Teacher and student as assessors: the changing position,

1
(No Transcript)
2

Teacher and student as assessors the changing
position, expectations and roles for the
literacy educator, students and parents
Robert J. Tierney, University of British
Columbiarob.tierney_at_ubc.ca
3
Issues around the teachers role in the context
of Literacy education
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
Vigilant parents
8
Teachers Roles
leader
mentor
monitor
technician
guidance
coach
advisor
motivator
9
Top-down reforms
Best Practice
Teacher professionalism
Ongoing improvement
10
Situated assessment teaching in a
collaborative fashion Or Evidence-based
practicing
11
Using Research to Build Effective School
Reading Programs in High Poverty Settings

• P. David Pearson, UC Berkeley
• Barbara Taylor, U of Minnesota
• Debra Peterson , U of Minnesota
• Michael Rodriguez , U of Minnesota

www.ciera.org
12
Characteristics of Effective SchoolsA National
View
13
effective literacy programs are distinguished by
teachers working together and using their
observations to develop instructional plans along
with customized ways to assess them
14
Overall Characteristics Non-standardized,
ongoing transactional (c/f meaning
making)teacher as researcher --informed by array
of sources and engaged in a dynamic relationship
with students and stakeholders as well as
literacies, teaching is ongoing, complex
Characterization of reflective practice
Delivery mode Teacher as a professional working
in collaboration with parents, students and
colleagues
15
Sources Various observations and sources of data
may inform teaching. Local consideration of
assessment needs and the development of
assessment and evaluation tools in collaboration
with colleagues
Characterization of reflective practice
Assumes findings not generalizable,
non-transferable, but can inform work in a
case-like fashion
Reform mode Inside-out, school and
classroom-based, student-based, community-based
16
Illustrations

• Portfolios new literacies--culture as a
  resource
• Students, collaboration and conversation/Teacher
  as assessor

17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
Some principles for learner centered assessment
37

Diversity should be embraced, not slighted, by
assessment.
38
Literacy learners have cultural backgrounds which
are inseparable from their literacies
39
Kris Gutiérrez
What I see is that for poor kids in schools
deemed underperforming, you have more reductive
literacy practices.
By reductive, I mean that there is an emphasis on
the acquisition of autonomous skills such as
vocabulary, decoding, and p2honics, instead of
making these skills a part of a larger menu
within a literacy program. They are not engaging
students in meaningful texts and learning
40

Assessment procedures may need to be
non-standardized to be fair to the individual.
41

Learning possibilities should be negotiated with
the students and stakeholders rather than imposed
via standards and assessments that are pre-set,
prescribed or mandated.
42

Assessment should be assessed in terms of its
relationship with teaching and learning.
43
Teachers and Parents

• Learning to be a public intellectual and
  developing a learning community

44
U HILL STAFF DECLINE FRASER INSTITUTE NOMINATION
Staff of U Hill was short-listed (as were four
other Vancouver schools) for the Garfield Weston
Awards for Excellence in Education in the Overall
Academic Achievement (non-selective enrollment
schools).l All schools declined the
nomination. At U Hill we strive to provide an
environment so that all students are able to
achieve success - in many different areas. The
staff believe that the Fraser Institute rankings
do not accurately or adequately describe what is
happening in schools. This award is limited to
academic achievement in provincially examinable
subjects and we feel that it is a disservice to
our students to narrow the sphere of
accountability and definition of success in this
manner. We applaud our students who do well in
provincially examinable subjects, just as we
applaud our students who achieve success in other
areas such as athletics, arts, service and skills.
45
Teacher
Student
Parent
46
Teacher
Parent
47
Student
Parent
Teacher
48
Student-teacher conferencing
49
Student-led parent conferencing
50
Some recap
51
To connect assessment to teaching and
learning To connect assessment to students'
ongoing goal setting, decision-making and
development To become better informed and make
better decisions To develop culturally sensitive
versus culturally free assessments
Why?
52
Collaborative, participatory, client-centered Coa
ch-like, supportive and ongoing rather than
judgmental, hardnosed and final Supplemental and
complementary versus grade-like and
summative Emergent not prepackaged Judicious De
velopmental Individual and community-based Diver
se
How?
53
Amidst students' lives Across everyday events
and programs In and out of school Opportunistica
lly, periodically, continuously
Where/When?
54
Who?
Students, teachers and stakeholders
55
Ongoing learning development, resources and
needs Emerging learnings and learning
strategies Short term and long term
development Individuals and groups Evidence of
progress, student self assessment and
decision-making Program, groups, individuals
What?