Jacob asked: "We talk often of testing alternatives, but what benefit do tests provide that we must replace?"
A proper answer to this question must begin with an examination of why we use tests in the first place. Tests, to the best of my knowledge, are intended to be a tool for measuring the academic prowess of a student. While they may not always live up to that intention, the hope at least is that they can show us what students understand, and what they have yet to learn.
This measurement of students' abilities and potential is somewhat important, though primarily within the school system. Top universities only want to take the brightest students, so that the universities' reputation for excellence is maintained, and they can continue to attract intelligent students, professors at the cutting edge of their fields, and donations from powerful and successful alumni and other organizations. In a similar vein, we want to try to attract intelligent people to teach our children in schools (a goal that would be much easier if teachers were given better pay and more respect in our society, but that's beside the point). And how do we determine if a person is fit to be a teacher? We give them tests to try to measure their knowledge of the subjects they will be teaching, and their ability to impart that knowledge in their students. Again, tests may or may not actually be useful in these aims, but those goals are what we strive for when we test.
This is as full a definition as I can muster as to why we have testing. Imprecise a tool as they may be, tests seem to be the only method we have of determining a student's academic strengths and potential.
To end with a question (or three): Given how little grades seem to mean outside of the academy, might it be possible to do away with them? How important is measuring academic ability within the academy? And if we were to get rid of grades, how might we restructure our education system to best benefit students?
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Blogging about Babies: Roots of Empathy
I am rather surprised (and mildly disappointed with myself) to see that I have not posted yet on a wonderful program: Roots of Empathy.
The "Roots of Empathy" program is based on a simple premise: babies bring out the nurturing instincts in humans, and thus interacting with them is a useful tool for battling bullying in schools. As discussed in this New York Times article, it's quite effective: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/fighting-bullying-with-babies/
The article describes how the interaction with the infant has a tremendous affect on the students, drawing out their nurturing instincts and making the class a calmer, kinder place -- and this from just one day a month of interacting with an infant.
There are many lessons we can take from this program. As a few suggestions: humans are not meant to live in age-segregated isolation; humans have a natural tendency to care for others when in a natural setting; babies are awesome. Whatever you take from it, though, one thing is certain: interactions with young children and infants is extremely beneficial for those people (children, adolescents, and adults) who care for them.
To end with a question: Should programs like "Roots of Empathy" be more widely used in schools?
The "Roots of Empathy" program is based on a simple premise: babies bring out the nurturing instincts in humans, and thus interacting with them is a useful tool for battling bullying in schools. As discussed in this New York Times article, it's quite effective: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/fighting-bullying-with-babies/
The article describes how the interaction with the infant has a tremendous affect on the students, drawing out their nurturing instincts and making the class a calmer, kinder place -- and this from just one day a month of interacting with an infant.
There are many lessons we can take from this program. As a few suggestions: humans are not meant to live in age-segregated isolation; humans have a natural tendency to care for others when in a natural setting; babies are awesome. Whatever you take from it, though, one thing is certain: interactions with young children and infants is extremely beneficial for those people (children, adolescents, and adults) who care for them.
To end with a question: Should programs like "Roots of Empathy" be more widely used in schools?
Grades and Grades: Age Segregation in Primary and Secondary School
We began to touch on this in class on Wednesday, but I wanted to give a more explicit treatment to this: "grades" in the sense of age segregation (first grade, fifth grade, etc).
Perhaps one of the most strikingly illogical aspects of our K-12 education system is this arbitrary division of children by age. Nowhere else in society are people segregated by age as they are in school. In an office, we do not have separate areas and expectations of a 22 year old versus a 45 year old. We do not maintain separate grocery stores for 30 year olds and 50 year olds. Even in universities, such age segregation does not happen. Any given class in university can have a spread of ages, from the 18 year old freshman to the 60+ year old non-trad taking a course simply for the joy of learning. And yet, in K-12, we box up all the 6 year olds with 6 year olds, 9 year olds with 9 year olds, and we consider this to be normal.
I will touch more on the issues of age segregation later. For now, though, I would like to relate this to our discussion of grades, for this is but one useful example of the downfalls of age segregation. By giving grades, we expect a certain level of performance from students. We have a notion of what a 10 year old child SHOULD know, and give grades to measure that. The problem comes when we realize that the grading rubric comes to an average. The average 7 year old SHOULD be able to pass this. The danger of averages is that you have extremes at both ends, and both of these are punished. The child who is not quite up to our level of work expected of his age is made to look stupid, ridiculed for his inability to maintain the level of work expected of his age. The above average student fairs no better. The child who is above average is held back, forced to do work she has already shown herself more than capable of completing, and she finds herself locked in to her grade because of her age, denying her the advancement of her education that she is more than capable of achieving should we give her the chance.
To end with a question: How might we equitably address differences in academic ability in children in regards to their education?
Perhaps one of the most strikingly illogical aspects of our K-12 education system is this arbitrary division of children by age. Nowhere else in society are people segregated by age as they are in school. In an office, we do not have separate areas and expectations of a 22 year old versus a 45 year old. We do not maintain separate grocery stores for 30 year olds and 50 year olds. Even in universities, such age segregation does not happen. Any given class in university can have a spread of ages, from the 18 year old freshman to the 60+ year old non-trad taking a course simply for the joy of learning. And yet, in K-12, we box up all the 6 year olds with 6 year olds, 9 year olds with 9 year olds, and we consider this to be normal.
I will touch more on the issues of age segregation later. For now, though, I would like to relate this to our discussion of grades, for this is but one useful example of the downfalls of age segregation. By giving grades, we expect a certain level of performance from students. We have a notion of what a 10 year old child SHOULD know, and give grades to measure that. The problem comes when we realize that the grading rubric comes to an average. The average 7 year old SHOULD be able to pass this. The danger of averages is that you have extremes at both ends, and both of these are punished. The child who is not quite up to our level of work expected of his age is made to look stupid, ridiculed for his inability to maintain the level of work expected of his age. The above average student fairs no better. The child who is above average is held back, forced to do work she has already shown herself more than capable of completing, and she finds herself locked in to her grade because of her age, denying her the advancement of her education that she is more than capable of achieving should we give her the chance.
To end with a question: How might we equitably address differences in academic ability in children in regards to their education?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)