Prensky, M. (2011). Assessment in
the partnership pedagogy. In Schrum, L. (Ed.), The best of Corwin:
Educational technology for school leaders (139-148). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Summary
In partnership classrooms, the goals
and forms of assessment must be reconsidered.
Students need detailed feedback from teachers through formative
assessment. They also need measures that
demonstrate improving upon their personal best along with self-assessment. Peer assessment and real-world assessment also
give student work meaning. However, individual
students are not the only ones that should be assessed in a partnering school;
teachers, administrators, the school as a whole, and parents should also be
assessed on how they are contributing to the learning process.
Reflection
Prensky (2011) ends the chapter
with the sentiment that a population adept with technology and full of entrepreneurship
is likely more important than one where most have a ninth grade reading level
and associate’s degree. I followed the
chapter to this point; considering multiple forms of assessment that enable
partnering and mirror the real world seemed commonsense. However, Prensky’s (2011) final thought
reminded me of the myriad of Star Trek,
Stargate, and other scifi episodes
that show civilizations dependent upon a failing technology that no one knows
how to fix.
Without enough students engaged in
science, engineering, technology, and math, our “increasingly complex digital
machines” (Prensky, 2011, p. 148) will assuredly stagnate. In addition, what good is technology and
innovation when we no longer have natural resources and manufacturing is
outsourced to other countries? While I
agree that international cooperation is preferred to raise standards of living
and education for all children, the best way to do so may be to focus on our
students at home, enabling them to become the innovators of tomorrow.
I agree with you that we need to focus on our students at home, and work towards having international cooperation. I think that since you are a science person you understand the need for students to understand the process, why certain things are occurring, and how that affects other things (chemical reactions, or something of the like). I don't think all educators have the same thought process, though. My interpretation of this chapter is that we stop asking students to do something that Google can do for us--recite information. As I look back at my K-12 life, it is comical to me that I had teachers so concerned about me being able to recognize the different types of clouds by sight. I remember nothing else but thinking that I could look that up if I really wanted to know. Maybe if there was some connection to why this was important, what people who study clouds do and why they do it--maybe I would have been more interested in it. I think if we show students how technology is an asset, what it can do for us, and how to use it, then we would benefit as a nation more than if we taught students simple facts.
ReplyDeletePatsy - that is great insight. I completely agree with your point, but hadn't considered that with this chapter. I was much the same - why memorize facts that you can look up when you need it?
DeleteWhen I took a curriculum theory course, I often most identified with Hilda Taba. She looked at the vastly increasing pool of knowledge and told teachers to focus on teaching big concepts using contexts that they and their students found familiar.
For instance, a big concept might be that the energy animals get from food can usually be traced back to the sun. Here in Oklahoma, we might use chickens eating insects as our example. In Maine, a teacher might talk about wolves and moose. Elsewhere, it might be lions and zebras. Whatever has the most meaning for our students.
In this regard, it is exactly what you said - the process/concept is important, not the specific facts.
I agree, in schools we are focusing so much on preparing for EOIs or other standardized test that we miss the boat on important things like preparing our students for the workplace that they are going to be in. Technology education is a must if our students are going to compete for those jobs being outsourced and they must have the tools to compete on a global scale. Why are we still focusing on stuff we thought was important during the time of WWI? Students live in an age of constant feedback...just ask any high schooler about a level on Call of Duty Black Ops 2. We must harness what students are good at and use it to our advantage when we teach them.
ReplyDeleteI agree Adam, but I also think there needs to be a balance of traditional knowledge and technology skills. Since I brought up Hilda Taba in my comment to Patsy, I'll mention her here too.
DeletePrior to Hilda Taba's era, the predominate curriculum was one of social efficiency - where we turned to employers to tell us what skills their workers needed and then trained students in those skills (this came straight out of behaviorism).
Taba made the point that the knowledge and needs of society are always changing and that preparing students with the skills of today handicaps them in the world of tomorrow.
So, there are definitely big picture concepts out there that students need to know. Beyond that, I think we need to offer them the opportunity to use the technology with which they are already familiar for an application beyond entertainment.
Somehow, I think this is essentially what you are saying - we just need to be clear on what "stuff" is out of date and what "stuff" is going to stick around.