Presentation on theme: "DOES THE DAMN THING WORK? LIARDID YOU DESIGN IT? YOU IDIOT NO PROBLEMS OH NO DOES ANYONE KNOW? ARE YOU GOING TO BE IN TROUBLE? CAN YOU BLAME SOMEONE ELSE?"— Presentation transcript:
DOES THE DAMN THING WORK? LIARDID YOU DESIGN IT? YOU IDIOT NO PROBLEMS OH NO DOES ANYONE KNOW? ARE YOU GOING TO BE IN TROUBLE? CAN YOU BLAME SOMEONE ELSE? Yes No
What are the fundamental themes in the AO’s that our students need to learn? How can the themes be linked from course to course and year to year? Endorsements Workload for teachers and teacher “buy in” Engagement, relevance and usefulness of units of work Assessment Pathways
91026: Apply numeric reasoning in solving problems 91027: Apply algebraic procedures in solving problems 91028: Investigate relationships between tables, equations and graphs 91031: Apply geometric reasoning in solving problems 91037: Demonstrate understanding of chance and data Linear proportions Primes, multiples, factors, powers Fractions, decimals, percentages, integers and conversions Standard form, sig figs, rounding, decimal place value Integer and fractional powers Rates Generalise operations with fraction sand integers Generalise operations with rational numbers and exponents Form and solve linear equations, inequations, quadratic, simple exponential equations and simultaneous equations with two unknowns Optimal solutions using numerical approaches Solve linear equations, inequations, quadratic, simple exponential equations and simultaneous equations with two unknowns Relate graphs, tables, equations to relationship Relate rate of change to gradient Angles intersecting lines, parallel lines, polygons Similar shapes, proportional reasoning Trigonometric ratios and Pythagorus’ theorem in two dimensions Angle properties related to circles Evaluate statistical investigations or probability activities Calculate probabilities Evaluate statistical reports Investigate situations involving elements of chance 20 Actively look to reduce assessment If standards unsuitable/unworkable do not assess Student performance National/Decile 9
91026: Apply numeric reasoning in solving problems 91029: Apply linear algebra in solving problems 91032: Apply right-angled triangles in solving measurement problems Linear proportions Primes, multiples, factors, powers Fractions, decimals, percentages, integers and conversions Standard form, sig figs, rounding, decimal place value Integer and fractional powers Rates Form and solve linear equations Solve linear equations and inequations and simultaneous equations Relate graphs, tables and equations to linear relationships Relate rate of change to the gradient Use trigonometric ratios and Pythagorus’ theorem Similar shapes and proportional reasoning Select and use appropriate metric units for length and area Measure at an appropriate level of precision 91031: Apply geometric reasoning in solving problems 91033: Apply knowledge of geometric representations in solving problems: Construct and describe loci Points and lines on coordinate planes, scale and bearings on maps Nets for polyhedra, connecting three dimensional solids with different representations Coordinate plane or map to show points in common or loci 91038: Investigate a situation involving elements of chance Compare and describe variation between theoretical and experimental distributions in situations involving chance Investigate situations that involve elements of chance 20
91257: Apply graphical methods in solving problems 91261: Apply algebraic methods in solving problems 91262: Apply calculus methods in solving problems 91261: Apply probability methods in solving problems 17 91257: Apply graphical methods in solving problems 91256: Apply co-ordinate geometry methods in solving problems 91258: Apply sequences and series in solving problems 91259: Apply trigonometric relationships in solving problems 17 - 19 91260: Apply network methods in solving problems 91268: Investigate a situation involving elements of chance using a simulation 91260: Apply network methods in solving problems 91261: Apply probability methods in solving problems PLD through first term on new approach to graphs 12MTA course just finished single internal, remainder of year to focus on teaching and learning in depth not rushing for assessments
ASSESSMENT Problem – whilst standards we chose matched, assessment tasks provided on TKI did not. So we have had to look at developing our own tasks and there has been a lot of debate around this. Our tasks needed to reflect the teaching and learning that had occurred in the units, students should be given the best possible opportunity to showcase their learning of the AO’s the course had emphasized. Andy Begg on rich learning activities
Sound assessment tasks are vitally important and whilst there is a huge body of research around principles underpinning design of tasks, there is no one ‘style’ of task that is more valid than others across all situations. Teachers/MU holders who feel confident in interpreting the standards should feel empowered to try to write tasks and get constructive feedback about the tasks from as many sources as possible (colleagues, moderators, Team Solutions etc) Moderators do not hold a monopoly on the style of assessment in regard to the SOLO framework. Whilst their judgements about style are valid in contexts specific for themselves, they cannot make ‘value’ judgements about the style of tasks others have written. Their feedback should only be in regard to the standard itself not the style of presentation of the problem.
Hattie, J. & Purdie, N. (1998) The Solo model: Addressing fundamental measurement issues. In Dart, B. & Boulton-Lewis, G. M. (Eds.) Teaching and learning in higher education. Camberwell, Vic, Australian Council of Educational Research. Hattie, J.A.C. & Brown, G. T. L. (2004). Cognitive processes in assessment items: SOLO taxonomy (Tech. Rep. No. 43). Auckland, NZ: University of Auckland, Project asTTle. There are many similarities between the Bloom and SOLO taxonomies. It is necessary when using both taxonomies to know the context of learning, and it is expected that the questions asked follow from some form of instruction or prior exposure to the information required. There is also the premise that the concepts in the instruction are hierarchical. There are also fundamental differences between the Bloom and SOLO taxonomies. The Bloom taxonomy presupposes that there is a necessary relationship between the questions asked and the responses to be elicited(see Schrag, 1989), whereas in the SOLO taxonomy both the questions and the answers can be at differing levels. Whereas Bloom separates 'knowledge' from the intellectual abilities or process that operate on this 'knowledge' (Furst, 1981), the SOLO taxonomy is primarily based on the processes of understanding used by the students when answering the prompts. Knowledge, therefore, permeates across all levels of the SOLO taxonomy.