4 ms·

How is competency evaluated, though? This whole approach relies on testing of some kind that can reliably measure competency in a subject area that also needs

by jtheory 12y ago

How is competency evaluated, though? This whole approach relies on testing of some kind that can reliably measure competency in a subject area that also needs to be well-defined. If we had that -- if the material that all students should learn could actually be built into the "correct" curriculum, and tests could be made that would measure if the student had mastered each level -- then that would be great. Students could learn in class, or sensibly test out of entire grades at a time. Teachers could be paid (or fired) based on how well their students mastered the curriculum, and school's funding could be dependent on their students hitting certain percentages. Unfortunately that underlying foundation isn't real; defining that curriculum means cutting up knowledge into odd shapes that don't match well to useful practical knowledge, or how most people learn. Being good at passing standardized tests mostly identifies students with good test-taking skills. Teachers who will be evaluated based on this sole, shitty measure at the end of the year are obliged to spend their time training students for the test, and have to cut out the field trips, explorations, experiments -- basically, all of the things that make inspiring teachers inspiring is no longer considered valuable. Citations required, to be sure (I don't have the spare time to dig around now) -- but some of this is common sense. If you set up a rewards system, you have to be really smart about what, exactly, you're rewarding. The most valuable educational experiences are not generally found in drilling for a standardized test, I think; so setting up a system where that's the only thing rewarded is going to be unhelpful.

japhyr 12y ago
You're absolutely right that you have to be careful about how you assess students' mastery of a subject. The fact that this does not seem easy isn't a good reason to shy away from it. A few ways that this can be dealt with: - Many courses already have a final exam well-established. Some states are starting to require that students be given the option to test out of core courses, and one option is to let them take the final. This doesn't mean take the final as many times as you want until you pass; we can set reasonable limits on offering opportunities to test out. - Portfolio-based assessment moves beyond just using standardized tests to assess competence. At my school, we set up independent studies frequently for students whose educational history is often checkered. These students develop a set of skills and knowledge in their course of study, and then demonstrate their understanding in a variety of ways. If you've set up the structures effectively, it's not overwhelming to individualize instruction for students who need it. One student's story: I knew a student who passed Algebra 1 and failed French 1 in 8th grade. In 9th grade he was given Algebra 1, and he was placed in French 2. His school wouldn't switch his classes; he failed Algebra because he refused to do all the work over again for a class he had passed, and he failed French 2 because he was in over his head. We gave this student the chance to test out of some of his math credit, and placed him in otherwise appropriate classes. When schools mess up, they often times have no idea how much that impacts individual students and their families.
kazagistar 12y ago
Whatever system is selected would measure competency at least as well as the current one, and almost certainly better. We already need to measure competence, we just mix that measurement with "an ability to learn at a specific rate". If you want to go faster or slower, you either have to self educate or fail and retry, respectively. The modern educational system is already pushing the idea of a reverse classroom, where lectures are on your own time, and homework and questions are done in the classroom. Desynchronizing the exact progress through the material is much simpler in this sort of environment. (Of course, it is important not to totally screw those people who rely on the structure and rigour of a formal schedule, or the cooperation of classmates; it is easy to focus too much on averages and ignore outliers). Personally, I prefer to on binges (spend 30+ hours in a few days on a single subject, then don't touch the subject for a few weeks). However, the educational system specifically discourages this, insisting that you you have deadlines, learn extensively within specific well-defined subjects, discuss things as a team, attend each lecture, and so on. If you fail to follow this structure, you fail, if you follow, you pass. If you cram for tests at the exact right time, you even get a good evaluation. It evaluates your ability to fit the system with high accuracy, and your competence with mediocre accuracy. Removing the unnecessary part of that would have to increase the overall accuracy, right?

by jtheory 12y ago

japhyr 12y ago

You're absolutely right that you have to be careful about how you assess students' mastery of a subject. The fact that this does not seem easy isn't a good reason to shy away from it. A few ways that this can be dealt with: - Many courses already have a final exam well-established. Some states are starting to require that students be given the option to test out of core courses, and one option is to let them take the final. This doesn't mean take the final as many times as you want until you pass; we can set reasonable limits on offering opportunities to test out. - Portfolio-based assessment moves beyond just using standardized tests to assess competence. At my school, we set up independent studies frequently for students whose educational history is often checkered. These students develop a set of skills and knowledge in their course of study, and then demonstrate their understanding in a variety of ways. If you've set up the structures effectively, it's not overwhelming to individualize instruction for students who need it. One student's story: I knew a student who passed Algebra 1 and failed French 1 in 8th grade. In 9th grade he was given Algebra 1, and he was placed in French 2. His school wouldn't switch his classes; he failed Algebra because he refused to do all the work over again for a class he had passed, and he failed French 2 because he was in over his head. We gave this student the chance to test out of some of his math credit, and placed him in otherwise appropriate classes. When schools mess up, they often times have no idea how much that impacts individual students and their families.

kazagistar 12y ago

Whatever system is selected would measure competency at least as well as the current one, and almost certainly better. We already need to measure competence, we just mix that measurement with "an ability to learn at a specific rate". If you want to go faster or slower, you either have to self educate or fail and retry, respectively. The modern educational system is already pushing the idea of a reverse classroom, where lectures are on your own time, and homework and questions are done in the classroom. Desynchronizing the exact progress through the material is much simpler in this sort of environment. (Of course, it is important not to totally screw those people who rely on the structure and rigour of a formal schedule, or the cooperation of classmates; it is easy to focus too much on averages and ignore outliers). Personally, I prefer to on binges (spend 30+ hours in a few days on a single subject, then don't touch the subject for a few weeks). However, the educational system specifically discourages this, insisting that you you have deadlines, learn extensively within specific well-defined subjects, discuss things as a team, attend each lecture, and so on. If you fail to follow this structure, you fail, if you follow, you pass. If you cram for tests at the exact right time, you even get a good evaluation. It evaluates your ability to fit the system with high accuracy, and your competence with mediocre accuracy. Removing the unnecessary part of that would have to increase the overall accuracy, right?