Monday, June 23, 2014
Team 3 - Chapter 12
In chapter 12, we read about changing how we evaluate our new students. Jukes makes mention of the Swiss watch makers who were once the premier watch makers in the world. When the new digital watch appeared, the Swiss ignored it and subsequently many lost their jobs since they refused to adapt. Could this parable be analogous to how we teach and evaluate our digital students? He mentions "we teach them the process of reading to empower them to read magazines, cereal boxes, product instructions, websites, and books we never dreamed of when we started." It is becoming clear that the process is much more important to learn than the content (albeit content is still hugely important to forming skills, as Jukes comments). Content can be searched for and "Googled". How do we evaluate process, instead of content? What do we need as educators to evaluate process?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I absolutely think that the Swiss watches can be related to how we teach and evaluate our digital students. If we keep ignoring the growing digital student then we will lose them altogether. Teachers already have a hard time with common core and keeping their students engaged with that. If we ignore the technologies that they use on a daily basis we are going to hinder their education.
ReplyDeleteThink about it this way... if we went back in time and went to a school that was before our time (I used to have computer labs in school) that had absolutely no computers we would feel helpless. That is how I look at it with the students now. If you refuse to use technology then they are going to feel helpless.
What are your thoughts on "process" and teaching under the common core guidelines? Can they co-exist?
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone that the example of the Swiss watchmakers is a great analogy to the educational system today. I am not sure why today's teachers are soley focused on teaching to fit the common core when that will not benefit the students in the real world outside of school. We should be teaching our students 21st-Century skills that they can understand, make meaning and then apply what they have learned out in the real world in real life situations. When schools place too much focus on the teachers teaching to the test and following common core guidelines, it is taking away the true value of learning for students. Research has proven that when teachers focus on teaching students how to answer questions in order to get the answer "right" we are setting students up to fail because most of the time, the students are not learning what they are being taught, they are memorizing, which they will not store that information long-term and later apply it. Should we shift our focus as teachers to teaching for understanding and later applying that understanding out in the real world or should we stay in the present and focus on teaching to the test? Which would better benefit our students?
ReplyDeleteGood question. I am interesting in reading the responses.
DeleteWith policy and governmental forces causing teachers to feel they must focus on testing because of fear of loosing their jobs, I think teachers are trying their best to imcorporate both real world and testing. As much as we all have our personal opinions on Common Core it tries to incorporate real world knowledge with testing stuff supposibly. I think that teachers need to cover both areas in the best possible way. It gets tricky when you have so much pressure to teach for the test.
DeleteI agree with Adrializ. Teachers are under a lot of pressure and they have limited time. However, it is crucial for teachers to teach for understanding as well as to the test. As horrible as it sounds, teachers almost need to "teach to the test" because there is so much emphasis on tests, APPR, and student scores.
DeleteI think it's important to remember that we are educators and our PURPOSE is to educate our students in order for them to grow and be successful in the future and in the "real-world." We need to teach our students information and skills that they will be able to apply and use in the future. This is what learning is all about! We need to make learning fun and exciting so students don't become bored and tired of school. Tests should only be used to assess what students are learning in order for teachers to alter their instruction.
That seems to be the core of the Common Core. They continually preach going deeper rather that wider. The curriculum also puts great emphasis on the ability to use prior knowledge to complete future activities. For example, a student must know the beginning of a process in 8th grade to apply it to something new in 9th grade. The process is critical as the material is spiraled around from year to year. Not only must they co-exist, but they are almost one in the same. The anger towards the Common Core should be focused on the standardized testing and modules, not the philosophy of thinking that the CC brings.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Swiss watch analogy can be related to our current educational system. In today's society we seem to be ignoring our students who are the digital generation. Many teachers seem to be stuck in their own ways because it may be all that they know or it may be the way that they prefer to teach. These teaching methods are still valued, we just need to adapt to meet the needs of the digital generations. Jukes, McCain and Crockett (2010) state, " Many of the things that were taught throughout the 20th century remain valid today, some even more so" (p.129). However, if we keep overlooking the digital aspect that the 21st-century has to offer, we could start to see a loss in jobs due to a low demand in qualified applicants to fill the positions. How can we fill that gap between the 20th century teachers and the 21st century students in digital technology?
ReplyDeleteI really found the swiss watch example quite eye opening. I do not like to answer a question with a question, but is there really a way that we can assess a process? Every student learns differently, as we are all well aware, but if their process allows them to think deeper on a subject than another student is there necessarily a grade that could be assigned to that without trying to make all the the "same".
ReplyDeleteI think that the Swiss watch story goes to many other companies who refused to go with the digital changes like Xerox with computer mouse and most importantly like Kodak refusing to go digital. Basically teachers need to accept the technology and use it! I think times have changed and a lot more teachers are using the technology and embracing it. Yet with APPR and testing I think the focus has impacted learning but, I think it has caused teachers to use the other resources available such as technology. I think the best thing to do is continue with the technology integration and embrace our future!
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to note the Common Core is using the constructivism theory. I agree with your final statement.
ReplyDeleteCaitlin,
ReplyDeleteyou raise a great question. It really would be an eye opener to the school system to see what teaching would be like if we didn't have state testing. I think that teachers wouldn't be so dry and would think out of the box. I do believe that there should be some form of testing within the school district that holds teachers reliable for what they are teaching. This could be done as a growth assessment from the beginning of the year and then tested at the end of the year to show the growth in learning they have made throughout the year.
Caitlin and Nicole, your comments on this topic were awesome! I really like the idea of grading to perfect the process, not telling students they were completely wrong. Similarly to this, when grading students I put a plus sign next to their grade for example +2/10. It allows students to see they got something right, when they could have recieved no credit. It becomes a process of improving that score. Nicole I really like the idea of a progress portfolio and grading students accordingly!!
ReplyDelete