Assessing other Groups' Assessments?

We haven’t gotten the chance yet to assess other groups’ assessments; however, when we assessed other groups’ mission statements, I found that to be quite enlightening. Reviewing other groups’ (or individual’s) work gives a different perspective to the reviewer and if feedback is given, to the creator as well. As time goes on, I’m sure we will eventually review other groups’ assessments.

The assessments, as with everything in the UdB process, should be based on the big ideas, or essential questions of the project. Speaking for our group, we are consistently going back to the big ideas and essential questions when designing our 15 session curriculum and assessments. I wonder how we can assess other groups’ assessments if we aren’t aware of where they are going, what their big ideas or essential questions are. I’m sure we would be able to assess, but would it be valuable feedback if we didn’t know what their goals are?

In referring to UbD, 2nd edition, the three basic questions assessors need to address are: 1) What kinds of evidence do we need to find hallmarks of our goals, including that of understanding?, 2) What specific characteristics in student responses, products, or performances should we examine to determine the extent to which the desired results were achieved?, and 3) Does the proposed evidence enable us to infer a student’s knowledge, skill, or understanding? When reviewing other groups’ assessments, I would assume that we would know their goals, expectations and big ideas.

Where has all the training gone?

I can’t believe I’m finally learning how to develop lesson plans that challenge students. At this point in my career, I’m not really sure I look forward to revamping everything I once did. Prior to this class, ignorance was bliss. I taught students skills that helped in reading comprehension, taught them how to construct paragraphs and many things that many of us would consider simple. For learning disabled students, what some consider simple is very difficult for them. Now that I’m reading and trying to apply many of the UbD concepts, my teaching is not what it should be.
I’m a product of MSUs MAT teacher of the handicapped program. My best learning experience came after I was in a classroom. I consider most of my training as “on-the-job training.” The UbD process is very interesting. I feel that many of the units could be designed and shared with other teachers teaching the same curriculum. Am I wrong is feeling that this process will require a lot of planning time, but would be more effective if designed correctly? Am I wrong in thinking that this type of unit design could be shared and put in place in school’s curriculum guides? I’m getting the sense, much of the work could be done as part of curriculum development that occurs in the summer.
Is this how new teachers are being trained. If future administrators/curriculum supervisors are getting training in this type of design perhaps change can take effect. I’ve been a teacher for twelve years and I was only exposed to this concept when I returned to MSU for a supervisory and principal’s certificate. My first masters didn’t address this at all. I can see my future in being a future change agent to teachers who are willing to really challenge students and who give students reasons for learning. I can anticipate my teaching will continue to change and whenever I change careers, I can see myself helping teachers rethink their design of lessons and units. I realize I’m not an expert in this type of design, but being exposed and trying to apply it myself will help me share UbD to others are my career grows.