Pay the People What They are Worth

By Dr. Edwin Weaver

January 26, 2009

We all want to be paid for all the work we do and when we are not paid, we feel cheated. When that happens, usually, we will avoid that type of work in the future. The same hold true in education.

What does your scoring say to the students? How you weight quizzes and exams marks sends a strong message to your students. You may think you are being fair and equal about everything, but is that how the student sees it.

At the university where I worked teaching English, the program director wanted the four main language skills weighted the same (reading, writing, language knowledge and listening). This sounded fair and correct, however the way that the university assessed these four skills were different.

To assess the language knowledge (vocabulary) the students received multiple-choice questions, memory level, not much work required. To assess listening, the student listens to a taped conversation and answered mostly multiple-choice and true/false questions. Even the assessment of the reading skill used multiple-choice questions.

Now, the writing is entirely different. The students had to write a 500-word essay. The essay was based on a question, which was related to the reading and listening component. Connecting the writing task to the listen and reading is great however, the students must write 500 words or more. This requires much more work than answering multiple-choice and true/false questions, not to mention you are incorporating the listening task and reading task.

Each section of the exam received the same amount of marks. The exam consisted of 20 questions from language knowledge, the 25 questions from reading, the 20 questions from listening, and the 500-word essay (with an outline). Each section, Language Knowledge, Listening, Reading and Writing all received the same amount of marks; 25% of the value of the mid-term or final exam (the final exam for Foundation year was 50% of their final grade and the mid-term was 25% of the final grade).

Here is the question to my fellow educators. How do you suppose this affects the students? Knowing that the amount of work required for writing an essay has no more value than answering multiple-choice and true/false questions, where would you devote you efforts.

Of course, the students concentrate on the first three sections and if time permits, they go to the writing section and write something. I have invigilated many of these exams and watched the students ignore the writing section and concentrate on the solving the multiple-choice questions. Afterwards they would spend 10 to 20 minutes writing something, often not even answering the question.

Their actions made a clear declaration that they did not value the writing section because it was not worth it. I followed up my theory by giving the students of my classes and two other classes a survey. The results showed that the students felt that 1) the writing took too much time, 2) they could score higher by focusing on the multiple-choice questions, and most importantly that 3) they would attempt to write the essay if the value was higher on the exams.

This attitude also affected their learning. Attempting to teach these students how to write well was very difficult. They did not see a need for it. They felt they could pass the course without learning how to write well.

Attempting to be fair, we have de-motivated the students in a particular skill. Looking at this true-life example may give you some insights on your own classes.

How do you weigh the different tasks the students perform? How do the students perceive the marking? In our case, we performed a survey to gather data on student’s perception to the different tasks and the value of each of those tasks. This told us that if we wanted to promote all four language skills we had to change the weighting to create an environment where the students applied themselves equally to all four skills.

Analyzing the impact of our assessments is very important for the continued success of our students. Take a look at how you assess your students, how you mark the assessments and the weight you assign to each task and ask yourself and your students if it is fair. Ask them to rate each task in order of preference and explain their preference. You may be surprised at the answers you get.

The Art of Reflection

By Dr. Edwin C. Weaver

www.we-develop-leaders.com

www.uniqueleaders.org

www.english-works.net

Input, input, input! I-Pod, I-Phone, Walkman, cable TV, cell phones, instant messages, CNN, high powered ad campaigns, internet and the list goes on; we are undulated with input. Everywhere you turn you are barraged with input, however there is no time to digest and evaluate the information.

Yes, we are in a world where the amount of information and knowledge doubles every 18 months. We live in a time where there are great discoveries and it seems that we will find the answers to everything. However, how much of the information we receive is really useful, how much is good, how much is leading us in the right direction? This is difficult to tell, especially without true reflection.

Many of our students are so accustomed to having constant input that they do not know how to evaluate what is good, what is helpful or what is correct. They do not know how to take the information they have received and turn it into solid abilities. They need to learn how to reflect on the information and turn it into something worthwhile, to turn it into true knowledge and not just memorization.

One of Dewey’s (1933) basic assumptions was that learning improves to the degree that it arises out of the process of reflection. Therefore, Knowledge is constructed, in part, through reflection, e.g., ongoing active, persistent, and thoughtful consideration and participation in a situation (Canning, 1991).

In order to make good decisions, in order to make the right choices, we need to reflect on the information we receive. According to Mezirow (1990) reflection is used “to examine the justification for one’s beliefs … and to reassess the efficacy of the strategies and procedures used in problem solving” (p. xvi).

Even when a student arrives at the university, he/she does not have this ability. In many cases they have to learn how to reflect on what they have learned and turn their information in to concrete strategies and procedures. Teachers at the high school and elementary level have given the student volumes of information, knowledge, but the student has not had time to sort, categorize and process the information into usable knowledge and abilities.

Often, the student made errors during his/her time at school. These errors were corrected by the teacher giving the student the correct answer. However, the student did not have time to reflect on his/her mistakes and discard the faulty thinking which caused him/her to make the error in the first place.

This lack of reflection means that the student will probably continue to make the same mistakes. Students who have errors in their thinking process or misconnection with information need time to reflect on the information and sort out what is correct and what erroneous. They must connect the right information with the right outcomes; so that they will ‘know’ that the answer is correct.

Mezirow (1990) said that “reflection enables us to correct distortions in our beliefs and errors in problem solving. We must re-learn how to use reflection in our daily lives. We must teach our students that they need to take time out every day to reflect on the information which they have received during the day and discard that which is not useful or incorrect.

We have bombarded our students, our future hope, with volumes of information. We have given everything they need to succeed, except for the most important tool possible; reflection. The only way they can sort our this bombardment of information id by teaching them how to effectively reflect on the information to avoid errors.

Singer (1980) has said that the bombardment to the senses produces a series of orienting responses that interferes with cognition and reflection. Our students have more information in their head than most of us when we were their age, but with less ability to use this information correctly. The increased amount of input is actually causing our student to become less intelligent, less effective.

In an effort to ensure that our students learn and to combat what we believe is apathy or inability to learn in a specific manner, we as educators, have often turned to the visual aids and the media to help with the education process. In fact we may have been defeating ourselves and our ultimate goal. It has also been put forth that prolonged exposure to media reinforces a narrow view of reality, suggests children (Swan, Meskill & DeMaio, 1998) and adolescents (Huston & Alvarez, 1990; Signorielli, 1990, 1993; Wroblewski & Huston, 1987).

These added inputs may help to student learn or memorize some facts, but in the end it may hurt more than help. We may be causing our students to focus on a narrow point of view and a point of view which may be erroneous. If we want our students to break the mold and to overcome the errors we have made, we must help them to overcome the effects of this incredible amount of input.

This is not to say that we must stop or limit the amount of input. Instead of trying to stop or limit we must teach them how to properly reflect on this input to determine what is good and what is helpful, so that they can discard errors or the useless information. We must teach elementary and high school children how to correctly reflect on the input they receive and how to evaluate their own reflection.

Just talking about the information you have received or rehashing the information in your mind is not sufficient to engage the metacognitive level. In other words, you will not really learn from the information Marzano (2001). Marzano has researched and written much on the subject of learning and one point is clear, we need to do more than just present information. We need to teach our student how to reflect on what they have learned.

Every new piece of information must be compared to prior knowledge and or old idea. Connections must be made. Errors must be discovered. Truth must be reinforced and the student must proceed.

We are in the process of developing the future. this future will determine what happen to the human race, as we know it. Shouldn’t we give them every possible opportunity to succeed? Shouldn’t we give them every tool they might need? We teach them about every subject under the sun while they are in elementary and high school, just in case they need that information. Now, let’s also give them the tool to evaluate, assimilate and use that information. Let us give them the gift of the Art of Reflection.

References:

Canning, C. (1991). What teachers say about reflection. “Educational Leadership,” 48(6), 18-21. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ 422 848).

Dewey, J. (1933). “How we think.” Boston, MA: DC Heath and Co.

Huston, A., & Alvarez, M. (1990). The socialization context of gender role development in early adolescence. In R. Montemayor (Ed.), From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period (pp. 156-179). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Marzano, R. J. (2001). Designing a new taxonomy of educational objectives. Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press.

Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Signorielli, N. (1990). Children, television, and gender roles: Messages and impact. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 11, 50-58.

Singer, J. L. (1980). “The Power and Limits of Television: A Cognitive-Affective Analysis,” in The Entertainment Function of Television, edited by P. Tannenbaum Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1980.

Putnam, R.W. (1991). Recipes and reflective learning: “What should prevent you from saying it that way?” In D.A. Sch%n (Ed.), “The Reflective Turn: Case Studies in and on Educational Practice.” New York: Teachers College Press.

Swan, K., Meskill, C., & DeMaio, S. (1998). Social learning from broadcast television. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Vandewater, E. A. and Lee S. J. “Measuring Children’s Media Use in the Digital Age: Issues and Challenges,” American Behavioral Scientist (forthcoming).

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological

processes. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University.

Wroblewski, R., & Huston, A. C. (1987). Televised occupational stereotypes and their effects on early adolescence: Are they changing? Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 283-297.

Note about the articles and Dr. Weaver:

These articles are not meant to be scholarly investigations, just the experiences, opinions and beliefs of Dr. Weaver.

Ever time I have run into a problem with my students or colleagues, I have looked for answers. I have read the research of others on the subject. I have performed my own research, whenever possible, to find the answers. I have taken time to reflect on the information and form my own opinion.

Afterwards, I have put into practice the information, as I see it. If it worked, I continued to use it. If it did not produce the desired effects, I went back to the drawing board.

What worked for me is what I have written about. I write these articles to others who may be experiencing similar difficulties in their career, in the hopes that something in these articles may help.

May you find the answer to your problems and find success in your live and promote success in the lives of those you teach.

EDU - TALK