"Assessing and Evaluating Students' Learning"

         In the world of academia, there are a multitude of ways to teach a course and lead a class discussion over what they’ve learned.  However, an aspect of being an English Language Arts teacher is making sure students not only comprehend what they’ve read but are also able to apply it to the text.  In the chapter titled “Assessing and Evaluating Students’ Learning” in Teaching Literature to Adolescence, the authors have compiled various examples of evaluating a students’ progress in their course in order to see how much students have.  It was this chapter which helped me understand that there is more to viewing a student’s progress than just grades.

            In high school, I was conditioned by my Language Arts teachers to read a novel or short story, memorize as much content as possible (such as setting, characters, and plot), and be able to pass a test in order to obtain the highest grade possible.  Unfortunately, because of this method of teaching, my ability to dissect and analyze a piece of literature for its meaning was stunted.  After reading this chapter on assessing student learning, I am more comfortable now to teach literature.  By focusing their attention on learning critical conceptions and ideas about the text, the students become fluent with the “knowing-how” aspect of learning literature.  Nonetheless, this approach does not come without some short comings.

            One method of assessing student learning was introduced in this chapter as “Providing Students with Criteria in Writing Assignments.”  The gist of this method of evaluation was to provide a “template writing assignment” which is a “stylized writing task that dictates form” (Williams, 231).  While this template provides an outlet that William feels gives a student a form of free-writing, I cannot help but feel like this assignment presents a contradiction to its definition.  The template dictates the mode or vehicle in which the student may write about the intended subject; essentially, the student has no choice of free-writing, but is instead writing to the educator’s intended molding or outlining of the text.  The aforementioned example is just one of many ways that teachers may evaluate a students’ learning progress.

            While many of these methods do not require more than a student’s participation and paper and writing tool, another method mentioned did catch my eye that might have another shortcoming of its own.  E-Journals and blog responses can be seen as a helpful tool to both teachers and students.  With an increase in technology integrated into classrooms and students with proficient PC skills, it is hard to find a downside to this type of assessment.  However, what if students do not have outside access to a computer or laptop?  Some low income districts are restricted on the technology they receive in their schools; there are even some schools whose technology is too outdated and has not caught up with other schools in their district.  Simply for economic reasons, this method of assessment might seem a little out of reach for some classrooms.  It would make students without computers or internet access feel inadequate when compared to students who have computers and internet access.

            Developing learning criteria, rubrics, self-evaluations, and peer reading journals are other methods that teachers have devised in order to study how best to score and evaluate their classrooms.  Assessing and evaluating students’ progress in an ongoing battle and is constantly being developed and updated for the betterment for teachers.  Although there is no universal method that is perfect and will work for every classroom, as future educators, we have our own standards and our own philosophies to follow that will help us to assess our students.

"California State Universities Expository Reading and Writing Course Assignment Template "

         The past week’s document – per our required reading – was California’s Assignment template which covered California’s CCSS for English Language Arts.  While I am familiar with some aspects of the template themselves, I was caught off guard when parts of more unfamiliar topics covered areas that I didn’t become familiar with until I after I started my career as an English Literature student.  The template covers “Reading Rhetorically” and “Writing Rhetorically.”  I already assumed that the template would cover reading and writing as they pertain to language arts students; however, it was the addition of the word “Rhetorically” that surprised me.

            According to the definition in the template, “to ‘read rhetorically’ means to focus not only on what the text says but also on the purposes it serves, the intentions of the author, and the effects on the audience” (3).  While this definition serves the purposes of collegiate level writing, to use its definition to outline a template for secondary students shows how well versed and on our toes we as future educators need to be in order to affectively lead a language arts classroom.

            The template flows mechanically and justly through reading, connecting reading to writing, and writing.  A part of teaching language arts that I pride myself in is the frequent interjection of new vocabulary. 

“Key concepts provide a frame for future activities related to knowledge building and academic language, including vocabulary” (4)

Whether in lectures or in reading, building stronger vocabulary and diction can help students to understand the reading assignments and prepare them for future lessons while simultaneously opening up their minds and opinions on words they choose to use or express in their own writing. 

            I believe that this template can help future teachers, such as ourselves, to make more structured lesson plans while also allowing us to develop our own teaching strategies that will be more beneficial to our classrooms.  In the section “Reading Rhetorically” under the section “Considering the Structure of the Text,” the template outlined a few teaching strategies that were unfamiliar to me; playing an outlining game to help students identify when an introduction begins and ends, and what words or phrases help clue the students in to where key ideas and concepts start and end.  While this strategy may be favourable in some classrooms by certain teachers, I don’t believe that this way of outlining the text would be beneficial to my teaching strategy.  Although, the writers and editors made a great effort to pepper the template with helpful ideas and strategies.

            Overall, I believe that the template is a useful tool for future educators.  It was easy to read and understand, both helpful and insightful, and within the first twenty-nine pages, covered the basics of how to help structure or curb our own teaching strategies while working with CCSS. 

"The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Instruction in Grades 6-12: Origins, Goals, Challenges"

            The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) is not something that I came into this class with unfamiliar knowledge.  I had this understanding that the CCSS was something adopted by my state which implemented tools to allow teachers to help their students succeed when President Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” act brought of our state and national testing scores down.  After reading The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Instruction in Grades 6-12, I found that there were more flaws to the traditional standards-based approach than there were in the new CCSS. 

            The CCSS allows teachers to come together and share experiences in order to build new curriculum in their class rooms that will allow their students to grow in the classroom and prepare them for future post-secondary studies.  The CCSS, according to authors Richard Beach, Amanda Thein, and Allen Webb, is a “more consistent set of goals” and “will make standards-based reform more effective.”  Despite the good this reform does to improve student learning, I saw that the clear difference between the CCSS and the previous standards-based approach lies within the flaws outlined within the chapter’s discussion on “limitations of a Standards-Based Approach” rather than the improvement of the CCSS reform.

            In the standards-based approach to education there were many rigid flaws that allowed students – both higher learners and those already struggling behind – to slip through the cracks of each school’s educational system.  As a future educator, it is frightening to imagine not seeing any one succeed in a class; I feel that it is my responsibility to help every learner achieve above and beyond set state standards.  The limitations that schools face as part of the previous standards-based approach include standardizing the curriculum for every student.  In the case of standardizing the curriculum, students would be taught the same subject using the same curriculum despite some students not being able to grasp what the curriculum holds for them.  Not every student learns the same and therefore would fall through the curriculum set by the state’s standards.

            Further gaps found in the standards-based approach included:  Homogenization of instruction, fragmented curriculum – the isolation of standards being taught as opposed to “well-balanced curriculums” intended to build sophisticated “connections and understanding” between subjects.”  Failure to acknowledge cultural diversity and economic failure within districts are also found to be problematic with the standards-based approach. 

Among the shortcomings of the standards-based approach, I find that what school districts and teachers face that is probably the hardest issue to combat is the lack of funds or economic inequities that students face.  The amount of children living in poverty – those who cannot afford food or come from poor income families – are the students who suffer the most from the economic downturn our nation has been struggling to come back from.  While teachers have the power to educate and further improve the minds of our students, the change within our nation’s economy happens at a level that is above the heads of most of our learners.  Our students cannot conceive why the economy is the way it is or how they can change it.

While the standards-based approach faced many shortcomings, the new Common Core State Standards aims to fix and improve upon how teachers help their students grow and function within the classroom.

"Discussion As A Way of Teaching"

            Throughout my years as a student, I’ve been a part of many different discussions.  Stephen Brookfield’s “Discussion as A Way of Teaching” portrays various methods used by teachers to help students learn through discussion.  At first, Brookfield outlines two important things to keep in mind when discussing “discussion” as a method of teaching.  The first is that Brookfield gives his reader the definitions of critical terminology needed to understand discussion such as conversation, dialogue, and discussion.  Brookfield also provides his reader his goals or his “aims” – that is to say what he hopes his reader will take away from the reading.  The second bit of information that Brookfield gives his reader is a list of why discussions fail.  While rules in this list include “unprepared students” and “reward system askew,” as a future educator, I noticed one rule that seemed important to analyze for a more in-depth meaning: “Unrealistic expectations.”  By setting unrealistic expectations, some teachers who follow their student’s line of reason and train of thought, will understand that their students fall short of where their teachers wanted them to be.  By doing this (setting unrealistic expectations for class or group discussion) a teacher or educator has already set up their students to fail.

            In “Discussion as A Way of Teaching” there are several methods of discussion that I believe would be beneficial to my future students.  One of these methods discussed early in the reading is called “The Circle of Voices.”  I know that I’ve heard of this method of teaching before from my Survey of American Literature I class: to put it simply, students take three to five minutes to gather their thoughts and ideas together for discussion.  After this time is up, the teacher sets up students into groups as large as five.  Within their groups, one-by-one, students will go around and openly talk about their thoughts and ideas about the topic at hand.  The most important rule about this is “[D]uring the time each person is speaking no one else is allowed to interrupt.”  I know that politicians would benefit greatly from participating in that last rule, for sure.  If this method is teachable in a high school English class, I believe that it is also beneficial for future brainstorming work outside of the classroom, too.

            Something else that Brookfield discusses that I believe is helpful for his readers to understand is the thought and behind his claims for discussion.  Brookfield’s claims help his readers to see the multitudes of effectiveness to discussion as a method of teaching.  These claims include students being able to “explore a diversity of perspectives,” increase their “awareness of, and tolerance for, ambiguity or complexity,” and also “shows respect for student’s voices and experiences.”  While these claims are simple in understanding, they justify and open up the possibilities of how and why these methods are used in different classrooms.