Project 3 -
Self Assessment Rubric
Shannan Muskopf
Assessing Activity
My classroom curriculum is
described as a laboratory based science course, so much of the curriculum is
designed to include activities that give students an opportunity to work with
scientific technology and to collect data and analyze that data. The learners
are often engaged in activities and tools within the classroom, but little
of the learners time is spent engaged with tools and objects found outside
the school. Logistically, many of the topics covered in biology are laboratory
centered, and since most students dont have a laboratory at home, the
activities are limited to the classroom environment.
The laboratory based curriculum does encourage observation and reflection. Many
of the labs are described as open-ended where students are given
objects or data, and are asked to discuss with their peers what conclusions
can be drawn from them. Students, therefore, share frequent observations
about their activity with peers and interested adults. An example is a lab
where students observe a fish, and slowly lower the water temperate, they observe
and record data about the fishs breathing rate and develop a hypothesis
to explain what they have observed.
Students use some cognitive tools to support explorations and manipulations.
Admittedly, many of the labs have been dummied down to make it easier
for lower level students to achieve the goals. The recipe structure of the activities
though improves the smoothness of the activity, often hinders the development
of cognitive thinking. Students will often follow the recipe and do the minimal,
without making broader connections. Though the labs will ask for the students
to draw conclusions and evaluate data, many will just quickly write what happened
to get the assignment done. For instance, in the fish lab, some students will
go the extra mile, truly be curious about the fishs behavior and even
manipulate some other variables (like heating up the water). Other students
will follow the directions, copy down their data and with as little effort as
possible say the fish breathed slower as a conclusion.
Assessing Construction
Interest level
varies among the learners. Learners frequently seem to be operating based
on a sincere curiosity about the topic of study. The use of real tools and
laboratory based activities does seem to motivate students to want to try things
out and experiment, however this motivation drops considerably when the students
get to the point of publishing their observations and conclusions. For example,
in one activity, they are given a live earthworm and their task is to design
experiments to discover what environment the earthworm prefers (they are given
certain parameters to test - light/dark , cold/warm , moist/dry). They seem
very motivated to play with their earthworm and flashlights and the cold packs,
but they tended to moan and groan when it came to actually writing out their
results.
Learners are often expected to make sense of new experiences and develop
theories. Often, rather routinely in this case, because the class is designed
to be lab-oriented, but it also contains a good deal of lecturing and direct
instruction. So while students may have to develop theories about earthworm
preferences, they will also spend a good amount of time memorizing the taxonomy
and anatomy of the earthworm. Some of the labs do require the students to develop
their own approach at solving problems, but the vast majority of the labs are
basic, follow the instructions and answer the questions in the lab manual. Science
teachers often describe one type of lab as a recipe lab, and the other type
as an open-ended lab. Open ended labs are obviously more geared toward cognitive
tools and mental modeling, but they are not used as frequently.
Assessing Cooperation
Students are often working in groups to solve problems and complete assignments.
Learners are often immersed in activities in which collaboration with peers
results in success. Many of the activities require the students to delegate
duties within the group. For instance, in the earthworm activity, students work
in groups of 4, and the groups must determine who is going to be the worm
wrangler, the equipment specialist, the data gatherer
and the group leader. I often put these types of group designations
on the lab manual, because Ive found that when students are given a particular
job to do, the entire group becomes more responsible for the activity, since
each individual has a specific job to do.
The majority of the coursework is done in class. Little of the learners
time is spent gainfully engaged with experts outside of school. In fact,
homework is rare in my class, most of the students do their work in class, and
may have some reading assignments to do outside of class.
Because most of the course is set up to be activity of lab based, cooperation
has been emphasized. Students learn early on that in order to be successful,
they are going to have to learn to work with a group. After some practice and
developing a group dynamic, the learners collaborate with ease. Negotiations
become almost invisible, yet the ideas of all team members are valued.
Within the group, usually the most capable learner will take on the job of team
leader, no matter what activity they are doing. These roles seldom shift, I
could probably predict exactly who is going to be doing what in any activity.
Though the students do decide their own roles, they will almost always decide
them in the same way. The most boisterous student will usually get the team
leader spot, the quiet shy student will have the data gatherer position,
the student that cant be trusted to do either will be given the worm
wrangler or equipment specialist job. Often these two jobs
will also fall to the student who is the least motivated to do anything. Group
members can then tell him or her to go get the flashlights, or go get the worm,
and the team member will do so and feel his or her job is complete. So, even
though students are allowed to choose, roles and responsibilities are shifted
infrequently; most capable learners accept more responsibility than the less
capable.
Assessing Authenticity
The tasks learners face have been designed for schools, and are separated
into distinct subjects. Though some math does apply to science labs, where
students are required to make graphs and evaluate trends in data, the majority
of the instruction is strictly science based. There is no program in place to
coordinate cross-curriculum or theme based units. Occasionally, Ill try
to add creative writing or historical themes to the lessons, but as a whole,
the main focus is science.
Students are required to memorize facts. They may do a lab with earthworms where
they generate hypotheses, conduct investigations and assess results, but for
every one day spent on an activity like that, three to four days are spent in
lecture and reading. Students are expected to know how an earthworm relates
to other species, how it is classified, how it reproduces, and how it moves.
They are required to memorize the anatomy of an earthworm and label it on a
chart. Therefore, a large percentage of what is expected is memorization.
Students sometimes (rarely) are asked to evaluate, synthesize, or create.
Much of the instruction down in class is lecture, read, worksheet format, though
I have been actively trying to move toward a more constructivist approach where
students become problem solvers. Ive changed many of the lab worksheets
to include open ended questions, where students have to think of how they can
answer the question within the scientific method. Ive removed many of
the recipes in the labs to allow for more creativity and thought
as students are required to essentially devise their own experiments. It seems
as though both me and the students are learning with this approach, the labs
dont always go smooth and students often get off track. In this sense,
students occasionally face ill-structured challenges and are expected to
refine their problem as well as solve it.
The majority of the instruction and the majority of the labs still
direct students toward a right or wrong answer. Even in the earthworm activity
discussed earlier there is a right answer: earthworms prefer dark, moist, and
cool environments. So even though the process is somewhat aligned with constructivist
principles, the problems presented to learners tend to have right answers,
correct solutions that the students are expected to eventually reach.
Assessing Intentionality
Before each unit, students are presented with goals of the unit, for instance
in the unit on worms, students are given a list of objectives: define a worm,
be able to identify the parts of a worm, list the parts of a worm, and describe
a worms lifestyle. For this unit, as well as others, learners are generally
engaged in activities that contribute to the attainment of specified goals.
The goals presented to the students come from the science curriculum guide,
so that all teachers teaching the same subject have some uniformity. Learners
are sometimes involved in the establishment of learning goals, as each teacher
does have some freedom to veer off the chosen curriculum. In my class, the
ecology unit starts with a brainstorming of a list of environmental concerns,
students are asked to choose which topics they would like to learn about and
establish their own goals. It is still directed, since I am required to cover
specific topics and make sure my students have achieved specific objectives.
Learners progress is monitored by others, specifically the teacher.
All projects, labs and worksheets are turned in for a grade, that grade decided
by me based on either straight points or a rubric type evaluation. At no point
do students monitor their own progress.
Little emphasis is placed on metacognition. There are few opportunities to
discuss the learning process with peers or educators. Students do not have
the opportunity to learn how to learn. Definitely an area I would like to improve
upon. It is simpler to set the goals for the students, like do a reading assignment
of fill out a worksheet. I have not approached this from a metacognitive standpoint
where the students can discuss and evaluation their own processes. Certainly
introducing mindtools and concept maps could improve this situation and I will
try to incorporate this into my lessons next year.
Technology integration into the curriculum is just getting started at my district.
We have a few technology lessons, where students explore web sites, answer questions
or write reports. These lessons are specific to a particular unit. For instance,
when learning about ecology, students visit Recycle City at the
EPA site. Its a good lesson and does contribute to the learning goals of the
ecology unit. Technology is not at this point making major contributions, instead
it used to supplement specific unit objectives, therefore the use of technology
contributes to the attainment of specified goals.