As the season of standardized testing begins in Pennsylvania, I think of other schools across the commonwealth that are facing the same crucible as mine. We (meaning educators) are tasked with the preparation of students for these tests. Furthermore, we are asked to prepare our learners for standards that are aligned with a standardized assessment without "teaching to the test." The range of abilities in modern education, paired with the likelihood of customized instruction, is forming a "perfect storm" of old vs. new. As ideologies clash, learners and facilitators alike will have to choose sides, aligning themselves with tailored learning or traditional education. We are at an impasse, it seems, where those responsible for creating the assessments are dictating curricular decisions, and those who are facilitating learning (and therefore administering said assessments) have few resources to adequately prepare. As far as the Pennsylvania System of Standardized Assessment (PSSA) goes, the stakes have never been higher. Teacher evaluations and school funding must bow before the almighty test score. Teachers whose students do not perform on one test as well as their peers will have a lower performance evaluation. In other states, like Texas, there is even legislation on the docket to have teacher pay affected by student performance. Imagine if you will: a world where every job's salary was determined by customer satisfaction alone. How much would your mechanic make if you got to determine his pay? It's surely an extreme example, but of an extreme proposal. Waves of students are seeking respite from the onslaught of test after test. Alternate assessments, once easily accessible, are no more. Students will either take the same test as their non academic peers, or the version of the test for the extremely disabled. There is no middle ground anymore, and the substitution is not the same. Such a small percentage of students actually qualify for alternate assessments that it does not represent the population of students with special needs accurately. In this world of modern testing and education, we may be overdoing it. With the future comes change. We may not like it, but it comes nonetheless. What will our great change be? Will we stop the cycle of testing, or will we add the final straw that breaks the camel's back? The choice is ours to make.
0 Comments
If someone were to ask me what the most important aspect of teaching is, I would respond with, "Instruction." Educators (especially administrators) often find themselves trying to define this critical component to the learning process. As a teacher, I often wonder what form instruction will take in the future. Currently, it is hard to define. The attempt to do so may result in frustration, tedium, and a stalemate of creative thought. Instruction has elements of teaching, learning, planning, and delivery in it. Part of teaching requires that learning facilitators (a title some would think teachers are destined to have) make meaningful connections to their students. Some might argue that learning requires a face-to-face interaction. The reality (however sad) is that students don't even need face-to-face interaction to find friends. What makes us think they need it to learn? The face of 21st century teaching and learning is the access to and use of technology. This technology will be used by the learner to access a plethora of educational offerings. This enables learners to be engaged in the standards aligned system in ways that teachers previously thought impossible. Learning facilitators will soon find themselves asking: how do I connect to students I don't see? Not every public school student is enrolled in cyber education, but there is a growing trend in distance education enrollment in the United States. In some schools (namely mine), students are already enrolling in cyber programs at a fast rate. In my day-to-day duties, I am tasked with the management and instruction of special education students who are enrolled in the district cyber program. The management and instructional coaching of cyber students is enough of a challenge, but students who have Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) present a very unique challenge in the 21st century. These students require a customized education, whether they are in the brick-and-mortar school building or enrolled in a cyber-education program. The role of the teacher will indeed transition to that of a learning facilitator. It may only be a matter of a few years, with all the recent technological upgrades to schools. One-to-one device use is increasingly popular amongst public schools, and it is the beginning of tailored educational offerings. In this first year of one-to-one devices, I have been able to effectively implement a non-disruptive, individualized, data-based system of intervention, supplemented with my teaching and remediation. In many regards, I may already be a learning facilitator. There are some elements to teaching that are (as of now) irreplaceable. In my experience, a student who makes a physical appearance in the school building (even if only for a period or two) will have a significant increase in their academic growth. The direct intervention of a teacher or case manager cannot be replicated. As a final reminder of the inevitability of the future, consider this tweet: The transition to completely customized education will not be an easy one. If history has taught us anything, it is that the acceptance of change is slow and (often) painful. Teachers of the "old guard" will not as readily accept these new ideas of blended and customized learning, compared to their younger and more recently trained colleagues. The ensuing struggle will only strengthen the bonds that teachers (or "learning facilitators") have with their learners. As long as a focus on students and their growth (academic, physical, and emotional) is held by all stakeholders, the end result of public education will not change: a productive member of society that is fully equipped with the necessary skills to succeed in life outside of school. Change will manifest itself in the blending of online and in-person instruction, a school district's variety of academic offerings, and the ways in which educator and learner work together.
|