When someone teaches kindergarten math they are teaching extremely basic topics that they have completely mastered themselves. Virtually everyone is a kindergarten math subject matter expert. Do they let just anyone teach kindergarten? Why does the state standards initiative known as the "common core" still lay out standards for kindergarten math? Some of the standards include:
Grade K Overview
Counting and Cardinality
- Know number names and the count sequence.
- Count to tell the number of objects.
- Compare numbers.
Operations and Algebraic Thinking
- Understand addition as putting together and adding to, and understand subtraction as taking apart and taking from.
Number and Operations in Base Ten
- Work with numbers 11-19 to gain foundations for place value.
Measurement and Data
- Describe and compare measurable attributes.
- Classify objects and count the number of objects in each category
Geometry
- Identify and describe shapes.
- Analyze, compare, create, and compose shapes.
http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/K/introduction/ Just because we know something extremely well does not mean that we are good at teaching it. Similarly, as James 3:1-2 says, not everyone is cut out to be a teacher. How do we know if we are doing a good job? Is it just a matter of whether or not students subjectively like our courses? Is there a nonnegotiable core of each class that must be learned by each student in order for the course goals to have been met? Are there any teaching standards that are universal for all teachers of the Bible (or any other subject for that matter)?
I will admit freely that our culture is assessment obsessed. Our culture scientifically and empirically tries to gauge every measurable aspect of the education task. I will also admit that here at the Bible school we are engaged in a primarily spiritual endeavor. What, then, is the role of objective, measurable standards as laid out in the TRACS accreditation manual? For example:
D 11.4 Curriculum (regardless of mode of delivery) has as its central focus the education of students.
a. Course and program objectives are written in reference to measurable learning outcomes.
b. Course outcomes are assessed through student achievement and competency.
D 11.5 Curriculum has a logical and appropriate scope and sequence.
a. Curriculum conforms to national norms.D 11.6 Clearly defined student learning outcomes are established at the course, program and institutional level and reflected in all aspects of academic and support services.
c. Curriculum progressively leads to student competency and learning.
D 11.7 Programs offered by the institution impart a common core of knowledge, which enhances students educationally and/or vocationally, are consistent with national norms, and are appropriate for educational level.
How are we going to meet these standards? What do these standards even mean? How do you use standards in your teaching and how do they contribute to to the goal of imparting, "a common core of knowledge, which enhances students educationally and/or vocationally, are consistent with national norms, and are appropriate for the educational level?"
Any thoughts are appreciated.
Thanks for the conversation starter Ric. One of the things that excites me about accreditation is that it is a good opportunity for us to step back and take a look at our entire program. For years, Joint AMT has wanted to identify what we believe is a common core, so to speak, of what students must know, be able to do, etc. The way I see this working is a two-pronged approach. On one prong, Joint ELT identifies what we think is most important for each individual course. On the other prong, we look at other similar institutions to see if we are in the ballpark of national norms. A long road ahead of us, but I think we're in a good position to work through these things and we'll be the better for it.
ReplyDeleteThanks Wiley. I'm excited that we're going down this road together. I think it will really challenge us to up our game and to make "student achievement and competency" the focus of our curriculum, teaching, and program. Standards we create for curriculum development, the overall program, individual courses, and teacher training must be implement and enforced but also measured. That may be the most difficult part. It's easy to talk standards and objectives in isolation. Measurement, benchmarking and improving is the long-term hurdle. Here are some resources there:
Deletehttp://educationnext.org/expert-measures/
http://educationnext.org/the-business-model/
http://www.epi.org/publication/bp278/