Assessment through the Student's Eyes

I really enjoyed reading this article.  I thought it had a lot of really good ideas about how to make each student to learn all that they are capable of.  There is so much to be said for students being their own teachers and letting students learn from their own mistakes.  I really like the idea of student regulated assessments.
I also really like the concept of getting each student to be on a winning streak.  As educators, isn't that our goal?  Don't we want every one of our students to be successful?  If we could truly get each and every one of our students on a winning streak, we would have such a great learning environment for out students.  It is amazing how impressisonable young kids are.  If we help them to believe that they really can do anything that they set their mind to, they will believe it and we will hae a lot of kids out there reaching their full potential.  Wouldn't that be awesome?
I loved the example of the fifth grade student getting to retake the test and earning a 100%.  That teacher definitely had the right idea when it came to assessment. It sounds like it was qutie the form that the students worked through, but it was obviously worth it in the end.  If we want our students to be the best they can be, we are going to have to do a little more work, but that is a sacrifice I am willing to make.  When we let students figure out for themselves what it is that they don't fully understand, they are going to be a lot more motivated to fix it themselves.  Kids get tired of being told all the time what it is that they are doing wrong.  If we let them figure it out on their own, they will feel accomplished because they could figure it out, and they will know what they personally need to do to fix the problem.
This was a really good article.  I liked a lot of what it had to say.  What did you guys think?

1-to-1 computer classrooms

I thought that this was a really interesting article.  I would definitely agree that a program like this can only be as effective as the teachers implementing it.  I think that is true of any program.  Nothing is going to be successful in the classroom if the teacher isn't wholeheartedly inolved in it and wants to see it succeed.  I think  this ideo of a 1-to-1 ratio of computers to students in the classroom could be a really good idea.  Like they talked about, one of the schools used the computers for difficult group projects. 
That is being very advanced in teaching strategies.  It is including technology in the classroom and encouraging working with peers.  There is a lot of value in that.  I can also see the downside of the computer ratio. It is a very costly idea and like was said in the article, is something that is extremely difficult to keep up with as times change.  How long will it be before laptops are obsolete and everyone has an Ipad or tablet?  Do we re-vamp the classrooms then to give each student an Ipad?  As much as I love the idea of each student getting to work on their own laptop and become more familiar with the technology culture that now surrounds them, I feel like it might be an idea that is both easier said than done and better in theory.  We can so easily fall into the trap that says that as long as we have technology, we are doing well.  If the technology isnt being used, than it serves no point and we might was well go back to the way that things used to be.  I think no matter what the new idea for technology-rich classrooms, the key to their success is the how involved the teachers are.  That puts a lot of pressure on us.  Do you think it is possible to make a seemingly unlikely program effective in your own classroom if the rest of the school doesn't do it well?

SMARTboards: Are they really worth it?

I thought this video and the following comments were really interesting.  The first thing that caught my attention in the video was the number of times the word easy was used.  It was really annoying, I thought.  And I am not a big fan of that word.  Teaching is hard work, and so is learning.  I understand that they meant it to mean that the smartboard was simple enough that both the students and the teachers could use it, but it would have been more effective to say that, rather than "easy"  seven mission times.  When I watched the video, that is the only thing that really caught my eye, but after reading the comments,  I see that there was a lot wrong with the video.  I definitely agree with the comments about it not really advancing the way we teach at all.  The kids were still sitting in their seats and not getting any chance to interact with the teacher or each other at all.  I think we often fall into the trap that says just because it is technology means it is a great advancement in the classroom.  But if we aer still using all the same methods we have used before, are we really changing the way the students learn?  Isn't that the goal as educators, to change the way a student thinks about the world around them?  I like the idea of having a class set of net books and a projector.  I think it would get more of the kids involved at a time.  Another really good comment was made in the comments.  When using the SMART board, the teacher's back was still to the classroom, making it hard to control the class.  True innovation is going to occur when a teacher can walk around the classroom and engage each and every student while they are teaching.  I don't really have a solution to this problem of using new "toys" to do the same old things, but I think it is a problem that should be addressed.  What do you guys think?