologically with our words.
I’m not sure if there is such a thing as healthy competition, and I’m wary of allowing for it in my classroom since it’s already so rampant in society. I’d like to help the girls in my classes uncover what they like about themselves, discover what in the world fascinates them and brings them joy, and empower them to be kind, curious, and active participants of life. I liked the “Building Confidence Circle” exercise and could see myself doing something similar in my class. I think it helps to temper competition and bullying by building self-esteem and reinforcing a sense of belonging. |
Archives
August 2017
Categories
All
|