Gunner Brown

EDU 602-Hawkins
Field Experience Report

7/23/2014

To accomplish our field experience, we were tasked with creating questions that we can
use to examine other teachers philosophies of assessment. We then conferenced with two other
members of the class, with the objective of determining if they had a valid, well-supported
philosophy. My objective was not to see if their philosophy was correct, but rather to see if their
personal beliefs were grounded in evidence that would be acceptable to the community as a
whole.
I feel like using the method described was beneficial because it was easier to understand
the individual philosophies from their writers. The one thing that I felt like made it useful was
making sure that the right questions were asked. My questions focused on the strengths and
weaknesses of their philosophy and evidence. This sort of reflection forced the teachers to think
critically about own beliefs. I think that by asking deep-thinking questions, I was able to identify
one teacher who had a complete and well-supported philosophy. The other teacher had a
philosophy that was small, and a lot of the evidence seemed to have little to do with the
philosophy itself.
In regards to future use in my classroom, I think the individual conference method has a
definite use as long as a few caveats are made. As mentioned above, I think that asking the right
questions is vital to classroom effectiveness. If the questions I asked are surface questions that
do not create thoughtful thinking, very little of my assessment would be valid. This also includes
not having repetitive questions. For example, I did not even use one of my pre-created questions
in the interview because both participants answered it as a part of another question. I was then
forced to either think of a new question as a replacement or to skip that one entirely.
I also believe that this method requires a high level of student involvement. Much like
the level of questioning, if the student gives brief, low-depth answers, it may be difficult to draw

Gunner Brown
EDU 602-Hawkins
Field Experience Report

7/23/2014

valid conclusions. Now asking good questions at least lessens the risk of this particular problem,
but there is still the possibility that students are reluctant to share.
There may be other potential problems with the conference method as well, most
classroom dependent. One example might be what other students are doing as the teacher is
engaged with a student. Obviously, it worked well in the graduate classroom setting, but a
freshman level Algebra 1 class might not respond as positively with a lessened amount of
supervision.
As long as these potential obstacles are controlled for, I do think this conference method
has positive classroom opportunities. The chance to hear explanations and beliefs directly from
the student would help me really assess the student learning that has, or has not, taken place.
This formative assessment would also help get to know the students and their learning style.
Especially in the math classroom, it is entirely possible that you have a student who struggles
with tests but can verbally describe the process effectively, and vice versa. Based on traditional
summative measures, they would be considered less than proficient. But they at least have the
opportunity to demonstrate more competency in another way.
Which, truthfully, should be a primary objective of all teachers. Allowing students
multiple opportunities to succeed in a variety of formats. This method would assist all
stakeholders, giving students feedback and the chance to explain their thinking. Parents would be
able to see the feedback and possibly understand where students are at as well. Finally teachers
and administrators would be able to see what learning has or has not taken place.