ReportWire

Tag: Definitions

  • What Is Critical Reading? A Definition For Learning – TeachThought

    What Is Critical Reading

    by Terry Heick

    Critical reading is reading with the purpose of critical examination of the text and its ideas.

    To add a bit more to that definition, we might say, “Critical reading is reading with the purpose of critical examination of the text and its implicit and explicit themes and ideas.”

    What is Critical Reading? To expand on the simple definition above, critical reading is the close, careful reading of a text to understand it fully and assess its merits. It is not simply a matter of skimming a text or reading for plot points; rather, critical reading requires that you read attentively and thoughtfully, taking into account the text’s structure, purpose, and audience, among other characteristics (e.g., tone, mood, diction, etc.)

    See also The Definition Of Critical Thinking

    Critical reading is the process of reading texts to understand them fully. It involves asking questions about the author’s intention, the text’s structure and purpose, and the meanings of individual words and phrases. Critical readers also consider the context in which a text was written and how different audiences might interpret it.

    What is a critical reading strategy? A critical reading strategy is anything the reader does that helps them evaluate a text critically.

    See also Creating A Culture Of Reading In Your Classroom

    What are some examples of critical reading strategies?

    Critical Reading Strategies

    Inferring (‘Reading between the lines’ is the act of identifying and examining implicit messages and biases.)

    Claim/Counter-Claim (itemizing each and how they work/don’t work together in a specific text; concept mapping can be useful here)

    Journaling (while or after reading to reflect both on the text and the process of evaluating that text)

    See also 8 Of The Most Important Critical Thinking Skills

    Marking The Text

    Rereading

    Adjusting Reading Rate

    Monitoring Understanding

    SPQ: Stop, Paraphrase, and Question

    The Contrarian (viewing the text from a specific perspective other than your own–often the opposite of your beliefs, opinion, or perspective)

    Critical Lenses (reading a text while ‘seeing’ that text through a specific concept or category–including socioeconomic, historical, gender, race, sexuality, and other ‘concepts’ or realities; this can help uncover bias, create new meaning previously inaccessible to the reader and, perhaps most importantly, help the reader understand the subjectivity of reading and how much of an impact our own biases have on our understanding of both texts we read and the world around us).

    See also How To Help Your Students See Quality

    Why is Critical Reading Important?

    Critical reading is important because it allows you to read and analyze a text critically, breaking it down into its component parts and assessing its strengths and weaknesses. It also helps you understand the author’s purpose in writing the text and how it relates to your own life.

    As the process of reading texts with a focus on understanding and evaluating the arguments and evidence presented, critical reading involves asking questions about the text, making connections to other texts, and thinking critically about the author’s argument. Critical reading is necessary for success in school and in life because it allows you to assess information critically and make informed decisions.

    How To Read Critically

    To read critically, you only need to read to identify and evaluate the ‘quality’ of a text.

    Quality can mean different things depending on the purpose and context of a text. Note, the quality here is different than the ‘quality’ of literature or film, or other fiction. In these cases, specific hallmarks of quality certainly exist but they relate to the ability to convey a compelling fiction (e.g., tell a ‘good story’). The use of dialogue to establish characters, the use of setting to ground conflicts, and the weaving of a unifying narrative through the course of dozens of small events, each done with the purpose of helping the reader slowly uncover some truth about themselves or the world around them–these are the kinds of practices that help determine the quality of fiction.

    In non-fiction form–essays, for example–quality is concerned more with the clarity and relevance of a specific claim and the author’s ability to demonstrate the importance and truth of that claim.

    Wikipedia offers up a strong example of the need for critical reading: “The psychologist Cyril Burt is known for his studies on the effect of heredity on intelligence. Shortly after he died, his studies of inheritance and intelligence came into disrepute after evidence emerged indicating he had falsified research data. A 1994 paper by William H. Tucker is illuminative on both how “critical reading” was performed in the discovery of the falsified data as well as in many famous psychologists’ “non-critical reading” of Burt’s papers. Tucker shows that the recognized experts within the field of intelligence research blindly accepted Cyril Burt’s research even though it was without scientific value and probably directly faked: They wanted to believe that IQ is hereditary and considered uncritically empirical claims supporting this view. This paper thus demonstrates how critical reading (and the opposite) may be related to beliefs as well as to interests and power structures.”

    Types Of Questions To Ask While Critical Reading

    Critical reading is the process of analyzing a text to understand its meaning and to assess its argument. When you critically read a text, you ask yourself questions about the author’s purpose, the evidence they provide, and the logic of their argument.

    Who is saying what to whom? That is, who is the author, what is their message, and who is that message for?

    Is this true? By what standard?

    Does the thesis pass the ‘So what?’ challenge. Put another way, are the claims being made compelling and significant? Worth understanding?

    What is explicitly stated? What is implied? What is the relationship between the two?

    What are the underlying assumptions of both the text and the claims within it?

    Does the knowledge (facts, truths, information, data, etc.) in the text represent our current best understanding of things as they are today? If not, what has changed and why? And how does that change impact the strength and meaning of the text itself?

    What here is fact and what is opinion?

    What is the significance of this text?

    What are the claims made by this text? Are these claims clear? Relevant? Compelling? New? That is, has this been said before?

    What reasons are given to support those claims? Are these reasons aligned with the claims? That is, is the claim-evidence reasoning precise?

    That is, is the claim-evidence reasoning accurate?

    By formulating questions like these, you can not only guide your own comprehension of the text, you can also begin to learn how arguments (and the texts that contain them) are constructed. This can help students form rational, strong arguments of their own while also providing practice analyzing and evaluating the merit of arguments put forth by others (these can be formal academic arguments or informal ‘arguments’/claims made in real conversations on a day to day basis in their lives).

    The Mindset Of Critical Reading

    We bring ourselves to a reading and the ‘self’ we were is forever changed if only ever so slightly. Knowledge acquisition changes us and reading is a process of knowledge acquisition. The same text read five years ago has new meaning now because the meaning is not in the text but in your mind which has changed over that period of time. This kind of realization illustrates the necessity for critical reading (and critical thinking while reading).

    See also Critical Thinking Is A Mindset

    As human beings, we misunderstand too much and lack too much information and perspective. This leads to humility being one of the most important reading strategies of critical reading. By bringing that mindset to a text, we stand a better chance of evaluating the claim-reasoning strength of a text and, in doing so, stand a better chance of improving our own knowledge and critical reasoning skills.

    In Why Students Should Read, I said, “When we read–really, really read–for a while, a normally very loud part of us grows quiet and limp while our mind begins unraveling new ideas. Then, pushing further, we look inward, turning our skin inside out to expose our pulsing, naked nerves to the text. We erect a sense of self to withstand the sheer momentum of the text, then rummage through the debris when it’s all over to see what’s left behind.”

    Reading is interested in what was said, comprehending is interested in what was meant, and critical reading is interested in what is actually true.

    Terry Heick

    Source link

  • Piaget Learning Theory: Stages Of Cognitive Development – TeachThought

    Piaget Learning Theory: Stages Of Cognitive Development

    by TeachThought Staff

    Jean Piaget (1896-1980) was a Swiss psychologist and one of the most influential figures in developmental psychology.

    Piaget is best known for his pioneering work on the cognitive development of children. His research revolutionized our understanding of how children learn and grow intellectually. He proposed that children actively construct their knowledge through stages, each characterized by distinct ways of thinking and understanding the world.

    His theory, ‘Piaget’s stages of cognitive development,’ has profoundly impacted formal education, emphasizing the importance of tailoring teaching methods to a child’s cognitive developmental stage rather than expecting all children to learn similarly.

    Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development outlines a series of developmental stages that children progress through as they grow and mature. This theory suggests that children actively construct their understanding of the world and distinct cognitive abilities and ways of thinking characterize these stages. The four main stages are the sensorimotor stage (birth to 2 years), the preoperational stage (2 to 7 years), the concrete operational stage (7 to 11 years), and the formal operational stage (11 years and beyond).

    See also Levels Of Integration Of Critical Thinking

    A Quick Summary Of Piaget’s Stages Of Cognitive Development

    In the sensorimotor stage, infants and toddlers learn about the world through their senses and actions, gradually developing object permanence. The preoperational stage is marked by the emergence of symbolic thought and the use of language, although logical thinking is limited. The concrete operational stage sees children begin to think more logically about concrete events and objects.

    Finally, in the formal operational stage, adolescents and adults can think abstractly and hypothetically, allowing for more complex problem-solving and reasoning. Piaget’s theory has influenced teaching methods that align with students’ cognitive development at different ages and stages of intellectual growth.

    Piagets Stages Of Cognitive Develpment

    Piaget’s Four Stages Of Cognitive Development

    Piaget’s Stage 1: Sensorimotor

    Piaget’s sensorimotor stage is the initial developmental stage, typically occurring from birth to around two years of age, during which infants and toddlers primarily learn about the world through their senses and physical actions.

    Key features of this stage include the development of object permanence, the understanding that objects continue to exist even when they are not visible, and the gradual formation of simple mental representations. Initially, infants engage in reflexive behaviors, but as they progress through this stage, they begin to intentionally coordinate their sensory perceptions and motor skills, exploring and manipulating their environment. This stage is marked by significant cognitive growth as children transition from purely instinctual reactions to more purposeful and coordinated interactions with their surroundings.

    One example of Piaget’s sensorimotor stage is when a baby plays peek-a-boo with a caregiver. In the early months, an infant lacks a sense of object permanence. When an object, like the caregiver’s face, disappears from their view, they may act as if it no longer exists. So, when the caregiver covers their face with their hands during a peek-a-boo game, the baby might respond with surprise or mild distress.

    As the baby progresses through the sensorimotor stage, typically around 8 to 12 months, they begin to develop object permanence. When the caregiver hides their face, the baby understands that the caregiver’s face still exists, even though it’s temporarily out of sight. The baby may react with anticipation and excitement when the caregiver uncovers their face, demonstrating their evolving ability to form mental representations and grasp the concept of object permanence.

    This progression in understanding is a key feature of the sensorimotor stage in Piaget’s theory of cognitive development.

    Piaget’s Stage 2: Preoperational

    Piaget’s preoperational stage is the second stage of cognitive development, typically occurring from around 2 to 7 years of age, where children begin to develop symbolic thinking and language skills. During this stage, children can represent objects and ideas using words, images, and symbols, enabling them to engage in pretend play and communicate more effectively.

    However, their thinking is characterized by egocentrism, where they struggle to consider other people’s perspectives, and they exhibit animistic thinking, attributing human qualities to inanimate objects. They also lack the ability for concrete logic and struggle with tasks that require understanding conservation, such as recognizing that the volume of a liquid remains the same when poured into different containers.

    The Preoperational stage represents a significant shift in cognitive development as children transition from basic sensorimotor responses to more advanced symbolic and representational thought.

    One example of Piaget’s preoperational stage is a child’s understanding of ‘conservation.’

    Imagine you have two glasses, one tall and narrow and the other short and wide. You pour the same amount of liquid into both glasses to contain the same volume of liquid. A child in the preoperational stage, when asked whether the amount of liquid is the same in both glasses, might say that the taller glass has more liquid because it looks taller. This demonstrates the child’s inability to understand the principle of conservation, which is the idea that even if the appearance of an object changes (in this case, the shape of the glass), the quantity remains the same.

    In the preoperational stage, children are often focused on the most prominent perceptual aspects of a situation and struggle with more abstract or logical thinking, making it difficult for them to grasp conservation concepts.

    Piaget’s Stage 3: Concrete Operational

    Piaget’s Concrete Operational stage is the third stage of cognitive development, typically occurring from around 7 to 11 years of age, where children demonstrate improved logical thinking and problem-solving abilities, particularly in relation to concrete, tangible experiences.

    During this stage, they can understand concepts such as conservation (e.g., recognizing that the volume of liquid remains the same when poured into different containers), and reversibility (e.g., understanding that an action can be undone). They can perform basic mental operations like addition and subtraction. They become more capable of considering different perspectives, are less egocentric, and can engage in more structured and organized thought processes. Yet, they may still struggle with abstract or hypothetical reasoning, a skill that emerges in the subsequent formal operational stage.

    Imagine two identical containers filled with the same amount of water. You pour the water from one of the containers into a taller, narrower glass and pour the water from the other into a shorter, wider glass. A child in the concrete operational stage would be able to recognize that the two glasses still contain the same amount of water despite their different shapes. Children can understand that the physical appearance of the containers (tall and narrow vs. short and wide) doesn’t change the quantity of the liquid.

    This ability to grasp the concept of conservation is a hallmark of concrete operational thinking, as children become more adept at logical thought related to real, concrete situations.

    Stage 4: The Formal Operational Stage

    Piaget’s Formal Operational stage is the fourth and final stage of cognitive development, typically emerging around 11 years and continuing into adulthood. During this stage, individuals gain the capacity for abstract and hypothetical thinking. They can solve complex problems, think critically, and reason about concepts and ideas unrelated to concrete experiences. They can engage in deductive reasoning, considering multiple possibilities and potential outcomes.

    This stage allows for advanced cognitive abilities like understanding scientific principles, planning for the future, and contemplating moral and ethical dilemmas. It represents a significant shift from concrete to abstract thinking, enabling individuals to explore and understand the world more comprehensively and imaginatively.

    An Example Of The Formal Operation Stage

    One example of Piaget’s Formal Operational stage involves a teenager’s ability to think abstractly and hypothetically.

    Imagine presenting a teenager with a classic moral dilemma, such as the ‘trolley problem.’ In this scenario, they are asked to consider whether it’s morally acceptable to pull a lever to divert a trolley away from a track where it would hit five people, but in doing so, it would then hit one person on another track. A teenager in the formal operational stage can engage in abstract moral reasoning, considering various ethical principles and potential consequences, without relying solely on concrete, personal experiences.

    They might ponder utilitarianism, deontology, or other ethical frameworks, and they can think about the hypothetical outcomes of their decisions.

    This abstract and hypothetical thinking is a hallmark of the formal operational stage, demonstrating the capacity to reason and reflect on complex, non-concrete issues.

    How Teachers Can Use Piaget’s Stages Of Development in The Classroom

    1. Individual Differences

    Understand that children in a classroom may be at different stages of development. Tailor your teaching to accommodate these differences. Provide a variety of activities and approaches to cater to various cognitive levels.

    2. Constructivism

    Recognize that Piaget’s theory is rooted in constructivism, meaning children actively build their knowledge through experiences. Encourage hands-on learning and exploration, as this aligns with Piaget’s emphasis on learning through interaction with the environment.

    3. Scaffolding

    Be prepared to scaffold instruction. Students in the earlier stages (sensorimotor and preoperational) may need more guidance and support. As they progress to concrete and formal operational stages, gradually increase the complexity of tasks and give them more independence.

    4. Concrete Examples

    Students benefit from concrete examples and real-world applications in the concrete operational stage. Use concrete materials and practical problems to help them grasp abstract concepts. 

    5. Active Learning

    Promote active learning. Encourage students to think critically, solve problems, and make connections. Use open-ended questions and encourage discussions that help students move from concrete thinking to abstract reasoning in the formal operational stage.

    6. Developmentally Appropriate Curriculum

    Ensure that your curriculum aligns with the students’ cognitive abilities. Introduce abstract concepts progressively and link new learning to previous knowledge. 

    7. Respect for Differences

    Be patient and respectful of individual differences in development. Some students may grasp concepts earlier or later than others, and that’s entirely normal.

    8. Assessment

    Develop assessment strategies that match the students’ developmental stages. Assess their understanding using methods that are appropriate to their cognitive abilities.

    9. Professional Development

    Teachers can stay updated on the latest child development and education research by attending professional development workshops and collaborating with colleagues to continually refine their teaching practices.

    TeachThought Staff

    Source link

  • The Difference Between Assessment Of And For Learning

    The Difference Between Assessment Of And Assessment For Learning

    It boils down to purpose. In 50 Ways To Measure Understanding, I talked about the purpose of assessment:

    Assessment: Of Learning vs. For Learning

    Assessment is often discussed as though it were a single act—a quiz, test, or score. But its real power comes from clarity of purpose.
    If you’re wondering what is the purpose of assessment?,
    the answer determines how you design, use, and respond to it.

    Think like a doctor: Before you design an assessment, you need a plan for how you’ll use the results.
    Data without a purpose wastes time, energy, and resources—both yours and your students’.

    Assessment For vs. Of Learning

    Assessment for learning
    (What Is Formative Assessment?)
    is designed to inform instruction. The goal is not to sort or label students, but to generate feedback teachers can use to revise lessons, activities, or pacing.
    In this sense, the assessment’s purpose is diagnostic—it helps teachers decide what to do next.

    Assessment of learning (commonly called summative assessment) measures what students have learned after instruction.
    The purpose here is accountability—demonstrating achievement against standards, benchmarks, or objectives.
    These assessments are usually graded and reported, often carrying high stakes for students.

    In practice, the same assessment tool can serve either function. A quiz might be used as a quick check to guide tomorrow’s lesson (for learning),
    or as an end-of-unit measure of mastery (of learning). The difference lies in how the results are used.

    Before, During, and After Instruction

    Assessment is commonly grouped by timing:

    • Pre-assessment: Before instruction, to identify prior knowledge and guide planning.
    • Formative assessment: During instruction, to provide ongoing feedback and inform next steps.
    • Summative assessment: After instruction, to measure achievement or proficiency.

    Pre-assessments can blur categories. They assess what students already know (of learning) but also generate information teachers can use to adapt instruction (for learning).

    The Purpose Question

    Ultimately, the central question is simple: What is the assessment supposed to do?

    If the goal is to reveal what students can do, it’s of learning.
    If the goal is to guide what teachers should do next, it’s for learning.

    The distinction is less about labels and more about use. The real value of assessment is not the score itself, but the instructional decisions it makes possible.

    Related Reading

    Research

    Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment.
    Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.

    If you’re trying to decide on a type of assessment, you first have to know your the purpose. What do you need to know?

    Vagueness can make teaching more difficult–in terms of purpose and goals and assessment items,. etc., But specificity in the fast-moving and at-scale classrooms where a teacher can be responsible for hundreds of students and their need for that kind of specificity.

    Terrell Heick

    Source link

  • A New Definition For Equity In Education

    A New Definition For Equity In Education

    A New Definition For Equity In Education

    by Terry Heick

    In a profession increasingly full of angst and positioning and corrective policy, there are few ideas as easy to get behind as equity.

    Equal. Equality. Equity. Equilibrium. Equate. These are all fine ideas—each tidy and whole, implying their own kind of justice while connotating the precision of mathematics. Level. Same. Twin.  Each word has its own nuance, but one characteristic they share in common is access—a level, shared area with open pathways that are equidistant to mutually agreed-upon currencies.

    When discussing equity, there are so many convenient handles–race, gender, language, poverty, access to technology, but there may be a larger view that we’re missing when we do so.

    Equity is the idea and goal of fairness and inclusion to provide all students with the resources, opportunities, and support they need to succeed, regardless of their background, abilities, or socioeconomic status. Unlike equality, which treats everyone the same, equity recognizes that students come from diverse circumstances and may require different approaches and resources to achieve similar outcomes.

    The Scale of Equity

    There isn’t a more global issue—equity being perhaps the global issue of our time. United Nation statistics published last year in The Economist put it plainly. While progress is being made in sub-Saharan Africa in primary education, gender inequality is in fact widening among older children. The ratio of girls enrolled in primary school rose from 85 to 93 per 100 boys between 1999 and 2010, whereas it fell from 83 to 82 and from 67 to 63 at the secondary and tertiary levels. And elsewhere, in Chad and the Central African Republic, there is a flat-rate of less than 70 girls for every 100 boys.”

    This is a starkly different conversation about equity than the one we might have in the United States, the UK, Canada, or Australia. We have the luxury of becoming choosier, and harsher on ourselves, as progress is made, i.e., let’s first make sure there are free, quality schools everywhere, and that children can all read and write, and then at some point down the line we can concern ourselves with iPads vs Androids, or the broadband access in our poorest communities.

    It’s easy to miss the scale of this as an ‘issue’ because unlike assessment, curriculum, teacher pay, class sizes, educational technology, or any other persistently evergreen edu-choke point, equity never stops affecting. It’s both the center and periphery of everything because we’re always who we are, where we are.

    The Cultural Effect

    As a species, we express ourselves through differences. What makes ‘culture’ interesting is how it both recognizes the individual while simultaneously allowing them to disappear into the whole again. In culture, there is both identity and anonymity. There is a constant self–>group transaction that is based on both affection (inward expression) and image (outward expression). This transaction is then repeated across cultures, with completely different functions. Differences within and across cultures are differences nonetheless, but the individual can think while groups simply gather.

    So this is a brutally narrow take on how people gather and cohort and manifest their vision of what it means to be human, but the point remains: As educators, we suffer that same reductionism when we see the masses the same way Nielsen does television ratings. Students aren’t demographics, and it’s murky at best to see how treating them that way has improved their lot or our shared progress.

    While squinting and trying to narrow gaps, it’s too easy to lose the scale and product of our work. The segmenting of Mackenzie and Andrew into a group, and that group into a subgroup, and their understanding into data, and the knowledge we hope they come away with into standards we can teach with—this all becomes a tone—a posture dictates the terms of teaching and learning. Equity in the classroom is different than in the job market.

    A subcorollary is that we all share equity and inequity, both in possession and effect. In “The Hidden Wound,” Wendell Berry writes, “It may be the most significant irony in our history that racism, by dividing the two races, has made them not separate but in a fundamental way inseparable, not independent but dependent on each other, incomplete without each other, each needing desperately to understand and make use of the experience of the other…. we are one body, and the division between us is the disease of one body, not of two.” This is both abstract and practical. We share both living space and social membership.

    Somehow, though, public education, more so than any other industry or profession, is expected to aggregate these inherent disparities while transcending them. Our task?

    • Create a curriculum that provides a common language for knowledge without homogenizing the nuance of that knowledge
    • Design learning models that are inherently inclusive regardless of access to technology
    • Establish authentic functions for family members and communities who may speak a completely different language

    As individuals, we work to separate ourselves—as children, often based on image, and as adults, often based on income, where we choose to live, what we drive, the smartphone we carry, and what we choose to do “for a living.” But each of these expressions of who we are–gender, native language, race, sexuality, socioeconomic level, and so many others–are also opportunities for disparity all work to undermine the function of education.

    It’s easy to see equity in education as a matter of fairness, access, and inclusion, but that’s only the case if what’s being fairly accessed is a system of teaching and learning that is able to meet the needs of an increasingly global population—that means fluid, responsive, dynamic, neutral, and alive. For an industry that struggles to get every student reading on grade level, this may be a bit much. My gut reaction, then, is that this can only occur through the affectionate expression of the local—this student in this home in this community, with the school functioning as an extraordinary support system.

    The equity is at the student level rather than the demographic level because demographics only exist in paperwork. For every student, there is commonness and there is difference; there is what’s shared (i.e., student needing knowledge), and there is distinction (e.g., poor, rural, white, black, male, female). This never stops. We can revise our schools, curriculum, pedagogy, and technology until it is inclusive, fair, and accessible to every student, but that’s been an ongoing effort that may represent a kind of basement for our goals.

    But why not consider something more ambitious? New thinking about the terms and definitions of gender emphasize both the characteristics and the fluidity of any culture. If we insist on standardizing content, maybe we can avoid standardizing education. How many different answers are there to, “Why learn?” Fantastic! Let’s iterate ourselves until we can honor that.

    The work before us, then, may not be to level an academic playing field for which there is no straight, but rather to create new terms for why we learn, how, and where—and then change the expectation for what we do with what we know.

    Simply guaranteeing access and inclusion into a body of content-based is no longer sufficient if our goals stretch beyond academic. A modern definition for equity in education may be less about equal, fair, or even, and more about personalization–a body of knowledge, habits, and networks that help each student realize their own perfectly unique potential.

    As for a definition for equity in education? How about, “eye-level access to curriculum, education models, and learning spaces that depend entirely on the native interests, knowledge demands, and human affections of learners individually.”

    Or more briefly, “a fully-realized system of learning that starts and ends with the humanity of each student.”

    A New Definition For Equity In Education; adapted image attribution flickr user helpingting and skotit;

    Terrell Heick

    Source link

  • 6 Types Of Assessment Of Learning

    6 Types Of Assessment Of Learning

    6 Types Of Assessment For Learning

    by TeachThought Staff

    What are the types of assessment for learning?

    And more importantly, when should you use which? If curriculum is the what of teaching and learning models are the how, assessment is the puzzled ‘Hmmmm’–as in, I assumed this and this about student learning, but after giving this assessment, well….’Hmmmmm.’

    In The Difference Between Assessment Of Learning And Assessment For Learning, we explained that “assessment for learning is commonly referred to as formative assessment–that is, assessment designed to inform instruction.” Below, we identify types of assessment of learning–very briefly, with simple ways to ‘think about’ each so that you hopefully wake up with a better grasp of each type.

    6 Types Of Assessment Of Learning

    1. Diagnostic Assessment (as Pre-Assessment)

    Diagnostic assessments are used at the beginning of a course or unit to determine students’ prior knowledge, skills, and understanding of the subject matter. This type of assessment helps teachers identify students’ strengths and weaknesses, allowing them to plan instruction that meets their students’ specific needs. Examples include pre-tests, surveys, or initial observations.

     

    One way to think about it: Assesses a student’s strengths, weaknesses, knowledge, and skills before instruction

    Another way to think about it: A baseline to work from

    Tip: Done at the beginning–of the school year, beginning of a unit, beginning of a lesson, etc.

    See also What Is Project-Based Learning?

    2. Formative Assessment

    Formative assessments are ongoing processes that teachers use to monitor student learning and provide feedback during instruction. These assessments help teachers adjust their teaching strategies to improve student understanding and performance. Examples include quizzes, class discussions, and homework assignments that inform teachers about student progress.

    One way to think about it: Assesses a student’s performance during instruction, and usually occurs regularly throughout the instruction process

    Another way to think about it: Like a doctor’s ‘check-up’ to provide data to revise instruction

    Tip: Using digital exit ticket tools like Loop can be an easy means of checking whether students have understood lesson content, while also promoting student reflection.

    3. Summative Assessment

    So what are the different types of assessment of learning? The next time someone says ‘assessment,’ you can say “Which type, and what are we doing with the data?” Summative assessment, for example.

    Summative assessments evaluate student learning at the end of an instructional period, such as the end of a unit, course, or school year. These assessments are used to determine if students have met the learning objectives and to assign grades. Examples include final exams, end-of-term projects, and standardized tests.

    One way to think about it: Measures a student’s achievement at the end of instruction. It’s like talking to someone about a movie after the movie is over. : )

    Another way to think about it: It’s macabre, but if formative assessment is the check-up, you might think of summative assessment as the autopsy. What happened? Now that it’s over, what went right and what went wrong?

    Tip: Summative assessments can be useful for teachers to improve units and lessons year over year by measuring student performance because they are, in a way, as much a reflection on the quality of the units and lessons themselves as they are on the students.

    4. Norm-Referenced Assessment

    One way to think about it: Compares a student’s performance against other students (a national group or other ‘norm’)

    Another way to think about it: Place, group or ‘demographic’ assessment. Many standardized tests are used as norm-referenced assessments.

    Tip: These assessments are useful over time in student profiles or for placement in national-level programs, for example.

    5. Criterion-Referenced Assessment

    One way to think about it: Measures a student’s performance against a goal, specific objective, or standard

    Another way to think about it: a bar to measure all students against

    Tip: These can be a kind of formative assessment and should be integrated throughout your curriculum to guide the adjustment of your teaching over time. Mastery or competency-based learning would use criterion-referenced assessments.

    6. Interim/Benchmark Assessment

    One way to think about it: Evaluates student performance at periodic intervals, frequently at the end of a grading period. Can predict student performance on end-of-the-year summative assessments. A benchmark assessment is an interim assessment so it could be useful to think of them as distinct even though they function similarly.

    Another way to think about it: Bar graph or chart growth throughout a year, often against specific ‘benchmarks’

    Tip: Benchmark assessments can be useful for communicating important facts and data to parents, district officials, and others. One goal is to inform the allotment of resources (time and money) to respond to that data.

    6 Types Of Assessment Of Learning

    TeachThought Staff

    Source link

  • Getting Started Using Talking Circles In The Classroom

    Getting Started Using Talking Circles In The Classroom

    Talking Circles are a traditional discussion and decision-making format originating in First Nations cultures.

    In this format, individuals sit in a circle, signifying equality, and take turns speaking while holding a ceremonial object. This allows for respectful and inclusive conversation, as everyone can share their thoughts and feelings in a supportive environment. The circle also represents connection and unity, as participants are encouraged to listen attentively and empathetically to one another.

    In addition to their traditional use, Talking Circles have also been adapted for use in classrooms to demonstrate equality and connection among students. In this context, they encourage open dialogue, active listening, and mutual respect. This fosters a sense of community and belonging, and helps to create a safe space for students to express themselves and engage in meaningful discussions.

    Common types of Talking Circles, also known as Sharing Circles, include Healing Circles, where individuals share their experiences and emotions in a therapeutic setting, and Restorative Justice Circles, which are used to resolve conflicts and repair harm within a community. These various types of circles serve different purposes but all emphasize the values of equality and connection.

    Using Classroom Circles In The Classroom

    Circle practice in the classroom involves sitting in a circle and engaging in meaningful dialogue. To get started using sharing circles, arrange chairs in a circular formation, establish active listening and respect guidelines, and designate a talking point, topic, or opening stem piece to pass around. Types of questions to ask can include academic content discussions, social and emotional check-ins, and reflective prompts. The benefits of utilizing circles in the classroom include fostering community, enhancing communication skills, and promoting student empathy and understanding.

    Incorporating talking and sharing circles into the classrooms can create an inclusive and collaborative learning environment. Students can share their thoughts, ask questions, and engage in deeper discussions about the subject matter.

    Additionally, circles provide a platform for students to express their feelings and experiences, leading to improved social and emotional well-being. Reflective circles encourage self-awareness and critical thinking. Overall, circle practice in the classroom contributes to a positive learning experience and supports students’ academic, social, and emotional growth.

    Strategies For Using Talking Circles For Learning

    Talking circles can be a powerful tool for promoting inclusive classroom communication and learning in various subject areas.

    One strategy for using talking circles is incorporating them into regular classroom discussions, allowing students to take turns speaking and ensuring that all voices are heard. This can be especially beneficial in language arts, social studies, and literature, where dialogue and diverse perspectives are valued.

    Another strategy is to use talking circles as a focal point of the classroom, where students gather to share their thoughts, ideas, and reflections on the studied subject matter. This can create community and collaboration, promoting authentic conversation, listening, and reflection.

    More Strategies For Using Talking Circles In The Classroom

    Sharing Circles Can Building And Social-Emotional Learning

    At the start of a school year or new term, talking circles can be instrumental in building a sense of community within the classroom. By sharing personal stories, interests, and aspirations in a safe, respectful setting, students learn about each other deeply, fostering empathy, respect, and a sense of belonging. 

    This practice can be particularly beneficial in developing students’ social-emotional skills, such as self-awareness, social awareness, and relationship skills. Teachers can prompt discussion with questions like “What is something you’re proud of?” or “Share a challenge you’ve overcome,” encouraging students to listen actively and empathize with their peers.

    Conflict Resolution and Problem-Solving

    Talking circles provide a structured methodology for addressing conflicts or challenges within the classroom. By giving each participant an equal opportunity to speak without interruption, these circles encourage honest and open communication, allowing all sides of a conflict to be heard. 

    This process of talking circles can help students develop critical life skills such as empathy, patience, and problem-solving. When a disagreement arises, a talking circle can be convened to discuss the issue, with the teacher guiding the process to ensure a constructive and respectful dialogue. The goal is not only to resolve the immediate conflict but also to teach students a method for peaceful conflict resolution that they can carry with them outside the classroom.

    Reflection and Feedback

    After a project, lesson, or unit, teachers can use talking circles to facilitate reflection and feedback. This approach allows students to share their thoughts on what they learned, what they found challenging, and suggestions for future activities. 

    Sharing circles can also give teachers valuable insights into students’ understanding and experiences, informing future teaching strategies. This reflective practice encourages students to think critically about their learning processes and to practice giving and receiving constructive feedback, a skill valuable in academic and personal contexts.

    Cultural and Historical Education

    Talking circles can effectively engage students in learning about different cultures, histories, and perspectives, particularly those of Indigenous peoples who have traditionally used talking circles in their communities. 

    Teachers can honor these traditions by conducting lessons or discussions on specific topics within a talking circle and provide students with a more inclusive and respectful understanding of diverse cultures. This can be particularly impactful when discussing historical events, social justice issues, or literary works from various cultural perspectives. 

    Through this method, students gain knowledge and learn the importance of respecting diverse viewpoints and the value of communal dialogue.

    Sharing Circles Can Building And Social-Emotional Learning

    At the start of a school year or new term, talking circles can be instrumental in building a sense of community within the classroom. By sharing personal stories, interests, and aspirations in a safe, respectful setting, students learn about each other deeply, fostering empathy, respect, and a sense of belonging. 

    The Benefits Of Using Talking Circles

    The benefits of incorporating talking circles in learning include fostering peer-directed and flexible learning experiences. Talking circles promote a more inclusive and student-centered learning environment by allowing students to dialogue and share their ideas openly. This can lead to a deeper understanding of the subject matter and a greater appreciation for diverse perspectives.

    Incorporating talking circles in learning also promotes deeper listening and reflection in conversations. This allows students to develop their communication skills and learn to appreciate the viewpoints of others, leading to more meaningful and inclusive discussions.

    In conclusion, sharing and talking circles can be valuable for promoting inclusive classroom communication and learning in various subject areas. Educators can create a more inclusive and student-centered learning environment by incorporating them into regular classroom discussions and using them as a focal point of the classroom.

    TeachThought Staff

    Source link