Book Review: Embedded Formative Assessment by Dylan Wiliam

I just finished reading Dylan Wiliam's Embedded Formative Assessment. I highly highly highly highly recommend it for all teachers - and no I'm not getting paid to say that (even though it would be awesome to get paid to say what I think about stuff.) First off, I don't know if you know this, but Dylan Wiliam is one of the world's leading experts on formative assessment and why it raises student achievement. This guys has done his research... and it's a lot. Most claims in his book are followed by a citation. The book has an impressive 17 pages of references - most of which come from peer reviewed research journals. He also did some of the research himself.

Soooooooooo many teachers have formative assessment all wrong, which is why I didn't understand it until I read Dr. Wiliam's book. There is no such thing as an assessment that is itself formative. Instead, you use an assessment formatively. Whether an assessment is formative depends on how you use it. Wiliam gives many examples of how to do such a thing.

I also like his framework for how to focus learning in the classroom. The 5 key strategies he suggests are:

1. Clarify, share, and understand learning intentions and criteria for success.
2. Engineer effective classroom activities that elicit evidence of learning.
3. Provide feedback that moves learning forward.
4. Activate learners as instructional resources for one another.
5. Activate learners as the owners of their own learning.

I'm finding it difficult to describe how awesome this work is. The research he cites explains a lot of the problems that are hindering student achievement in schools today. They also provide practical ways to solve those problems. Most of those strategies aren't even difficult, they are just uncomfortable for us to do because we have been doing things wrong for so long.

This is starting another project for me. I'm going to collect practical strategies to do the above 5 strategies. I've actually already started. Here is a link.

Once again, I highly recommend it. It is a great book for non-traditionalists and traditionalists.

Teaching Philosophy. CMI Framework = Awesome. Why all sides are better than one.

First off, check out this CMI Article. I think this is absolutely brilliant. It puts all the important philosophies to learning mathematics together. A major problem with most teaching frameworks is that there is always too much emphasis on something. Traditionalists emphasize algorithmic skills. Purists emphasize definitions and concepts. Application-ers emphasize models. 

After reading this article, I realized that we need to emphasize all of these things. Too much of any one of them isn't good. I think the Common Core gives us the right standards, we just need to teach them evenly.

So if I'm going to teach everything fairly evenly, what will be my approach? I still favor taking an application-er approach, but perhaps the other focii can be incorporated as to not lack the other things that students should learn.

Your thoughts? How can we emphasize everything? Is there a curriculum that does so?

Resource: The Start Of A Games Library

Hello y'alls. I've started a Games Library on a Google doc. You can look at it here. You can have it if you want. You can steal all of those wonderful ideas that I stole from other people. I just ask that you don't forget to give credit to the people I took them from. I also ask that you comment on things. Try them out. How did they go? Did they fail miserably or work out? What would you change? I've made it so you can comment, so comment away :)

What makes good games?

What makes a good game to use in class? This is half rhetorical (as is becoming typical). I have a few ideas, but I'd love to hear what you think.

Here are some guidelines I like to use:
1. The game needs to involve everyone most of the time.

2. If the game is for practice, the time spent practicing math skills during the game needs to be roughly equal to or more than the time spent doing the game mechanics.

3. The game needs to be fun.

4. Competition helps, so the game needs an element of it. (Caution: competition can turn into a monster!)

5. The simpler the game, the better. The cheaper the better (since it is disguised as "fun" some schools aren't willing to pay for supplies.)

6. Ideally every person can contribute to the success of the team throughout the game. People who struggle won't ruin it for the rest.


What do you think? What makes a good game to use in class for practice, review, or learning?

Games in Class?

Yeah that's right! It's time to stop being boring and bring games back into class. For some weird reason traditional teachers stop letting kids play when they get out of elementary school. Then they proceed to suck the life out of them via "learning."

I want to bring them back!

Games make life so much better. I love games and so I want to use them in class. They really do have all sorts of uses.

Purposes for games in my Math classes are:
1. To break the ice, allow students to become strong team members, and learn life's important lessons. Students have no idea how to interact with each other. If you don't believe me, look at teenage couples. So... awkward... Games can help students learn to work together and stop being jerks.

2. To have FUN! Fun isn't a bad thing. Sometimes students are feeling groggy or down or bored even before class really gets going. Use a game to wake them up! Use a game to get students into a happier mood or to celebrate successes.

3. To practice and review. Part of hating the traditional math class to me is hating worksheets. If I ever want to crush children's delight in math, I'd give them worksheets. Why can't we turn practice into a game? Take the problems from a boring worksheet, put them into a game, and now students can practice while enjoying themselves. I don't know why teacher insist on only using games for review. Why can't we use them to practice before review time?

4. To learn Math. Some games are perfect tools for learning mathematics. Look at poker: a game of probabilities all over the place. We don't necessarily need to teach gambling games (someone somewhere will probably throw a fit over it) but we can use other games to teach mathematics. Then math becomes the tool students use to become better at something they want to be good at. Sweet!

Note: Game-Based Learning
There is a movement going on to have game-based learning in schools. I like the idea, but I'm not sure how it will pan out. I've seen some mighty bad "educational" games made. If software developers can make games that are cool that teach students real skills, then I'm all for it. If a game can engage a student so he/she is intrinsically motivated to learn more, then let's do it!

What other purposes can you see for using games in class? Are any of these purpose not okay with you? Do you think Game-Based Learning will succeed?

TED talk: Change Isn't Hard, It's Uncomfortable

Just finished watching this (thanks MindShift). I recommend it. It is good to hear that there are schools pushing to break the industrialized way we have been teaching. My favorite point that he brings up is that change isn't hard, it's uncomfortable. We can do it! My favorite way to deal with uncomfortable things is just to dive in and surround yourself in it and then deal with things as they come up.

What did/didn't you like about what Grant said? How can we "Teach into the unknown?"