methods

Chapter 3 discussed effective use of time in teaching. For the most part, I believe teachers do try hard to do the song and dance to engage students, but where they fall short is in evaluating student learning. In this new world of depth of knowledge and MCT2 testing, what methods would you use to document a teacher's evaluation of student learning during clinical supervision? -Elke Michalak

Yes, the frameworks have changed, the resources are new, the textbook resources are old, and the methods of documenting a teacher's evaluation of student learning during clinical supervision is problematic. Proper documentation of student learning will remain a problem until administrators are fully informed and familiar with the new curriculum and the depth of knowledge requirements.

I agree that there must be a relationship between what is taught and the curriculum required in today's schools including the priority for teaching depth of knowledge. I also agree that there must be a strong relationship between what is taught and what is evaluated by teachers. Transcribing teacher's questions is one clinical supervision teachnique that could provide an avenue for evaluating a teacher's ability to evaluate students learning. In this technique, a teacher's questions are written and analyzed according to a specific criteria such as depth of knowldge. In this technique, the observer could identify a teacher's ability match their student's learning with the objectives of the intended lesson.

This is so important. Perhaps the best way is to "supervise" and not just "evaluate". This involves much. An administrator should look at the the way a teacher is assessing each student. Also, fostering to each learning style is important. This can be observed by looking at lesson plans. Another way to test for depth of knowledge is to evaluate test questions on written exams.

I would make sure that the teacher was checking for understanding with leveled questioning techniques, using some form of independent work, through formative assessments, anectodal notes, review of class/homework. More importantly, I would look for teachers to differentiate instruction based on students' academic and learning style needs. My teachers used prescriptive instruction to reach our students; it worked for us, Level 3 to Level 5.

Iron and steel engineer

Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology, 4th International Conference, RSKT 2009, Gold Coast, Australia, July 14-16, 2009, Proceedings