The reason for my inclusion of that particular Dilbert cartoon at the top of this post is that I reckon most UK teachers couldn’t differentiate between a Level 4b and 4a in their subject. In fact, the distinction’s pretty meaningless. I’ve seen some schools use the sub-levels as following:
Level 4c – some work at Level 4 standard
Level 4b – most work at Level 4 standard
Level 4a – all work at Level 4 standard
In that case, why use the sub-levels in the first place?
It’s my belief that Assessment for Learning, that buzz-phrase from a couple of years ago, has been hijacked and contorted into something it’s not. I’m certainly not arguing against students knowing where they’re at in a subject and how to improve. It’s just that using National Curriculum levels as a means for doing this smacks of laziness to me. Instead, professional teachers should be able to convey the key skills, processes and subject knowledge students need to be able to progress. That’s just good teaching.
Kristen Swenson on 27 Feb 12Critical thinking explained in six kid-friendly animations If you've been looking for a crash course in basic logic - or just want to explain to a friend exactly what a logical fallacy is - turn your attention to these simple, easy-to-understand videos, which lay out the basics of critical thinking. Creative solutions agency Bridge 8 created these animations to offer a basic overview of critical thinking. The videos were designed for an audience of kids (Edit: Australian grades, not ages) 8-10, but they're handy for anyone who wants to brush up on their logic. The first video (up top), provides an introduction to critical thinking and how we form judgments and opinions.
Cached
