6 min read
I've been wondering what to write next, and in the end decided to change things up a bit. I am inspired by the second run of Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills MOOC which started yesterday. I'd strongly encourage anyone interested in this topic to join us! I actually registered for the first run last year but couldn't find the time to do any of the work. This time I'm more determined!
So for these five to six weeks I'm going to blog a weekly informal reflection on the course. It isn't a cMOOC, unfortunately, so I don't know how many people will be blogging along, but I'm going to do it anyway (and tweet too). I plan to write about my chief takeaways for the week, their implications for my own research interests, and any questions that occur to me.
The theme for Week 1 is Defining 21st Century Skills. I am immediately engaged, since anyone who has to write about this topic struggles to define it! Here are the learning objectives, as they are called here:
- Understand the influence of technology on the workplace, and the implications for schools
- Understand what is meant by '21st century skills'
- Be familiar with a range of approaches to defining 21st century skills
- Be familiar with 21st century skills frameworks
- Understand what is meant by a developmental approach to assessment and learning.
(Interesting that Bloom's or similar is not a must here!)
We are introduced to a number of frameworks, starting from the ATC21s one, since the course is run by Esther Care and Patrick Griffin from the ATC21s team. They have developed the KSAVE (knowledge, skills, attitudes, values and ethics) model:
Ways of Thinking
1. Creativity and innovation
2. Critical thinking, problem solving, decision making
3. Learning to learn, Metacognition
Ways of Working
5. Collaboration (teamwork)
Tools for Working
6. Information literacy
7. ICT literacy
Living in the World
8. Citizenship – local and global
9. Life and career
10. Personal and social responsibility – including cultural awareness and competence
Here are the other frameworks introduced:
- Learning to know
- Learning to do
- Learning to be
- Learning to live together
OECD (3 overlapping circles)
- Use language, symbols and texts interactively
- Interact in heterogenous groups
- Act autonomously
P21 Partnership for 21st Century Learning
European Commission Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning
- Communication in the mother tongue;
- Communication in foreign languages;
- Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology;
- Digital competence;
- Learning to learn;
- Social and civic competences;
- Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship; and
- Cultural awareness and expression.
And even though Singapore is a ATC21s member, MOE's 21st Century Competencies framework is not mentioned. Perhaps it's assumed to be aligned with the ATC21s framework. I include it here anyway for the sake of comparison.
Care and Griffin are clear that no framework can be a 'one size fits all', and so it isn't so much a case of competing frameworks but that different contexts have different needs. That said, I feel more attracted to KSAVE for reasons I can't really articulate now. I also note that UNESCO's framework is the only one here that doesn't refer to technology in some way, even obliquely. I'm not sure why that's so. Which framework makes most sense to you?
The other major takeaway is ATC21s's framework for what I think is essentially formative assessment. From the initial self-assessment quiz, which was supposed to tell me how much I already know and don't know (but was really too vague to do that), I gather that this framework is the crux of the course, which they will illustrate in the coming weeks using the example of Collaborative Problem Solving. I was surprised at this point to find my familiar friends Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky), criterion referenced assessment (Glaser -- though I shamefully have never cited him when I wrote about criterion referencing) and Rasch measurement.
@sallyngsh might remember joining me for a talk by an NIE colleague on Rasch and ZPD. At that time I felt that the speaker wasn't really claiming that one could locate the ZPD using Rasch. But I think that this is precisely what Care and Griffin are claiming. Very briefly, the Rasch variable map lines up item difficulty and person ability along the same scale, and the developmental levels we infer from a criterion referenced scale can be lined up against this as well. So at the bottom we have low difficulty, low ability and the lowest level of development/competence. At the top we have high difficulty, high ability and the highest level of development/competence. A test-taker and an item on the same level of the scale indicates that that test-taker has about 50% probability of getting the item correct. The idea, if I understand it correctly, is that a teacher can look at this map and say these students are at this level, so I need to work with them on these items and items that are one level up (or similar), because this is the ZPD.
Which is all fine and really quite brilliant. Except that the MOOC doesn't at this point address what I think many people familiar with Rasch measurement know: it's an obscure theory in an obscure field of study (among educators anyway), and seemingly difficult to grasp, even for people with a working knowledge of assessment theory and statistics. And to be honest, I don't know if that many teachers have such a working knowledge; many are statistics-phobic which would be a huge barrier here.
The Self-directed Learning Oriented Assessment (SLOA) project in Hong Kong has actually introduced Rasch measurement to school teachers for use in formative assessment. The teachers were trained to use the program Winsteps; while they found using it challenging, they nevertheless were able to appreciate its benefits. Unfortunately, I don't think Rasch has become more widely known or practised subsequently. I've wondered a few times if I could possibly run introductory courses for teachers, but I'm not a university funded research programme, so this could be too ambitious, with zero demand locally.
I know now that one important question I'd like to answer by the end of this MOOC is: how can ordinary teachers get the hang of Rasch and use this framework in their classrooms, given that the investment of time and energy to do this is considerable, and their motivation and/or confidence low? A second: if ATC21s has a solution, can I play a part to make this an emerging assessment practice among Singapore teachers?
Looking ahead to the learning objectives in the coming weeks, I rather suspect that this MOOC will not offer a solution, and it might be unrealistic to expect it to anyway. But I would surely appreciate some clues and inspiration.
#edsg #atc21s #assessmentliteracy #afl #21cc #rasch