MKO = More Knowledgeable Other (such as a teacher, a peer who has already developed the skill, a parent etc.) Ability +1 = An equation Often referred to in ESL teaching. The student’s ability (ie what is fully accessible) plus the next level of difficulty. Eg a book should have most of the words that the reader can understand, but also a few new words. Without the +, there is no new learning. With +2 difficulty, the material or concept is inaccessible. 50:50 = The student gets 50% right and 50% wrong.
Pathos is a quality that arouses emotions Go over cut-off calculations
What stands out? Which criteria have students all scored on? Is there a criteria they all failed to reached? Which criteria appeared to the be hardest?
‘ ...the point at which the student is most ready to learn.’
NB: It is NOT the students’ level of achievement but the level at which they are working or developing
Children can be on the ‘verge’ of being able to solve a problem at any given time
To assist their problem solving, they require structure, encouragement, reminders, demonstrations, co-operative learning with discussion
How do we know where we need to intervene? What is Known (fully accessible) Point of intervention (accessible with help) ZPD What is Unknown (inaccessible)
Often characterised by:
most answers are correct
Incorrect answers tend to be accidental
Lack of motivation
Often characterised by:
MKO is needed
Often characterised by:
Nearly all answers are incorrect
Correct answers tend to be accidental
lack of motivation
Linking developmental continua with planning for intervention
So, how do we recognise the point of intervention?
Let’s start with our assessment rubric...
We write our assessment rubric using a developmental continuum
Here are just a few examples of developmental continua : Bloom's Taxonomy of Cognitive Domain Krathwohl's Taxonomy of Affective Domain The Dreyfus Model of Skills Acquisition The Problem Solving Continuum NB: Our aim is not to make the assessment totally objective. This is impossible given that we all have biases. Our aim should be to eliminate as much subjectivity as we can, so that our instrument is as objective as possible.
In this case we are using Dreyfus Process Novice Rigid adherence to rules Advanced Beginner Guidelines based on aspects – may miss details Competent Standard and routine procedures Proficient Looks for most important, deviations perceived Expert No need to rely on rules, looks to the future
For Example…A vocal performance Let’s look at aesthetics… Category: Technical Skill Category: Aesthetics Expert 3.3 Articulates the lyrics according to the context of the composition 4.4 Extracts meaning from the composition according to context, notation and knowledge of other extrinsic influences on the composition. 5.3 Contextualizes emotions in the song and conveys the emotions through voice, and facial expression. 6.3 Evokes emotions in the listeners that oscillate with the moods, interpretations and character contexts of the composition. 16-19 Proficient 1.3 Consistent placement of voice creating a warm and rich quality across the breadth of the vocal range. 2.3 Pitch accuracy and flexibility is supported by diaphragmatic control. 4.3 Conveys the context of the piece using notation and lyrics as a guide. 5.2 Uses the lyrics and notation to guide the light and shade of the performance 6.2 Arouses emotions in the listeners that are congruent with the intentions of the composition. 11-15 Competent 1.2 Consistent vocal quality that spans the breadth of the vocal range 3.2 Articulates consonants and rounded vowel sounds. 4.2 Emphasizes key lyrics according to context and notation 6.1 Conveys emotions according to lyrics and notation 7-10 Advanced Beginner 2.2 Accuracy of pitch varies depending on volume and height/depth of the notes. 4.1 Interprets the song based on an understanding of the lyrics. 5.1 Uses the context of the lyrics to emphasize meaning-laden words and phrases. 4-6 Novice 1.1 Breath control varies changing the quality of sound. 2.1 Accuracy of pitch varies throughout the song. 3.1 Clarity of articulation varies throughout the performance. 1-3 Indicators 1. Vocal quality 2.Pitch 3. Articulation of lyrics 4. Interpretation of the context 5. Expression 6. Pathos Cut- points
Summary statements of learning at each level Level 4: At this level, the student is learning to refine diaphragmatic control across the full vocal range to support pitch and tone, and to develop flexibility. S/he is learning to use the lyrics and notation to inform and convey an understanding of the contexts within the composition. Level 1: At this level the student is learning to use the diaphragm to breathe. He/she is learning to use the muscles of the vocal chords, face, mouth, throat, chest, back and abdomen to control the quality of vocal production and pitch. Level 5: At this level, the student is learning to interpret and communicate the underlying story and emotions within a composition. S/he is learning to use the voice to evoke emotions and imagination in listeners congruent with the story that is being told through the composition. Level 3: At this level, the student is learning to maintain a consistent quality of sound across the vocal range. S/he is learning to enunciate and emphasize lyrics in order to communicate the emotions of the context and the intentions of the composer. Level 2: At this level the student is learning to refine their use of muscles to control volume and pitch. S/he is learning to understand the relationship between the lyrics and the feelings that the song represents. S/he is learning to enunciate consonant and vowel sounds to convey meaning Category: Technical Ability Category: aesthetics Expert 16-19 Proficient 11-15 Competent 7-10 Advanced Beginner 4-6 Novice 0-3 Indicators 1. Control of Vocal Quality 2.Control of Pitch 3. Articulation of Lyrics 4. Interpretation of the Context 5. Expression relevant to the composition 6. Pathos communicated to the audience
Organise students highest score at the top, lowest at the bottom.
Highlight only the rows with student names.
Click: Data - Sort.
Click Options - select ‘sort top to bottom’ - Ok.
In the “ Sort by ” space select the final column (with the totals).
Then click “Descending” - Ok.
Organise criteria from easiest to the hardest.
Highlight the columns that have the criteria scores.
Click: Data, Sort.
Click “Options”, select ‘sort left to right’, Ok
In the “ Sort by ” space, select the row number that has all the added criteria results.
Then Click “Descending” - Ok
Step 4: finding the ZPD This is our ZPD It is the area where intervention is needed in order to help the students move to the next stage on the continuum. Notice that the quality criteria are no longer in sequential order Notice that the students are are no longer in alphabetical order
Step 5: Divide the students into the general levels At this level, the recommended intervention is… At this level, the recommended intervention is… At this level, the recommended intervention is… At this level, the recommended intervention is… At this level, the recommended intervention is…
The larger the area of overlap between 1s and 0s, the less reliable your data is.
The smaller the area of overlap between 1 and 0, the more reliable your data is.
If the area of overlap is fairly wide, it can mean that the assessment tool needs refining.
Perhaps the students did not understand certain expectations?
Perhaps the quality criteria are in the wrong order?
When we talk about general interventions, what do we need to consider?
The students’ individual general developmental levels
The students’ group developmental levels
The assessment history of the students.
Student Results At this level the recommended intervention for the group is... At this level, the recommended intervention for this student is… Developmental level = x . Group Targets Individual targets
Step 6: Looking for anomalies What we see here are the students who seem to have interesting ‘gaps’ in their achievement.
Aside from the general interventions for the Expert level, we also need to work on articulation.
What are some possible causes for this result?
What might we do to help him improve in this area? What resources might we need?
Some students may achieve well on the majority of the criteria, but there may be a specific area that requires attention. Before we intervene, it can be important to find underlying causes, so that we can choose appropriate intervention strategies
Nigel is assessed as being “proficient”, but he seems to have problems with pitch in this assessment. What questions might we need to ask in order to figure out:
If pitch has been has been an ongoing area of difficulty for Nigel, or if it is an anomaly on this occasion.
What could be the cause?
What resources might be needed to help Nigel move up the developmental continuum?
Other areas requiring intervention The students’ results can be indicative of more than just their level of achievement… The student’s needs Welfare Language Social/cultural Academic Learning difficulties? Background? Interrupted schooling? Reading/writing levels Subject specific vocab ESL/NESB Language processing difficulties? Absences? Trauma or abuse Family difficulties Illness? Behaviour or truancy related? Withdrawal programs? Peer pressure? Cultural background and expectations? Racism/sexism/bullying etc? Social groups? Conflict?
Orpah has reached a competent level for this assessment, but her articulation and understanding of the meaning of the song seem to need more work.
How would you find some underlying cause(s) for this?
Who else might you consult/work with in order to meet her needs?
What are some interventions that the vocal teacher can employ?
Interventions: Georgia Case Study: At the beginning of Semester 2, Georgia’s skills had developed well and she was beginning to achieve results in the ‘competent’ level. However, lately Georgia had been arriving late to class and had missed a few lessons entirely. On this day, she seemed to struggle to get through the song. You noticed that the normal vigor with which she tackled her work was not there.