On September 19th, in Education 394 (Pedagogy, Curriculum and Teaching), we discussed the new BC Curriculum and the development style of assessments. I like the Aristotelian idea that curriculum is a process where teachers think critically and understand their role and expectations as well as have an action plan for the educational encounter; teachers encourage conversations which produce thinking and action; and teachers continuously evaluate the process. I appreciate the curriculum as praxis as the teacher has the additional role of trying to raise the potential of every child. From my observations, BC’s curriculum tries to be a praxis of curriculum as evidenced by the support networks of Educational Assistants, Food Programs, and support staff such as Aboriginal educators, ESL teachers, and support room teachers. At this early stage, I wonder if there are enough enrichment opportunities for the young learners who would benefit from being pushed.
The key word of learning, in my and Ken Robinson’s opinion, is curiosity. I am motivated to learn by my curiosity, to please members of my groups and teams, and to set a good example for my children. When I was a young learner, I was motivated by small rewards such TV time. In other words, my motivations have matured, moving from extrinsic to intrinsic motivations. From K – 12, I learned the Three R’s plus instructions on how to be a moral person, Chinese style. I remember spending a lot of time stressed out about exams, but I also remember the good friends who suffered alongside me. My core competencies have depended tremendously with a Western education. I gained the opportunity and confidence to share my ideas (communication), a metacognitive perch (or a place from which I can critically think about my own education as well as that of the West and aboriginal ideas about knowing and learning) (thinking), and a clearer idea of who I am in the world (personal and social). Of course, not everyone has the opportunity to learn from two education systems, so I feel very lucky to have my insight.
I think the marriage of formative and summative assessment is highly contextual: young learners in the primary grades need more formative assessment to build self-esteem, but learners in older grades benefit from some competition and occasionally summative assessment. I personally prefer formative assessment, but I also enjoy getting back an assignment with a grade. I suppose a balancing act will be conducted with adaptations and adjustments made when necessary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wX78iKhInsc
