tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post3090004624170424873..comments2024-03-27T08:53:29.267-04:00Comments on CURMUDGUCATION: Defining Competency Based EducationPeter Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16511193640285760299noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-13375645435049406832016-04-01T23:02:12.234-04:002016-04-01T23:02:12.234-04:00I'm working through your comment "Sometim...I'm working through your comment "Sometimes real learning means figuring out how to find your way through the fog, not simply learning to follow directions and meet someone else's expectations." The deeper our school district has wandered through the jungle of CBE, known in these parts as The Proficiency-Based Grading System, the more entangled we've become in the brambles of Learning Targets and Mastery. Frankly, the fog would be a welcome relief. At least then we could admit that learning is a process shrouded in a good deal of mystery. <br /><br />Measuring real learning has always been difficult, hasn't it? For one thing, real learning doesn't always happen until much later, even years after the final exam. On the other hand, real learning from the first semester might be forgotten by the second semester. (Is there such a thing as Eternal Mastery? If so, should it be incorporated in a CBE algorithm? Ha.) In addition, sometimes assignments and exams are not very good at measuring real learning in any student, while other times they adequately measure real learning in Student A but not in Student B. Thus, measuring real learning is more of a "try to catch a cloud and pin it down" sort of exercise, one whose limitations need to be accepted. Instead, real learning is deconstructed and fed into a standards-based algorithm and spit out as an evidence-based, data-driven, hard-edged, non-nuanced lump of mastery. The (only) good news is that it can be easily measured.<br /><br />Basically a transcript is a record of hoop-jumping and expectations-meeting spread out over a certain period of time. Who knows how much real learning took place? It's more likely, however, that a student with perfect attendance and high marks will have experienced more real learning than he would have had he skipped half of his classes and earned mostly Ds. At the very least the good student knows what it means to be engaged, even if he has an in-it-to-win-it attitude rather than one focused on real learning. When the desire to engage in real learning kicks in, he will be more prepared than the student who refused to engage on any level, ever. But I may be wrong...<br />Lisahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08617672109728978548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-77242377214271390602016-04-01T09:38:53.632-04:002016-04-01T09:38:53.632-04:00I can't get beyond #1. I agree it's either...I can't get beyond #1. I agree it's either a nightmare for the teacher or requires total reliance on the computer system. If there's a particular sequence to these activities, how much enthusiasm could the teacher possibly bring to supporting kid #30 compared to kid #2? And where does group work come in, especially once kids are far enough along and there's no one else that's at kid #30's stage in the learning activity? Also, anyone who's spent more than 5 minutes in an upper elementary classroom knows what will happen there: the upper level kids are going to race each other to see who can get done the fastest and will resent being asked to work with slower kids/teams to help them because it will slow them down.JSShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03021819001984170463noreply@blogger.com