While the desired outcome may occur it’s not fair to the student to be coerced into producing work. In the past I never realized how much teachers use rewards and punishments (consequences) in our classrooms. Alfie’s approach has some similarities to other theorists, but for some reason his seems more student motivating; while the most compelling part of his theory is that students can be an active part of classroom policy making, curriculum building and establishing a learning community. A collaborative learning environment seems almost foreign in a public school setting. Our curriculum is test centered not student centered, it allows little room for movement and little room for additional materials to be requested by students or presented by the teacher.
Building on from the learning styles and theories I have covered, it is clear to see that although they target multiple learning groups; they fail to underpin any techniques, skills and strategies to become an effective learner. “Many students can perform and obtain good results, but that itself may be insufficient to make them effective learners. Often the distinction between performance and learning is blurred and many students have difficulty reflecting on how they can learn to become better learners” (Gavin Reed & Shannon Green 2009). As you can see from this quote; within a school environment the focus is results orientated, which is deceptive given children cannot build up their learning techniques without reflection. Reflection is key to becoming an effective learner, to reflect on what has been learned and from this reflective period, plan for positive change.
While simple, they helped form how I learned. What would happen, though, if older classes began using similar techniques? Instead of having just worksheet after worksheet, or x number of chapters to read out of x book, what if teachers focused on the tactile learning that benefited students so much when they were little? No research seems to have been done on this. "That lack of longitudinal data...may lead to overstating the effects of homework," says centerforpubliceducation.org.
Standardized testing does not measure how much a student achieves or actually understands for many reasons, therefore the stakes should be lowered. Achievement is when someone completes something successfully, and is differently defined for each person. Achievement is a very difficult thing to truly measure therefore how it is possible they be measured accurately by standardized tests. In “Standardized Tests Do Not Effectively Measure Student Achievement”, psychometrician Daniel Koretz believes there are two reasons testing does not accurately measure school achievement. First, tests don’t fully measure all important aspects of education, and second, tests only measure small parts of students ' knowledge (Philp Harris).
Many schools have integrated an extra class for students to prepare for taking the tests. Students in these classes can receive either a pass or fail for the course. The original reason and importance for having these tests was to ensure that all students are meeting the standards of education in those tested subjects by the time they graduate. Having more research done about statistics and percentages on opposition and stances on proficiency testing would make an impact in the way schools would continue standardized testing, not only in high schools, but elementary schools as well. Since there is little investigation and research that has been done, there is not a strong voice from the teachers, parents, or students on this subject.
There are many reasons why traditional teacher evaluations are looked down upon. One of the reasons is because of the fact they are done so infrequently. Very little can be observed regarding the teaching and learning processes (O’Donovan, 2011). This can lead to a very unfair representation of a teacher’s performance since much of what a teacher can do, cannot be observed in one or two observations. It is also questioned whether the judgments of administrators are valid due to both the infrequency and lack of evaluator training (O’Donovan, 2011; Milanowski, 2011).
This argument goes along with the other two mentioned and explained above. There isn’t much that is positive to say about these assessments. It places so much pressure on students to perform well and pressure on teachers to teach what is going to be on the test. This brings negative energy to classrooms. An article by Greg Jouriles helps explain why we don’t need these tests.
Teachers paid little attention to these tests, which in turn had little impact on curriculum. However, in the continuing quest for better schools and high achieving students, testing has become a central focus of policy and practice. Standardized tests are tests that attempt to present unbiased material under the same, predetermined conditions and with consistent scoring and interpretation so that students have equal opportunities to give correct answers and receive an accurate assessment. The idea is that these similarities allow the highest degree of certainty in comparing result... ... middle of paper ... ...ct on sound knowledge. Therefore it is unfair to determine that a student may perform poorly at college simply because of one standardized test they took at high school.
In the case of students with visual impairments and/or learning disabilities, repetition was found to be the most favoured method to explain everything, from diagrams in economics to sociological concepts. However, implementation of this method was time-consuming. While, in general, students with disabilities were encouraged to seek help from the teachers beyond the class timing, it was observed that students with learning disabilities rarely did so, possibly due to the social stigma attached to their disability. With regard to teaching students with learning disabilities, it was found that a majority of teachers did not take any particular efforts towards addressing the needs of these students may be because their disabilities were hidden or invisible in nature. Contrast to the lack of information on how to cater to students with learning disabilities, a majority of the teachers were able to adjudge some measures as facilitating learning among students with visual impairments such as encourage students to sit in the front row, read aloud any text that was presented in visual format or making the study material available in soft copy.
Learning about PBIS and then being able to see it put into action in the school I volunteered in just proved how these newer and more modern techniques work for students and teachers. Learning about formal and informal assessments and then putting the knowledge into action was helpful as it showed me the difference in the two and how each is unique depending on what you are assessing. Prior to this class I had very little knowledge about the discipline and suspension procedures involved with a student with disabilities. To be able to determine whether a student performed an action because of lack of implementation of the IEP or whether it was a direct relation to the disability or not is very fair for all students. Prior to these laws, students were disciplined unfairly and students were not protected by the laws.