What is the role of assessment in learning? Is assessment a tool for the teacher or student? How can assessment be both?
It seems that assessment was really pushed only within the past 2 decades or so. I remember reading somewhere that it really took off in the 90's. Is that true? Hmmm.
I see the role of assessment in learning as a way to measure learning. Rubrics come to mind. In the lesson rewrite assignment we just completed, the original lesson plan contained a rubric that teachers would use to assess student essays. It spelled out what elements an advanced essay contained, what a proficient essay contained and what a basic essay contained. Other grading rubrics might be something like, if a student gets 5 out of 5, that's an A, 4 out 5, B, 3 out of 5 C, etc.
Assessment is a tool for both the teacher and the student. When the teacher assesses student learning, they can (hopefully) see if the students are actually "getting" what they are trying to get across when they teach. Whether the students are gaining knowledge or understanding requires different assessment tools, I imagine. For instance, out UbD text talks about "authentic" assessment for student understanding as opposed to mere knowledge gain.
It is a tool for students in that students can see if they are really learning what is being taught. This probably goes without saying, but I think assessment is more valuable to a student in the form of an evaluation as opposed to just giving out a grade. Students learn more about their own learning when a written evaluation is provided. Assessment of teachers by students also comes to mind in the form of surveys, such as good ol' SOTEs.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Information Literacy (continued)
What are the key understandings in teaching about information? Think about how information is conceptualized, both within popular consciousness, and academia. Using Bruce's informed learning, as well as standards what do we think is important in understanding information? This is a continuation of the IL discussion (and maybe this part should have come first) - does this change the way you conceive IL standards?
Primarily, I think teaching about information requires an understanding about where the students are coming from. We have to assess their backgrounds and design the curriculum accordingly. For instance, information literacy instruction would differ depending on the age and educational background of the students. I think of our library's integrated course seminars and how the librarians tailor their sessions to the students, depending on where they are in their level of education (are they undergraduates or graduates?, what discipline it is (political science or public administration?) and where the students are in their research (information resources session at the beginning of the course vs. one-on-one instruction as the course progresses). This also brings to mind Bruce's definition of information as "anything that we experience as informing. Information will appear differently in different contexts and different disciplines" (p.5). Most teaching librarians will understand this and take into account the variant nature of information.
This of course, is an academic handling of information. Information is viewed critically, it is evaluated and presented judiciously. As Jessica mentions in the previous discussion, the ACRL standards make the assumption that people come to college with some of these evaluative skills already in place. Branch out to popular consciousness about how information is conceptualized, perhaps the critical/evaluative component is not part of the definition. In popular consciousness, I see it as something that is taken more at face value. It is presented a certain way (e.g. via television, newspapers, web, etc.) and absorbed as fact. It's is something to be digested and added to someone's knowledge base but stops there. I'm not saying that the non-academic person lacks evaluative skills, but I think the popular definition of information is much narrower than the way it is viewed in academia where it is seen as something that can be truly transformational in one's life.
So, what then is important in understanding information? I agree with Bruce that is is anything that informs, regardless of how is is presented, and that it can also become transformational. At this point, looking at the ACRL standards for information literacy, my conception of the standards hasn't changed in that they are for students who come to the table knowing that information is more than just something to be absorbed at face value. I think the AASL K-12 standards should be made a priority in a student's life so that they can come to the table ready to meet the ACRL standards.
Primarily, I think teaching about information requires an understanding about where the students are coming from. We have to assess their backgrounds and design the curriculum accordingly. For instance, information literacy instruction would differ depending on the age and educational background of the students. I think of our library's integrated course seminars and how the librarians tailor their sessions to the students, depending on where they are in their level of education (are they undergraduates or graduates?, what discipline it is (political science or public administration?) and where the students are in their research (information resources session at the beginning of the course vs. one-on-one instruction as the course progresses). This also brings to mind Bruce's definition of information as "anything that we experience as informing. Information will appear differently in different contexts and different disciplines" (p.5). Most teaching librarians will understand this and take into account the variant nature of information.
This of course, is an academic handling of information. Information is viewed critically, it is evaluated and presented judiciously. As Jessica mentions in the previous discussion, the ACRL standards make the assumption that people come to college with some of these evaluative skills already in place. Branch out to popular consciousness about how information is conceptualized, perhaps the critical/evaluative component is not part of the definition. In popular consciousness, I see it as something that is taken more at face value. It is presented a certain way (e.g. via television, newspapers, web, etc.) and absorbed as fact. It's is something to be digested and added to someone's knowledge base but stops there. I'm not saying that the non-academic person lacks evaluative skills, but I think the popular definition of information is much narrower than the way it is viewed in academia where it is seen as something that can be truly transformational in one's life.
So, what then is important in understanding information? I agree with Bruce that is is anything that informs, regardless of how is is presented, and that it can also become transformational. At this point, looking at the ACRL standards for information literacy, my conception of the standards hasn't changed in that they are for students who come to the table knowing that information is more than just something to be absorbed at face value. I think the AASL K-12 standards should be made a priority in a student's life so that they can come to the table ready to meet the ACRL standards.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Information Literacy
What are the big ideas of information literacy? Look beyond the skills - how are we conceptualizing information literacy (you may want to break it down). What are the unstated biases guiding the way we discuss information literacy - in terms of standards. If you were teaching a course that focused on information literacy what are the overarching understandings you would want students to have at the end of the course?
In terms of conceptualizing information literacy, it is not simply about finding information whether it is in print or electronic format. Real information literacy requires evaluation and ethical use of the information. Information seekers should question where the information is coming from (they should question "the slant" so to speak) and they should be able to use it in appropriate ways. For example, plagiarism should be avoided and credit should be given where credit is due. Also, information is used differently depending on the context (such as a specific discipline.)
The unstated biases guiding the way we discuss information literacy, in terms of standards are assuming the information seeker has the cognitive, physical ability or socio-economic ability to meet information literacy standards. I can't help but think of people with "invisible" learning disabilities, physical disabilities or those with limited access to information due to external circumstances. These people would have trouble meeting the standards suggested by ACRL. (I don't know if I'm approaching this question in the right way. I'm curious to read what others have to say about this.)
The overarching understandings I would want students to have at the end of an information literacy course would be the powerful nature of information and how it informs all of their decision making. It would want them to understand why it is so important to know where their information is coming from and use this as a guide to question why they think the way they do. (Metacognition?) I would also want them to understand what a privilege it is to have open access to information in a variety of formats and how some information is costly and protected. You can't find everything on Google!
(I referred to the ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for this post.)
In terms of conceptualizing information literacy, it is not simply about finding information whether it is in print or electronic format. Real information literacy requires evaluation and ethical use of the information. Information seekers should question where the information is coming from (they should question "the slant" so to speak) and they should be able to use it in appropriate ways. For example, plagiarism should be avoided and credit should be given where credit is due. Also, information is used differently depending on the context (such as a specific discipline.)
The unstated biases guiding the way we discuss information literacy, in terms of standards are assuming the information seeker has the cognitive, physical ability or socio-economic ability to meet information literacy standards. I can't help but think of people with "invisible" learning disabilities, physical disabilities or those with limited access to information due to external circumstances. These people would have trouble meeting the standards suggested by ACRL. (I don't know if I'm approaching this question in the right way. I'm curious to read what others have to say about this.)
The overarching understandings I would want students to have at the end of an information literacy course would be the powerful nature of information and how it informs all of their decision making. It would want them to understand why it is so important to know where their information is coming from and use this as a guide to question why they think the way they do. (Metacognition?) I would also want them to understand what a privilege it is to have open access to information in a variety of formats and how some information is costly and protected. You can't find everything on Google!
(I referred to the ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards for this post.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)