Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Testing for Intelleigence?
Assessment
The main objective of assessment is to determine the children’s strengths and weaknesses. Scores can be essential when they are directed toward the right intention; when they are used to initiate strategies in which weaknesses are braced in and strengths are nurtured. There is no one size-fits-all learning, just as there is no one correct way of evaluating children’s performance (Sternberg, & Grigorenko, 2004). Due to the high individuality of children, there cannot be a universal assessment for all children; rather a selection of tools must be employed such as tests, interviews, observation, logs, journals, graphic organizers, video samples, rubrics, and portfolios etc... (Stanford, 2003).
We have to focus on the multi-facets of learning whilst evaluating children’s achievement. Assessment should encompass analytical, creative, and practical thinking in which flexibility and diversity of options must be afforded to children (Sternberg, & Grigorenko, 2004). If we are to target multiple intelligences as we teach children, we must also test them in the various areas of these capacities. How can we expect a child who has verbal-learning deficiencies; for example, to achieve well on an entirely language-based test? Another important point is the pressure that sometimes accompanies students as they are tested. Standardized testing- pressures may result in stress that might affect the child’s performance, and become no longer reliable. Hence, we have to afford the children ample time and multiple chances to succeed.
“Successful assessment is in alignment with instructional practices” (Bellanca, Chapman, & Swartz, as cited in Stanford, 2003, para.11). As we implement Multiple Intelligence theory practices and strategies, we must provide children with various opportunities in order to demonstrate their comprehension in diverse ways (Stanford, 2003). Significant attention must be given to technical, artistic, scientific, and practical subjects as well. We need to place our priorities in the right area. Anciently, when schools were established, there was a major emphasis on knowledge and wisdom; which can be interpreted in modern times to awareness and problem-solving. When we focus on these skills, we help children become knowledgeable decision makers and capable problem-solvers. Hence, I believe that though language, math, and other subjects are necessary for building up education, when these areas of learning are assessed, they should not be the sole determinant of the child’s success or failure. In the end, how helpful to the community would be an “A” student who has poor social and emotional skills?
Assessment must match the child’s ability to learn and make use of what is learnt, not on what is obtained (Stanford, 2003). Recent studies have implied that possessing a skill does not necessary mean it is used successfully. “Poor thinkers and poor problem-solvers may possess the skills they need but fail to use them in certain tasks” (Burke, as cited in Stanford, 2003, para. 13). Evaluating the tendency to use the knowledge skills is the healthy approach that empowers children and contributes to bringing about life-long learners to our society.
Assessment in New Zealand
According to Crooks (2011), “Summative assessment is intended to summarize student attainment at a particular time, whereas formative assessment is intended to promote further improvement of student attainment.”(Crooks, 2011, para.2). In New Zealand Formative assessment trends has been a basic component of national assessment strategies in the education system since the 1990s. The Ministry of Education defines it as follows:
The main objective of assessment is to determine the children’s strengths and weaknesses. Scores can be essential when they are directed toward the right intention; when they are used to initiate strategies in which weaknesses are braced in and strengths are nurtured. There is no one size-fits-all learning, just as there is no one correct way of evaluating children’s performance (Sternberg, & Grigorenko, 2004). Due to the high individuality of children, there cannot be a universal assessment for all children; rather a selection of tools must be employed such as tests, interviews, observation, logs, journals, graphic organizers, video samples, rubrics, and portfolios etc... (Stanford, 2003).
We have to focus on the multi-facets of learning whilst evaluating children’s achievement. Assessment should encompass analytical, creative, and practical thinking in which flexibility and diversity of options must be afforded to children (Sternberg, & Grigorenko, 2004). If we are to target multiple intelligences as we teach children, we must also test them in the various areas of these capacities. How can we expect a child who has verbal-learning deficiencies; for example, to achieve well on an entirely language-based test? Another important point is the pressure that sometimes accompanies students as they are tested. Standardized testing- pressures may result in stress that might affect the child’s performance, and become no longer reliable. Hence, we have to afford the children ample time and multiple chances to succeed.
“Successful assessment is in alignment with instructional practices” (Bellanca, Chapman, & Swartz, as cited in Stanford, 2003, para.11). As we implement Multiple Intelligence theory practices and strategies, we must provide children with various opportunities in order to demonstrate their comprehension in diverse ways (Stanford, 2003). Significant attention must be given to technical, artistic, scientific, and practical subjects as well. We need to place our priorities in the right area. Anciently, when schools were established, there was a major emphasis on knowledge and wisdom; which can be interpreted in modern times to awareness and problem-solving. When we focus on these skills, we help children become knowledgeable decision makers and capable problem-solvers. Hence, I believe that though language, math, and other subjects are necessary for building up education, when these areas of learning are assessed, they should not be the sole determinant of the child’s success or failure. In the end, how helpful to the community would be an “A” student who has poor social and emotional skills?
Assessment must match the child’s ability to learn and make use of what is learnt, not on what is obtained (Stanford, 2003). Recent studies have implied that possessing a skill does not necessary mean it is used successfully. “Poor thinkers and poor problem-solvers may possess the skills they need but fail to use them in certain tasks” (Burke, as cited in Stanford, 2003, para. 13). Evaluating the tendency to use the knowledge skills is the healthy approach that empowers children and contributes to bringing about life-long learners to our society.
Assessment in New Zealand
According to Crooks (2011), “Summative assessment is intended to summarize student attainment at a particular time, whereas formative assessment is intended to promote further improvement of student attainment.”(Crooks, 2011, para.2). In New Zealand Formative assessment trends has been a basic component of national assessment strategies in the education system since the 1990s. The Ministry of Education defines it as follows:
Formative assessment is an integral part of the teaching and learning process. It is used to provide the student with feedback to enhance learning and to help the teacher understand students’ learning. It helps build a picture of a student’s progress, and informs decisions about the next steps in teaching and learning. It can take a variety of forms, such as comment on a presentation, conferencing or interview, or the analysis of test results.(Ministry of Education , 1994, p.8).
Benefits of Formative Assessment include the teacher’s being able to determine the standard students reach and modify instructional methods accordingly. Each student has different and unique ways of learning; hence, teachers enjoy flexibility to modify lessons as they see best fit their students. In addition, they keep their students current of the daily progress. This way, students are more motivated to assume responsibility and become self-motivated learners. In New Zealand, instead of a narrow-minded system of assessment, there is an emphasis on the professional evaluation conducted by teachers based on learning principles. Assessment is considered to be the means in which professionals check the children’s progress as it observes past, current, and future potentials (Ministry of Education, 2011). Educators acknowledge the importance of assessing what must be valued instead of valuing what is assessed (Ministry of Education, 2011).
The Key principles of assessment in New Zealand are:
• The student is at the center
• The curriculum underpins assessment.
• Assessment capability is crucial to improvement.
• An assessment capable system is an accountable system.
• A range of evidence drawn from multiple sources enables a more accurate response.
• Effective assessment is reliant on quality interactions and relationships.
(Ministry of education, 2011, p.4)
“As an education system, we must get away from the concept of failure of Māori learners, to how the system can and will maximize Māori potential. The system has to change to meet the needs and interests of learners rather then learners having to change for the system.”
(Ministry of education, 2011, p.18)
Sources
Crooks, T. (2001). The validity of formative assessments. Educational Assessment Research
Unit. Dunedin, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001862.htm
Stanford, P. (2003). Multiple Intelligence for Every Classroom. Intervention In School &
Clinic, 39(2), 80-85. Retrieved from Walden Library
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2004). Successful Intelligence in the Classroom. Theory into practice, 43(4). 274-280.
Retrieved from walden library
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)