Formative assessment

                                       

A story to share:

Last semester, during my block I taught year 8, microbes. After 2 weeks, I asked the students (as advised by my teacher) to prepare pamphlets on any type of microbes in groups. Each group was assigned a microbe by me and they were supplied the necessary stationary. Students were allowed to use book and at the end every group would be presenting their pamphlets.

When students started to prepare, it was a revealing journey for them as well as for me. When I was supervising the groups, I could explore there deficiencies, lack of understandings and even some misconceptions. Moreover, I realized some aspects of teaching had to be changed. I should have allowed more time for student participation, frequent question asking. It was optimistic for me that I was not a complete failure, but I needed many improvements. Moreover, apart from content I also found out about the student’s literacy level. Many of them were really good, some of them lagging far behind the rest of the class and some of them were at an average level.

Next week, I took some revision classes which were mainly student oriented and less teacher talk. We discussed bacteria, virus, fungi, protozoa, good and harmful microbes. This time the students were at much clearer position about their concept. Many of them came up with interesting questions.

This experience with year 8 gave me the idea about necessity of formative assessment in the classroom. Continuous teaching without any investigation to find its success will not take the class anywhere. Formative assessment is assessment for learning, which does not need any grading like a summative assessment. Well it creates the opportunity for student practice as well as acts as a guide for teacher for future teaching strategies. So both the teacher and the students know where they stand and what aspects have to be improved (Dodge, 2009). One crucial thing that underlies this type of assessment is student participation. Without students’ participation it will not acquire its full effectiveness. Furthermore the teacher has to identify learning goals, establish success criteria and devise the assessment tasks to discover extent of learning (Garrison and Ehringhaus, 2007).

There is no single but many strategies to be implemented in classroom for formative assessment, where they are aligned with the learning and course objectives. As a teacher we must bear in mind that these types of tasks are ultimately preparing the students for their summative assessments by deepening their understanding of the topic taught. Students are challenged on their ideas. At the time designing the tasks Bloom’s taxonomy can help to come up with questions, tasks and guide us to nurture specific skills in question in relation to the course. And the skills are already mapped by the teacher in the mapping grid before starting the course.

Several strategies can be used as formative assessments. Let us take the module 8.5 Evolution of Australian Biota in stage 6 biology syllabus as an example. For dot point 8.5.1, the traffic light technique can be applied, where students will demonstrate their level of understanding as the teacher goes through basics like Gondwana,  matching continents and more. For 8.5.2 (evolutionary relationship between extinct species… mega fauna, extant species), think, pair and share can be used by giving students some research materials. Later students can describe their understandings to the whole and come up with their queries as well.

With the dot point 8.5.3.4 (pollination, seed dispersal…) students can be divided in groups and each group will prepare their own concept map. Afterwards, one member from each group will explain the other groups about their topic. And simple lightning writing activity can also be used here. Of course all these activities must be supervised by the teacher where teacher goes to every group and listens to the discussions and facilitates the students, if needed.  

Lastly I think it is important that the teacher does an assessment of students’ prior knowledge at the beginning of the module by doing a brainstorming, simple e quiz (where teacher then discusses the wrong answers), concept mapping on theory of evolution, cell division and movement of crustal plates. As we proceed, we should also take into account the level of improvement or decline in regards to the content and provide feedback on that to the students.

It is evident that undertaking formative assessment is quite time consuming and requires a lot of effort from the teacher. With a big syllabus like biology which is compacted with lots of contents we need to be tactical about the assessments. We must provide descriptive feedback to the students which allows them to really see where they in terms of the concept instead of just saying ‘good’, ‘well done’ or ‘needs improvement’.

References:

Dodge, J. (2009). 25 Quick Formative Assessments for a Differentiated Classroom: 

     Easy, Low-Prep Assessments That Help You Pinpoint Students' Needs and Reach All 

     Learners. New York: Scholastic Inc.

Garrison, C. & Ehringhaus, M. (2007). Formative and summative assessments in the 

     classroom.  Retrieved from http://www.amle.org/Publications/WebExclusive

     /Assessment/tabid/1120/Default.aspx

Misconceptions in Biology

Misconception or alternative conception is an opinion formed from lack of understanding of a concept properly. The line between the right and alternate conception is very sophisticated. The source of misconceptions can be cultural, social or lack of understanding in the classroom. The concerning fact about misconceptions is that we tend to build students knowledge and skills on the basis of their prior learning. Any misdirection on the previous knowledge can deviate the students from reaching the bigger conceptual goal.

The whole learning journey is to be carefully crafted to prevent the birth of any alternate conception. Moreover, a police action is required to check any development of wrong opinion.

At the time of teaching biology in stage 6, a teacher must be concern about the alternate conception brought by the students in the class as well as ones taken from the class. Here comes the necessity of diagnostic tests to identify whether the students understand the right concept.

Different strategies can be implemented to identify misconceptions in the classroom. At the beginning of any module, teacher discovers the preconceptions in relation to the prior learning. For example at the beginning of the module 8.4 Life on Earth, students can be tested on their conceptions about evolution theory, fossil formation and its importance in estimating age of the earth. We can run a topic test in the form of e quiz, where everybody remains anonymous. With given freedom, students respond spontaneously. Teacher will be able to find out some of the naïve ideas. The crucial thing here is to devise the right questions. After identifying the misconceptions, the strategies to replace them with the correct ones have to be implied. We can use inquiry based learning like a web quest, making a poster/ pamphlets based on guided research to create a better conceptual understanding of the previous concept. Later on as the module progresses, aside from just chalk and talk methods, paedagogies like problem based learning, discovery methods should be used. This will create the necessary time and space for the students to confront their own concepts. At the same time small on going assessments on the topic taught can also help to figure out the weaknesses.

Identifying misconceptions and changing them is a time consuming task requiring patience and research on teacher’s part. But we must remember that we are teaching not just for exam purpose, there is also a bigger purpose- to prepare them for their future.

Bibliography:

NSW Board of Studies. (2002). Stage 6 Syllabus Biology. Sydney, Australia: NSW Board of Studies.

     Available from http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/biology.html

Koba, S. & Tweed, A. (2009). Hard to teach Biology concepts: A framework to deepen student

    understanding. New York: NSTA

Vosnaidau, S. (2008). International handbook of research on conceptual change. New York: Routledge

Role of the stage 6 syllabus support document to design a program:

The stage 6 science syllabus support document has been designed to help teachers interpret the syllabus. This means teachers will explore what is the actual objective of the syllabus and what information  have to be bore in mind when planning learning and assessment. The document emphasizes the necessity to plan both simultaneously.

So before planning a unit program, the scope and sequence and skills mapping is to be done by the teachers. Again the support document guides us to the basics of scope and sequence and skills mapping. Scope and sequence includes the sequence, duration, outcomes assessed in the units along with time and type of the assessment task. And the skill map shows the skills to focused on each module along with their level of learning experiences (model, practice). According to the map, the leaning strategies can be implemented in the program. Moreover, with scope and sequence in hand the teacher exactly knows which outcomes are intended to cover and design the program accordingly.

Moreover, the support document also outline the indicative hours of work for practical, field work and theory and necessity of OHS policy and safety measures during teaching.

Finally designing a program is a work of creation based on these basic principle where syllabus outcomes are focused, evidence of learning is identified and reliable and valid methods of gathering the evidence of learning is included.

To clarify our understanding, the appendix of the support document includes an example of a part of program. It shows that a progam begins with contextual outline of the module and the intended outcomes from the module. Then syllabus dot points, skills and teaching strategies are placed in 3 columns respectively. Every program is the result of thought and planning of module by a teacher in a systematic manner which will any teacher to look at the document and interpret the idea.

After carefully going through the support document and the stage 6 draft sample unit for Biology, this was my summarized understanding of necessity of the support document in designing a program for a module in biology.

Bibliography:

NSW Board of Studies. (2008). Science Stage 6 draft sample learning unit for 

         Biology. NSW: Board of Studies. Available from

         http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/biology.html

NSW Board of Studies. (2009). Science Stage 6 Revised support document.

         Available from

         http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/biology.html

Teaching values in stage 6 : Local Ecosystem

Dot point focused: Identify human impact in the ecosystem studied.

Approach chosen: Moral development approach

Strategy used: Prior knowledge: Human impact on ecosystem

1.    Students are given a printed document about carbon tax and given 10 minutes to read.

2.    Then they are asked to take a stand on the issue by standing on two sides of the classroom (already pointed by teacher as “yes” and “no”).

3.    Again students on each group are divided into smaller groups to discuss their point of view within themselves for next 10 minutes. Each group is to summarize their points and one of the members will present it. Teacher goes to every table and listens to the points and provides constructive comments and encouragement.

4.    Then, each member presents the discussion summary in next 30 minutes. After each presentation questions are invited from others.

5.    At the end teacher summarizes the discussion done in the class and thanks the student for their participation. Moreover, teacher also mentions the purpose of the class is to develop an opinion of their own based on facts.

The document on carbon tax:

                                                                Carbon Tax

A Carbon Tax is a tax imposed on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, including CO2 formed as through the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).¹ It is one of two major market-based options to lower emissions, the other being cap and trade  schemes. Implementation of a carbon tax system is feasible, because the carbon content of every form of fossil fuel can be calculated relatively easily as is the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere when the fuel is burned.²
There is a general consensus in the scientific community that the current increase in levels of CO2 emissions is destabilizing global climate patterns and threatening  ecosystems, and there is much discussion about which approaches should be taken to reduced emissions.  Some economists and environmentalists favor a carbon tax for its simplicity and rapid effect; whereas others favor cap and trade. In the US a cap and trade system is currently  more politically favored.

Structure and calculation

A carbon tax is levied on the production, distribution or use of fossil fuels based on how much carbon their combustion emits. The government usually sets a price per ton of carbon and then translates it into a tax on electricity, natural gas or oil.
A carbon tax is easy to implement as it can utilize existing tax collection mechanisms. A carbon tax can be collected per unit of energy (usually measured by British Thermal Units, or BTUs). Natural gas emits the least CO2 when burned, and coal the most, with petroleum (oil) products in the middle. Generally, one BTU from coal emits 30% more carbon dioxide than one BTU from oil, and 80% more than from natural gas. A carbon tax would follow these proportions, taxing coal more heavily than petroleum products, and much more than natural gas.³
Carbon that is included in a product such as plastic, but that is not burned would not be taxed. Similarly, carbon used in the production of energy that is permanently sequestered, rather than released into the atmosphere, would also be exempt.⁴
One example of calculation method is as follows: According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), emissions from petroleum are about 20 pounds of CO2 per gallon (2.4 kilograms per litre, 2.4 kg/L), so a tax of $100 per ton of CO2 ($110 per ton of CO2) would translate to a tax of about $1.00 per gallon ($0.26 per litre). For other emission resources, the numbers are: 19.564 pounds of CO2 per gallon of motor gasoline, 22.384 pounds of CO2 per gallon of diesel fuel, and 21.095 pounds of CO2 per gallon of jet fuel (2344.3 g CO2 per L of motor gasoline, 2682.2 g CO2 per L of diesel fuel, and 2527.7 g CO2 per L of jet fuel).⁵   Therefore, a tax of $100 per ton of CO2 translates to a tax of $0.978 per gallon of motor gasoline, $1.119 per gallon of diesel fuel, and $1.055 per gallon of jet fuel ($0.258 per litre of motor gasoline, $0.296 per litre of diesel fuel, and $0.279 per litre of jet fuel).
Advantage:

^·          Carbon tax reduces consumption of fossil fuels. Supporters argue that if gas were $5 per gallon, people would drive less and stop driving SUVs.  If would spur innovation to conserve fuel and produce renewable energy.  They also argue that if the carbon tax were to be implemented for the coming decades, utilities would likely stop building coal-fired, carbon-intensive power plants.⁶

·         Carbon Tax creates incentives for the development of clean energy and energy conservation. A carbon tax makes using  fuels such as coal and oil more expensive, thus making renewable energy emitting less or zero CO2 more attractive (e.g., wind power and solar power). It also makes low-carbon fuels (e.g. biofuels), conservation behaviors, such as bicycling, recycling, and usage of "green" products more appealing to individuals. In addition, the more cost-competitive alternative energy under a carbon tax mechanism will lead to more capital investments in infrastructure, facilities and technology development in this field.

• Carbon tax raises tax revenue. A carbon tax also raises tax revenue that can be used to subsidize environmental programs or low-income families. Many fans of the carbon tax support progressive tax-shifting, which means a shift of the tax burden from federal income tax and state sales tax.
• Carbon tax is more simple and stable. Compared to a cap-and-trade scheme, the price of carbon is predictable and stable in a carbon tax system. Businesses and utilities will easily know the price of carbon and its trend. They can make decisions on investments in alternative energy and energy efficiency programs accordingly.  

Disadvantage:

 Even supporters of a carbon tax admit that there are barriers to implementing a carbon tax, particularly on a national and international level.

• Carbon tax is politically unpopular in the United States. There are some politicians who are concerned with resistance from their constituencies and are worried that it would upset voters. Policy makers are also concerned that higher gas taxes would raise revenue but do little to curb pollution. On the other hand, the public is also worried the abuse of the tax revenue.⁷ Carbon Tax could become  a revenue grab by desperate governments, that they create artificial winners and losers in the economy and that, if they are not at least done in step with other countries, they will simply drive jobs and business offshore to cheaper locales.⁸
• Cap and trade programs have gained the recognition worldwide, which makes it difficult for the implementation of a carbon tax. After the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, a global cap and trade program, the cap and trade system became well-recognized worldwide. In the United States, the voluntary cap and trade market – the Chicago Climate Exchange and a successful cap and trade program on sulfur dioxide emissions have made capped programs the norm.
• Possible negative impact on consumers and economy. There are concerns that the components of carbon tax added to the current tax structure will likely to have potential impact on consumers and economic growth. Especially, carbon tax is likely to have bigger impact on ppor communities that already struggle to heat their homes or use their vehicles for work. As for the economy as a whole, a carbon tax can skew the development of different sectors. For example, in 1990s, Ontario's long-running Fair Tax Commission rejected posing carbon taxes, arguing they would distort too many key sectors of the economy, manufacturing and transportation in particular.⁹

Implementation

Finland  was the first country to adopt a carbon tax.¹⁰ The tax went into effect¹¹ in 1990, at Mk 6.66 ($1.45) per metric ton of CO2. While originally based only on carbon content, it was subsequently changed to a combination carbon and energy tax . The current tax is €20 per ton of CO2 (€75 per ton of carbon) or $27.01 per ton of CO₂ ($101.28 per ton of carbon) in U.S. dollars (using the August 17, 2007 exchange rate of USD 1.00= Euro 0.7405).¹²
Sweden enacted a tax on carbon emissions in 1991.¹³ Currently, the tax is $150 per ton of carbon, but no tax is applied to fuels used for electricity generation. In addition, industries pay only 50% of the tax.¹⁴ Non-industrial consumers pay a separate tax on electricity. Fuels from renewable sources such as ethanol, methane, biofuels, peat, and waste are exempted from the taxation. As a result, the tax resulted in a heavy expansion of the use of biomass for heating and industry. The Swedish Ministry of Environment forecasted in 1997 that by 2000 the tax policy would have reduced CO₂ emissions in 2000 by 20 to 25%.¹⁵ On September 17, 2007, Sweden's government announced that it will increase its carbon taxes to address climate change. Petrol prices will go up 17 öre per litre, with the increase in fuel tax calculated on the basis of a 6 öre tax increase per kilo of CO₂ emitted. ¹⁶
Netherlands changed its fuel charge system in 1992 to a fuel tax, and in 1996 the Regulatory Energy Tax was introduced. The 1996 regulatory energy tax was the first tax introduced for environmental reasons.¹⁷
The United Kingdom introduced a "climate change levy" in 2001 on the use of energy in the industry, commerce and public sectors. Revenues are used to offset cuts in employers' National Insurance Contributions and to provide support for energy efficiency and renewable energy. Rates are set to 0.15p/kWh for gas ($0.003) , 0.07p/kWh for liquid petroleum gas ($0.0014), 0.44/kWh ($0.0087) for electricity and 0.12p ($0.0024) for any other taxable commodity (using the August 17, 2007 exchange rate of USD 1.00= GBP 0.503). There are various exemptions including for electricity generated from new renewable energy and fuel used for "good quality" combined heat and power. ¹⁸
New Zealand started its carbon tax plans in 2005 and planned to enact a carbon tax equivalent to $10.67 (of U.S.) per ton of carbon (based on conversion rate of USD 1.00 = NZD 0.71). The original design of the tax structure was revenue-neutral, with proceeds used to reduce other taxes.¹⁹ However, a new government determined that the carbon tax woulnot cut emissions enough to justify the costs, and the tax was abandoned.²⁰ According to the Carbon Tax Center addendum: In September 2007 the government unveiled a proposed emissions cap-and-trade scheme intended to cover all carbon emissions. While we don't yet have a link to the government's proposal, the NZ Green Party's Preliminary Assessment provides some details.²¹
Boulder, Colorado was the first city in the United States to implement a tax on carbon emissions from electricity begining on April 1, 2007. The tax is approximately equivalent to $7 per ton of carbon and will cost the average household about $1.33 per month. Households that use renewable energy are eligible to receive an off-setting discount. The City of Boulder expects the tax to generate about $1 million annually until it expires in 2012. The revenues will be used to fund Boulder's climate action plan to further reduce energy use and to comply with the Kyoto Protocol. ²²
Quebec (Canada's second largest province) began collecting a carbon tax on Hydrocarbons on Oct. 1, 2007. Though the tax rate is quite small, it made Quebec the first North American state or province to charge a carbon tax.
Power prices are essentially unaffected at Quebec at March 2008 exchange rates. The petroleum tax rate equated to just 3.1 cents (U.S.) per gallon of gasoline and 3.6 cents for diesel.  However, only a tiny fraction of electricity in Quebec is generated from fossil fuels (virtually all electricity is generated from hydropower).
British Columbia announced a revenue-neutral carbon tax in Feb. 2008 . The tax would be phased in, starting at a rate of $10 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions released from the burning of each particular fossil fuel. This initial rate would be translated to a tax of $0.0241 per litre of gasoline purchased; $0.0276 per litre of diesel fuel; $0.4988 per gigajoule of natural gas; $0.0276 per litre of heating fuel oil; $20.79 per ton of Canadian bituminous coal; and $17.72 per ton of sub-bituminous coal. Although the initial price per ton of CO2e is lower than that advocated in many jurisdictions, the tax rate would increase to $15 per ton on July 1, 2009; $20 per ton on July 1, 2010; $25 per ton on July 1, 2011; and $30 per ton on July 1, 2012. For gasoline, the 2012 rate would translate to a tax of approximately 7.24 cents per litre.²³  

This document was taken from “Climate lab beta” (http://climatelab.org/carbon_tax)

References:

Climate lab beta (n.d.). Carbon Tax. Downloaded on 5^th August, 2011 from

     http://climatelab.org/carbon_tax.

NSW Board of Studies. (2002). Stage 6 Syllabus Biology. Sydney, Australia: NSW

     Board of Studies.  Available from

    http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/biology.html