Walter, I agree with your position about this. I often think of it in these terms: we want to talk about depth of learning and not just proficiency in regards to skills and content. To do that, we need to offer al "alternative world" to the one that argues for more and more high stakes testing. The tools you propose seem really consistent with that. And thanks for sharing the article. Gerald
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Walter Bender <walter.ben...@gmail.com> wrote: > Amidst all the discussion about the future of Sugar, it would be good > to keep in mind what more we can do in terms of analyitics and > evaluation. We have a pretty decent mechanism (wrtiten by Martin) for > data gathering about what kids do; the portfolio for assessing what > they have done; and a few rubrics for tying together some of these > data. The ideas expressed in [1] suggest we could do more. > > regards. > > -walter > > [1] > http://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2015/02/26/things-every-kid-should-master/uM72LGr63zeaStOp9zGyrJ/story.html > > -- > Walter Bender > Sugar Labs > http://www.sugarlabs.org > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel >
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
