ERIC Number: EJ953116
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2011
Pages: 3
Abstractor: ERIC
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-1536-6367
EISSN: N/A
Commentary on Road Maps for Learning: A Guide to the Navigation of Learning Progressions
Heritage, Margaret
Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, v9 n2-3 p149-151 2011
Ten years ago, the authors of Knowing What Students Know proposed that large-scale and classroom assessment should be created from the same underlying model of learning. They suggested that, ideally, a model of learning should provide a developmental perspective, "laying out one or more typical progressions from novice levels toward competence and then expertise, identifying milestones or landmark performances along the way." Since this advice was first mooted, the progressions movement has been gaining ground in an effort to provide better descriptions of learning than typically offered by standards and from which to develop curriculum, assessment, and instruction. Black, Wilson, and Yao (this issue) advance the discussion of progressions by situating them clearly at the curriculum, assessment, and pedagogy nexus. With the clear road map that progressions provide, teachers can determine strategic curricular aims, plan and implement their teaching, interpret assessment information, and respond to the status of student learning as it emerges in relation to the progression. No doubt progressions provide support for taking these actions. However, the successful accomplishment of each is not only reliant on progressions but on the knowledge and skills that teachers bring to this range of tasks. Indeed, all the advantages that learning progressions offer will founder in the absence of the knowledge and skills of teachers to make effective use of them for the purposes these authors espouse. Black et al. distinguish between macro- and micro-levels of assessment, proposing that summarizing a period of learning requires macro-level assessment, while formative work demands micro-level. From the author's perspective, teachers need to deploy distinctive kinds of knowledge and skills to apply the two forms of assessment. While it is comparatively straightforward to estimate student achievement in terms of a location along a progression, the formative use of progressions may require a considerably more sophisticated and nuanced approach to their implementation. The author contends that the progressions of Black et al. are necessary, but not sufficient, for true instructional improvement. A large-scale effort in teacher development centered on the implementation of the progressions, and of the formative judgments that are based on them, is still needed if students and teachers are to take a measurable step forward.
Descriptors: Expertise, Curriculum Development, Instructional Improvement, Student Evaluation, Achievement Gains, Educational Objectives, Reader Response, Summative Evaluation, Formative Evaluation, Change Strategies, Educational Change, Teaching Methods, Classroom Techniques, Educational Strategies
Psychology Press. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Opinion Papers
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education; Higher Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A