States, districts, and schools are developing a range of different ways to structure their Instruction and Assessment system (the set of learning goals of what schools want students to know and be able to do; the way they can identify if students have learned them; and, if not, how they can provide feedback to help them learn it). I’m having difficulty being able to describe the differences as well as the implications. The issue of the importance of the design of how we describe what students should and/or have learned has come up in meetings about assessment, about learning progressions (instructional strategies that are based on how students learn and are designed to help them move from one concept to the next), and with the NCAA over the past month.
So I’m doing the only thing I know how to do—which is to try to identify the different issues or characteristics that are raised to see if I can make some sense of it. For example, here are a number of questions that help me understand the qualities of any set of standards and competencies:
Is it designed to reach deeper levels of learning?
Is it meaningful for teachers for teaching and for students for learning?
What are the implications for assessment?
Is it user-friendly?
What are implications for creating interdisciplinary and project-based learning?
What are the implications for tracking student progress and communicating what students know and are able to do?
Sourced through Scoop.it from: www.competencyworks.org