PART 2: Using Learning Targets to Achieve Standard ProficiencyIf you read Part 1 of this blog entry already, hopefully you realize that using percentage-based, letter grading systems are antiquated and deserve reconsideration. I'm not going to go too deep into the reasons why I believe that system needs to change because the purpose of this entry is to focus on how to make it better. Before going any further though... small disclosure... I am not claiming to be anything close to an expert on Standards Based Grading and I am just starting my own journey with all of this. I just figured that if my colleagues and I have this many questions and concerns about how to transition in to Standards Based Grading as smoothly as possible, other people might have the same questions and concerns and I can at least give you my plan, reasoning, successes and failures along the way. STANDARDSThe shift in grading philosophy taking place at the Turner School District in Beloit, WI and throughout the education community in general is focused largely on STANDARDS. The first problem with shifting the grading philosophy to focus on standards is that often they are misunderstood. Based on the definition, it makes it seem like our goal as educators might be to try and get all students to be the same, but that's only true in a very narrow sense. None of us want to force students to give up their individualism or their unique set of talents... all it means is that we want to make sure they all are able to achieve certain benchmarks and learn certain skills by the time we are done educating them. Of course, deciding what those benchmarks and skills are and when they should be accomplished by children is above my pay grade. Frankly I'm not sure it can be done perfectly by anyone, but I'm OK with that. In my opinion it is better to at least have something out there to shoot for, no matter how vague, to provide a sense of direction for curriculum and instruction. Without those standards, too many teachers would be wandering through the wilderness with no real accountability to live up to... and THAT would give WAY TOO MUCH ammunition to people that already harp on teachers. Standards have been created for basically every grade level and every subject in schools. Some standards have been written at the local level by individual districts, some at the state level, some at the national level. Again, that opens standards up to criticism, and again, I think it's mostly unfair! People have problems with national standards because they aren't flexible enough when comparing different areas of the country. People have problems with local standards because it makes it too different from neighboring districts. People have problems with state standards because... well, I guess the same reasons ans the previous examples... but overall, people have problems with standards because someone else created them and it might bring change... and those are two things that Americans are often just not cool with. So here's a problem as an educator starting this journey... There are so many standards and so little time, so which standards do I assess? I can only speak to what my own school is doing with this right now, and can only give you the firsthand experiences of my own department, but like anything in life you need to prioritize. Every teacher in our Middle School and High School has basically narrowed down their list of standards to find 4-6 they really feel deserve more attention than the others. The 5 prioritized standards I selected for 7th grade Geography can be found on the Geography Standards page of this website. Great, I know which standards to assess, but how to I score it?I'm going to try and give you an idea of where I'm at with this... but long story short: I have no clue! Well, let me rephrase that. I have a few ideas based on inservices and speakers and things that I have read, heard and seen, but there's so much debate out there surrounding the RIGHT way to do it. Here are essentially 2 ways I'm looking at it. 6 point proficiency scale In this scale, I set the score of 5 as the benchmark for students to meet. Achieving a score of 5 means you know everything I need you to know, can demonstrate all the skills I need you to demonstrate. Back in the day, that would be an A. Since we use skyward to report grades in our district and that computer system uses the old average and letter grade system, I just enter any score of 5 as a 19/20 and kids get an A. A 6 means the student blew me out of the water, and that converts to a 21/20, but is also very difficult to achieve. 4 means you're close but possibly need a few tweaks, and so on and so forth down the list to 1 where you are clearly struggling with a limited ability related to that standard. All the standards can be re-assessed and students can move up the scale, thereby showing more mastery and improving their grades. I realize many people love and use 4 point proficiency scales, but I didn't think that was enough to differentiate as many skill levels as I thought might exist. How many times would I look at an assessment and think "hmmm, that kid deserves a 3.5 on a 4 point scale." The 6 point scale eliminates that to some extent because the indicators are more specific and the assessments are more easily slotted at different proficiency levels. Beyond all that, the biggest reason I like a 6-point proficiency scale is that it also roughly breaks down to a scale of 3 major levels: Expert, Apprentice, and Novice. 5 and 6 go into the "Expert" level, 3 and 4 go into the "Apprentice" level where a 4 means you need just a little improvement to reach the expert level, and a 1 or 2 meet the "Novice" level, telling you your understanding is at a basic, beginner's level but there is a bridge from a 2 to the apprentice level to show your improvement. But if a major reason I like a 6-point scale is because it so simply shows if a student could be considered a novice, apprentice or expert on any given standard, why not go to 3 levels of proficiency? 3 point proficiency scales: Maybe I'm changing my mind... I got on board with the 6 point scale after hearing Myron Dueck speak on the matter at a presentation in Janesville. One of his colleagues in the realm of educational consulting and standards based grading showed us a 3-level approach done at his school at an inservice in Beloit later this year. The reason for a 3 point scale is to get EVERYONE on board with a widely accepted set of criteria. If all the teachers in your district can agree on language for 3 different levels, theoretically it should be simpler to report consistently across multiple classes. It also reduces the workload during grading and streamlines the process overall. I could be looking at student assessments and be giving them a score based on if I feel they meet the LEARNING TARGETS leading to each standard. A 3 means they consistently accomplish the target, 2 means they sometimes accomplish it, and 1 means rarely. With several learning targets per standard, I could use that collection of 1's, 2's and 3's to assess their overall performance on each standard if I wanted to, while simplifying all the small reports for individual assessments throughout the grading term. SIGH... This is definitely a process, and I know my student teacher would love that I am using the word process right now because it's an overused educational buzzword that we love to make fun of, but man... they keep telling me it's a long process and I now see exactly what they mean. I don't know what system will work long-term. If you are reading this as a parent or student, you're along for the ride whether you want to be or not. I assure you that no matter what system I use, I am doing my very best to assess accurately and fairly. I am currently "piloting" standards based grading in our middle school, meaning I have some license to experiment with reasonable assessment methods with the goal of finding one that works for everyone across the district starting in the 2017-18 school year. Will one of these be the way Turner goes? Who knows... It's all part of the process.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorJohn Honish: Archives
June 2021
Categories |