I Personally Believe...

I personally believe that the appropriate focus for all teachers should be on the students in our classrooms. Teachers should not be in school to solely earn a paycheck. We (teachers) chose our profession because we have some sort of love for imparting knowledge to the youth of our society that will one day take our place. A teacher should be willing to go out of his or her way to help a student.. It is my belief that upon completion of my class, each of my students should be a better more well-developed person, morally, socially as well as intellectually and in order to reach this goal, it is important for me to realize the impact that I may have on each individual. A teacher is a role model, an educator as well as a friend and therefore should always strive to reach each individual that enters the classroom in order to learn. While we cannot know the aptitude each of our students has towards what we will be teaching them, we should work towards gaining their interest. If we cannot get them to like what we are teaching, we should at least impart our knowledge as clearly, precisely and creatively as possible with the hope that our students will grow from the experience.
As far as assessments are concerned, teachers should, once again focus on reaching the students. Classrooms should be student based rather than teacher oriented. This type of classroom format and philosophy most definitely encourages teachers to continue to modify, strengthen and perfect assessments in order to get the best result from each student. I personally feel that assessments have more value to the students when they appeal to their emotions, allow for creativity and the expressing of opinions. Of course, this tends to be my philosophy because of my content, English Language Arts. This may be different for other content areas, but the same sort of empathetic view can undoubtedly be administered within all classrooms. Nitko and Brookhart state that teachers should “craft assessments that are free from characteristics irrelevant to assessing the learning target” (87). Within the English Language Arts content area there seems to be a lot more freedom when it comes to this well-informed guideline. Learning targets tend to be more expansive ranging from lower level learning taxonomies (Blooms), as in vocabulary acquisition and plot summaries, to higher level thinking activities that draw upon student experiences and personal creativity. Still, I agree that keeping learning targets in mind while crafting assessments is critical. Students should be able to express themselves freely within a classroom, while it is the teacher’s job to make sure that what is being expressed relates to the learning target being taught.
Another point that Nitko and Brookhart make is that students should be able to understand the results of assessment techniques and be able to make connections to the focus of the learning target being assessed (87). This is also quite true. When students have to ask the question “Why are we learning this,” it should be an indication to the teacher that they have been unclear in their direction. It is the students’ right to know the importance and relevance of what they are learning and teachers should be wary of this fact. Another point found in Educational Assessment of Students that was brought up is the fact that teachers need to work alongside school administrators as well as other teachers to ensure the success of each student. Every student is different. Therefore it is the responsibility of the school district as a whole to reach out to each student providing “reasonable accommodations for classroom assessment activities” and further for the teacher to “seek the help of the appropriate school personnel” (89). Resources are available in almost every school district. The abundance of special needs that each teacher will encounter is undeniable. Therefore, I agree that assessments should be made, altered and perfected to reach the needs of all of these students. Further, I agree that collaboration between teachers can only help students to reach their fullest potential. For example, I currently work alongside another teacher, co-teaching and English 10 class. My “co-teacher” and I have worked at modifying tests and activities to be sure that his students as well as mine are able to understand the learning targets we have prescribed for each unit. Working together undoubtedly changes the success rate within the classroom. If teachers are reluctant to work together, it only hinders a student’s progress and personal growth as an intellectual human being. While working together is a good thing, I also agree with Nitko and Brookhart when they say “It is irresponsible for authorities to create a situation that pressures teachers into reporting high scores” (91). Low scores do not necessarily mean that a student is “dumb” or “stupid.” They should serve as an indication to teachers what should be changed and refined. Administrators and supporting teachers should understand this aspect of teaching and that teaching should be an ongoing learning experience for both the students as well as the teachers. Finally, there is one aspect that Nitko and Brookhart discuss that I feel may not necessarily be true. This is in the area of privacy and confidentiality. I do agree that students should not be “flagged’ when evaluating assessments or using assessments as a way of research among other teachers. However, within my own classroom, I sometimes use teaching techniques that do not keep student assessments confidential from other students. For example, I use peer-review of essays, correcting test responses and displays of student work on my walls. Nitko and Brookhart do not totally admonish these practices. In fact, they say “These practices raise the question of whether the evaluations should be confidential” (96). I do not think that these practices should be confidential. Quite on the contrary, I believe that activities such as these help students to achieve higher. It has been shown that one of the highest levels of learning is achieved when students actually teach other students what they know, while the teacher facilitates such activities. If we want students to strive to do their best within classrooms, I think there should be constant communication between the students in order for them to achieve at a higher level.
For the most part, Nitko’s and Brookhart’s ideas reiterate some of my own beliefs. I believe that teachers should strive to provide the best forms of activities and assessments for their students, allowing them to grow both emotionally and intellectually from being in the classroom. I do understand that the implications provided in Educational Assessment of Students may have a different meaning based on each teacher’s content area, the rules and guidelines are can be following within any subject. In all teaching situations, teachers should be aware of the responsibilities they have, be able to uphold those responsibilities and reach out to each individual that walks through their doors to learn.