Learning Assessment In The Classroom

The assessment of learning in the classroom, allows teachers to understand what their students are learning and the best methods to use to teach them.  The information gathered through classroom assessment, can help teachers plan and modify their teaching methods, monitor student progress, and identify strengths and weaknesses.  It can also determine whether students are prepared for important placement tests, such as the SAT’s, and help students improve their own performance in the classroom.
Classroom assessments help students realize what is important in the learning process and what is expected of them.
Teachers need to consider several things while planning assessments.  They need to determine what their learning goals are, decide what the assessment strategy should be, and take into account what evidence would prove that students were reaching the learning goals of the classroom.
The assessment strategy needs to be planned in the context of classroom instruction and each assessment should be designed around each particular learning experience.  Properly chosen, well developed assessments will give teachers the best information on how much their students have learned.  Assessments should be designed around what goals and outcomes the teacher has for the students and how to measure those outcomes to determine that they have learned the material.  Assessments should be pertinent to what was taught in the classroom and relevant to the student’s real world experiences.
There are multiple ways to assess student learning and using several methods will give the best results.  No single assessment will work in all situations. Each has its own strengths and weakness and each will give different evidence of what was learned.  Since  each student learns and tests differently, using multiple forms of assessment will allow for the best results and give each student a chance to prove what they‘ve learned in the way best suited to their individual learning style.

Testing Requirements Can Be Impossible To Reach

One of the first laws that president George W. Bush got passed that had a resounding effect on the nation as a whole was the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). Most parents, teachers and students know it simply as No Child Left Behind” and it has become somewhat a cartoonish villain for those who work in the education system. The NCLB was set up to make sure that students were receiving the same sort of education as their peers across the country and perhaps foolishly it set out a system of funding education in order to meet its goals.

Of course what any federal education act doesn’t take into consideration is the very real and very different circumstances that face a child going to school in urban Chicago compared to a child who is attending classes in rural Iowa. The circumstances are simply not the same and no matter who says they should be that will not be changing any time soon. Where NCLB truly fails is that there is really no mechanism for determining the different circumstances or metering out when a school may not have met its standards but has still met or surpassed what would be the realistic standards of that school, student and classroom.

The NCLB instituted a nation-wide system of testing that was designed to determine whether or not a school, a teacher and a school district was meeting the requirements that were set forth by the federal government. If these schools were able to meet the requirements of the testing, then they continued to receive federal aid at a level they had grown accustomed to. Should they fail what had become extremely subjective testing criteria, they would have their funding reduced and cut off all together. What this boiled down to was that schools which were struggling continued to struggle while schools that were successful continued to have success.

Rebuilding the Education Habitat

When talking about an educational habitat, it can be important to really take a good long look at that term. When dealing with a habitat we aren’t talking simply about what someone calls their home or their living area. We are talking about a section of the world where people, in this case the students, teachers, school administrators and on down the line feel most comfortable.

Comfort in an educational habitat means learning and learning in a way that includes everyone involved in the educational process to feel as though they have helped in some small way. One way this education habitat can feel like a safe zone for struggling students is for the teachers to take an active role in the success or failure of the child. While some might say that is already being done, there have been studies which show that now more than ever teachers feel as though they are doing too much, not too little when it comes to educating children. The fact that education standards continue to fall shows that there may a disconnect here of epic proportions. Teachers need to realize that when a child is struggling in a subject it does not necessarily mean that the student has no interest in learning. It can mean that in a world that is telling most kids they should already know everything they need; this particular student is out of place.

Staying after school and offering up some of a teacher’s free time can mean the difference between reaching these students and showing them that I don’t know is acceptable to say as long as the following statement is but I want to. Teachers who offer up their free time are more likely to have students come to them looking for help and guidance than those who stop teaching when the day’s final bell rings.

Modern Education In A Successful Habitat

A teacher writing on a blackboard.
Image via Wikipedia

A new term that has come up in the education circles these days is what is called an education habitat. This means more than just where you go to school or the area of town where your school is located. Rather an education habitat is a place where everyone involved in the educational process feels at home and feels comfortable. Even this does not mean that a successful education habitat is someplace where the student feels they can walk into and put their feet on the desk or talk back to a teacher. And education habitat means that as far as learning standards are concerned, teachers, students, school administrators and parents are all feeling comfortable with the way the school day and year is going.

An effective educational habitat is one where a teacher understands that there are going to be different needs from each one of her students and instead of looking at that as a sign of weakness he or she sees it as their duty to meet those needs. A teacher who may even be able to come up with additional time in their day to stay after school and help a student who is struggling can be one of the most effective forms of keeping their habitat safe.

Teachers who understand that sometimes there needs to be a different study plan laid out for a student are the same ones who have some of the best class test scores in the country. Not everyone learns information the same way. A teacher who approaches their day as if the failure to succeed by some students is nothing more than stubbornness are the ones who will not last all that long in an effective educational habitat. Teachers who can adapt to their surroundings not only survive and flourish but contribute greatly to the construction of their habitats.

School Vouchers and the American Education System

Among the many solutions people have floated as a way to fix the American school system one solution that seems to be gaining the most ground, especially in urban areas is school vouchers. These school vouchers are a way for students from families who would not normally be able to go to private school to finally be able to attend them. The vouchers are basically free scholarships based on financial situations rather than actual academic achievements.

Of course one main drawback with these school vouchers is that poor students are then at the mercy of what is usually a religious private school that is free from the government restrictions of indoctrinating their students in any way, shape or form. School vouchers can also come across as unfair because for the most part they are now offering this private schooling to someone for a limited period of time. While some voucher programs might take place over the entire career of a high school student, other voucher funds run out before the student has matriculated meaning that they may have to finish their education in a lesser well funded public school.

Finally there is something to be said for directing the money that usually goes to the private school vouchers towards rebuilding and improving the existing public schools as that money will almost assuredly reach a larger population in the long run. Education testing has long shown that the surroundings that a student learns in has a major effect on their performance. Public schools that are well funded have a much better chance of turning out well educated students as compared to those who are allowing their schools to rot and the teachers and staff to continue to be underpaid and underappreciated. School voucher programs may seem like a quick fix but in the long run they actually hamper public schools improvement.

Educational Habitat and the Quality of Education

Study after study, survey after survey and test after test show that the quality of student’s surroundings directly equate to how much and how well that student will learn. If a school is falling down around the student, in effect the school district is saying they don’t really care what sort of state the buildings are in, the students will be far behind their age level peers in schools that have better upkeep. Teachers that are scraping the bottom of the barrel for text books and supplies will find students who are either barely attending classes, not attending at all or when they do attend could care less about the subject that is being taught.

Not surprisingly, most of the educational habitats that are negative for both the student and the teacher are occurring more and more in urban areas with high population base and a high poverty rate. Even public schools that have higher donations by student families as well as better funding from the city, county and state in urban areas do quite a bit better that schools that may be located just a few miles away but is suddenly located in the magical bad part of town.

Students can tell when they are being ignored or not cared about and most of those students will respond by not caring about their school or their own academic achievements. Educational habitat means more than just where they go to school, it means the feeling they get when they enter that school or the classroom. If a feeling of apathy surrounds the school, it should not be on the student to break through the torpor. If a school is falling down around a student’s ears it is not something that fools students into thinking the school district cares about them. The apathy is catching and it’s catching quickly.

Teaching In the Urban jungle

The sad fact of trying to educate our country’s youth is that there is a disparate level of what can be taught and learned in the poorest of inner city neighborhoods versus in the affluent areas of the country that host some of the best public and private schools in the country. This difference is not because the rich are somehow automatically smarter than the poor. This is because for whatever reason the federal government has found a way to segregate schools without actually calling it segregation. In every major city in the country the test scores of high school students goes down the closer you get to the center of the city. The other number that goes down the more into the heart of the city you go into is the funding for schools.

Perhaps it is a self fulfilling prophecy. More affluent schools are able to afford the best desks, the best computers the best and newest text books and the newest teachers. Because of this, the students feel more comfortable learning and just going to school and test scores rise. When test scores rise, state and federal funding dollars rise as well. State and federal funding dollars go into making sure the kids in these schools have the best computers and books and desks and the cycle begins again.

Meanwhile inner city schools have to scrape by to make sure every student has a place to sit. The walls are falling down and the teachers are just looking to make it through the day. Is it really any wonder why these schools have some of the worst test scores in the country? And is losing funding the way anyone actually thinks the problem will get solved? Still our country marches on, content in leaving the poorest of the poor behind once again.

A Generation Of Children Left Behind?

Perhaps the biggest debate to hit the United States education system was the passage of the No Child Left Behind Bill. The act, known as NCLB, was designed to improve the educational standing of our students by setting high goals at the state level and testing students. States who wished to continue receiving funding from the federal government were required to participate.

NCLB immediately came under fire. A heated debate between its supporters and those who believed it would do more harm than good ensued. Supporters point to test results that seem to prove that students taught under this system perform better. They also believe that the standards, which were set at the state level, were more ambitious than the standards traditionally set at the local level. In other words, students under NCLB were better prepared and better educated. While the system doesn’t set federal standards, it tests students at regular intervals to access progress and performance.

Opponents of the bill believe it has been a total failure and has forced educators to teach to the test. In other words, teachers focus their education efforts solely on teaching students the material covered in the next standardized test. Other complaints include gaming the system under which administrators reclassify students to produce more favorable statistics and thus generate more federal funding and unrealistic goals.

Because this system is still in place today’s students are effectively caught in the middle. Teachers may feel forced to teach to the test instead of instructing students in real life or inquiry based lessons. Administrators are forced to focus on standardized testing in order to receive adequate funding. Parents have little say in this matter. This environment may very well produce graduates who are ill prepared for either the college world or the work place. Perhaps it is time to leave behind No Child Left Behind.

Are We Redefining Accountability?

The dictionary defines accountability as a willingness or obligation to account for actions or accept responsibility for them. The debate over how to apply this idea to our education system has been growing over the past several decades. Recently, every state in the country has implemented their own accountability and assessment plans in an attempt to improve the quality of education their students receive.

This sounds like a good idea  setting measurable goals for our students; unfortunately, this idea hasn’t translated as well as we would like. A recent study shows that American 8th graders are still lagging behind students from 14 other countries in literacy, science and math. The question becomes why?

If each state develops, implements and tests accountability standards, why are our students under performing? Some experts believe that the wide social, racial and economic disparity that exists throughout the country is the culprit. Students from poorer regions and those from urban areas generally under perform. Because the standards are statewide, these disparities are not taken into consideration.

Perhaps the larger question is whether our accountability system should be based on standards at all. The matter is further complicated when we consider funding. A percentage of each state education funding comes from the federal government and is based on students within the region performing well on a set of standardized tests. This has led to an environment where students are taught on a standard basis instead of an outcome basis.

Many of us are confused and disheartened by this issue. Of course we want our children to perform well. We want all of our children to have access to quality education so that we can compete globally.

Instead of changing the definition of accountability as it relates to our education system, maybe it is time to reconsider who should be held accountable and for whaat.

Chartering A School

Parents, educators, administrators and even students wanted a different educational forum for students. Public educational institutions are often found to be lacking, leaving those involved with the school feeling that their students are not receiving the best education. The answer, in some areas, is charter schools.

Charter schools are public schools. They receive state funding and are not allowed to charge tuition fees to their students. Students opt in to a charter school. In cases were there are more students than available seats in a particular school, a lottery system is often used to award the seats.

What makes charter schools different and more appealing is the fact that they are not held to the same rules and guidelines as other public schools. Instead, their goals are set forth in their charter in the form of measurable goals for which their students, teachers and administrators are held responsible. This often leads to an educational environment that is more strident then other schools and better educates students.

Charter schools are often founded by administrators, teachers or parent groups particularly in economically depressed areas. These areas, such as inner cities, often have public schools that are lacking. Many believe there is a direct correlation between the affluence of a neighborhood and how well its schools serve the community. Charter schools aim to bridge this gap and often do so admirable.

It seems that instead of addressing the growing problem in our public school system, we have turned to alternative educationally methods to provide our students with better opportunities. This should elevate the debate between standard based education and objective based education to a new level. As we move forward, perhaps we should question whether we want to move our children or address the growing problems in our current public system.