Did These 2nd Graders Debunk the Myth That Tests Measure Learning?
- 78Shares
Listen to Dunlea’s story on the Hack Learning Podcast
For these precocious problem solvers, the answer was simple: See which plane flies the longest distance.
As you might imagine, soon paper airplanes were zigzagging their way around the classroom. Then, practice ended, and it was time for the “real” test.
They lined up enthusiastically, inhaled deeply, and flung their paper aircrafts toward the ceiling.
Some flew gracefully; some landed softly. Some crashed.
Instead of labeling the experiment and the lesson a failure and plastering a poor grade on his students’ records, Dunlea engaged his young learners in conversation. The planes flew far during practice, he told one confused designer. So what went wrong during the “real” test?
“I choked,” the 7-year-old replied, a powerful observation for a 2nd grader.
Rather than allow the child to submit to frustration, Dunlea reminded him that he had created a good plane, because it flew far during practice.
“That’s right,” the teacher emphasized. “Sometimes you guys might bomb a test, but you have to remember that even though your plane crashed, you know you’ve got a great plane. You have to remember this when you take a test. The test doesn’t decide how smart you are. The test decides how you did that day.”
In arguably one of the most important lessons these 2nd graders will ever learn–a lesson they’re now channeling through their teacher–a one-time, one-off test cannot define who you are as a learner.
“You could hear a pin drop,” Dunlea says of the experience. “You could tell they were all really thinking about what was going on, and I think it was a really good example of how we can destress (testing) and we can break down the anxiety levels.”
So, 7-year-olds understand that tests can’t measure their learning.
One must wonder, when will the adults catch up to the kids?
Latest posts by Mark Barnes (see all)
- Mission-Minded Learning Makes the World a Better Place - September 28, 2017
- 5 Coping Mechanisms for Bouncing Back from Your Bad Teaching Day - March 8, 2017
- Boomerangs, Inspiration Boards and Seven More Simple Solutions for Teachers and Leaders - January 31, 2017
Related Posts
About The Author
markbarnes19
Mark Barnes is the Founder and CEO of Times 10 Publications, which produces the popular Hack Learning Series -- books that provide right-now solutions for teachers and learners. Mark is the author or publisher of dozens of books, including Bestseller Hacking Education: 10 Quick Fixes for Every School. Barnes presents internationally on assessment, connected education, and Hack Learning. Join more than 140,000 interested educators who follow @markbarnes19 on Twitter.
Whoa. These 2nd graders rock!
Twitter: jcbjr
IN reading this post and listening to the podcast, I found myself thinking about a strong belief of mine that I’ve not Considered or posted recently: “There are THREE components of any testing that must be addressed carefully to have any ultimate value: (1) What learning outcome(s) do we want to test? (2) How are we going to know our testing / grading process is a legitimate and fair one? (3) What are the grading outcomes / what do those outcomes tell us?
I remember when I was a graduate student at Johns Hopkins a long time ago, I was a TA in a funded First-year engineering course. One of the faculty working on this project was a sociologist I believe. She would look at the statistics of each question’s grades and suggest that some questions should not be included because the grade distribution didn’t allow differentiation among student knowledge levels for example. The project head never agreed to do this.
As I began teaching and, more importantly, began Considering how to insure grades reflected learning, the sociologis’s message truly made sense. I did two main things: I spent an incredible amount of time preparing the exams, developing the grading rubrics, grading the exams, AND post-assessing all of these to seek to improve. And I changed my ‘curving’ procedure: Instead of curving the actual class average to a ‘C’, I curved the highest actual grade to an ‘A+’ – believing it was far more likely I had at least one super learner in the class than the average learner in the class was a ‘C’ student (adjusting every student grade the same amount of course).
But, even then, there were things that really bothered me about what I thought was much better regarding grading. This was quite a long time ago (“back when ‘dirt was clear’ – so long ago, it wasn’t even dirty yet”)…
Fast forward to present day. Were I still in a classroom on doing an online course, I’d absolutely certainly never do grading; I’d require each student keep an e-portfolio documenting their progress in and procedures used to learn effectively. AND HERE’S WHERE THE THREE COMPONENTS OF TESTING COME TO MIND! Rather than testing, these three components should be guides to each student’s e-portfolio development: what are you seeking to learn (teacher input aligned with appropriate standards), how did you go about doing that learning and how did you go about know how well was it going, and how well did you learn / how do you know / what’s still unfinished?
And, THIS WAY, the student and I both learn how to improve, the student and I know what the level of learning – not at one instant but as a result of the entire effort, and the student can propose a course grade that I of course will determine solely.
Sorry for the diarrhea of the writing… My ‘aha’ moment that I wanted to share!!!
John Bennett recently posted…Too Often It’s the Student Message
Twitter: markbarnes19
Hey John, you are one of the pioneers of the movement away from traditional grades. Thanks for sharing. You’ve got carte blanche here, so make it as long as you with. It’s always good stuff.
Mark Barnes recently posted…5 Ways to Reimagine and Re-energize Your Classroom