Assessment in the Partnership Pedagogy
Marc Prensky
Chapter 8 discusses assessment in both a traditional and in a partnering setting. Prensky discusses the two types of assessment that are the most usual: summative and formative. He points out that formative is the most useful of the two due to the fact that enables the student to receive feedback on their work. Then however, Prensky, goes on to discuss the most useful types of assessment in a partnering setting, most of which fall under the formative umbrella. One of the types of assessment he discusses is called Ipsative Assessment, in which the students try to beat or better their personal best. Other types that are successful in a partnering setting are peer based feedback (Peer Assessment), evaluation from a real-world audience (real-word), students understanding their own assessment (self-assessment), allowing students to use tools familiar to them (21st century assessment) as well as the standardized test put forth by governing bodies (summative). Prensky concludes the chapter by discussing major fears by teachers and administrators about partnering and new types of assessment which include, a fear of students not learning enough to be successful on standardized tests and a fear that the new activities/assignments students are doing in partnering classrooms will not count because they are not tested. He concludes by pointing out how to assess how well an administrator supports partnering as well as the parents of the students and the school as a whole.
Chapter 8 deals will something that caused myself and another teacher much free time this past summer. Early in that summer we both with to the "Flipped Classroom" conference in Chicago. There we were introduced to the flipped classroom model as well as a standards based grading/mastery approach to student assessment. In a flipped classroom teachers have more free time to move about the class and constantly assess what a student knows in a variety of ways. For example, a teacher may ask the student questions about a lab, help them with practice problems, ask them to do an example problem for them, ask them to explain a concept to them...the possibilities are endless on how a teacher can assess a student. However, not many of these are summative in which you can put a grade on. For instance, why make a student do 20 practice problems when they can do 5 and then explain it to you perfectly. A mastery grading scale allows you to assign a mastery score of 1-4 (4 being mastered) on a particular skill or objective in a unit. Allow, like Prensky outlined in the chapter, it took our principle a little getting used to for him to get all the way on board.
So with your new flipped classroom approach, have you done away with unit tests and quizzes and gone to an approach where you see the recognition of knowledge from the students during the labs and practice times instead? With science sometimes the answers are more cut and dry, and I wondered if you were adjusting your testing with the ideals of common core, or if they had already changed with the flipped classroom.
ReplyDeleteIf you still do test, what and how often do you do it? And have you seen an increase in comprehension and student pass rate?
I have not done away with unit tests and quizzes, however I base more of their daily grades of interactions with me and the level of mastery I see in their work based on the practice problems everyday. I have also tried to incorporate more open ended questions that help lead to the concept that will be tested. This gives the students sometime to mesh what they have experienced to what is actually going on in a series of questions. Finally, we test about every 2 to 3 weeks depending on the unit, however next year when all the units are complete the students will fully move at their own pace and take the tests when they are ready.
Delete