gpmt

Thought-provoking article.

A great find from Larry Ferlazzo but what are the other five? A bit of research led me to a presentation by Rick Wormeli "Fair isn't always Equal: Assessment and Grading an a Differentiated Classroom" and sure enough the other five were located in the presentation. The are listed below:

* Assessing students in ways that do not accurately indicate students’ mastery (student responses are hindered by the assessment format)

* Grading on a curve

* Allowing Extra Credit

* Defining supposedly criterion-based grades in terms of norm-referenced descriptions (“above average,” “average”, etc.)

* Recording zeroes on the 100.0 scale for work not done

To check out the full presentation (and it is a long URL):

http://www.vashonsd.org/mcmurray/science/justin/Resources/Wormeli/Annual_Wormeli_Fair%20Equal.pdf.

We hopefully are all trying to differentiate, but sometimes we need that creative push and encouragement. This is a wonderful resource with printable infographics for coming work areas and links to concepts and other resources to really get you thinking in every direction outside of the box - each student will gain something out of you using this. 

These differentiation flowcharts will prompt teachers to make good decisions around scaffolding of student learning.  

Check out concepts, assessments, and activities for differentiation...

Some good reminders in here.

More like this please!

Can these posters be purchased and printed?

The Common Core testing is rapidly approaching and this article discusses a research paper that was just released by UCLA's National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards & Student Testing. 

They state that "the assessments hold a lot of promise for improving teacher practice and student learning" and that "the test-making projects face key financial, technical, and political challenges that could affect their success."

They also reference a variety of resources, including one new to me called the Depth of Knowledge Levels (DOK), which provides four levels (the link to the DOK is at http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/sia/msip/DOK_Chart.pdf):

* Level One is recall

* Level Two is skill/concept

* Level Three is strategic thinking

* Level Four is extended thinking

The link to this DOK reminds me of Bloom's Taxonomy with verbs to help you understand each section as well as activities based on the level. The question that remains to be answered is if the tests being created by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium will reach these levels, and according to this report it appears that will have "the more lengthy, complex performance tasks being crafted by the two groups...seemed likely to assess skills at DOK Level 4."

The post also discusses some of the issues that remain, including cost and time of testing, cost of scoring, dealing with accomocations, and "Managing the "shock to the public and to teachers' instructional practice" that the tests' increased intellectual rigor will demand."

How do you test creativity and innovation using "set" core standards of evaluation? Creativity and innovation require a certain amount of willingness for failure and risk taking. How does training for common core test "standards" assist that higher level goal?