Monica De Tuya

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Knowing The Learner Chapter 2 Review #1302
    Monica De Tuya
    Keymaster

    Hi Patrick,
    I have specific to pieces of your content where I was particularly excited, curious etc. about what you had to say (please see more of that below). But in general, I would like to say that I liked the format of your response, I feel that it prompted a lot of challenges from you – and I mean that in a good way. I sense that you are really digging in to this material, thinking it over, making connections, and confronting the material when it doesn’t fit or doesn’t connect. I am not surprised. I feel like I went through the same struggles. Still do. We are working in a realm that is so beautifully complex and interwoven across disciplines, infused with politics, and wrought with emotion – but perhaps most challenging, working with the insides and outsides of humans. There is a complexity there that is daunting. And yet, it is my belief that the concepts and guidance through KTL brings simplicity and clarity to that complexity. For example, each time I read this chapter, my attention is drawn to the same thing: the 3 questions that reveal the essence of the educational processes. In this way, it is made so simple for me. This is not to diminish the very real, reasonable and important dilemmas you bring up. I guess the point I am making is that this work is, at the very same time, both simple and complex, if that is even possible!

    Here are my specific responses:

    “Overall, I still liked the reading, but I would start to have concerns if reading this in a non-professional setting.”

    I am curious as to what type of concerns. E.g. Comprehension? Feeling the value of the text? Loosing interest?

    “If I am understanding, concepts are parts of skills and skills are part of dispositions. Is that correct? ”

    This is great! What IS the relationship between the three domains of learning? How/do they overlap? How/do they lead from one to the other?

    “Artistic aptitude is listed as an innate trait, which I wholeheartedly disagree with. Artistic aptitude is more of a learned skill, just as much as aptitude with typing or open mindedness…..Looking over this I would not be able to define whether something was a trait or disposition.”

    I find this discussion similar to (and just as fascinating as) the discussions/arguments that have been held for decades about nature vs nurture. Being the highly complex organisms we are, and with science still struggling to understand aspects of our neurophysiology, neurochemistry, genetics, etc. – all of which play a part in both our traits and dispositions – how can ever untangle this? You might find the writings out there on fixed versus growth mindset interesting…and perhaps they even make this discussion more confusing, because they proclaim a direct effect that beliefs (dispositions) can have on our brains (fixed trait, presumably).

    “I would reorder “The Contexts of Educational Activities” to Settings, Programs, Activities, Events since that more closely matches their relations. The current order seems mismatched.”

    Yes, I see this. It also shows me that you get these concepts!

    in reply to: Knowing The Learner Chapter 1 Review #1289
    Monica De Tuya
    Keymaster

    First I will say – what fun this is! Every time I re-read KTL, and every time I have the privilege of witnessing someone experience KTL for the first time, I feel like new insights, connections, and revelations are made. Thank you, Patrick, for taking this journey!

    Now, onto my specific responses:

    With regards to the book in general:

    “I would recommend to people interested” –> I am curious who you think would be interested…in other words, in your opinion, who is the audience for this book? Who do you think would find it of value? And why?

    With regards to accomplishment-based grading:

    “Does this work most of the time or can it work in certain scenarios?” –> I will turn this (perhaps rhetorical) question back to you and ask: what do you think? Would it take a certain scenario for this particular approach to work, and if so, what do you think this scenario would be? What would help facilitate the success of an accomplish-based grading approach, and what would hinder it? I have my own thoughts and research to draw upon about the answer to your question, specifically with regards to the can it work. And I think the content in KTL provides some guidance here as well. I suspect that Paul has more expertise in terms of the research that tells us does it work. But I would like to hear more from you first!

    With regards to C&L:

    “What’s to stop a student from just putting no effort into the assignment?” –> Indeed. Why should they try at all? I think the chapter gave some explicit and implicit answers to this question, or rather, suggested the context or situation under which this would be more likely that they would try at all. What do you think? (For instance, I think this speaks to the “transparency, motivation, fairness” indicators, brought up in reference to Robert Pavlica’s class.)

    “What if students are getting all the wrong answers? what about those on the edge of the bell curve?” –> As part of your ACASE on-boarding experience, you will have the opportunity to experience C&L firsthand, as a student would. I would be interested to circle back to your questions/comments after that and see what you have to say!

    With regards to Questions about Science Research in the High School:

    You asked three very important and interesting questions. I would argue that as you proceed through the book, you will have the ability to answer these questions. I do not know if there is actually one answer to them, or even a right answer to them, but I believe that based on our work, there is an ACASE answer to each of these questions…

    With regards to your last paragraph:

    This is an interesting and important paragraph for many reasons. I appreciate how you internalized the content, making it personal and applicable to your educational experiences. It is fascinating to me how this book inspires that type of reflection – it happened to me as well. There are two additional points that struck me in your comments here:

    1) for you, the emphasis seemed to be on how this is “good” for teachers…when I re-read this chapter, I saw more this time of how it is “good” for students! I am curious – did you see anything or can you extrapolate anything to answer your own question, of why this is good for students, of how this process improves student outcomes?

    2) The point you raise about getting people “on board” is a critical one. I will use the word “stakeholders” – in any educational endeavor there are most certainly many different and many levels of stakeholders. But it goes deeper than this, to a recurring theme/point not only in this book (e.g. the preface, p. 10 & 12) but in all of ACASE’s work…and you actually allude to it in your reflections here. That is the connection of assessment information (and all the processes and activities wrapped up in assessment information) to community building. What are your thoughts on that?

    Monica De Tuya
    Keymaster

    Hi All,
    When I view this report the first thing that strikes me is the 100% agreement the raters had for one of the students – I was not expecting to see that level of consensus, and I am curious as to what worked so well to achieve that agreement. For the other student, everyone agrees except for one person – me! I see that there are comments available for some of the ratings, would it be worthwhile/possible to easily view those or present those within this conversation thread? That would add an element of information that might enhance the conversation.
    Monica

    Monica De Tuya
    Keymaster

    Hi All,

    Here are my thoughts with regards to the above prompt: “What were your expectations for this rating experience and were those expectations met? Why or why not?”

    This was the first time I administered the activity as an instructor, so therefore it was the first time I had rated the activity from that perspective as well. Also, it had been several years since I had worked with the process and the tools of this activity. My expectations were that this would be a complex and time-consuming activity, both administering and rating. My expectations were met! I found that preparing for administering, administering and rating all took much focus, energy, and intellectual exertion. Was this because of the tools or the process, or was it because I was coming to the activity after a long time away, and my personal process? I think it is the latter.

    This is not to say that it was a negative experience – to the contrary, I found the intellectual exertion exciting and productive!

    Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on your expectations for the activity. Then, as this conversation progresses, we are going to look more closely and specifically at the actual tools and processes.

    Best,
    Monica

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)