Overview


 * What's My Grade? **

We know kids get it, we know how much learning is involved in designing, building, sharing and remixing scripts and we know it’s hard fun! What happens, however, when teacher-learners try to align Scratch projects with learning outcomes and assessment procedures and how do we convey this learning to parents? Might this be an opportunity to shift thinking in other directions?
 * Abstract:**

If we want young people to engage with their learning then we need to provide opportunities for both them and their parents to become increasingly discerning about what they have learned and how they have learned it. Having infused Scratch into the Maths curriculum through challenge-based investigations rather than delivered content, we are in the process of rethinking traditional, rubric-driven assessment practices. If learning is a collaborative process then assessment should no longer be driven by teacher-learners, it must include all stakeholders: teacher-learners, learners and parents.

**Proposal:**

Jane Harris (Chinese International School, HKG) and Clive Dawes (Kellett School, HKG) have been working to develop models of authentic Scratch infusion into the learning environment. Jane presented at the first Scratch Conference in 2008 and outlined how she was using Scratch as a vehicle for double-loop professional development to shift thinking about pedagogy and Working Mathematically through math investigations. There is a hyperlink on the Media Links page of this wiki to the Voicethread Jane produced for this conference, as well as a movie snapshot of her working with teacher-learners and evidence of how this translates into the learning environment.

In parallel to this, Jane has pioneered Scratch Mornings at CIS: these are held for parents as their children begin to work with Scratch and again at the end of investigations. Involving parents in the learning process today is of paramount importance, especially in a Confucian Heritage Chinese (CHC) culture where much value is placed on traditional pedagogies. If parents do not understand what learning looks like in the Scratch environment as well as the process their children go through as they create and share knowledge, then they will not be supportive of innovation and change.

Developing the model further, this year Jane invited both parents and learners to take part in the assessment process. Learners designed interview questions to help them reflect on their learning and the process they went through, and then filmed each other as they answered the questions. They then built a presentation which showed as a screencast of the final project: learners inserted the interview onto the same page and a sample of the scripts they developed. Project notes could be added if learners wanted to include them. During Student-Lead Conferences parents were given a list of follow-up questions to help them to probe deeper into the understandings their children may or may not have, as well as the generic Maths rubric. They were encouraged to use the visual evidence as well as the face-to-face responses to determine where the learner was performing along the continuum. Examples of student work, copies of the parent questions and the generic rubric are posted on the Media Links and Documentation pages of this wiki.

A link to a short movie summarising how CIS are building a Scratch community through partnerships with all the stakeholders is also posted on the Media Links page and includes reactions/reflections from administrators, teacher-learners and parents. This snapshot was made with the support of LEAD (Learning through Engineering, Art & Design, HKG) and shown at World Scratch Day, HKG.

Clive is in the process of piloting the above models and looking at their adaptability, replicability and sustainability; in short, whether they may have a positive, neutral or negative impact on teacher-learners and parents at Kellett School.

The presentation is intended to run as a conversation in response to the evidence and documentation on this wiki. A short overview of the above will be provided, then Clive and Jane will pick out what worked and what didn’t, briefly discuss why and suggest alternatives.