INCREASING STUDENT LEARNING THROUGH STANDARDS-BASED GRADING OCTOBER 21, 2011 PRESENTED BY DAN ALDERSON Clear Standards, Muddy Grades Some basic assumptions first Our touchstone Whats best for kids? I invite you on a potentially uncomfortable journey Session Goals By the end of our time together, you should be able to: compare and contrast traditional and standards- based grading; state the strengths and weaknesses of each system; and leave with some practical strategies that will ensure your your grades represent reality Questions to consider *Warning* We have to move quickly Whats the purpose of grading? Who are grades for? What should grades communicate? Common Definition A grade reflects what a student knows and is able to do. CURRENT PRACTICE STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES Traditional Grading Systems Traditional Grading may include Participation On-time turn in Homework* Tests Quizzes Effort (or lack thereof) Work habits Attendance Reports/projects Attitude Which of these factors MAY show us what a student knows and is able to do with regard to curriculum/standards, learning targets? Synopsis: Current System Secondary, this is what we do Mandated curriculum Teach (and were good) Assignments along the way (quizzes, activities, homework) Assessment Repeated Math Next Strengths: Current System 1. Easy* 2. Clean supported by math 3. Familiar - known knownknown 4. Popular Everyones doing it 1. Works for some kids (point harvesters) 2. Traditional always been done this way Current System where did we get it? (grading) practices are not the result of careful thought or sound evidence, rather, they are used because teachers experienced these practices as students and, having little training or experience with other options, continue their use. Guskey, Thomas R. (Editor), Communicating Student Learning: The 1996 ASCD Yearbook, ASCD, Alexandria, VA, 1996, p. 20. The power of tradition Weaknesses of Traditional Grading System Question: Have you ever received a grade that wasnt accurate, ie. it didnt represent your actual skill/ability level? Question: Have you ever GIVEN a grade that wasnt accurate, ie. it didnt represent the students actual skill/ability level? Be prepared to share out Weaknesses: Current System 1. Focus is on point gathering and hoop jumping Can you finish these refrains? Is this going to be on the How many points is Can you translate them? Weaknesses: Current System 2. Leads to grade inflation Non-achievement data has replaced portions of what grades should be about. What is reported to stakeholders is a muddied picture of students abilities. Weaknesses: Current System 2. Leads to grade inflation (part two) According to the College Board Since 1987, the population of students with A+, A, and A minus grade-point averages has grown from 28% to a record of 37%, while their SAT scores have fallen an average of 13 points The College Board, 1997, p. 2 - as quoted by Robert Marzano Weaknesses: Current System 2. Leads to grade inflation (part three) Students who get GPAs of 3.5 (A grades) and above in poor schools, and students who get GPAs of 1.8 to 2.2 (D+ - C-) in rich schools score the same on the SAT. Cross, 1997, p as quoted by Robert Marzano So what? In my mind that equals educational fraud, plain and simple. Weaknesses: Current System 2. Leads to grade inflation (part four) Students in those high poverty schools and their parents are being led to believe that they are achieving at high levels when they are, in fact, not learning what they need to succeed in a wider community. Cross, 1997, p as quoted by Robert Marzano Weaknesses: Current System 3. Those who need the most, get the least. Instead of prompting greater effort, low grades more often cause students to withdraw from learning. Lets look at Elliots writing Guskey, and Baliey, Developing Grading and Reporting Systems for Student Learning, Corwin Press, 2001, Lets look at Elliots writing Weaknesses: Current System 3. Those who need the most, get the least (part two) Those who experience success gain the confidence needed to risk trying Students who experience failure lose confidence in themselves, stop trying, and fail even more frequently. Ever had an intentional non-learner? Stiggins, R., Student-Involved Classroom Assessment, Merrill Prentice Hall, 2001, p. 43. STRENGTHS: WEAKNESSES 1. Easy* 2. Clean supported by math 3. Familiar - known known 4. Popular Everyones doing it 5. Traditional always been done this way 6. Works for some kids (point harvesters) 1. Leads to point gathering 2. Inaccurate (inflated/deflated grades) 3. Those who need the most get least Overall: Creates a culture where most students focus on points rather than learning Overview Current System Standards-based Grading OVERVIEW STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES Standards-based Grading is when 1. Non-achievement* factors are reported elsewhere What are some non-achievement factors you can think of that find their way into teachers gradebooks? * Non-achievement has a very special meaning here! Standards-based Grading is when 1. Non-achievement factors are reported elsewhere Effort -- But I worked on that (assignment) for (insert ludicrous number of hours here)! Participation -- Idea that engagement = achievement Standards-based Grading is when 1. Non-achievement factors are reported elsewhere Behavior -- Standards-based Grading is when 1. Non-achievement factors are reported elsewhere Timeliness -- Late Work Policies Whats the learning target? Did the student reach it? Standards-based Grading is when 1. Non-achievement factors are reported elsewhere Work Habits -- Attendance No studies support the use of low grades or marks as punishments. Guskey, and Baliey, Developing Grading and Reporting Systems for Student Learning, Corwin Press, 2001, Standards-based Grading is when 1. Non-achievement factors are reported elsewhere Formative Assessments Students should be assessed or checked on everything (or almost everything) they do. BUT Everything that is assessed/checked does not need a score. AND Not every score should be included in the gradebook. Standards-based Grading is when 2. Inflationary practices are removed Extra Credit Spongebob But its just a few points . Its the MESSAGE! Standards-based Grading is when Inflationary practices are removed Fallacy of averages final grades should never be determined by simply averaging the grades from several grading periods (e.g., adding the grades from terms one through three and dividing by three). OConnor, K., How to Grade for Learning: Linking Grades to Standards, Second Edition, Corwin, 2002, p. 135. Inflationary practices are removed Fallacy of averages If the purpose of grading and reporting is to provide an accurate description of what students have learned, then averaging must be considered inadequate and inappropriate. Standards-based Grading is when Guskey, Thomas R. (Editor), Communicating Student Learning: The 1996 ASCD Yearbook, ASCD, Alexandria, VA, 1996, p. 20. Standards-based Grading is when Inflationary practices are removed. Fallacy of averages ACME SCHOOL of PARACHUTE PACKING Student 1 83.75% Student 2 75% Student 3 75% Anything above a 70% on the performance assessment is mastery your parachute will open. Which student do you want to pack your parachute? EXAMPLE Inflationary practices are removed Using a zeros in the gradebook The use of an I or Incomplete grade is an alternative to assigning zeros that is both educationally sound and potentially quite effective. Standards-based Grading is when Guskey, and Baliey, Developing Grading and Reporting Systems for Student Learning, Corwin Press, 2001, STRENGTHS: WEAKNESSES 1. Accurately communicates students skill/ability levels* 1. Focuses both students and teachers on learning 2. Focuses students and teachers on standards 3. Honors students most recent achievement data 4. Serves struggling students better 1. Works for *all kids 1. Accurately communicates students skill/ability levels* 2. New to many teachers 3. Unfamiliar to most stakeholders 4. Funky to use SBG with traditional reporting system Overview of Standards-based Grading Return to the beginning Our touchstone Whats best for kids? So what do I do? Consider the following 4, 3, 2, 1 grading scale Multiple attempts Multiple paths to show mastery Change structure of tests Change late work policy Use Descriptive Rubrics Formative assessment Summative assessment Rethink homework Erase the zero No count Re-think the comments section on report cards Start by doing some research on SBG - Two of the best works are both from OConnor: Everything is in the world of 4, 3, 2, 1 4 = skill was performed above standard 3 = skill was performed at standard 2 = skill was performed below standard 1 = skill was performed far below standard and is still emerging 0 = required task was missing or incomplete Convert points on tests to 4, 3, 2, 1 Numerical Score 100 88% 87 75% 74 60% 59 0% Performance Score 4 Above Standard 3 At Standard 2 Below Standard 1 Far Below/Emerging Practice with 37 pt. test Grading formula With regard to summative assessments: A -- Student has earned almost all 4s, and NO 0s B -- Student has earned mostly 4s and 3s; far more 4s than 3s; extremely few 2s, 1s, and NO 0s. C -- Student has earned mostly 4s and 3s; more 3s than 4s; extremely few 2s, 1s and NO 0s. D -- Student has earned mostly 2s, and NO 0s. F -- Student has not completed all of the required assessments; student has earned a 0 (zero). Late work my policy If its on time, green folder. If its late, red folder. Late fee? Youll get it scored in time for a grading period, but no guarantee itll be scored in time for you to change a below standard into an above standard. Absolute, undeniable, immutable DEADLINE? Multiple attempts Has to fit my schedule Original work and revised work both required Changes highlighted Original rubric Student has to DO something between first and subsequent attempt(s) Figure out what went wrong Study Hall 1:1 tutoring After school study sessions Additional reading Internet research Do over = Did better? Lets look at Elliots writing Response from the learning community? From which segment of students should you initially expect to receive the most flak? What can you expect from parents? What can you expect from colleagues? What can you expect in terms of student performance? Standards-based grading results in Class culture whose focus is on learning and meeting standard Grades that accurately reflect what students know and are able to do Justifiable grades Higher gains for all learners especially those who struggle Session Goals By the end of our time together, you should be able to: compare and contrast traditional and standards- based grading; state the strengths and weaknesses of each system; and leave with some practical strategies that will ensure your your grades represent reality Parting thoughts Movie slides follow this point This slide is a placeholder. Which students have met the learning target? Whom do you want to pack your parachute? Which student gets the highest percentage/average ? Extra Credit What if .. ? What do you think would happen if you did an outstanding job, all the students in your class(es) did an outstanding job, and all the students received a grade of 90% or higher? What reaction would you get from staff in general? your department colleagues? principal? Why? Standards-based Grading is when Inflationary practices are removed Grading on a curve Grading on a curve makes learning a highly competitive activity learning becomes a game of winners and losers; and because the number of rewards is kept arbitrarily small, most students are forced to be losers. Guskey, Thomas R. (Editor), Communicating Student Learning: The 1996 ASCD Yearbook, ASCD, Alexandria, VA, 1996, p. 20. Standards-based Grading is when Inflationary practices are removed Fallacy of averages - Student 1 receives mostly As and high Bs in the beginning; but his/her performance drops off considerably, and s/he receives an F on the final performance test. (83.75%) Student 2 is erratic, receiving an equal number of As and Fs. (75%) Student 3 is clueless at the beginning, but by the last few sessions, s/he catches on and performs flawlessly on the final performance. His/her grades are, in order from the first test to the last, F, F, F, F, F, C, B, A. (75%)