[ad_1]
For some time there has been a debate about which evaluation model should be applied in schools. Votes or no votes, judgment or no judgment. The plotted path appears to be clear. A school that is on the path of competencies, and in primary school the grading system is overcome in favor of the judgments but that substantially increase the activity of the teaching staff in an important way.
We are always the regulars and it is convenient to reflect seriously on this because we are constantly witnessing a situation that sees an increase in the charges but not in the salary owed, on the other hand, in OS it has been reported that the salaries of the staff of the Italian primary school always remain among the lowest in Europe with even 12% less than the EU average.
Descriptive judgment is introduced
As of the 2020/2021 school year, the periodic and final evaluation of learning is expressed, for each of the study disciplines provided for by the National Indications, including the transversal teaching of civic education referred to in the August 20 law 2019, n. 92, through descriptive judgment reported in the evaluation document. Descriptive judgments refer to objectives that are assessed as defined in the school’s curriculum and reported in the assessment document.
Individual objectives must be identified in the curriculum
The OM of December 4 clearly states that the learning objectives subject to periodic and final evaluation are identified in the school curriculum for each course year and for each discipline. The objectives refer to the National Indications, with special attention to the disciplinary objectives and the goals of competence development.
The reference model is the certification of competencies
Skills school starts from elementary school with the new assessment system. In fact, in the aforementioned MO it is clearly indicated that the descriptive judgments to be reported in the evaluation document are related to the following levels of learning, in line with the levels and descriptors adopted in the Competences certification model, and making reference to to the dimensions indicated in the Guidelines:
a) In the process of first acquisition
b) Base
c) Intermediate
d) Advanced.
All four levels of learning are required
The levels are defined from dimensions that characterize learning and that allow a descriptive judgment to be formulated. It is possible to identify, in the pedagogical-didactic literature and in the comparison between the research world and the school world, four dimensions that are at the base of the definition of learning levels. Therefore, the learning levels (advanced, intermediate, basic, in the process of acquisition) should be understood as non-derogable.
It will be the school in its autonomy to manage the levels of learning
Non-derogable learning levels, however, allow flexibility in how they should be developed. In this sense, the tables of the Guidelines attached to the MO of December 4 can also be used to make life easier for teachers. But how well you can understand the workload will still matter. There are different ways of expressing the descriptive evaluation in the Evaluation Document: in compliance with the provisions of Legislative Decree no. 62/2017, each center, in the exercise of its autonomy, prepares the Evaluation Document, taking into account both the working methods and the professional culture of the center, as well as the efficiency and transparency of communication with students and parents. Even in graphic form, different models and solutions can be used, which in any case must contain:
– discipline;
– the learning objectives (also for thematic nuclei);
– level;
– the descriptive judgment.
The DV requires a detailed description of student behavior and learning.
The Evaluation Document certifies the results of each student’s educational trajectory through a detailed description of the behaviors and learning manifestations detected permanently. In the periodic and final evaluation, the level of learning refers to the results achieved by the student in relation to the different objectives of the discipline: this allows the elaboration of an articulated descriptive judgment, which respects the path of each student and allows to enhance their learning, highlighting the strengths and on which to intervene to obtain a greater strengthening or development and guarantee the acquisition of the necessary learning for later developments.
The descriptive judgment must be complete, not a simple summary.
It is specified at the ministerial level that the descriptive judgment on the achievement of the learning objectives cannot be reduced to the simple sum of the results obtained during the individual assessment activities: it is necessary to collect information on the cognitive processes with a view to progression and modifiability continuous manifestations of student learning. The evaluation, in fact, “documents the development of personal identity and promotes the self-evaluation of each one in relation to the acquisition of knowledge, skills and competences”. In this sense, the student’s self-evaluation, understood as a reflection on their own learning process, can be part of the descriptive judgment.
Good job, to the teachers, and surely there will be, rightly or wrongly, those who regret the grading system, expectations were probably different.
[ad_2]
