Timeline for Rewards based educaton
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 2015 at 17:28 | history | edited | Karthik Thiagarajan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Jun 8, 2015 at 17:18 | history | edited | Karthik Thiagarajan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fewer questions are considered
|
| Jun 8, 2015 at 16:07 | comment | added | Joey Kramer | @AndreasBlass Why do you think we need a category for "formerly proficient"? I think all that would do is muck up the system. A student who is able to demonstrate proficiency with a concept would be a student who just needed to knock the rust off to regain that knowledge. I'm not talking a traditional system where that student passes a quiz with 10/12 and goes on to the next concept. I'd much rather see them create a hang glider to prove math/physics concepts, or run a conference to show english/history ideas, or write a short novel to prove english concepts. | |
| Jun 8, 2015 at 15:48 | comment | added | Benjamin Dickman | There are interesting pieces in the work of Amabile, Hennessey, and their collaborators around intrinsic vs. extrinsic (e.g. grades) motivation. A google scholar search to get you started can be found here. Without more specificity in the posed questions, I am hesitant to invest the time necessary to flesh out an answer to this post... | |
| Jun 8, 2015 at 4:08 | comment | added | Andreas Blass | @JoeyKramer In my opinion, honest assessments will require, in addition to "proficient" and "not proficient", a third category, "formerly proficient". One might argue that this category should be a subset of "not proficient", but your description of what it takes to finish high school seems to put the third category into "proficient", which seems implausible (to me). | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 23:44 | answer | added | paul garrett | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 22:01 | comment | added | paul garrett | Although many aspects of the question-group are very interesting, and important, there are too many things tangled up together, not to mention several tacit assumptions that two things are the same, when perhaps they are antithetical. At least being clearer about goals, means, limitations, etc. would help allow some cogent responses. | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 15:51 | comment | added | Joey Kramer | Yes, there are other ways. They are not going to be easy to get a school district on board because it won't translate to nice, tidy packages for a college to look over. Assuming the use of common standards, we could simply make a binary system where we mark students "proficient" or "not proficient" as they complete concepts and can prove they have done so. They finish high school as soon as they complete every concept (however much time that takes). At the end of their high school career, they will have a portfolio of useful things (hopefully) instead of a grade/class rank. | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 15:34 | comment | added | paul garrett | @JW, it is a bit specific to mathematics insofar as the notion of "contest" does not exist universally... (ignoring the other explicit and implicit premises in the question). | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 7:56 | comment | added | J W | How specific is this to mathematics, apart from the mention of the IMO? | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 6:17 | comment | added | DavidButlerUofA | I second @BenjaminDickman 's comment. It's a great issue to discuss generally, but it will be easier to come up with an "answer" if it's more narrow. Perhaps ask just one aspect and then cover another one with a new question later on. | |
| Jun 7, 2015 at 5:29 | history | asked | Karthik Thiagarajan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |