Learning Assessment System Assignments (LASAs) - Research Paper Example

? Learning Assessment System Assignments (LASAs) of Learning Assessment System Assignments (LASAs) Introduction In general terms, learning refers to the process of modifying existing or acquiring new knowledge, preferences, values, skills, and behaviors and it involves synthesizing various forms of information at a given time. There is a consensus among psychologists and education scholars that learning is contextual and it is build upon and shaped by what an individual or group of individuals already know (Dahlgren et al, 2009). The process of learning among humans happens as part of training, schooling, personal development, and education. In classrooms with the practice of learning assessment, students are aware of what they are expected to learn in a unit of study. It is this realization that makes learning assessment system critical in education systems. Learning assessment system is a tool that measures whether a student has learnt what he or she was expected to learn after a certain period of time (Woollard, 2010). The system entails assessment that is accompanied by a letter grade or number. It also entails comparing a student’s performance with set standards, as well as communication of results to the parents and students. There are spectrums of learning theories that consist of many ways or approaches to explain how humans and students in particular learn (Porter and Lacey, 2005). This paper will discuss Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development Theory and Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences. In particular, it will compare and contrast these two theories and thereafter provide an argument to support the adoption of each theory to the PK-12 classroom when planning learning opportunities for students. Compare and contrast Vygotsky’s theory of “zone of proximal development” to Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences. The Zone of Proximal Development Theory (ZPD) was developed by Lev Vygotsky, a Soviet social constructivist and psychologist. He defined ZPD as the distance between the actual or concrete level of development as ascertained by independent problem solving and the potential development level as ascertained through the process of problem solving under the guidance of an adult, or through collaboration with peers of similar ability (Vygotsky, 1978). This theory views interaction with capable or more capable peers as an effective way of developing strategies and skills. It suggests that teachers use cooperative learning exercises where children who are less competent develop with the assistance of peers who are more competent and skillful; that is, within the proximal development zone (Chaiklin, 2003). Vygotsky who was the main proponent of this theory believed that when a student is at the Zone of Proximal Development for a given task, provision of the appropriate assistance will give the student sufficient “boost” to achieve the task at hand (Berry, 2008). He also believed that once the student has benefitted from the appropriate assistance and has mastered the task, then the assistance can be removed and the student is able to achieve the task again on his own (Vygotsky, 1978). The propositions of this theory were informed by the believe by some of the educational professions who included Vygotsky that the role of education was to provide children with experiences that are within their ZPD, therefore enhancing and encouraging their individual learning. Mayer (2008) notes that the ZPD theory defines functions that are yet to mature, but are in the maturing process. This theory was developed to argue against the conventional means of determining students’ intelligence. In other words, it was developed to argue against the use of knowledge-based and academic tests as a way of gauging the intelligence of students. According to this theory, the student’s intelligence cannot be determined by examining whet he knows; instead, it argues that it is better to independently examine student’s ability to solve problems, as well as his ability to solve problems with the assistance of the adult. It should be noted that while the theory of ZDP was originally developed by Vygotsky, other scholars have changed, modified, and even expanded this theory from its original conception (Zaretskii, 2009). The ZPD concept is widely used across the world to study the mental development of children because it relates to education. The theory of multiple intelligences was originally developed by Howard Gardner in 1983. Gardner viewed intelligence as the ability and capacity to solve problems, and to fashion products that are valued in cultural setting(s) (Gardner, 1983). Gardner believed that intelligence of a human being should not be solely equated with logical-mathematical or linguistic intelligence. This theory emerged from recent documents and research that showed that students possessed various kinds of minds and are therefore able to learn, perform, understand, and remember in different ways. He came up with a list of intelligences that all individuals are able to know (Gardner and Seana, 2006). It argues that individuals differ in the strength of these intelligences and in ways through which such intelligences are combined and invoked to solve different problems, progress in different domains, and carrying out diverse tasks. Gardner argues that these differences challenge the conventional educational system that makes an assumption that all individuals have the ability to learn the same materials in similar way and that a universal, uniform measure suffices to test learning of the students (Gardner, 1999). The theory of multiple intelligence as postulated by Gardner further states that the educational system as currently constituted is heavily biased towards logical-quantitative modes, and linguistic modes of assessment and instruction. It is against this background that Gardner argues that a contrasting set of assumptions that are more likely to be effective in education (Gardner and Seana, 2006). These assumptions are informed by the realization that students learn in identifiably distinctive ways. Besides, Gardner is of the view that these set of assumptions are necessary the wide students spectrum, and the whole society would be better served if disciplines could be presented in various ways and learning assessed by various means. Initially, Gardner formulated a list of seven intelligences that was provisional and he argued that there were exceptionally weak correlations among them (Stiggins, 2005). Individuals for intelligence” title has to satisfy certain criteria and must involve the ability of resolving genuine difficulties or problems within a given social, political, cultural, or economic setting (Gardner, 1983). Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory includes the following theories: visual-spatial; musical; logical-mathematical; linguistic; intrapersonal; interpersonal; and bodily-kinesthetic. Visual-spatial intelligence is that which involves thinking in terms of physical space. Individuals possessing this intelligence are often very aware of their environments (Gardner, 1999). They like reading maps, drawing, doing jigsaw puzzles. Example of people possessing this intelligence is sailors and architects. Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is that which involves effective use of the body. Individuals with this intelligence have an intense sense of body awareness and like touching things and movements. They are able to communicate well through body language and be taught through hands-on learning, physical activity, and role playing (Chappuis, 2004). Examples of people possessing this intelligence are surgeons and dancers. The third intelligence as postulated in Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligence is musical intelligence which relates to sensitivity to sound and rhythm. Individuals possessing this intelligence love music and are sensitive to sounds within their environments. The tools mostly used by these individuals include multimedia, CD-ROM, radio, musical instruments, and stereo among others (Marzano, 2005). Interpersonal intelligence is another form of intelligence; it involves interacting and understanding with others and students learn through interaction. Individuals having this intelligence tend to be street smarts, have empathy for others, and have many friends. They can be taught well through dialogues, seminars, and group activities (Gardner and Seana, 2006). In addition, Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory includes three other intelligences: interpersonal, linguistic, and logical-mathematical intelligences. Intrapersonal intelligence encompasses the ability to understand one’s own goals and interests. The learners possessing this intelligence tend to shy from other learners because they are more in tune with their inner feelings, have motivation and intuition (Gardner, 1983). Linguistic intelligence involves the ability to use words effectively and learners possessing this intelligence often think in words and have auditory skills that are highly developed. They like making up stories or poetry, playing word games, or reading (Sitzmann, et al., 2010). The most appropriate tools for this kind of learners include lecture, tape recorders, books, games, and computers. The final type of intelligence originally developed by Gardner is logical-mathematical that involves calculating and reasoning. Learners with this intelligence tend to think abstractly, conceptually, and have the ability to explore and see relationships and patterns. They can be taught well through investigations and logic games (Gardner, 1999). While Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development Theory and Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences are two distinct theories, they have main comparison; they both challenge the conventional educational system way of examining students and assessing their abilities and intelligences. ZPD theory argues against the use of knowledge-based, academic tests as a way of gauging intelligence of the students (Chaiklin, 2003). This theory is against the conventional learning assessment system and proposes that students’ ability and intelligence should be determined by their ability to independently solve problems and to solve problems with the assistance of the adult(s). Similarly, Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory argues against the conventional educational system that assumes that all individuals have the ability to learn similar materials in a similar way and that universal, uniform measure suffices to test learning of the students (Gardner, 1999). Therefore, Gardner proposes that contrasting assumptions are likely to be more effective in the education system because students learn in identifiably distinctive ways. He also argues that there is need for contrasting set of assumptions because the learners and the society at large would be served better if disciplines could be presented in various ways and learning assessed through different means (Black, 2003). The main comparison notwithstanding, these two theories contrast in various ways. Vygotsky’s ZPD theory argues that a learner can do better when assisted by more competent peers or adults. The theory holds that a difference can be realized in a learner through assistance in the form of a teacher modeling a student behavior, student imitating behavior of the teacher and by student practicing reciprocal teaching until he masters the skill already mastered by other students in the classroom (Chaiklin, 2003). Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory is seen to deviate from the core assumptions of Vygotsky ZPD theory as it seems to emphasize on individual ability and intelligence in performing different tasks and solving problems. Gardner is seen to argue against ZPD theory that emphasizes on the importance of interaction as an effective way of developing strategies and skills. Gardner argues that students learn in identifiably distinctive ways and therefore effective education can be achieved by providing different ways of learning and testing student learning (Porter and Lacey, 2005). In other words, Gardner believes interaction among learners with their peers and teachers would only entrench the already biasness towards logical-mathematical and linguistic modes of assessment and instruction rather than allowing students to pursue and achieve in their different intelligences (Gardner and Seana, 2006). Also, while Vygotsky seems to suggest that intelligences are related and that all students will succeed in particular tasks through interaction and appropriate assistance (Obukhova and Korepanova, 2009), Gardner believes that there is weak correlations among the intelligences and that each learner is intelligent in his own way and not necessarily in similar ways like the rest of the learners. An argument to support the adoption of Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development theory in the PK-12 classroom Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development Theory has been adopted significantly in the PK-12 classroom. Reciprocal teaching is the contemporary application of Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development Theory and is used in improving ability of the learners to learn from text. In reciprocal teaching method, students and teacher collaborate in practicing and learning four main skills: predicting, questioning, summarizing, and clarifying (Obukhova and Korepanova, 2009). The role of the teacher is reduced with time. Apart from reciprocal teaching, the contemporary application of this theory is in apprenticeship and scaffolding, where the teacher or more competent peers assist in structuring tasks to enable a novice learner to successfully work on it. Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development Theory is also used in feeding the current interest in collaborative learning program particularly in the PK-12 classroom (Cubukcu, 2012). The theory is applied since it suggests that group members should have different ability levels so that more advanced peers can assist the less competent peers to operate within their zone of proximal development (Earl, 2003). The key benefit of this theory is that it helps challenge a student in accomplishing his or her full potential. Also, as the student picks up increasing aspect of a specific learning goal, teacher’s role diminishes until the child is able to perform the task on his own. It further encourages a student to find out how he is progressing in his learning. However, there are some problems associated with this theory (William and University of London, 2008). The first one is the need for individualized attention as teachers must increasingly interact with the students to ensure that the student benefits from the interaction. The concept is time consuming as the teacher who applies this theory need to spend time developing appropriate lesson plan. Besides, the concept may call for a teacher to give up certain controls to allow students to make mistakes during learning (Obukhova and Korepanova, 2009). The following is a description of artifacts that demonstrate how this theory is used: a student in PK-12 classroom decided to take introductory tennis course. His class spends a day every week practicing and learning a different shot. In the course of the week, instructor observes that the student is frustrated as he keeps hitting his forehand shots far past the baseline or either into the net (Cubukcu, 2012). He notices that the reason for this is because the student is still gripping his racquet in similar way he hits his backhand. So, he goes over to show him how to reposition his hand to hit proper forehand. He models a proper forehand for him and then helps him to change his grip. As a result, the student improves significantly. The learning outcome of adopting this theory is its usefulness to provide instructors with options of examining and assessing learning phases and validating the phases in relation to a number of domains’ outcomes (Sitzmann et al, 2010). An argument to support the adoption of Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory in the PK-12 classroom Like ZPD theory, Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory has been adopted in the PK-classroom and has been instrumental in improving learning in schools that have adopted it. It has been beneficial in addressing some of the problems of schooling (Cooper, 2006). A considerable number of schools have looked to structure their curricula according to the multiple intelligences, as well as designing their classrooms and schools to reflect the multiple intelligences concept (Gardner, 1999). There is need to adopt this theory in PK-12 classroom and in school as a whole because it broadens education vision; as it is evident in the real life, all the intelligences are necessary in life (Sitzmann et al, 2010). The need for adoption of this theory is also necessitated by the emerging social and economic dynamics that require development of flexible and local programs. Multiple intelligences theory provides deep understanding, creativity, exploration, and performance that cannot be accommodated easily within the conventional educational context. While this theory is beneficial, there are problems associated with it adoption in classroom. The critics argue that the criteria employed in this theory are not adequate. Also, it has been argued that there is no well-worked through set of tests for identifying and measuring certain intelligences (William and University of London, 2008). Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory have met strongly positive response from schools who find it a better learning assessment tool and vital in enhancing education goals. New City School in Missouri is one of the most notable schools in implementing this theory. The school started to use this theory in 1988 and has hosted four conferences for educators who are interested in adopting the theory in their classrooms. Claus (2011) explains that Key Elementary School is another school that has adopted Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory. The school first began by using it as a basis for curriculum guide for talented and gifted students. The school promotes multiple intelligences theory by making a value judgment on all intelligences with equal emphasis. It also establishes a priority that focuses on the area of strength for each student. The schedule of the school is balanced to provide equal time to each student with instructions across all the intelligences (Claus, 2011). The learning outcomes of adopting this theory have been positive across all levels. It has helped students develop a sense of self-confidence and accomplishment. It has also provided a theoretical foundation of recognizing the diverse talents and abilities of students. Furthermore, the theory has widened learning approach and assessment to allow for a wide range of students participating successfully in classroom learning (William and University of London, 2008). References Berry, R. (2008). Assessment for learning. Aberdeen, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Black, P. J. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Chaiklin, S. (2003). "The Zone of Proximal Development in Vygotsky's analysis of learning and instruction." In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. & Miller, S. (Eds.) Vygotsky's educational theory and practice in cultural context. 39-64. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Chappuis, S. (2004). Assessment for learning: An action guide for school leaders. Portland, OR: Assessment Training Institute. Claus, J. (2011). Multiple Intelligences Theory. Retrieved from http://www.ithaca.edu/wise/multiple/ Cooper, D. (2006). Talk About Assessment: Strategies and Tools to Improve Learning. Toronto, ON: Thomson Nelson. Government of British Columbia. Cubukcu, Z. (2012). Teachers' evaluation of student-centered Learning environments. Education, 133(1), 49-66. Dahlgren, L., et al. (2009). Grading systems features of assessment and students' approaches to learning. Teaching In Higher Education, 14(2), 185-194. Earl, L. M. (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, H and Seana, M. (2006). The science of Multiple Intelligences theory: A response to Lynn Waterhouse. Educational Psychologist, Volume 41, Issue 4, Fall 2006, pp. 227–232. Marzano, R. J. (2005). A handbook for classroom management that works. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and Instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Obukhova, L. F., & Korepanova, I. A. (2009). The Zone of Proximal Development: A Spatiotemporal Model. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 47(6), 25-47. Porter, J. & Lacey, P. (2005). Researching Learning Difficulties: A Guide for Practitioners. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Sitzmann, T et al. (2010). Self-Assessment of Knowledge: A Cognitive Learning or Affective Measure?. Academy Of Management Learning & Education, 9(2), 169-191. Stiggins, R. J. (2005). Student-involved assessment for learning. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and Society: The Development of Higher mental Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. William, D., & University of London. (2008). Assessment for learning: Why, what and how?. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Woollard, J. (2010). Psychology for the Classroom: Behaviorism. Oxon: Routledge. Zaretskii, K. (2009). The Zone of Proximal Development What Vygotsky Did Not Have Time to Write. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, vol. 47, no. 6,November–December 2009, pp. 70–93. Read More