Date: Mar 8, 2013 12:28 PM
Author: Anna Roys
Subject: Re: Why schools used to be better
Responding to GSC with clarification:
By "summative" I mean NCLB standards based assessments that are aggregated
across categories, and compared by school, state and nation.
I think these assessments are primarily for policy makers and do not help
teachers that much in driving instruction day after day in the classroom.
Instead they take away critical time that students need to think deeply and
instead force us teachers to focus and spend extra time checking for and
building skills. ( I do think skills are important, but they are only one
piece of the puzzle. )
I also believe these tests cannot adequately assess the whole child and
students' innate ability to learn. Again I assert, a primary purpose of
life is to learn and we are born knowing how to do it. It seems that
whether students believe in themselves and their ability to succeed plays
a huge role. Somewhere along the way many students often question whether
they can do it. I tell my students they can do it and stretch them as far
as possible with high expectations, then modify expectations for those who
really need it.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:42 PM, GS Chandy <email@example.com> wrote:
> Anna Roys posted Mar 5, 2013 7:29 AM:
> > Hi all,
> > As a teacher, I find myself wanting to constantly
> > assess, check for
> > understanding on the fly, as I go;
> Indeed. There is (and should be) this kind of 'assessing' and 'checking'
> going on all the time. Little of this is quantitative. Most of it is, I
> believe, the sudden 'look of comprehension' ("EUREKA!") that appears on the
> student's face when he/she has 'got' a new concept. I am not a
> professional teacher myself - but I've seen it and it is truly the most
> rewarding part of teaching (IMHO).
> (Probably more often,) the puzzled looks on the student faces shows the
> teacher what he/she needs to do to enable/ ensure comprehension.
> >I find it very
> > valuable, as this can
> > inform me on where re-teaching may be needed.
> > My educational philosophy is
> > for mastery of content, not just a lot of content
> > coverage at superficial
> > levels. Informal assessments are great, however,
> > there are times I think
> > the summative assessments may not reflect true
> > pictures of student
> > abilities and achievement levels.
> If by 'summative' you mean 'quantitative', I agree entirely!
> >Notice I do not see
> > abilities as
> > achievement levels. To me the ability is the ability
> > to learn, the purpose
> > of life, which all humans are born with and may be
> > developed, whereas,
> > achievement levels are what we see on the summative
> > test scores.