In order to prove their proficiency with plate tectonics, simple machines, Newton’s Laws and other physics concepts students have been working on a variety of STEM projects. They have built model houses that were to be able to withstand an earthquake. Students have constructed Rube Goldberg machines. They have engineered bottle rockets, egg cars and roller coasters. When considering iPad apps the one app that has been consistently used throughout all of these projects is the use of the camera. Students have used the camera to track their projects progress, remember construction design and record the performance of whatever it was they had built.
The camera apps usage for the tasks at hand would be considered synthesis and evaluation on the levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Students were building structures from diverse elements, putting parts together to form a whole, while obviously emphasizing the creation of a new structure. Not only were they creating something but their creations could withstand obstacles and perform tasks.
Students were using the camera app to evaluate their projects as well as their peers’ projects; looking at the end result as well as the process they used to get there. Students were able to see mistakes while their projects were undergoing construction and then compensate for those problems. They made judgments concerning the usability of materials they were working with and had to make collaborative decisions about what would and would not work for the tasks at hand.
When evaluating Acuity with Bloom’s Taxonomy I find that it is reserved for the first four levels of Blooms. There is assessment of knowledge, comprehension, and even application. While in fewer instances I can see some evidence of analysis. In my opinion Acuity is not a good assessment of synthesis or evaluation skills;it is difficult to show these types of skills with multiple choice testing.
No comments:
Post a Comment