Tuesday, November 15, 2022 - Community Education Directors' Meeting
Friday, November 11, 2022 - VIRTUAL Title III Meeting
Friday, November 18, 2022 - Teachers' Advisory and Principals' Advisory Council Meeting
Wednesday, November 23, 2022 - Superintendents' Council Meeting
October 19 Recap
Unfortunately, due to last-minute unforeseen circumstances with our presenter, the MRVED Superintendents agreed it would be better to cancel the MRVED event versus trying to put something together last minute. It was decided that the districts would plan their own professional development for the day. The MRVED would like to thank Benson schools for being willing to host the event. Our hope is that your day was productive and worthwhile in your districts. We look forward to moving forward into MELT with a stronger lineup than ever before!
MELT 2023
MELT 2023 is fast approaching. There are currently over 60 individual sessions planned from people from all around Minnesota as well as many of our great local teachers. If you want to present or know of someone that should be presenting, please let Brandon (braymo@mrved.net) know. There's always room for a couple more sessions.
IMPORTANT: MELT registration will open on Wednesday, December 14th at 7:30 AM and close at the end of the day on December 22nd. Be sure to register early as sessions fill fast. Your principal will be sending you the brochure and registration materials a couple days prior.
MELT 2023 Networking Facilitator Sign-Up
The MRVED is looking for people to be facilitators of networking sessions for MELT 2022. As a facilitator, you are not expected to be the expert or present on anything. Your job is to facilitate the meeting. Start and end the session on time and keep people positive. You will also have the ability to email the group prior to MELT to gather ideas and plan for the hour. Sign-up link is listed below. Facilitators are paid a $100 stipend and allowed access to early registration.
**Please note; Any networking sessions that does not have a facilitator, will not be held.**
With the election drawing near and campaign ads filling our television screens, it creates a great teachable moment for students. Students may have lots of questions as to why we vote, who are the candidates, how do you vote, etc... Many of these questions can be difficult to answer, especially for younger aged students. Fortunately, there are some great resources for teachers to help them talk about the election with their students. Below is a listing of some awesome resources.
This enlightening article was posted on Edutopia this past week by Mary Beth Townsend on grading practices was a quick read that makes you think about the purpose of grades. It also provides small steps a teacher can take to begin grading equitably in their classroom. Reading the article reminded me of a short video I saw a few years ago by Doug Reeves on Toxic Grading Practices. Give the short 6 minute video a watch today and reflect back on your own grading practices. The one line in the video that stands out to me is "The penalty for not doing the work, should be doing the work - not a zero".
Instructional Coaching - Everyone Needs a Coach
Within the MRVED, we have a small group of teachers and leaders that gather monthly to discuss instructional coaching. It is one of my most favorite groups that I meet with monthly. We have great conversations about continuous improvement not only in teaching practices, but in our own careers. The group is currently reading the book Dare to Lead by Brene Brown. The book is centered around vulnerability and how to react to that vulnerability and lead people through that vulnerability. It is an excellent book that I highly recommend for any teacher leaders. I was reading our section of the book for our discussion and had a few thoughts. Why do we, in education, view working with a coach as a punishment? Why do we view it negatively? I think it all goes back to vulnerability. Brown defines vulnerability "as the emotion that we experience during times of uncertainty, risk, and emotional exposure (Brown, 19)." Working with a coach is a risk..."what if it doesn't work?" "What if what I am doing is wrong?" "I don't need help." Through experience, as a coach, the reward certainly outweighs the risk. If you are interested in going through a coaching cycle or want to learn more, please reach out to Brandon (braymo@mrved.net). Brandon can coach anyone in our districts and there is no additional charge to your school. Watch the TED Talk below from Atul Gawande on why everyone needs a coach!
Jon Gordon's The Power of Positive Leadership for Teens
Last fall the MRVED had the privilege of hearing Jon Gordon speak. Jon's books are inspirational and full of life nuggets. The books are very easy to read and can be applied to almost any area of your life. On December 4th, he is offering a 2-hour workshop on The Power of Positive Leadership for Teens. The cost is very reasonable at $59 per person (with group rates available). If you are an advisor of an activity or coach of a sports team, this would be a great training for your student leaders. Jon is very influential and can help your student leaders grow. Check it out today!
The 2nd draft of new Minnesota Social Studies standards was scheduled to be released sometime in February has been delayed until spring. MDE cites the reason for the delay is for MDE and the committee to review a "significant" number of public comments. With this delay, it was subsequently delay the final adoption of the standards into next school year. The first draft of the standards can be found by going to the MDE Social Studies website. It is high recommended that if you are a teacher and/or parent of school-aged children that you review the document to become fully informed of the proposed changes. The next public comment period will be available after the review of the 2nd draft this spring.
Hot Topics
Grading During the Pandemic
Talking with educators, one of the common questions many people are wrestling with is "How do I grade kids during the pandemic?" With gaps in learning, kids at different spots academically, some kids learning from at home, etc...How do you fairly grade everyone and everything? Below you will find a short, but powerful article from Joe Feldman and Doug Reeves.
Children's Screen Time Has Soared During the Pandemic
The headline is probably not shocking to anyone, but as we revert back to "normalcy" what effect has all this screen time had on our kids? The New York Times published an article in mid January about this very topic. It is a very thought-provoking piece, one that has ramifications in the classroom. How do we "detox" our kids from their screen time addiction?
13 Virtual Games to Play in Your Elementary Classroom
Now that many of our elementary schools are back to in-person learning, the question now shifts to, "How can we utilize the at home devices effectively in our classrooms"? Here is a great article from Emelina Minero from Edutopia with 13 virtual games for the elementary classroom.
MELT evaluations came back in and the reviews were quiet positive. About 85% of people that participated in MELT gave it an overall rating of a 4 or 5. This is awesome! Many thanks to the people that presented and made the day what it was.
Senators and Representatives Meet with MRVED Superintendents
The MRVED Superintendents met with local Senators and Representatives on Wednesday, January 24. The legislators that were in attendance were Senators Dahms & Lang and Representative Miller. The group spent the time discussing future legislative issues. It was a great opportunity for both the legislators and superintendents to discuss issues pertaining to education in a smaller, intimate environment.
MRVED Meetings:
February 2, 2018 Title III Teachers
February 7, 2018 MRVED Board (7 p.m.)
February 22, 2018 TAC
February 23, 2018 Principals' Council
February 28, 2018 Superintendents' Council
Teacher Licensure Rulemaking Comment Period
The rulemaking for the new teacher licensure legislation is currently under review. You can comment on the rulemaking until March 9, 2018. It is strongly suggested you spend a couple minutes looking through the rulemaking document as it will have an impact on renewing your license. Information on the hearings and comment period instructions can be found on the Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings website. If you have any questions on Teacher Licensure, feel free to contact any member of the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board (PELSB).
Tech Tip of the Week - Google Story Speaker
Make interactive, talking stories without coding. Play your story instantly on Google Home.
Story Speaker lets anyone create talking, interactive stories with no coding required. Just write your story in a Google Doc, push a button, and every Google Home device linked to your account can play it.
You don't need to know how to code.
Basic and advanced templates get you writing quickly.
There's a lot Story Speaker can do, including respond to what players say, give random responses, and remember what the player said.
You can even export your story and so anyone with a Google Home can hear it. (Experimental!)
This is not an official Google project. It's just a fun little experiment.
Will Letter Grades Survive?
A great article came across my Twitter feed this past week. It really makes you think and question your own grading habits. It is a very quick read and well worth your time.
Innovator's Mindset - Powerful Learning First, Technology Second
Chapter 9 in Innovator's Mindset by George Couros is on the use/role of technology in our schools. As the previous chapters, this one does not disappoint. Couros writes some remarkable things that really make you think and question what you are currently doing.
Couros paints a picture at the beginning of the chapter that kids today have endless opportunities to learn, even before they enter school. This statement is so true! I think about my 5 year old, her favorite app is YouTube and she loves watching tutorial videos. We have this information at our fingertips and yet, have not fully embraced the idea.
However, it takes more than just throwing devices into the classrooms. There needs to be a shift in the mindset of teaching and learning. We can't continue to do what we did prior to the devices being in the room. Couros says that technology is not only a tool, but a "transformational" tool. On top of it being a transformational tool, it should be a "personalized" transformation tool. Think about the power of the device in the hands of our students. With the tools we have we should be personalizing learning for our students in a way in which transforms the teaching and learning process.
Couros also talks about the importance of balance. The balance between the learner and the technology. Although we have all this power, we need to remember that the learner has something to learn in the process. Sometimes we get fully wrapped up in learning the device and wanting to know the full potential of the device and we forget the learning process for the kids.
To end the chapter, Couros gives us four questions to guide our technology:
What is best for kids?
How does this improve learning?
If we were to do ____________, what is the balance of risk vs. reward?
Deadlines Last year, on this blog, we spent a significant amount of time outlining different grading practices. In our best practice meetings this school year, we have taken the grading practices a little further and dove deep into conversation about it. One of the common criticisms to grading practices and standards based grading is we do not hold the kids accountable. The assumption is that students are allowed to turn in work whenever they want. I stumbled across a great article by Brian Stack on Deadlines Matter. It's a great article and a quick read and might change some perceptions about deadlines and standards based grading.
Grading Practices Books
One of our focuses this year in the best practice meetings has been on grading practices. The groups spend time discussing and reflecting on their own grading practices. Each group has had stellar conversation over this topic, and many people have walked away from the MRVED with a different view on grading. With that being said, here are some book suggestions to support your learning on grading practices.
Guskey, Thomas R. On Your Mark, Challenging the Conventions of Grading and Reporting. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree, 2015. Print.
Guskey, Thomas R., and Jane M. Bailey. Developing Standards-Based Report Cards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010. Print.
O'Connor, Ken. A Repair Kit for Grading, 15 Fixes for Broken Grades. Boston, MA: Pearson, 2011. Print.
Reeves, Douglas. Elements of Grading, A Guide to Effective Practice. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree, 2011. Print.
IMPLEMENTING EFFECTIVE GRADING AND REPORTING PRACTICES WITH THOMAS R. GUSKEY
Topic: Implementing Effective Grading and Reporting Practices
Presenter: Dr. Thomas R. Guskey, Professor at the University of Kentucky, International Consultant and Author
Audience: K-12 Teachers, Principals and District Level Administrators, Building Leadership Teams and School Board Members
Dates: February 18, 2015
Location:
Double Tree by Hilton Rochester-Mayo Clinic Area
150 S. Broadway
Rochester, MN 55904 (507) 281-8000 Hotel Website
Registration: 8:00 am-8:30 am
Cost:
$225 per person if you register on or before February 6, 2015
$250 per person if you register after February 6, 2015
$210 per person if a school registers with a team of 5 or more
*Price includes coffee in the morning, lunch, refreshments throughout the day and all workshop materials*
Workshop Time: 8:30 am-3:00 pm
Workshop Description: Based on his recent book On Your Mark: Challenging the Conventions of Grading and Reporting, participants who attend this workshop will learn how to create and sustain a learning environment where students thrive and stakeholders are accurately informed of student progress. Mr. Guskey will clarify the purpose of grades, craft a vision statement aligned with this purpose, and discover research-based strategies to implement effective grading and reporting practices. He will also identify policies and practices that render grading inaccurate, and understand the role grades play in students’ future success and opportunities.
By the conclusion of this workshop, participants will:
Learn how to question traditional grading and reporting practices, and seek more accurate practices.
Identify the purpose of grading, and ensure school and classroom visions, practices, and policies support it.
Implement research-based grading and reporting practices that promote accurate, useful accounts of student learning.
Understand why traditional practices, such as grading on the curve and offering plus or minus grades, don’t fully report student academic performance.
Examine grading and reporting policies, and make sure they support students, parents, and other stakeholders.
Fix 15: Don't leave students out of the grading process. Involve students; they can, and should, play key roles in assessment and grading that promote achievement.
Students need to be involved in the grading process and should understand how and why they are being graded. Grading should be transparent, not only for student use, but parent and administrator use as well. Be clear in what you are grading.
Conclusion
The past 15 weeks we have been focusing on Ken O'Connor's 15 Fixes for Broken Grades. I highly suggest reading through the whole book, it will change the way you approach grading in your classroom. It's a very quick read, and well worth the time!
Fixes 1-6: Fixes for practices that distort achievement
Fixes 7-10: Fixes for low-quality or poorly organized evidence
Fixes 11-12: Fixes for inappropriate grade calculation
Fixes 13-15: Fixes to support learning
Don't include student behaviors in grades; include only achievement.
Don't reduce marks on "work" submitted late; provide support for the learner.
Don't give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
Don't punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
Don't consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
Don't include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
Don't organize information in grading records by assessment methods or simply summarize into a single grade; organize and report evidence by standards/learning goal.
Don't assign grades using inappropriate or unclear performance standards; provide clear descriptions of achievement expectations.
Don't assign grades based on student's achievement compared to other students; compare each student's performance to preset standards.
Don't rely on evidence gathered using assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
Don't rely only on the mean; consider other measures of central tendency and use professional judgment.
Don't include zeros in grade determination when evidence is missing or as punishment; use alternatives, such as reassessing to determine real achievement, or use "I" for incomplete or insufficient evidence.
Don't use information from formative assessments and practice to determine grades; use only summative evidence.
Don't summarize evidence accumulated over time when learning is developmental and will grow with time and repeated opportunities; in those instances, emphasize more recent achievement.
Don't leave students out of the grading process. Involve students, they can, and should, play key roles in assessment and grading that promote achievement.
The goal of this series over the past 4 months was to get you to examine your grading practices. In order to make any change, one must first realize and understand what the purpose of a grade is. The purpose of a grade is to communicate what a student knows and is able to do. Without this clear understanding, teachers tend to lump behaviors and expectations into grades, thus inaccurately reporting what a student knows and is able to do. I highly recommend Ken O'Connor's book on grading. He provides fixes that are practical for any classroom and will give you a more accurate picture of where your class is.
If you are looking to go deeper into standards-based grading, which was referenced many times over the past 4 months, I suggest looking at Thomas Guskey and Jan Bailey's book Developing Standards-Based Report Cards.
Fix 14: Don't summarize evidence accumulated over time when learning is developmental and will grow with time and repeated opportunities; in those instances, emphasize more recent achievement.
This fix encompasses many different things. The prime example for this fix is the student who has scores like this:
Homework 1 - 10/20
Homework 2 - 8/20
Homework 3 - 6/20
Quiz - 14/20
Homework 4- 14/20
Homework 5 - 12/20
Homework 6 - 10/20
Test - 48/50
According to the test score the student learned what he/she was supposed to learn. With all categories being equal the student has a 64% for this unit, when the student got a 96% on the summative assessment. Like the previous week, are we grading the learning or what was learned?
Analogy: If I am running a race, it doesn't matter what position I started in, nor does it matter the position I was in for most of the race. The only thing that matters is where I finish. If I have accomplished my goal of finishing first, should I punish myself for not starting in the 1st position?
This is another concept that requires rethinking grading formative assessments and practice. It is a change in some teaching philosophy that requires deep thought and discussion. If we are assigning homework to teach responsibility, then it goes against the first fix about grading behaviors and not learning.
The past 12 weeks we have been focusing on Ken O'Connor's 15 Fixes for Broken Grades. I highly suggest reading through the whole book, it will change the way you approach grading in your classroom. It's a very quick read, and well worth the time!
Fixes 1-6: Fixes for practices that distort achievement
Fixes 7-10: Fixes for low-quality or poorly organized evidence
Fixes 11-12: Fixes for Inappropriate Grade Calculation
Don't include student behaviors in grades; include only achievement.
Don't reduce marks on "work" submitted late; provide support for the learner.
Don't give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
Don't punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
Don't consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
Don't include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
Don't organize information in grading records by assessment methods or simply summarize into a single grade; organize and report evidence by standards/learning goal.
Don't assign grades using inappropriate or unclear performance standards; provide clear descriptions of achievement expectations.
Don't assign grades based on student's achievement compared to other students; compare each student's performance to preset standards.
Don't rely on evidence gathered using assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
Don't rely only on the mean; consider other measures of central tendency and use professional judgment.
Don't include zeros in grade determination when evidence is missing or as punishment; use alternatives, such as reassessing to determine real achievement, or use "I" for incomplete or insufficient evidence.
The last 3 fixes are fixes to support learning.
Fix 13: Don't use information from formative assessments and practice to determine grades; use only summative evidence.
Formative assessments are assessments for learning. They are used to gather information about what to do next in the classroom. FA's primary purpose is to see if and who needs reteaching. It is not punitive or rewarding for the student, so why would you use them for points? Formative assessments should never be used to determine grades. Once a teacher does an assessment of learning (summative) those can be counted towards a grade. As mentioned in previous weeks though, in a standards-based reporting system, this is a non-issue. You either exceed, meet, partially meet, or do not meet the standard.
Also a part of this issue is the debate as to what should truly be graded. There are some teachers that grade everything and there are some teachers that grade very little. So what is the magic formula? The answer lies in your philosophy of teaching and learning. The one piece of advice that has swayed my thinking, and I do not recall who it came from,, "learning is a process and we make mistakes through this process".
This makes me think about what am I grading, the learning, or what has been learned? Why are we punishing kids for making mistakes along the way to learning something? Grades do not need to be punitive or rewarding. They should reflect what students know and are able to do.
Fix 12: Don't include zeros in grade determination when evidence is missing or as punishment; use alternatives, such as reassessing to determine real achievement, or use "I" for incomplete or insufficient evidence.
The case for the zero can be a highly debated issue in schools. We often hear, "the student didn't turn the assignment in, therefore it is a zero". Or, "putting a zero in the grade book creates a sense of urgency." The problem with the zero, however, is that research has shown it can actually have counterproductive effects on student motivation and it involves inappropriate mathematics.
For instance, the typical grading scale would be:
A=100-90
B=89-80
C=79-70
D=69-60
F=59 and below
There are 11 points in the A range, and 10 in the B,C,&D ranges, and 60 points in the F range. Douglas Reeves points out this exact flaw in grading in his article The Case Against the Zero. The answer to this flawed system is a 5-point scale instead of the 100 point scale. This will accurately and evenly weight the zero against all other grades.
Another fix is to not give students a zero for work not turned in, but rather an "I" for incomplete. The theory is outlined in the book Power of ICU by Danny Hill and Dr. Jayson Nave. Giving students incomplete grades and making them do the work may be a little more of a hassle, but in the end will more accurately reflect the grade the student has received.
The past 10 weeks we have been focusing on Ken O'Connor's 15 Fixes for Broken Grades. I highly suggest reading through the whole book, it will change the way you approach grading in your classroom. It's a very quick read, and well worth the time!
Fixes 1-6: Fixes for practices that distort achievement
Fixes 7-10: Fixes for low-quality or poorly organized evidence
Don't include student behaviors in grades; include only achievement.
Don't reduce marks on "work" submitted late; provide support for the learner.
Don't give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
Don't punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
Don't consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
Don't include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
Don't organize information in grading records by assessment methods or simply summarize into a single grade; organize and report evidence by standards/learning goal.
Don't assign grades using inappropriate or unclear performance standards; provide clear descriptions of achievement expectations.
Don't assign grades based on student's achievement compared to other students; compare each student's performance to preset standards.
Don't rely on evidence gathered using assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
Fixes 11 & 12 deal with fixes for inappropriate grade calculation
Fix 11: Don't rely only on the mean; consider other measures of central tendency and use professional judgment.
In a truly standards-based reporting environment this fix would be irrelevant. The student either Exceeds, Meets, Partially Meets, or Does Not Meet the standard. Unfortunately many teachers are not ready to take the full plunge into the world of standards-based reporting, so we are stuck with giving scores and calculating grades.
Using the mean, or averaging the scores, can be a flawed system. For example:
A student has the following scores on assignments:
91, 92, 91, 93, 92, 92, 64, 94, 93, 92
You would probably say this is an "A" student. They have done "A" work for the majority of the quarter. However, it averages out to an 89. Think about if that score of 64 was never turned in and it was a 0. What would that do to the average? This is where professional judgement would come into play. If this student deserves the grade of an "A", then that is what they should get. You could also drop the lowest and highest score to get a better determinate of the average.
The next time you average out scores, think about how averaging is an inaccurate way to determine grades.
Fix 10: Don't rely on evidence gathered using assessments that fail to meet standards of quality; rely only on quality assessments.
If your assessments are assessing information and/or standards that are not pertinent to the grade level or class, then why are you assessing? The assessments need to have:
Clear Purpose
What's the purpose?
Who will use the results?
What will they use the results for?
Key Targets
What are the learning targets?
Are they clear?
Are they appropriate?
Sound Design
What method?
Quality questions?
Sampled how?
Avoid bias how?
Effective Communication
How to manage information?
How to report? To whom?
Student Involvement
Students are the users
Students need to understand the targets
Students can track progress and communicate too
When creating an assessment it is important to make sure it:
Relates to the learning goal
Is at the level the standard calls for
Is appropriate
Questions are clear
If your assessments do not meet any of the criteria listed above, your data will be inaccurate and results will be skewed.
Fix 9: Don't assign grades based on a student's achievement compared to other students; compare each student's performance to preset standards.
When assigning grades to students, a teacher should never or very rarely use a curve. What this does is unintentionally pits students against each other and the "successful" students will be less likely to help those in need.
Grading should be based upon whether the student knows or does not know the standard. In theory, all students can achieve in a classroom if this were the case. It could also be the opposite where none of the students achieve.
"Grading students by comparing their performance to one another distorts individual achievement. We need clear, criterion-referenced achievement standards- absolute, not relative, standards that describe a limited number of levels: at, below, and above proficiency. Teachers in a noncompetitive grading system assign grades to each student based only on that student's own achievement in relation to the applicable standards." (O'Connor, 80)
The information for this series comes from Ken O'Connor's book A Repair Kit for Grading: 15 Fixes for Broken Grades. During this series you will get a "taste" of each fix, but I highly recommend investing in this quick read. O'Connor offers very practical fixes to the grading system. If all else, he will get you to think about how you currently are grading your students.
The first 6 fixes were fixes that were focused on fixing practices that distort achievement:
Don't include student behaviors in grades; include only achievement.
Don't reduce marks on "work" submitted late; provide support for the learner.
Don't give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
Don't punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement.
Don't consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately.
Don't include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
Fixes 7-10 focus on fixes for low-quality or poorly organized evidence. The first of these fixes is:
Fix 7: Don't organize information in grading records by assessment methods or simply summarize into a single grade; organize and report evidence by standards/learning goals.
In simple terms this means creating a standards-based report card. I dread the day my daughter comes home with a "B" in math, because what does that really mean? Does it mean she knows all her standards, but lacks in some behavior? Did she really earn a "C" and then do extra credit to get a "B"? As a parent, I want to know what she does and does not know. I loved her kindergarten report card. It listed all the math concepts, letter sounds, and star words she needed to know. The teacher was then able to assess those standards and report if she did or did not know it. As a former high school social studies teacher, I thought to myself, what do the letter grades I give my students really mean? A parent would get the report card and it would say "Johnny" got a "D" in social studies. As Johnny's teacher I would then get an email from mom and dad asking what he was "missing". In a standards-based report card world, the discussion is no longer what is he "missing", but rather what does he not know.
In the elementary classroom the standards-based report cards make sense and seems to be a much easier sell than the high school classroom. When switching to a standards-based report card in the high school many questions arise, such as:
What about GPA and colleges?
Elementary has 30 kids, high school teachers can see up to 150
I think these are questions that can be worked out. A formula can be developed to translate into a GPA and a system can be established where 150 standards-based report cards are not insurmountable. In the end, we are here for the students and to see what they know and are able to do.
Fix 6: Don't include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence.
Cooperative learning is a great teaching strategy and research has proven that through cooperative learning student learning can dramatically increase. However, O'Connor suggests that cooperative learning should be used as a form of formative assessment and not be graded. After the cooperative learning activity, students can then individually be assessed for a better determination of learning.
Group scoring can be unfair and not accurately reflect what a student knows and is able to do. For example, there are four members of a group. Their task is to cooperatively create a presentation, three of the four members could work very hard and complete the task and receive an "A". Does the fourth member deserve the "A"? Therefore, group grading is unfair and not all students are accountable for the learning.
Again, fix 5 is a subset of fix 1 (achievement grades and behavior grades are separate). "Standards-based learning is not about seat time." (O'Connor, 47) I think we all agree that being in school is a good thing and will lead to greater achievement. However, if a student can prove to a teacher they know the standard being taught at the time, why does that student need to be in a attendance? Grades on achievement should reflect what the student knows and is able to do.
Attendance is important, but if we are deducting points from their achievement grade based upon their attendance, our grade then becomes distorted. If the student can prove they know the material, do they really need the seat time, or can we do something different to challenge that student? If the student is not in attendance, and cannot prove they know the material, what will we do about it? Does deducting points really make sense if our grades are truly about achievement?
O'Connor gives a great example in his book from Forrest Gathercoal:
"I was confronted at a workshop by a teacher who asked "are you telling me that if a student has been ill and another has been skipping, that they both should be able to make up that work missed?" My response was that both needed an educator when they returned, perhaps the one who skipped more than the other. Regardless of the reason for student absences, make up work and late assignments should be accepted to ensure those students equal educational opportunity." (Gathercoal, 2004, p.163; quoted in O'Connor, 2011, p.49)
Fix 3: Don't give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement.
Much like deducting points for being late, adding in bonus points distorts grades as well, especially if the bonus points are given for tasks that demonstrate no educational achievement. Examples include; cleaning the whiteboard, bringing in Kleenex, dress like a _______, etc... Ken O'Connor even states that giving bonus points on quizzes or exams should be avoided as well. Many times the extra credit questions are high order thinking questions that all students should be required to show they know or do not know, it shouldn't be a choice.
Extra credit inflates grades and does not accurately reflect student learning. Ask yourself, "Does this grade accurately reflect what the student knows and is able to do?" It's a hard thing to throw out of your classroom especially if it has been a past practice. Avoid providing extra credit for menial tasks that are not related to student learning.
Fix 2 is a subset of fix 1. Fix 1 was to not include student behaviors in grades. Fix 2 is; "Don't reduce marks on "work" submitted late; provide support for the learner".
Fix 2 might be a tough one to swallow for some. This fix requires a change in thinking for the teacher. Many times grades are used as extrinsic motivation. Some recent research on extrinsic motivation by Daniel Pink shows that extrinsic motivation may not necessarily lead to better results. It may, in fact, have the opposite affect on the desired behavior. Again, by adding or subtracting points on assignments for being late or on-time the teacher distorts the grade on achievement.
The flip-side of this argument is that when an adult is late on a bill, they are normally penalized. This is true, but are we replicating the real world, or trying to prepare our students for the real world? There are some things in life that you can turn in late without penalty, and there are some things you will get penalized for being late on. If we are preparing our students for the real world, we should teach them how responsible adults deal with being late. If I am going to be late on a bill, the responsible thing to do would be to call the person you owe and negotiate a new reasonable date.
A teacher could also include timeliness as part of the behavior grade mentioned in fix 1. As teachers, we should also be helping our students develop the skills needed for life after school. By continually punishing for being late, we are doing nothing but punishing the student. We should be setting up supports for the student. Just like if a person cannot continually pay a bill on time, there usually are supports there to assist the person in paying the bill. The old adage, "if I don't pay my electricity bill, the power company flips the switch". This is true, but they don't flip the switch after one day of being late. If asked, they will work with the person who is struggling to pay. Treat students the same way, support them, don't punish them!
Overall, punishing distorts the achievement grade. Always ask yourself, "Does this grade accurately show what the student knows and is able to do?"
The first 15 weeks of the MRVED update is going to feature a series on the book A Repair Kit for Grading: 15 Fixes for Broken Grades by Ken O'Connor. This is an excellent and quick read for any teacher. O'Connor really makes one think about what you are grading and how you are grading your students. The best part of the whole book is he offers practical ideas that can be implemented into the classroom tomorrow. These posts will only be an overview of the fix. I highly suggest this book, and it would make for a great PLC book study.
The book is broken into chapters:
Chapter 1: Fixes for Practices That Distort Achievement (Fixes 1-6)
Chapter 2: Fixes for Low-Quality or Poorly Organized Evidence (Fixes 7-10)
Chapter 3: Fixes for Inappropriate Grade Calculation (Fixes 11-12)
Chapter 4: Fixes to Support Learning (Fixes 13-15)
Before diving into the fixes, we must first come to agreement on the purpose of a grade. As defined by Ken O'Connor as to the purpose of grades, he states "I Believe that primary purpose to be communication about achievement, with achievement being defined as a performance measured against accepted published standards and learning outcomes." (O'Connor, 7)
Fix 1: Don't include student behavior in grades; include only achievement
This fix is the first one for a reason. It is one of the biggest problems with grades today. If a grade is used to communicate what a student knows and is able to do based upon a certain standard or benchmark, then the grade should accurately reflect that. Adding or subtracting points based upon behavior severely distorts the grade, thus not showing exactly what the student knows and is able to do.
Behavior can go both ways; a teacher could have a student that knows everything, but misbehaves in class, therefore reflecting in a lower grade. Or, a teacher could have a student that might not know everything, but tries hard, thus reflecting in a higher grade.
O'Connor is clear in that he is not saying that certain behaviors are not important to learning. Many students who exhibit desirable behavior will achieve and many students who do not exhibit the desirable behaviors do not achieve. But the grade for achievement should not reflect these behaviors.
In a truly standards-based environment, this fix is easy, (the student either knows it, partially knows it, or does not know it at all). The easiest way to fix this is to have a separate grade for behavior. I encourage you to try this quick grading fix for a quarter.
What it looks like: Course grades should reflect what a student knows, not what a student does or how he/she acts. (Goodwin & Hubbell, pg. 196)
Why it is important: Grade inflation gives students a false impression they have learned something. Students learn how to play school, rather than learn material. Grading nonacademic factors also lowers expectations for students. (Goodwin & Hubbell, pg. 196)
