Reporting success?

I heard the PA Secretary of Ed speak on Tuesday and he promoted the effectiveness of academic standards. He had heard Daniel Pink speak earlier in the day and was commenting on how someone like Daniel Pink gets paid to cause commotion (because Daniel Pink advocates for many changes that run contrary to the standards movement).

We seek "best practices" or research-based methods of instruction that increase achievement of the expectations set by standards document. But what if what we are aiming for, is wrong? Then many of the methods have the potential to be ineffective. Again, what does success look like for students competing in today's global arena? How do we communicate success?

From the same paper mentioned in my previous post...

Improving assessment and grading practices can have positive effects throughout the school as well as for individual students. For example, assuming a reduction in failures from improved assessment and grading, Reeves (2008) states, “student behavior improves, faculty morale is better, resources allocated to remedial courses and course repetitions are reduced, and resources invested in electives and advanced courses increase” (p. 87). Assessments, when properly designed, will improve instruction by providing appropriate feedback to both the student and the teacher and will also allow for a greater range of students to be successful (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006; O’Connor, 2002). Educators often complain about initiative overload and indeed several members of this cohort mentioned that concern throughout online discussions. The movement towards the 21st century classroom already creates stress for those making the transition and so it is useful to note the work of Fisher and Frey (2007) in framing formative assessment as a support for other education initiatives, rather than an additional initiative.

The 21st century skills that were analyzed as part of this course involve either higher level thinking skills or difficult to measure “soft” skills associated with interactions. These skills do not fit well with traditional classroom assessment systems nor do they often get measured on the standardized tests used to comply with No Child Left Behind. This should not imply that these skills cannot be assessed to both improve learning and measure the new vision of success. DiMartino and Castaneda (2007) assert that authentic assessments are essential to assessing applied skills and that a shift away from the Carnegie unit method of measuring seat-time is needed to achieve the vision of a 21st century classroom. The form that assessment takes is also brought into question by a number of researchers including Marzano (2000), McTighe and O’Connor (2005), and Sternberg (2008). The drive towards standardized, multiple-choice style assessments under NCLB can be interpreted to inhibit efforts to move towards a 21st century model of teaching.