Reflection on In-Class Discussion

8 Replies to “Reflection on In-Class Discussion”

1. Hi Josephine, this is a great post to get us talking about class discussions! I have to agree that the framework is a little bit too clear-cut. While I understand that teachers need to know exactly what to teach their students, I just feel that, like you stated, it does not allow room to deviate (and by turn, I mean it positively) from the norms and let kids explore more in-depth which allows higher rates of critical thinking. Looking at the SOL framework again, I understand your point entirely and agree with you here. Our standardized tests were called ERBs from the Educational Records Bureau during my grade school education. As per their site, they are the “trusted leader in assessment and data-driven insights for independent school educators and families, supporting the growth of the whole child.” While I think these tests are essential in gaining valuable feedback about what students are learning, I think tests are such a terrible way to measure these things because I know several peers who were excellent students who had testing anxiety and could not translate the information correctly. There has to be another way to measure it for the sake of those kids.

2. Hi Josephine! I like how you made your post about what we have been learning recently in class! I agree that the curriculum framework is a helpful resource because it lays out exactly what teachers are expected to teach. The pacing guides can also be a really helpful tool when looking at what to teach and when to teach it. The standards are a hot topic of discussion in the education world because of the weight put on students and teachers to teach directly to the test. This limits their ability to go above and beyond in their learning experience, especially in terms of accumulating critical thinking skills. Critical thinking skills are so important in the early stages of development. Students also don’t necessarily get to look into their interests as much as I would hope due to the pressure of the standards set for them. It puts educators in a tough position where they have to decide how much time to set aside from the required curriculum to let kids explore. I took SOL tests growing up and they didn’t bother me that much because I was an average test taker. Still, through my coursework, I have learned the negative impact it can have on kids, especially in terms of test-taking anxiety and feeling like they aren’t good enough because they aren’t good test takers. Overall, this is an important topic in figuring out how to plan your future curriculum and how we can best support our students through the standards.

3. Hey Josie, I love that you used the discussion post as an opportunity to continue our discussion from class. I appreciate that standards create a list of content you need to cover and outline at what grade level makes the most sense for that content, making for a somewhat uniform expectation for what students need to know on a larger scale. However, there is so much to cover with not a lot of science instruction time incorporated into most schedules. To me, this is the most limiting factor because when you are rushed, you might sacrifice some of the more in-depth and hands-on science experiences in favor of pushing through content. I don’t recall much from my experience as a student on this topic, but I do see some of this in the school I work in now. Rather than collaborating with resource teachers to enhance science content, I know some grade levels are more reliant on those teachers to cover the science content as they prioritize math and reading in their own classrooms. It can be helpful for a resource teacher to work with the classroom teachers to supplement content, such as a librarian reading a book to students that matches the content their classroom teachers are teaching. But in this scenario, it seems like more of the science content is being covered by the resource teacher because the classroom teachers don’t have enough time in their schedule to cover it all before the SOLs. Ultimately, I think this means SOLs, specifically the tests, communicate the wrong expectations for learning. Yes, there is content that needs to be covered and assessment can potentially help explain if that has happened. But the goal isn’t to push through content for the sake of passing a test, it is to create meaningful learning experiences across content areas.

4. Hey Josephine, I love that you chose to post about a class discussion instead of the traditional route. While I do appreciate the standard of learning framework, I do agree that it can be constricting. I think the learning standards should just be a guideline for the classroom teacher. This way, the teacher would have free range to teach the students as they see fit. I am strong believer in the idea that only the teacher knows what is best for her students academically. As a classroom teacher, you can learn techniques that would be most efficient to your students’ learning. I think we also need to keep in mind that what is best for your student might not be what is best for a student from another class. As for SOL testing, I am honestly not a fan of testing at all. I think tests/exams make students nervous which does not allow them to accurately show their knowledge. However, I am a fan of formative testing. I think the most effective assessment of a student’s knowledge would be something as simple as an exit ticket , pop quiz or even a Kahoot!. Formative assessments are a quick and easy way to check for understanding without adding pressure on the student. It is also a good way for a teacher to receive feedback. I also am strongly believe that the SOL testing forces teachers to teach students how to pass the test, which does not allow them to focus on making sure the student actually understands the content.

5. Hi Josephine! I think this is a great jumping off point for our discussion. I agree with your mindset and agree with how the framework, while providing structure, can sometimes lead to a mentality, where teachers might end up prioritizing content coverage over helping the kids develop a deeper understanding. This pressure to ensure students perform well on standardized tests means less time for hands-on experiments, exploration, and real-world application of the scientific principles they are trying to teach. I also feel as though the framework may not always reflect the most current or relevant science topics, as it can take time to update standards. I assume this might be a source of discouragement to teachers who want to incorporate more relevant discoveries or local environmental issues into their plans. While I do appreciate and understand how the framework offers a valuable roadmap I also see the constraints that might impede the holistic and experiential learning that I think can really affect how a student feels about what they are learning. I think a rigid adherence to the standards can also limit the ability of teachers to cater to diverse learning needs within their classrooms. Each student learns differently, and requires different things to learn as effectively as possible and their teachers know that best. However, the pressure to cover all the objectives within a set timeframe often leaves little room for differentiation. I assume this issue poses extremely challenging for students who thrive with hands-on activities, discussions, or visual aids. As a result of things like not enough time or differentiation, the potential for engaging all students and nurturing a deeper and more meaningful understanding of the concepts is at risk with a “teaching the test” mentality.

6. Josie, your blog post is such a relevant extension of our previous end of class discussion with Dr. Stohr. I agree with you regarding the SOL framework providing some consistency and age appropriate subject matter to be taught to the students based on grade levels. Schools cover the same material for SOLs in various order regarding the timeline within the grade level year. Although Dr. Stohr mentioned being aware of seasonal subjects to be taught in the fall or the spring depending on the content.
   The grade level framework for SOLs is a starting point for content and mix it with creative lesson plans for the material to engage students. My concern is the limited time to teach the material and how to incorporate deeper dives into the material consistently to all students and not just the ones that excel in the subject that finish early. It may spark something with a student that is struggling when teaching in different formats, e.g. hands-on activities, etc.
   The SOL tests are used as an assessment tool for students and teachers to convey if the students know the material taught by the teacher. There are so many variables surrounding it regarding if students are good test takers or if the teacher communicated the material to the class for them to absorb the material. Teachers are teaching the students the content to pass the test due to time constraints. This is concerning because more students could potentially enjoy and go into the science field if they experienced different opportunities of teaching methods.

7. I’m glad you’re discussing the standard of learning (SOL) framework and lesson preparation. This framework helps organize educational goals and standardize classroom instruction. I recognize your concerns about the SOL framework’s possible limits, specifically its apparent critical thinking restrictions. It gives educators a clear structure, but it may limit their flexibility to accommodate varied learning styles and encourage lesson design inventiveness.I think the SOL framework is a good foundation for curriculum creation and assessment alignment, but it should be balanced with adherence to standards and flexibility to meet students’ needs and interests. Finding this balance can make learning more holistic and interesting.S Research by scholars like Thomas Guskey and Robert Marzano emphasizes the importance of aligning learning objectives with standards to ensure educational effectiveness. They also emphasize the need of higher-order thinking and student-centered approaches in this paradigm.E (Example): While SOL standards are necessary for curriculum alignment and accountability, project-based learning, inquiry-based activities, and real-world applications have improved student engagement and critical thinking.
   The SOL framework can help educators, but they must balance standards with flexibility to develop critical thinking and adaptation in lesson preparation. By using a range of teaching tactics and enabling student-centered learning, educators may create a more dynamic and stimulating classroom.

8. Hi Josie! I think its super interesting how you brought up what we’ve been doing in class in this reflection! I do think that Standards of Learning can be restrictive. Often teachers have to adjust their lesson planning to their students’ needs, and I feel like there is less room to do this under the SOL. I also think that with the SOL’s not being updated too often, newer information is not always on there, and so if teachers want to incorporate things that are happening currently, it can make it hard to do so. I also think basing achievement off of testing can be a problem as many students have testing anxiety or are slow workers and with standardized testing being a defined amount of time and only given as a written exam, it can make it hard for some students who may be intelligent and know their stuff to be able to perform due to the nature of a test being a stressful environment. I think students are better able to show mastery from work throughout a unit as opposed to one singular test.

Comments are closed.