Something I always wished for, particularly in the arena of math, was for my quizzes to please just be graded completion assignments. For my own personal learning, quizzes function best to see what I am not good at yet, or what aspects of a math concept I do not understand, to target learning. What that notion implies, however, is that it is hard to be prepared for quizzes, haha. They are often a day or two after the material they are covering was taught, and that only allows for a strict style of learner with ample free time every day to excel at them.

It seems that the readings for this week can hear what I am saying and echo it or snap their fingers melodiously at it (like, that’s a groovy idea, mannnnn). First was the Gillis and Van Wig reading. They accentuate the use of formative assessments. I love this idea. For one thing, formative assessments are very low-stakes tests. That may allow for students who have issues with tests to acclimate to a testing environment. If a student can get used to the form and diction and procedures of a test without any pressure, it seems like a good way to get comfortable in that situation. If someone threw me into a competitive high school baseball team without ever having played before, I never could have learned to love baseball—the environment was too hostile. But growing up on sandlots and playing house-league baseball gave me a comfort on the diamond that translated to that same competitive high school field. The Brozo-Simpson reading had some sports analogies in them, so I figured I’d follow suit.

Gillis and Van Wig really believe in formative assessment as a way to inform lessons. Used properly, G&VW say, formative assessments tell teachers what students know and what still needs to be covered, what is a foreign language to students and what students are using to write wonderful novels. I am saying that, for this purpose, perhaps teachers need not even use formal formative assessments. The teacher I am using my observation hours with has her students input their homework assignments into an online program. From there, the program tallies for her what types of problems students are not doing well with, what problems they are doing well with, and she says that this helps. In this way, can homework be considered a formative assessment? Or, where do we draw the line, and does the line matter?

I wonder what a learner auto-biography would look like from students of all ages. If I made one, I could add to mine “I learn slowly and so I do not do well on quizzes usually.” I could add the fact that I am not the best auditory learner and sometimes mumble back what teachers say so that I can more easily comprehend that (not sure why it works but it helps). I would indicate that while I am a slower learner, usually, I am also a thorough learner and will remember what I have learned. But, with all this being said, will it help me? Will it matter? School runs a particular pace and one class can only really go at one pace. But how can one pace suit 25-35 students? I like the idea of a learner auto-biography a lot from a conceptual standpoint, but I cannot figure out how to remedy its limitations. I think one of the most useful parts would be considering what your bad and good experiences with teachers were like, what did the experiences of each type (bad/good) have in common, and how can we bring it together to create a learning experience that works.