Effective Learning
Article Review:
Seven Practices of Effective Learning
Don R Jacobs Jr.
Dallas Baptist University
Article Review: Seven Practices of Effective Learning
McTighe and O’Connor give readers seven strategies for more effective grading and assessment practices. Each one gives a different spin on more traditional ways of assessing such as diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments. The authors give each suggestion in this order: 1) Using authentic summative assessments as part of their curriculum using the standards to meet the requirements. Students are given the opportunity to showcase their learning by creating and developing an action plan (i.e. science project, video). 2) Using evaluative criteria (or rubrics) to increase quality student work. Well-developed rubrics can clearly identify the important elements in an assignment and also guide teachers in the grading process. 3) Involving pre-assessments before teaching in order to “diagnose” misconceptions and deficiencies in student learning. 4) Allowing students choice in the way they are assessed. 5) Providing students quality feedback in a timely manner. 6) Encouraging students to assessment their own work and set goals with their own learning. 7) Allowing new records of achievement to replace old ones.
In Royse City ISD, our teachers would agree that with helpful models of what a student is expected to do, the level of quality work and student learning increases in the classroom. Together with student choice over the type of assessment and early and often forms of feedback from the teacher, students are able to have control about their education. With these practices in place of the classroom, students are also able to set standards and goals for themselves and be successful in the classroom. However, these practices become difficult with state testing guidelines. The authors state in this article “a standardized approach to classroom assessment may be efficient, but it is not fair because any
Seven Practices of Effective Learning
Don R Jacobs Jr.
Dallas Baptist University
Article Review: Seven Practices of Effective Learning
McTighe and O’Connor give readers seven strategies for more effective grading and assessment practices. Each one gives a different spin on more traditional ways of assessing such as diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments. The authors give each suggestion in this order: 1) Using authentic summative assessments as part of their curriculum using the standards to meet the requirements. Students are given the opportunity to showcase their learning by creating and developing an action plan (i.e. science project, video). 2) Using evaluative criteria (or rubrics) to increase quality student work. Well-developed rubrics can clearly identify the important elements in an assignment and also guide teachers in the grading process. 3) Involving pre-assessments before teaching in order to “diagnose” misconceptions and deficiencies in student learning. 4) Allowing students choice in the way they are assessed. 5) Providing students quality feedback in a timely manner. 6) Encouraging students to assessment their own work and set goals with their own learning. 7) Allowing new records of achievement to replace old ones.
In Royse City ISD, our teachers would agree that with helpful models of what a student is expected to do, the level of quality work and student learning increases in the classroom. Together with student choice over the type of assessment and early and often forms of feedback from the teacher, students are able to have control about their education. With these practices in place of the classroom, students are also able to set standards and goals for themselves and be successful in the classroom. However, these practices become difficult with state testing guidelines. The authors state in this article “a standardized approach to classroom assessment may be efficient, but it is not fair because any
References: McTighe, Jay, & O’Connor, Ken (2005, November). Seven practices for effective learning. Educational Leadership, Vol. 63 Issue 3, 10-17.