Assessment | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Assessment’ Category

Tightrope Teaching

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Blog, cooperating Teacher, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth on January 24, 2011| 9 Comments »

As an adjunct professor at a local private college, I have the privilege each semester to teach one of several methods courses required for our secondary English education students. In addition, I supervise a group of student teachers in their assignments which requires me to observe each student in each of their teaching assignments, one a middle school and the other a High school placement. Within my methods course I engage my students in many of the educational topics relevant to educators today. I have them use Social Media to create Personal Learning Networks, and I require these future English teachers to blog and post comments on blogs of others. They do not take tests, but rather are assessed on lessons, projects and Unit plans that they are required to create and develop.

To many of the educators with whom I am in daily digital contact this probably sounds like it should be the way all methods courses should be taught. Anyone familiar with what I have written over the past year on this blog would know that I believe in integrating technology into education. That is an emphasis I use in my class. This too might be praised by the choir of tweeting educators with whom I have come to belong. With all of this support, one would think that I would be convinced and resolute in a mission to put my stamp of relevance on all of my students. Not so fast!

I have a very strong belief in teaching the right thing as I have come to understand it. I also have an obligation to prepare my students to be the best possible candidates for a teaching position. This is the tightrope part. My biggest dilemma is that I can prepare them with what they need, but I can’t hire them. I know that many of the methods I am using and teaching strategies that I promote, may not be the same as those ascribed to by their perspective employers. There are many times when I will give my opinion and tell my students that they may not want to mention that in a job interview.

The other force that pulls my students is that of experience. Most have experienced teachers who demand memorization followed by a test, followed by more memorization and another test. This was their elementary and secondary experience and for many it continues in some classes in their college experience. Professors tell them that there is no need for technology in education and Social Media is trouble to be avoided by educators. I find it difficult to tell them that this is completely wrong, although I believe it. The truth is that this is an attitude of many educators today. These are the very people who will be in a position to hire and work with my students.

It is one thing to know the right thing to do, but it is another to tell someone else that, what they are doing is wrong. How do we teach relevant methods for teaching without selling it as something that must be hidden until it can be determined where the administration or even future colleagues stand on such issues? Of course this is changing, but it has been changing for 30 years and we are still discussing it. I see the reluctance to change with every school that I enter to do observations. Yes, it is getting better, but if education was really moving forward, the word “reform” would only apply to politicians and business people and not the other way around.

I know that my experience in this is not unique. We need to teach our future teachers relevant methods, techniques and tools, but that is not the only path to reform. We need to continue to engage our colleagues, administrators and Leaders in accepting change. We should not have to qualify or make excuses for being relevant and using technology as a tool for learning. Social Media, like any tool, may be misused, but it has a greater potential to be used as a positive force for change. We need to promote reform within the system for it will be too slow in coming if we wait for the colleges. We need to be the change. I want my students to clearly understand the expectations, so they can focus on their goal. I want to come down from the tightrope.

Read Full Post »

Space, the Final Frontier

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Education, Leadership, Literacy, PLN, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Teachmeet, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on January 20, 2011| 17 Comments »

I recently involved myself in a discussion I have been engaging people in since the mid 1970’s. The Topic: Is it one space or two after a period when word-processing? The topic resurfaced after @smartinez, a highly respected educator and Tweeter, sent out a link to a post explaining the rule. http://www.slate.com/id/2281146/ According to Farhad Manjoo, Old-fashioned typewriters used monospaced type, which produced a lot of white space between characters and words, so using two spaces after a period made the text easier to read, but as of the 1970s, monospaced type went out of style. Electric typewriters and computers now both use proportional fonts, eliminating the need for the extra space. This fact prompted this statement, “Typing two spaces after a period is totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong.”

Now for what happened after I re-tweeted that link to the post that validated the very position I have taken since the 1970’s. A number of people stepped up questioning, if that was important, or if anybody really cared. Some said that they had always done two spaces and will continue to do so. That was the attitude that set me off. I would like to say that it matters not to me whether one uses one or two spaces. Of course my experience and prejudices affect my impressions of things. I guess ultimately it does matter to me, for I will form an opinion of a writer somewhat based on my perception of their punctuation mistakes, however, I do see a larger topic here.

It should be evident to any thinking person that our society, or more accurately, our culture is greatly affected by technology. Tech is developing and moving forward each and every day. At almost any age any person can think back this or her past and recollect some piece of technology that has ceased to exist, or was replaced by another form or piece of technology. That is the way of our world. Technology has changed the way we all deal with information. Consider how we access, create, communicate, and collaborate and ultimately think about information in our culture. There is no going back in the way tech affects everything. The bigger picture however, is not solely the tech itself, but how we interact with that technology.

The reason why we have one space instead of two after a period is because the technology has developed to a point where the two spaces are unnecessary. Some people may want to hang on to the old way as a revolt against the machine, but that makes no sense. In their revolt, do they choose to take a Conestoga wagon to travel across a continent, or do they take a 747? How much rebellion is convenient or comfortable?

Now, I hope to get to my point. At the risk of sounding arrogant myself, I hate the arrogance of some educators, who actually believe that they can teach children today with absolutely no regard for technology, or its influence on our culture. It is true that a good teacher can teach with a dirt floor and a stick with the stick being optional. A good teacher with technology however, can offer more relevance to students in a world that will require them to constantly interact with technology. A good teacher with technology can be better. As our tools change, our methods for teaching need to change accordingly. We cannot ignore the fact that our society will require the use of technology and it is no longer the choice of the educator to teach with it or not. We are moving beyond accepting handwritten or even typewritten reports in our society. Therefore, we need to employ those rules which are required by the tool which we require people to use.

If we as educators are teaching children to function within a technological society that is constantly changing, we must educate our children to use those tools. We must also strive to teach and model the ability to adapt, since those same tools will continue to develop and change. A big problem we as educators, have is that we do not even understand what specific skills are going to be required of our students, because in many cases, the jobs they will have, do not yet exist. Without knowing of the jobs, how do we address the skills needed to fill those jobs? We as educators need to at least be relevant to our students if we stand a chance of giving them what they will need. We have a responsibility to assess what we do and how we do it. We no longer have the luxury of choosing what or how we remain comfortable teaching. We have a greater responsibility to our students that goes beyond our personal comfort level. We need to adapt our teaching skills and methods to address our students’ needs.

We have a responsibility to develop professionally. What we learned before we got our degrees and licenses has changed and continues to do so. We need to stay relevant in order to move our students forward. The amount of information is daunting. Not addressing it and not trying to get a handle on it does not keep technology from moving forward. The longer it takes educators to accept it, the further down the road it will move and the mountain of what we need to know will continue to grow.

In the world of today’s educator, he or she may choose to put two spaces after a period. In the world that will exist for their students however, there will be a different set of rules, determined by technology, requiring one space after a period. We must teach them for their needs and not ours. Yes, every educator has the right to choose to live in a cave. They do not have the right to drag their students in there with them.

Okay educators, your choice, one space or two after a period?

Read Full Post »

What’s Our Stake in High Stakes Testing?

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, EdChat, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, PLN, Reform, Seniority, Skills, Social Media, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Teched, Technology, Tenure, Thought Provoking, Truth on January 7, 2011| 15 Comments »

If you are not familiar with #Edchat, it is a Twitter discussion on specific topics held every Tuesday at Noon and 7 PM EST. A full explanation may be found at this Link: https://tomwhitby.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/edchat-revisited/. I am revealing in this post that I am the one who makes up a bulk of the #Edchat Topic choices. We do get some outside contributions, but each week I try to lift relevant topics from the Twitterstream and current Educational Blogs to explore further in an #Edchat discussion. It has been a successful formula thus far. My dilemma however, is always when is it a good time to revisit a topic. I recently received a comment from an educator that stated he always found the topic choices very interesting, but eventually we would need to discuss Standardized Testing or High Stakes Testing as a topic. Actually, #Edchat has discussed this topic in the past. The problem I have however is that in trying to keep the pulse of education concerns, Standardized Testing is the one topic that has an overwhelming majority of educators mentioning their opposition on a daily basis. Educators seem to be in agreement that Standardized Testing is a major roadblock to Education Reform. One growing opinion seems to be that the emphasis has become the tests and not the education.

Assessment has been and always will be part of education. A simple explanation: As educators we use Formative assessment to make sure we are succeeding with our students as we go. Do they get it? This allows for adjustments along the way. The Summative assessment tells educators how successful the complete endeavor was. After all is said and done, have the students gotten it? Educators do this to determine the next step, so they may continue to build on this education. This is the teacher’s assessment of learning for the purpose of the determining of what comes next. The curriculum is the roadmap of where to go. The assessments tell the teacher if the students are there yet. Teachers can always take students beyond the original destination.

Now we should look at High stakes testing. Its purpose is to accumulate data on education. Data requires simple, objective answers that are easily converted to numbers for analysis. As a former English teacher, I often envied Math teachers whose test answers were either right or wrong. As an English teacher I was always trying to figure out shades of right or wrong with essays. That oversimplification of math testing is less true of Math today with the changes that have been made requiring more of an explanation of reasoning. I hope no math teachers were offended.

The purpose of High Stakes testing seems to be changing. If it was originally intended to assess where we were with student learning in order to offer directions for places to improve, we may have strayed from that goal. It is now used to: determine funding, determine remediation, determine school closings, determine careers, and as a stretch, determine elections. These reasons have little to do with what educators use testing for.

Of course there is a simple solution; Teach to the test. That would give everyone what was needed. A problem with this however is that it will not work. It will not work because it does not consider all of the other factors involved in a student’s education; poverty, environment, culture, and even family relationships. How do we ask questions for the purpose of converting these factors into data in order to take all of this into account? Of course a more obvious reason teaching to the test won’t work is that it is not educating any one. Teaching to the test is preparing kids for a Jeopardy round, not life.

Now here is where I begin to sound like a conspiracy theorist. I, along with almost everyone in America, recognize that we are in a dire economic period. I understand we need to cut costs and increase revenue, and we will all need to sacrifice. One of our greatest expenses is education. Education has been highlighted as a political concern. It is apparent to some of us that the call for education Reform is code for cut taxes. The high stakes tests are not being used to examine and address changes in methods and curriculum as much as to vilify teachers. This call for reform by some is not a call for education reform, but rather a call for labor reform. It is a call to do away with Unions and due process for teachers. These tests are not being used to free teachers to innovate, but rather to begin to dismantle public education for the purpose of privatization for profit.

How can so many educators on every level be so opposed to high stakes testing and still it thrives? How can the mixed to dismal results of a Charter School movement still allow politicians to call for more Charter Schools? How can the influence on education by Poverty, Race, Environment, and Family go unrecognized as factors in need of reform?

We do need to reform education, but we need a better understanding of what changes will have a meaningful effect. There are many things that unions and teachers can do to affect change, but the greater changes however need to be made in methods and focus of curriculum. The emphasis of needed skills for a growing technology-driven society will be another game changer.

Assessment is needed and has a purpose in education. We need to focus assessments on the learning and not the Labor. The vast majority of educators are intelligent, dedicated, people-oriented, sharers. They may need to be given guidance and professional development in the latest methods and technologies, but they are the best source we have to support our education system. Firing teachers, closing schools, busting unions, and dismantling Public Education may be Reform to some, but to many others this is a destructive path. We need educational leaders to stand up and be heard on this. Voices of education need to be heard over those voices of business and politics and vocal disgruntled taxpayers. ( We are probably all disgruntled about taxes.)

Now I have to put up an #Edchat Topic dealing with High Stakes Testing. Your comments are welcomed here.

Read Full Post »

Let’s Go To The Videotape

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, Observation, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Teched, Technology, Tenure, Thought Provoking, Video taping on December 9, 2010| 20 Comments »

I recently read how Bill Gates is pushing for video-taping teachers as part of an assessment process during the observation of lessons. His goal is to include videotaping of all teachers in the process of their evaluations. On the surface this sounds workable and even helpful; after all it does work for athletes. For many years now, coaches and recruiters alike all said, ”Let’s go to the Video Tape” it will show us the way. Of course the media has changed and gone digital, so actual video tape is being replaced by other technologies, nevertheless we call it videotaping.

I have had myself videotaped at times during my career to objectively view what I looked like, and how I delivered a specific lesson to my students. It was my choice of class, my choice of lesson, and my choice to view and use. I knew what I was looking for in my lesson. I did find it to be helpful, but it was my choice to use it as a tool, and I chose how to do it. I have used videotaping with students doing oral presentations. It enabled them to see what the audience saw as the presentation unfolded. I think under the right conditions videotaping can be a useful tool to improve presentation skills.

I have also seen videotaping used to record the lessons of perspective teachers as they applied for positions. The video tape was then played back before the hiring committee. This was far better than the alternative of having the entire hiring committee sitting in the back of the class during the lesson. All in all I am not averse to using videotaping as a tool for assessment.

One problem with videotaping all teachers for assessment is that all lessons do not lend themselves to the videotaping process. Direct instruction or a lecture may be the best forms of lessons to be videotaped. We all love TED Talks. However, there are other types of lessons that may be considered “controlled chaos” that would not play well on the big screen, but they do promote learning. The teacher is not always the focal point of the lesson. Talking is not necessarily teaching. Some lessons like simulations, group work, or projects extend several days before yielding results. A single period videotape would not capture the results of the efforts of the teacher.

Another consideration is the introduction of the camera to the class. Once the discovery of the camera runs through the classroom, some students may exhibit different behavior. It also must be said, that not all teachers will be themselves when the camera starts rolling for the big production. With a room of thirty individuals in a classroom the introduction of a video camera must have an impact on behavior and performance of some. It has the potential of changing the dynamic of a class.

The idea to use this method for assessing all teachers may be well-intentioned, but that intention only works if it is to benefit the teacher. It is a great tool under the right conditions for specific lessons to assist the teacher in honing communication skills. However, here is the rub: some may see this video-taped observation not as an assessment tool to help the teacher, but a tool to remove the teacher from the class. Even if that is not the case, it will be the view of many teachers. With that view, teachers will begin to give to the camera what the camera views best. Lessons will be tailored for the camera, “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s”. Administrators will fill their video libraries with direct instruction lessons.

Teachers are not athletes who can adjust their physical skills to enhance performance. This is not to say that some things may not be improved by a videotaped intervention, as long as the teacher is open to it and the conditions are right. Their relationship with their classes is difficult to capture on a 40 minute video. How does the camera capture learning as it happens? It will certainly not be viewed on the face of the teacher. The focus of the camera might be more telling, if it was trained on the faces of the students. Video-taping as a tool for improvement with everyone’s cooperation and willingness to use it for that goal can work. Using it as a tool to bludgeon a teacher in a year-end review should not be the intent.

My real problem in this is that it would seem that education is being guided by the vision of the likes of Bill Gates. His view of education is to have all teachers lecturing like TED-Talk lecturers in five years. I do not agree with his vision, but what do I know? I am but a lowly educator.

Read Full Post »

In My Humble Opinion

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Education, Leadership, Literacy, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on January 22, 2010| 22 Comments »

I am beginning to appreciate this blogging thing more with each post I write. What I like best is that these are my ideas and have no effect on anyone except those who choose to accept them. Readers even get to pick and choose which of my ideas they want. I will never know what effect they will have, but I do get to read the comments, and for the most part they are positive. I appreciate the comments that are even more thoughtful than my original post. That being said, I can now post something that some will find upsetting . If you are in that group by the end of the post, come back to this first paragraph and remind yourself of this opening statement. It may have more meaning for you the second time.

Through my entire career in education I have seen plans that were supposed to revolutionize the educational system, the latest attempt being “No Child Left Behind”. Now with this new administration we are looking at merit pay for teachers. A plan flawed in its conception with a great potential to fail and once again target teachers as the reason for failure. I am putting an IMHO here to quell the stirring beasts who are about to pounce on the reply box.

As a teacher of teachers I always instruct my students to have an objective or a goal for every lesson they teach. Their purpose is to focus their thoughts, direction, and energy to accomplish that goal. Most importantly however, they are to assess their students along the way to make adjustments in order to complete the goal.

If we apply that same principle to our educational system, I would expect a positive result. All we have to do is ask the question, “What is the goal of education?” You have to see where this is going by now. The problem is who will answer that question: Politician, Parent, Administrator, Teacher, Student, Tax-payer, or that non-educator sitting on the educational advisory panel? The answers will muddy what should be a clear answer.

Here comes the IMHO again. As far as I can tell, the goal of education is to provide workers for the job force. That seems to be the driving force in everyone’s perception of education in America and probably elsewhere. Before you scroll to the reply box, finish the post. I might say something else to set you off. Employment seems to me, to be the Goal of education. Some might say the goal is to get the student to college. Moving a student to Higher Ed, it is just a hand-off to the college to prepare a student for higher paying employment. Colleges are ruled by the same goal.

The problem with all of this is that when the goal of employment is reached the perception of many is that the need for education, and learning has ended. That is true for many individuals no matter what line of work or whatever profession they enter. That most definitely includes ALL of the professionals in education. Once they get their job there is no longer a need to learn. We have even coined a phrase for those who are exceptions. We call them Life-Long Learners. Those are the people who did not buy into the education- culminates-with-employment idea.

If the goal for Education is employment and a student becomes employed, the goal has been attained. There is no need for continued learning. We have succeeded. If however, that is not the outcome we want, maybe we should go back to the beginning. Let us look at the Goal for which we must focus our thoughts, direction, and energy to accomplish. Maybe it needs tweaking, or clarification, or assessing, or a complete change. As an educator I have to throw all that in, even though IMHO the goal sucks and should be scraped.

It may be time to establish a Goal we can all agree upon. Here is my contribution or the point I would like to make with this discussion. My Goal would be to promote Learning and Literacy through education. “We do that”, you say. If we did, why do so many people stop learning and being literate once they get a job?

At one time people needed to spend time reading books and engaging in conversation and debate and collaboration. It was difficult to do when there was no time or place to do this after one graduated. After all, the goal was attained and there was no need. The Internet has changed all that.

If Administrators made their decisions on whether or not something promotes and supports literacy and learning, many decisions for financing, curriculum, and staffing might be different. If principals had that as a goal, School policies, support of teachers, professional development and even interaction with parents might be more purposeful. Teachers, many who will claim this to be their goal, will be more open to accepting new ideas and new tools for preparing kids to learn beyond the classroom. A skill they will need if we meet the goal of learning and literacy.

Employment and supplying a workforce should not be the goal of educators. That is the stuff of politics. Let the need to continually learn and communicate in a literate manner be the Goal of All educators. All decisions should be weighed with this in mind. All assessments should address this goal. We would need no standardized tests with this as a standardized Goal. IMHO.

Now you can return to my first paragraph and then scroll to the Reply box and leave your comment. I hope my humble opinion has given you pause to reflect.