Hafiz's Written Reflection 2

Young Adult Literature and Alternative Assessment Measures by Melissa Comer, offers a perspective on assessment – Assessment “is not to arrive at a grade for students”, but “to inform the educator as to what needs to be addressed in the classroom” (239). This line aptly sums up what most of us think when we talk about assessments, and it is a good reminder of what assessment truly is.

One of the alternative assessments that the Comer suggests is the use of ICT tools – Cyber-hunts and Twitter. Like a game of “scavenger hunt”, Cyber-hunt requires students to search for information using the internet, pertaining to the questions which are based on a certain theme of topic (242). This form of assessment seems to test student’s ability to make connections with various pieces of information to form meaningful understanding.

The use of Twitter for assessment on the other hand is more straightforward. According to Comer, it can be used to assess student’s understanding of a novel by getting them to “summarize the storyline from a particular character’s point of view” and so “forc[es] them to look at the key points” (243).

In my opinion, including these forms of ICT tools as part of assessment presents a pragmatic attempt to connect with students, knowing that this is “their…world”, and so perhaps increasing their level of enthusiasm for class as well (242).

The ICT tools, especially the Cyber-hunt, promote critical thinking among students considering that they have to select relevant information and justify their choice. This forces teachers to move away from just assessing students for content but also the process of trying to arrive at a particular understanding. I feel that this approach is more holistic, as we cannot always assess students based on the end product. However, I do understand that this can be rather difficult because if students do not answer the question, it will be difficult for me to assess the student solely on the process that he went through. Another problem with this activity is the reliability of information on the Internet. Most young students will find information that they want and would disregard the credibility of source. Therefore, the information that they get may not be accurate or even be false. Therefore, this highlights another difficulty when assessing student’s understanding using this particular tool.

Similarly, Twitter allows students to condense the information and pick out relevant points that summarize the whole novel. Again, students have to evaluate which points are important and which are not, and so promoting a level of critical thinking in them. However, a key problem that I have with Twitter is the limited number of characters that students can type per tweet (150 characters). What if there are a number of key points of equal importance? How are students to put them together in such a restricted amount of “space”? Students would be concern in squeezing these points in the tweet and forget about its coherence. Furthermore in written assessments, we want students to elaborate points, providing evidence. However, tweeting is a totally opposite thing!

Despite the problems of ICT tools, I feel that they represent the future of assessment. However, I am particularly interested in finding out more about Twitter and its potential to be a good mode of assessment in class. Other than its use to assess student’s critical thinking through the selection of information in tweeting concise novel summary, I am sure there are other key uses of Twitter as a mode of assessment.

Assessing Critical Literacy Through Classroom Discussion

In this post, I shall discuss on the role of classroom discussion and how it can help to develop critical literacy. I have selected to angle my post in such a manner as my individual essay would be about the development of critical literacy in the lower secondary Singapore English Literature Classroom. I will be making references primarily from Adler and Rougle's "Building literacy through classroom discussion" (2005), Liew's "Teaching Literature Through and Beyond National Education"(2013), and Paulo Fiere's "Pedagogy of the Oppressed."(1970)

Critical literacy, according to Paulo Fiere, getting students to activate their critical consciousness. (1970)  In the context of the English Literature classroom, this involves helping students to go beyond the literal meaning of the text and getting them to discover the ideologies embedded within. In other words, students are no longer passive subjects of the things they read, but rather, they play an active role in discovering how has the text can shape readers and the world they live in. According to Fiere, this should not stop at a 'discovery stage,' he advocates that students eventually take up a more activist position to transform the world they live in. In the context of the Lower Secondary Singapore Literature Classroom, I argue that teachers can leverage on the richness of fiction and help students discover how it actually reveals the reality of the world they live in - involving students to adopt a more activist approach to learning would position English Literature as a transformative subject that goes beyond the boundaries of fiction into the world of reality. 

The problem is, many teachers often assume that critical literacy is a higher level ability that is difficult to attain- one which would perhaps, be more appropriate for the more matured Upper Secondary level students. As a result, lower secondary students are often confined to the exploration of texts at a textual level. The irony is that, students taking English Literature at the upper secondary level would have to focus on the high stakes N and O level examinations and "teachers are expected to manage their limited curriculum time carefully, lest they risk compromising their student's performances in these high stakes examinations." (Liew, 2013, p184) This leaves little room for the exploration of critical thinking at the upper secondary level.  Therefore, it is only logical for teachers to explore on how critical thinking can be cultivated at a lower secondary level. The notion of critical literacy being difficult to cultivate can be debunked if teachers explore how lessons can be appropriated for lower secondary students.

Firstly, I believe that dialogue would be a good starting point to foster critical inquiry. The problem is,  teachers are often reluctant to engage in dialogue due to a plethora of classroom management issues that my occur - this ranges from the possibility of insensitive comments, reluctance to talk or even superficial conversations. Engaging in dialogue to foster critical inquiry might pose even more problems because sensitive issues might be raised and teachers are often compelled to avoid such situations due to the necessity to be politically correct.

Adler and Rougle suggest a range of techniques that can help foster a healthy, dialogic classroom. Firstly, they suggest that the physical layout of the classroom should be structured in a way that facilitates discussion - even though this might be seen as a superficial suggestion, I believe that this is sorely lacking in the Singapore classroom. During my teaching practice, I observed that the seating plan for most classrooms are structured in a traditional manner - students are often seated in rows, sometimes in pairs, sometimes, individually. The problem with this is that those at the back seemed to be trapped within an invisible embryo, away from class discussions. Hence, Adler and Rougle's suggested seating plans would be useful because everyone would be 'in the front,' doing so would send a strong signal to students that 'no one hides at the back.' I would also suggest that all students be equipped with a mini-white board alongside a seminar style seating arrangement - not all students are confident in articulating their viewpoints and some find it useful utilizing the mini white board as a tool to communicate with the rest of the class.

Finally, Adler and Rougle suggest that students post inquiry questions as a platform for further dialogue (2005). I take particular interest in this because in order to foster critical literacy, students should first learn how to question the text they are reading in their search for deeper meanings. Hence, the challenge will be for teachers to train students on how to formulate questions that foster deeper inquiry rather than superficial, comprehension style ones. Teachers should ponder upon questions such as:

"How can we assess student's ability to question?" 

"How can we train students to question the text on a critical level?"

This, I believe would be the major challenge for teachers because more often than not, the Singapore education system places too much emphasis on delivering the right answers rather than coming up with good questions. Teachers are too pre-occupied with coming up with ideas on crafting up a good answer - with the mastering of the PEEL framework being the holy grail to success. Little has been done to investigate how can questioning foster critical thinking. Perhaps, teachers can expose students to a variety of questions and scaffold the questions based on the Bloom's taxonomy model.

In conclusion, I argue that it is possible to start cultivating critical literacy for students at lower secondary level and a good starting point would be to create a classroom environment that fosters democratic dialogue. It is only then that the classroom can be a safe haven for students to "be honest and critical in expressing their opinions" (Lieu, 2013, p180) under the facilitation of a teacher. Teachers can only foster critical literacy if student's ability to question is assessed.

Yati's Written Reflection 2

Comer (2011) has shared many ways in which authentic assessment can occur in the classroom. I think all of the practices mentioned are practical. However, what I thought could have been overlooked is the interest inventory/survey method. I have always thought questioning can be a good way to assess students’ interest but I think the questioning method can be applied differently in Singaporean schools. Comer supports the notion that the students’ interest should be considered in the choice of literature or text (2011). However, in Singapore, it is not possible for educators to choose a required reading that students recommend because there is already a recommended list of set texts so questions like “What book do you wish your teacher would have as required reading? Why?” would appear pointless.

Instead, teachers can survey students’ interest of the chosen text; teachers ask questions which may be inappropriate for formal assessment but prompt personal responses that can contribute to authentic assessment. For example, teachers may ask questions like:

“What do you like/dislike about the text? Why?”

“Which character do you identify the most? Why?”

“Have you ever wondered what it is like if you were in the world of the text?”

Comer mentions that “by assessing students’ interests they learn to support their opinions while the teacher gains insight into the selection process” (2011). Although the questions above do not help in the selection process, which have been established as unnecessary in the Singapore context anyway, the questions do allow for students to talk about their interest and learn to support their opinions. Students may be taught to use words like “vivid”, “memorable” and “admirable” in their personal responses and this can better prepare students for the “personal response” element of formal assessments. Then, the interest/survey method promotes authentic assessment as students perform tasks in ways that can demonstrate their mastery of the text and the skill of writing. At the same time, these questions can get students to be more reflective and maybe bring out the “personal responses” element in English Literature.

Assessing Students' Comprehension Via Technology: Twitter (Comer, 2011)

Reflection 2

This article is about assessing students' learning through various means of alternative assessment. Students' learning can be taken to mean their interests and comprehension. Here, I would like to draw your attention to the proposed means of using Twitter to assess students' comprehension. as Helderman (2003) in Comer's article has stated, "students today are accustomed to translating their every thought and feeling into words". As a result, using tweets to convey how they feel is a relatable form of assessment for students. As every tweet has a limited word count, students have to summarise what they learn by only focusing at the key points to talk about. To add on to Comer's analysis, I think it is rather interesting and different to assess students through their tweets. Students could do multiple tweets to focus on explaining their points on a certain topic should they wish to, instead of just typing out a summary of what they have learnt in a single tweet, which is equivalent to a longer sentence. 

However, to summarize the storyline from a particular character's point of view may be somewhat limited for us in evaluating students' understanding of what we have taught them, so what I propose would be to give students a specific topic to discuss about via tweeting. For example, if students are studying on Animal Farm, they could be asked to do their reviews of their own learning every week through tweeting. One week's tweeting assignment could be to "Discuss whether Napolean is a ruthless leader", and the other week's tweeting assignment could be to "Consider why Snowball is always framed by Napolean". Here, students could do a regular tweeting assignment that not only does not take as long as structuring and writing an essay, but could also easily read their fellow classmates' tweets and reply to it to give feedback or ask questions. 

However, to follow up on developing their answers, I feel that ultimately, getting students to tweet is not enough. Instead, they have to structure their own arguments and their essays eventually, as essay writing is an integral part of Literature assessment. What we can get students to do is perhaps alternate between tweeting and blogging, since blogging their answers allow them to further develop their points and answers, as well as to practice organizing their essay answers. My stance is that twitter cannot be used as a single form of assessment, but when combined with other forms of technology like using blogs, they can be brought to a more traditional form of thinking and analysing literature through means that are culturally relevant to them. 

Velvet

Shariffah's Written Reflection 2

I read Melissa Comer’s Young Adult Literature and Alternative Assessment Measures (2011) and I found it highly practical. I see myself using her ideas in my classroom in future.

Comer talks about an assessment for learning rather than of learning. She argues that formative assessments promote learning better and are more effective at gauging what students know and do not know in relation to a text. They change what a student considers important knowledge and takeaways in lessons – the learning process and not the outcome of a test – and it is precisely this that I find most attractive about her essay.

The two ideas I rally behind are the surveys about choice of text to use in class and the knowledge-rating charts. With the surveys, I used to have concerns that students’ choice of text may not coincide with demands of the syllabus and may be too simple or inappropriate. But her suggestion that teachers limit the possibilities and ask students to choose from there is practical. As a student I find questions for the survey exciting and I agree that it sends a good vibe that student voices are heard.

The knowledge-rating charts are really explicit about the vocabulary and knowledge that students have to know; very good for a Normal Academic class. Students can monitor their learning process, and check if their peers are also unsure about the meaning of a word. Although it may be challenging to consolidate learning points since students may have varying levels of proficiency with the text, I think it conditions students in close-reading well because they have to read the text carefully to glean the meaning of the words.

Also, traditional assessments in Literature have always informed students that only a formal, structured way of presenting answers is acceptable. Students have to write in proper paragraphs and sophisticated language so that students with average proficiency in English are handicapped. Yet, her suggestions about assessing knowledge of the text through the cyber-hunt and Twitter summary offer new ways of presenting ideas, character viewpoints and themes. Technology is a language every student speaks. I think this is a brilliant alternative to traditional assessment in class. In fact, in a mixed-ability class, students have the chance to learn from their peers who are better at phrasing and expressing ideas when reading their Twitter summaries. Comer’s ideas opens the doors to a fresher, livelier, communal Literature classroom.

A personal setback might be that I am quite technologically-challenged. I barely learnt how to use Twitter recently and if I were to use this idea in future I have to learn from my students about how to be more tech-savvy. Still, I think the idea is perfect for them and I’m keen. 

Written Reflection 3: Learning Journey

Reflect on your class learning journey. What are some principles and practices that you can take away from the experience?

Deadline: 23 February 2013 MN

Written Reflection 2: Thoughts on Alternative Assessments

Explore in some depth one kind of alternative assessment. You may:
(1) Read one of the optional articles from Weeks 3 to 4. 
(2) Google or do a literature search on the same or similar form of alternative assessment. 
(3) Explore some other idea not mentioned in your readings.
  
Share about your readings and your thoughts about the specific form of assessment discussed. You should use this as an opportunity to explore an alternative assessment that you may be interested in for either your essay assignment or for your own classroom execution.

Deadline: 9 Feb 2013, Sat, Noon