是时候从一开始就努力努力

是时候从一开始就努力努力

经过特里·赫克里克

几年前，以下帖子摘录了自己和迟到的赠送武器之间的电子邮件交换。

我有一个关于如何将数据更加无缝和自然地集成到单位规划的琐事问题。

这个问题在各种形式和洞察中为我浮出水面，首先是“权力标准”的概念，然后是锚定课程规划的大想法。At that point the concept of summative assessments started seeming faulty to me: at what point is it ever best practice to accept non-mastery/confusion/failure/incongruity between performance and potential (or however you’d like to label less than ideal academic progress).

所以在一个课堂上，有评估的气候 - 与评估的课程只是指标下一步，以便进行资源和替代形式的评估 - 为什么所有评估都是表现性的？所有这些快照的无可所述是有用的，所以为什么坐在掌握和非掌握的证据中，并继续计划指导？

更准确地说，我们如何设计我们的活动/课程/单位以自然地吸收这些数据，以便向修订计划活动/课程/单位进行通知

我们如何计划的概述

If I begin curriculum planning by identifying ‘power standards,’ designing big ideas and subsequent enduring understandings (using 40/40/40, among other local tools and initiatives/mandates), then deciding what forms of assessment will offer me the best evidence of those understandings (using 6 Facets of Understanding, again, among other tools), where does the differentiation-based-on-assessment-results occur?

Let’s say in an English-Language Arts classroom I design an assessment matrix or pattern of sorts where I would like for students to be able to explain the most significant difference between allegory and symbolism, then after a series of activities, three days later I’d like for them to apply what they’ve learned–e.g., use either allegory or symbolism to promote political propaganda based on audience and thesis.

在发出评估后，75％的课程已准备好进行第二次评估，但25％的评估是“卡住”返回1.我是否以适当严格的指示向后计划，这是不可避免的。So the remaining mountain for any classroom teacher once they’ve clarified what they want the students to know and how they can demonstrate that knowledge is what to do for those students who are not ‘demonstrating proficiency’–not ‘remediate struggling learners with additional homework/heterogeneous grouping, etc.’, but real, authentic instructional design that reflects the same intentional, best-practice planning the rest of our instructional planning does?

Schools and districts are scrambling to develop ways to react to this very predictable quantity of non-proficiency (remediation, RTI, etc.), but this can be a ham-fisted, sledgehammer approach where all ‘non-proficient students’ are dealt with on the terms of that non-proficiency, often beyond the walls of their classroom, with other non-proficient peers, beyond the normal scope of school hours, etc., all requiring a tremendous investment of time and energy on the parts of everyone–a noble response to struggling learners, but might there not be a way to use curriculum and instructional planning to plan for this in a more natural, we-expected-this sort of way?

我一直在向我们的映射，单位设计或课程创造方面向我们的映射，单位设计或课程创作提供某种修订，以便从一开始就可以满足，而不是假设所有学生都会满足所有学习目标，and then offering a mediocre response when they don’t (not because we’re lazy, but because personalizing the learning of 30+ students in an outcomes-based learning environment with curriculum maps made by someone else is essentially impossible).

一个理解的流程图

数据是教学设计过程的核心，所以基于故意评估模式的结果的一种流程图是有意义的，不是吗？There are countless ways teachers use to respond when students aren’t demonstrating those understandings–sometimes it’s as simple as giving another opportunity for the same assessment, offering a revised assessment, revised rubric, reduce the number of steps, alter the sequence of steps, etc.–but these are on the shoulders of the classroom teacher in real-time. It’s simply too much to expect from teachers on a daily basis.

（也可以看看诊断教学。）

I’m not suggesting that we completely remove this from the teacher’s shoulders (as I see two of a teacher’s primary roles as that of master of resources and assessment), but would like to have non-mastery intentionally planned for during instructional design process so that non-mastery can be met with a planned, known, strategic and flexible response.

这不是接受非熟练程度（无论是什么意思），而是从一开始就规划它。

现在是从一开始就努力努力的学生;图像归因Flickr用户闪狼干