assessment reflection

Okay, I admit it, I did not have a rough draft of my digital media project prepared! I'll pelt those tennis balls at myself. However, i did learn something from the peer assessment activity--we decided that it is possible to do a movie in WinMovieMaker with 2 audio components without having to deal with the multiple steps. Get ready, here it is...blast the music in the background while you're recording your narration! Okay, all joking aside, I always enjoy that element of peer feedback, because troubleshooting and bouncing ideas is the most fun part of doing any task. I don't have a preference between getting or giving--both are equally rewarding.

When I get my own classroom, I will be all about peer assessments. I think the process just comes more naturally to English teachers (at Curry), because that's something we've delved into quite intensely when talking about teaching writing. It's the only way to teach writing--giving feedback and getting it. there's something to be learned from both ends. I actually think that some of the models we use in teaching writing (more structured, role-specific) could be applicable to creating authentic formative assessments for other content areas and tasks.

For example, there is the workshop strategy where the owner of the work is not allowed to speak while group members objectively discuss only what they observe without interpreting or judging (you're not even allowed to say "I like" because it's feedback that's not specific, not helpful, and not based on the work itself--it's the easy way out for the responder to not have to genuinely reflect and respond). Initially, that was difficult to get used to, but I think it forced peer responders to take a closer look at the work instead of glossing over it. Also, not allowing the author to speak prevents conflicts arising from the author getting defensive. In later workshop sessions, they'll get the chance to guide the feedback process.

Take the example from class last night; Alicia had said that she wasn't happy when readers did not "get" what she had intended in her writing. If her peers had only listed what was observable (basic comprehension level) from the piece without inferring meaning, perhaps it would have been clearer to Alicia what worked and what didn't, what was missing, or confusing. This way, the author gets to tweak things before readers begin the process of interpreting or analyzing. I think the same model could be applied to other things--peer responding to presentations, projects, etc. In that sense, it's actually an opportunity for the author to self-assess and reflect on their own work, based purely on what is there and what isn't.

In teaching writing, this workshop process slowly moves from the objective towards the inferences, but it provides authors with the safety of being given opportunities to fine-tune their work before feeding it to the sharks, so to speak. Off the top of my head, it would be a terrific way to perform formative assessments of students as they work towards an independent project. If all content areas could move towards a structured portfolio, where the entire body of work is considered, as opposed to a small batch of tests/quizzes and papers, I would be so happy. Wouldn't it be possible, that instead of taking report cards and transcripts of grades with them from level to level, students could take a portfolio representative of their efforts as well as learning curve. Now there's a pipe dream.