Chapter 3: Developing Lessons With Technology
1. Understanding by design (UBD) was a concept I learned about while reading the text, and after I read it I realized I had been using this method for many of my lesson plans. UBD is the "backward planning" of a lesson. You begin with the main idea, the desired results/assessment, and lastly fill in the step by step instruction, objectives and methods. I use this form of lesson planning because I feel that it keeps me concentrated on my goal of what to teach the students. When I just write the methods/steps first and then the main idea and assessment last I feel that it keeps me away from wanting to make sure the students learned from the lesson and I feel as if I am just throwing in an assessment. Do you write your lessons using the UBD or do you write them by completing the objective and methods/steps first? Which do you believe is a better method and why?
2. Norm-reference tests v. criterion references tests
Norm-reference tests compare students to one another on a ranking scale; while criterion references tests compare students' performance to specific objectives and standards, and not to other students. I believe that students should be compared to one another and should be compared to standards and objectives as well. There is nothing wrong with having a little competition among students so that they know where they stand among peers. For me personally I am extremely competitive and the want to be the best for myself and among others is what keeps me going and achieving. This can have a negative effect as well on students and bring down their self esteem to see themselves not ranked well on a scale. But, is it truly better to keep them blinded by this fact, is that really helping them? I personally think it is more harmful than helpful. If students are not being ranked against one another, they are being ranked on a scale against objectives and standards, which in reality is still ranking them. Is it wrong to have students compared to one another and ranked on a scale? Should students only be held accountable to objectives or standards alone?
3. I believe that paper based or "traditional" means of assessment are not a bad thing, though they should not be the only means of assessment. Students need to also be assessed based on their every day actions, their participation and achievements in class from a day to day basis. This however puts a lot of power on the teacher to assess students. The teacher can pick favorites, or grade at a lower scale to have more of their students achieve, etc. Also, every teacher has a different idea of what students should be taught and how. This is why there are the standardizes tests, even though many teachers hate them. How could a teacher assess a student other than by a paper test? How do you believe the education system can implement the standardized tests and also show a students progress from day to day? Would technology help in any way?
I have worked with the UBD design as well. I think it is a good method because it emphasizes the main concept or idea of a lesson. I have seen teachers struggle to keep their students focused. That being said, if they used the UBD design they might convey the main idea of a lesson to students in a more effective manner. I do not feel it is right to hold students accountable to one another because that does not take into account where they were testing when they came into your class. It other words, if you have a student whose test scores go from 65 to 80, and another who goes from 90 to 95, it is unfair to say that student A is not successful. It is a greater accomplishment to raise a failing students test scores 15 points than it is a perfoming students 5 points. I think that a pofrtfolio of a students work could be used to supplement standardized tests. The portfolio can show their day-to-day work and map out the progress they made in your class.
ReplyDelete