Formative vs. Summative Assessment:
Formative assessment has to do with measurements and conclusions that are made during the course of the program. It is used to determine whether an existing program of study is functioning as intended.
Summative assessment has reference to measurements made at the end of a course of study. It determines the effectiveness of the program based on a judgement of the learner. Judgements/grades are determined through testing.
What is the difference between Criterion, Norm, and Self-referenced interpretations?
Criterion:
The preferred method of interpretation. These assessments are meant to determine whether the learner has objectively achieved a set level of competency.
Norm:
These type are used when there is no set agreement on what the learners must know. It is a judgement about the learner's mastery of the material in comparison to the other learners.
Self:
Used when the learning desired is personal. Completely based in the learner's own opinion.
What is Self-Directed Learning?
It is a sophisticated type of learning style which integrates feeling with thoughts, acceptance of contradiction of established ideas, and tends to address problems for which there is no single final solution. These type may easily be offended by menial assessment methods such as multiple-choice questions. They enjoy critical thinking to which selection type tests do not provide opportunity. A self-directed learner might be tempted to withdraw himself from the class if he feels that there is no ability for him to demonstrate his knowledge. It is important to challenge this type of student with both formative and summative assessments, but you will be most successful as an instructor blending in all types of assessment.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Blog Assignment #2
What type of modality do I learn with?
As for in the airplane, learning by touch is the most obvious way to learn. But there is also the visual to consider. Especially grasping what the side pictures and outside reference points should be looking like. I am not much for auditory learning. I tend to zone out or get really tired and bored. Maybe it's ADD? Hope not. I'm a hands-on type of guy. I know I have learned something when it becomes natural to me. I remember past instructors telling me how to do something and having to wrap my brain around how it felt to perform the maneuver. Until that occurred, I struggled.
Points I will use in my teaching:
1. I think it's interesting how people associate meaning to things that they learn. In my own experience, learning power-on stalls, I tend to associate negativity. I struggled at first getting the recovery right and my instructor would become impatient and irritable. Those feelings of anxiety still come out when I perform maneuvers that at first seemed difficult. Knowing this, and drawing from my own experience I will be better able to realize how a student is perceiving a situation has a lot to do with his performance.
2. I also want to try to incorporate using all three types of learning styles in my teaching. Realizing that when you can teach visually, auditorilly, and kinestethically, students will retain much better what they learn. One example that I can think of is teaching airport traffic patterns. Show an unfamiliar airport (visual), act as ATC to give directions (auditory), and have the students chairfly (kinesthetic).
As for in the airplane, learning by touch is the most obvious way to learn. But there is also the visual to consider. Especially grasping what the side pictures and outside reference points should be looking like. I am not much for auditory learning. I tend to zone out or get really tired and bored. Maybe it's ADD? Hope not. I'm a hands-on type of guy. I know I have learned something when it becomes natural to me. I remember past instructors telling me how to do something and having to wrap my brain around how it felt to perform the maneuver. Until that occurred, I struggled.
Points I will use in my teaching:
1. I think it's interesting how people associate meaning to things that they learn. In my own experience, learning power-on stalls, I tend to associate negativity. I struggled at first getting the recovery right and my instructor would become impatient and irritable. Those feelings of anxiety still come out when I perform maneuvers that at first seemed difficult. Knowing this, and drawing from my own experience I will be better able to realize how a student is perceiving a situation has a lot to do with his performance.
2. I also want to try to incorporate using all three types of learning styles in my teaching. Realizing that when you can teach visually, auditorilly, and kinestethically, students will retain much better what they learn. One example that I can think of is teaching airport traffic patterns. Show an unfamiliar airport (visual), act as ATC to give directions (auditory), and have the students chairfly (kinesthetic).
Monday, January 10, 2011
Blog Assignment #1
What is epistomology?
A formal definition of the word is, "a philosophical branch of study that seeks to define what knowledge is and how you can come to know". This is something that I personally have never thought about. I always figured that when you come to know something, it becomes natural and it doesn't require much thought after that to arrive at conclusions. Example: 2+2=4. I just KNOW that is what it is and don't have to think about it much. In relation to aviation, an example could be the fact that by pulling back on the yoke, the aircraft will pitch up. It is knowledge to me because it comes naturally and doesn't require too many brain cells to achieve the desired outcome.
Constructivist vs. Positivist
I'll begin with the positivist. This type of epistemology deals with facts and how they are divided up or "blocked" into packets of information. It is disseminated to the students by degrees and is learned in sort of a pyrimid style beginning with the basics and ramping up (if the students goes far enough in the field) to where he can become an "expert" in the chosen field of study. Although the student may have knowledge in many fields, he can only claim expertise in this particular field because of the learning structure.
A constructivist on the other hand deals more with the use of the information gained rather than rote regurgitation. It requires that the student gives meaning to the data that is presented so that it will be useful to him.
Which type do I identify with?
I think that I am a positivist type learner. I am an analytical, left-brained type weirdo that actually enjoys things like math and physics. I prefer to hear a lecture, then study it out on my own. I have to admit I like the organization and stability of the positivist approach. I like knowing what to expect I guess.
A formal definition of the word is, "a philosophical branch of study that seeks to define what knowledge is and how you can come to know". This is something that I personally have never thought about. I always figured that when you come to know something, it becomes natural and it doesn't require much thought after that to arrive at conclusions. Example: 2+2=4. I just KNOW that is what it is and don't have to think about it much. In relation to aviation, an example could be the fact that by pulling back on the yoke, the aircraft will pitch up. It is knowledge to me because it comes naturally and doesn't require too many brain cells to achieve the desired outcome.
Constructivist vs. Positivist
I'll begin with the positivist. This type of epistemology deals with facts and how they are divided up or "blocked" into packets of information. It is disseminated to the students by degrees and is learned in sort of a pyrimid style beginning with the basics and ramping up (if the students goes far enough in the field) to where he can become an "expert" in the chosen field of study. Although the student may have knowledge in many fields, he can only claim expertise in this particular field because of the learning structure.
A constructivist on the other hand deals more with the use of the information gained rather than rote regurgitation. It requires that the student gives meaning to the data that is presented so that it will be useful to him.
Which type do I identify with?
I think that I am a positivist type learner. I am an analytical, left-brained type weirdo that actually enjoys things like math and physics. I prefer to hear a lecture, then study it out on my own. I have to admit I like the organization and stability of the positivist approach. I like knowing what to expect I guess.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)