I am helping to plan a reunion for the high school where I work (and attended). As I was thumbing through some things from yesteryear I came across this cartoon, drawn by a student, once published in our student newspaper. In what year do you think this picture was drawn and why? Feel free to add any commentary about the deep educational implications of this work : ) Check back next week for the answer.
I’ve heard people say that schools are the only places that a person from 100 years ago could be dropped into and still be able to recognize. I have even caught myself nodding to this statement. I had some time to reflect on this today and yes, I do believe that a person from 100 years ago would be able to figure out where they were if they were to suddenly appear in our schools, just as they would if they were to pop into a bank, police station or restaurant. I know that the people, usually presenters at conferences, who make such statements, are well meaning and the intent of their message is that we need to continue to improve the way we help kids learn. As educational professionals I believe we have an ethical responsibility to do so! It is easy to make sweeping statements like education hasn’t changed in 100 years. It takes more energy to observe how education has changed in 100 years. What are the ways in which you believe education has changed and improved since the turn of the 20th centruy?
I have been wrestling with the issue of whether it is appropriate to include “behaviour” as part of a student’s mark. It is common practice for teachers to award students marks for good behaviour or to deduct marks for poor behaviour. This is done as an attempt to motivate students to do things right, like coming to class with the appropriate items, having homework done and arriving on time. Sometimes if is very cut and dry: Students will receive two free lates, after that, one percentage point will be deducted from the student’s final grade each subsequent late. Sometimes it is a bit wishy-washy: Students will receive a mark out of 10 on their classroom participation and cooperation. Whether the practice is to reward desirable or penalize undesirable behaviour, it impacts the student’s final grade in the course. I agree that a student’s grade should reflect how well they know the concepts, targets, objectives, learning outcomes (or whatever else they are called) of the class. I also understand that some courses have a larger emphasis on the affective domain, physical education comes immediately to mind, and consequently it is somehow more appropriate to include this domain as part of a student’s grade. Certainly it is not less important for a math student to come to class prepared and participate in the lesson than a phys. ed. student. So how do we properly assess behaviour? Do we separate the two components completely? Can they be completely separated? Isn’t it important for the end users of the grades–the gate keepers to post-secondary education—to know the affective characteristics of a student, as well as their level of academic achievement? What about the “soft skills” so sought after by employers, shouldn’t a student’s marks communicate something about their capabilities in those areas? I know, more questions than answers . . . what are your thoughts?
