Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: Direct Instruction
Posted:
Oct 14, 1995 2:38 PM
|
|
Tad-
>But if students truly understand the concepts, shouldn't they be
>able to do reasonably well on these "low level" tests?
I agree. In fact, I've thought minimum competency exams might consist of
three parts:
1) Basic skills and concepts
2) Traditional word/application problems
3) Problems reflecting "higher order" thinking skills (what they called
"enhanced multiple choice problems")
For a student to demonstrate competency, s/he would have to pass two of three
parts. Students taught in traditional methods might be expected to excell at
1&2 while students taught in more "Standards" based classrooms might be
expected by some folk to excell at 2&3.
Then you might get some interesting data of unexpected proficiencies.
Perhaps, traditional kids might do better on 3 because they have a better
basis or perhaps we'd find "Standards" based students would excell at 1
because they truly learned the basics because they saw the value in them.
Why not?
Dan
|
|
|
|
