I have just read a blog from one of the learners in my class. He went into the subject matter and analyzed it thoroughly. I spent over ten hours working through my project for Tuesday and the other material for the final. It took me many hours this week trying to narrow the objectives to those that might work with the rubric. Then I worked with the rubric. This work kept me from going into depth about the Higher Education policy in Europe and nationally. However, I got familiar with some of the basic concepts and ideas. My course mate’s blog helped clear some of what I read up for me.
My problem with this assignment is, I am working on assessment for my proposed course and trying to write objectives and rubrics that are doing what they are supposed to be doing, helping me assess my students and helping students to assess themselves. Finally, trying to find assessment tools to help future student through the course material is a task and is about all I can, really, handle. Thinking globally about assessment makes my head hurt! This much I can say, the world is concerned with achieving the education goals that are set for the students. At each level, globally, nationally and at the state level, boards are getting together and asking themselves what needs to be learned, at what level and how best to test for evidence of this learning.
Herein lies the dilemma. The very people who got us all into this mess in the first place are trying to figure out how to get students out of it. From what I have heard and read so far, students are not the people making these decisions, nor do them seem to be consulted as to how they understand schooling at every level. Time and time again, we have seen experiments about student learning. One of the underlying concepts is students will learn if given the autonomy to learn what they are interested in with minimal guidance. That is the bottom line.
So what is the fuss here? It seems these academic intellectuals and state legislators and teachers are starting at the top and working down to achieve an answer and set up a new blueprint for teaching and learning. Why don’t they start from the bottom up and work from there? Why? Because, the world today’s potential students are facing is far different from anything anyone over the age of 35 has even conceived of. Learners are using difference parts of their brains to do different tasks and using technologies never used before. Everything I have read about the institutional moves to change institutions and programs of learning and the assessment of todays programs and institutions…has little to do with what the digital learner is all about or what corporations will need in the future.
Having spent five years as a graduate student and three of those years in one of the best political science departments in the US, I am seriously concerned with all the emphasis put on theories and theory building. Even more perplexing to me is the whole emphasis on assessing what colleges and universities are teaching. Granted they want to see results or they want students to be prepared for the world and its problems…but they have no idea what it will look like. Therefore, they want to give students the skills to problem solve, think critically and work in an environment they can only imagine at this point. My question is this, what do you think you are changing? You are trapped within the parameters of your own learning world and your learning experiences of the past and cannot possible create a new system that applies to upcoming learners, without their input in every step of assessment regarding institutions or schools and programs of learning.
Think about this thought…what if learners and students did the work your trying to do in assessing schools and programs of study? What would the outcomes look like? What kind of assessment would you have and what would the results look like? How can the older ways of doing things change with the assessment your using? I am open…go ahead! I have years to hear your thoughts on all of this. In sum, because I was a high school drop out and dropped out of my doctoral program (making me a university drop out), even when I knew I could finish and do so with honors, I know what today’s learners are saying and doing when they drop out…engage us or we leave! Or, let us follow our interests in the way we are seeing them through the screens of our computers, while looking into global cyberspace. Our instincts are good and mostly likely we see much further into the future than you can, simply by sitting at our computers in our own homes. Are we ready to listen to them?
Our corporations and businesses of the future are really going to dictate what we need to teach students and the skills they will need to be employable in the years to come. How many corporations and corporate board members are sitting in on your assessment parties when policy is being considered? I actully think Euporean institutional assessment is slightly farther ahead of the United State’s efforts. Please view the last two videos. They talk about what is needed and what would not work in a college or university. I took futurist courses in my undergraduate studies of sociology. Professor Patrick Dixon is a futurist. These are his ideas and that is NEW IDEAS.
Post Script: I forgot to add a comment or two about assessing the learning backgrounds of learners who have a rich background of experience on the job and in the world. Although this was suppose to happen (somewhere in the 60s), colleges and universities seldom seem to understand how to assess life experience. As a result, most people do not get credit for the things they have learned on the job or in other ways. I have always figured it was because universities are corporations and want to make money. Not accepting credits from other colleges or giving credit for life experience, they require students to take more of their courses and spent more money in their institution. Please see the link on assessment: http://chronicle.com/article/Where-Life-Earns-Credit-/64618
JOYSTECHTOOL 