One of the greatest challenges educators face is how to accurately assess student learning.
So often, the assessment tools are divorced from both the curriculum and common sense, leaving the educator struggling to chase not only a moving target, but a target that changes with shifting political winds.
This is true even in the emerging pedagogy of “maker spaces.” The maker movement which is growing in popularity in the U.S. currently has all the trappings of just another educational fad, despite its well-intentioned ideals.
In an effort to legitimize the movement, there is now an effort to create assessments that might help educators understand the student learning process. So, MIT in collaboration with Maker Ed has developed a research project to study this-Beyond Rubrics.
The three main questions the Beyond Rubrics projects will attempt to answer, according to the website:
- What might embedded assessment in maker activities look like?
- How do teachers codesign embedded assessments for maker-centered learning, and practice the skills necessary for implementing them?
- How does embedded assessment in making support the student learning experience?
In all honesty, I am not sure these research questions are necessarily unique to the “maker” movement. Eliminate the word “maker” from any of the above sentences and you have the essential questions that all educators grapple with daily as they wrestle with educating students for a world that does not yet exist, assessed on outcomes that can be analyzed using the most advanced statistical techniques, but tell us nothing.
Best of luck.
One of the many challenges educators face daily is how to communicate ideas to learners with a wide range of background knowledge, learning style, interest/motivation and aptitude.
How many of us have told fascinating stories, presented compelling information, or sketched out ideas on the board-only to have a certain segment of the class stare at us blankly?
I think this is especially true in an area like science, where the real world connections are a bit harder for students, especially younger secondary students to make.
So, for an appreciation of the true challenge and artistry necessary to make compelling visual representations of scientific concepts, you may want to read the MIT News article about Felice Frankel’s work.
Felice is an award winning, MIT research scientist and photographer has spent decades perfecting this craft and has created free tutorials in MIT’s Open Courseware.
I think any secondary science teacher would enjoy reading about her process and may enjoy using principles from the course to enhance their own pedagogy. It’s also a reminder for all of us non-science teachers to think about how we are communicating our lessons and to examine whether we might benefit from a creative re-examination-possibly utilizing some of Felice Frankel’s work as inspiration. I also think students may benefit from reading about her career as it is a blend of the artistic and the analytical and utilizes the best of each to help individuals develop a deeper understanding of their world.
Questions for Discussion
- How often do you use visual representations to enhance your lessons?
- Why does Felice Frankel encourage researchers to develop “metaphors” to help explain their work?
- Is there a concept that you think your students would benefit from seeing a visual image?
- What are some creative methods you have used to help “illustrate” a concept?
- What is Felice Frankel’s background-how might this have impacted her work?