The paper “ How the Learning Practice Proposes the Student Needed Skills to Deal with Any Form of Assessment in a Classroom” is a meaningful variant of a case study on education. The Australian Curriculum in its essence seeks to achieve the best standards on understanding, knowledge, and a student’ s capability of showing and demonstrating knowledge in a particular field of study. The study in this instance would seek to isolate a tenth-year student taking History. At this stage, it is usually expected of a student to be capable to demonstrate key events, the actions of individuals, groups, and beliefs and values.
Additionally, to be capable of explaining patterns changes and continuity of study over time and also isolate past events and support any given interpretation. The project report then seeks to identify the particular shortcomings of Tiara a year 10 History Student in Queensland. Further, an aspect of a key learning area is identified, and in this case Religious Education. The key strands involve beliefs, scripture, biblical underpinnings, and morals. However, the project only focuses on the religious strand and isolates the other areas of outcomes.
The other task is also to create a lesson that demonstrates the key areas of study that are integrated under the UDL system of learning and also isolating the various principles that are embedded within the UDL learning system. In this case therefore there is a great need in trying to reconcile UDL best practices in learning as well as trying to ensure that a student understands various concepts that are taught in the classroom setting (Annandale, 2004). The project also shows that having a good objective and learning outcome, boosts the overall assessment of a student based on understanding, knowledge, and skills that are acquired. Hypothetical StudentTiara is a History Student of Year 10 under the Australian Curriculum and assessment program.
This level is to provide and to ensure that students are capable of showing a wide range of understanding of various learning outcomes and ideas in the mastery of the subject. Firstly Tiara in her levels considered a student who achieves the grade of C in all her assessments and tasks. This is because of her failure to meet certain provisions within the curriculum and also in how she shows her understanding of the subject. Secondly, the History course has two integrated strands that are Historical Knowledge and Understanding and Historical Skills.
Historical knowledge in her assessment can be considered to be at a very low level because she fails to demonstrate a proper understanding of the sequence of events and also developing a good chronological framework in her assessments (Freebody & Luke, 1990). This, therefore, shows that an improvement needs to be undertaken in how knowledge is attained.
She also fails to adequately analyze and synthesis information from a range of given primary and secondary sources to be able to competently answer any given inquiry assessment. The assessment is given to her also inadequately fails to correctly and competently identify that the student is capable of identifying and developing their own interpretations and justify their answers. The student also fails to give an informed pattern of change and continuity over time and referencing it to key events and actions and also the use of evidence to support any given assumptions.
Annandale, K. (2004). Processes and Strategies in Reading Resource book (2nd ed.). Melbourne: Rigby Heinemann.
Anstey, M. (2002). Literature futures. Brisbane: the State of Queensland, Department of Education.
Barbara, B. S. (1998). Effects of Home-School Collaboration and Different Forms of Parent Involvement on Reading Achievement. Blacksburg, VA: The H.W Wilson Company.
Barbara, L. M. (2003). A Framework for the Redesign of K-12 Education in the Context of Current Educational Reform. Theory into Practice, 42, 6-12.
Barbars, L. M., & Vakili, D. (2005, August 8). Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1582-1600.
Christie, F., & Derewianka, B. (2008). School Discourse. London: Cambridge University Press.
Davidson, J. (2002). Literacy as a social practice. Practically Primary, 7(1), 3-48.
Freebody, P., & Luke, A. (1990). Literacies Programs. Australian Journal of TESOL, 5(7), 7-16.
Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2010, June 2008). Access Center. Retrieved May 21, 2012, from The Access Center Improving Outcomes of All Students: http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/udl/DifferentiatedInstructionHTML.asp
Howard, K. L. (2004). Universal Design For Learning. Learning and Leading with technology, 31, 26-29.
Montague, A., & Hopkins, L. (2002). Supporting learners in training. Adelaide: NCVER.
Pegg, J., & Panizzon, D. (2008). Inequities in student achievement literacy. The Australian Journal of Language, 30(2).
Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197-203.
Tomilson, C. A. (1999). Mapping a route toward differentiated instruction. Educational Leadership, 59(9), 6-11.
Vaughn, S., Elbaum, B. E., & Hughes, M. T. (1998). Social Outcomes for students with and without learning disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 428-436.
Walsh, M. (2011). Multimodal Literacy. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association Australia.