ECS 401 Week 6 Takeaway

1. Effective feedback is divided into three sections. First, a teacher must inform the student that they performed well on the assignment. Second, the instructor must inform the student of what has to be improved, and last, the teacher must instruct the pupils on how to improve.
2. Feedback is a vital skill that students must master in order to participate in peer and self-assessment effectively. When students participate in peer and self-assessment, they are aware of the learning objectives, understand what success looks like, can offer feedback in their local language, and can provide alternate viewpoints on future steps.
3. What are learning goals? They are short, simple statements in student-friendly language that outline what students should know or be able to perform at the conclusion of the instructional time. They design how students will show what they know and are capable of doing, set success criteria, and develop means for students to verify they comprehend these requirements. They design techniques to ensure students grasp the success criteria as part of their instructional preparation.

Advertisement

ECS 401 Takeaway Week 5

1. It is predicted that increasing the authenticity of an evaluation would have a good impact on student learning and motivation. Authenticity, on the other hand, is just a hazily defined dimension of evaluation since it is assumed to be a well-understood notion that does not require formal definition. But in order to apply something effective, it needs to be specifically defined.
2. In the context of assessment, authenticity is defined as the resemblance between the cognitive demands—the thinking required—of the assessment and the cognitive demands in the criteria circumstance on which the assessment is based.
3. The importance of using authentic competency-based assessments is 1) their construct validity. The construct validity of an assessment refers to whether it measures what it claims to measure. It means that tasks must accurately reflect the competency that needs to be assessed, that the content of an assessment includes authentic tasks that represent real-life problems in the knowledge domain assessed, and that the assessment task also requires the thinking processes that experts use to solve the problem in real life. And 2) their consequential validity. Consequential validity is the intentional and unforeseen impacts of assessment on instruction or teaching and student learning.

Reading: Gulikers, Judith & Bastiaens, Theo & Kirschner, Paul. (2004). The Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development. 52. 67-86. 10.1007/BF02504676.

Week 4 Takeaway

I think that student-centred assessment, learning target alignment, and students’ skills are the three most important to me. If I had known these principles in my K-12 experience it would have helped me as an elementary and high school student. Also, if I knew the learning targets, I would have felt that there was direction and a purpose to what I was learning.

1. Student-centered assessment – By leaning more heavily on formative evaluation techniques, teachers might help students become more motivated to study. This form of collaborative procedure empowers students and increases their likelihood of being actively involved in the classroom. According to research, student-centered evaluation methods have a favourable impact on motivation and learning.
2. Learning Target Alignment- Teachers must explicitly describe the learning goals that students are expected to grasp prior to instruction. Excellence becomes possible for all children when expectations are explicit and obvious to kids. Empirical research has frequently confirmed the link between assessment expectations and student motivation.
3. Student Skills – There has been a growing recognition of the varied talents that children might possess and acquire since Howard Gardner’s groundbreaking work Frames of Mind was published in 1983. MI Theory’s main benefit is that it reminds teachers to employ a variety of multi-modality teaching and evaluation techniques in their classrooms.

Reading:  Volante, L. (2006). Principles for Effective ClassroomAssessment. Brock Education: A Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 15(2).

ECS 401 Week 5 Takeaway

1. It is predicted that increasing the authenticity of an evaluation would have a good impact on student learning and motivation. Authenticity, on the other hand, is just a hazily defined dimension of evaluation since it is assumed to be a well-understood notion that does not require formal definition. But in order to apply something effective, it needs to be specifically defined.
2. In the context of assessment, authenticity is defined as the resemblance between the cognitive demands—the thinking required—of the assessment and the cognitive demands in the criteria circumstance on which the assessment is based.
3. The importance of using authentic competency-based assessments is 1) their construct validity. The construct validity of an assessment refers to whether it measures what it claims to measure. It means that tasks must accurately reflect the competency that needs to be assessed, that the content of an assessment includes authentic tasks that represent real-life problems in the knowledge domain assessed, and that the assessment task also requires the thinking processes that experts use to solve the problem in real life. And 2) their consequential validity. Consequential validity is the intentional and unforeseen impacts of assessment on instruction or teaching and student learning.

Reading: Gulikers, J.T.M. Bastiaens, T.J., & Kirschner, P.A. (2004). A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. Educational technology research and development, 52 (3), 67.

Week #3 Takeaway

1. Benefits of using feedback for students: Feedback is a type of grading that does not punish students for being wrong. It is not punitive grading. Some of the benefits of using feedback instead of grading numbers are 1) letting students make and learn from mistakes without penalizing them. 2) Feedback also lets students know where they need to work on and know what they are doing and understanding correctly. And 3) It develops a student’s feedback skills and communication skills, whether assessing feedback given to them or giving feedback to their colleagues.

2. There are several ways to issue grades using feedback. Each way is suited to different assignments and situations.

3. Benefits for teachers: 1) It reduces stress from grading and how teachers feel about giving back grades out. 2) It helps teachers and students communicate with each other and advertently fosters good relationships between teachers, students, and their classmates.   

Nodelman, P. (1992). The Other: Orientalism, Colonialism, and Children’s Literature. Children’s Literature Association Quarterly.

(n.a). Teaching About Gender Diversity.

Week #2 Takeaway

1. Knowledge is defined differently by different movements. Such two movements are the Positivist Epistemology and Constructivist Epistemology. Positivist Epistemology defined knowledge as information and facts whereas Constructivist Epistemology views knowledge as being generated by people. People give meaning to facts and information.

2. Positivist Epistemology views knowledge as objective and neutral. It often categorizes facts in binary. For example, is the sky blue or not? Compared to Constructivist Epistemology view knowledge as always being biased. Knowledge is rarely is objective and neutral because of the influence of the culture that people have grown up and currently live in.

3. The act of teaching knowledge is seen differently. Positivist Epistemology defines the act of teaching knowledge as passively transferring knowledge from teacher to student. While Constructivist Epistemology views teaching knowledge as helping students assign meaning to knowledge and as the productive activity that helps students make sense of their knowledge.

Reading: Hinchey, P.H. (2010). Rethinking What We Know: Positivist and COnstrucivist Epistemology. JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42976884