The basic idea of standards-based grading is simple: Grade students on their understanding of specific learning goals. It’s the details of that implementation that are devilish. In honor of the “publish, then filter” idea, writing this post is my way of working through (and hopefully solidifying) those details.
What standards?
I’ve started making a list of standards. I keep oscillating between thinking, “These standards are way too specific!” to “These standards are way too broad!” I’m taking that as a sign that they’re about where I want them. This is a list in progress. As of this typing the standards cover the first several mini-units of 9th grade Integrated Science. I’m open to any insights, questions, or comments you have concerning the standards. If you missed the subtle hyperlink earlier, CLICK HERE TO VIEW STANDARDS!
Grading
When the rubber hits the road, I need a specific way to calculate a student’s letter grade at any point in time. Figuring this part out is spending more mental energy than anything else. An incorrect implementation might make SBG no better than old-fashioned grades by cumulative points- and in face could be worse. I’d like to avoid that.
- Each standard is worth 10 points.
- Points translate directly to % and grades, so 9.5 = 95% = A
- The overall grade is calculated by averaging student scores on all the standards that have been assessed.
- Some SBG’ers don’t like the averaging method since some poorly understood standards might be covered up by a few well understood standards. Conjunctive scoring would get around this (Jason Buell gives a nice overview of conjunctive scoring here), but I worry that conjunctive scoring is a bit too “out there” for administrators, teachers, or students to get behind, and furthermore I’m not sure PowerSchool (our student information system) can handle it. I’ve put conjunctive scoring on the “possible future enhancements” list.
- Students may re-assess on any standard on any day.
- Limits:
- 1 standard per day, per student (the Cornally Corollary)
- Students must know what standard they want to re-assess
- Students can get help from me or re-assess, but not both on the same day (the Nowak Limit)
- Mid-terms and finals are summative
- Meaning these grades can’t change with reassessment. Total value of both combined is 20% of the overall course.
- I’ll be using the SBGradebook along with PowerSchool to record & report student progress.
- I’m not going to lie, I’m a little worried about how much time it’ll take to enter grades in twice. However, the SBGradebook looks like such an exercise in graphy-awesomeness I couldn’t not use it. Plus, it should help students track their own progress more effectively.
I’m pretty sure if you’ve written about SBG in the past 12 months you’ll see something of your system here. Hopefully you view it as flattery and not me biting your awesome ideas.
I’m pretty sure writing this post helped me more than it will help any reader. I needed to hash out several competing ideas I had floating around my head. As always, if you see something glaringly obvious that will sink this SBG ship, let me know.
I mentioned it in my last post, and I’m officially announcing it here. My ticket is punched and I’m on board the SBG Express for the 2010-2011 school year!
I’ve spent the last few weeks reading and rereading several teachers’ explanations and reflections on standards-based grading (including, but not limited to Shawn Cornally, Jason Buell, Frank Noschese, Matt Townsley, and several others who will be mad at me for not giving them a shout out). The more I read, the more I knew that standards-based grading was something that in some sort of sideways, subconscious way I’ve been working towards implementing the last several years even though I didn’t even know what “SBG” stood for until May of this year.
Here’s my basic understanding of SBG to date:
- Assessment and grades should accurately reflect student learning (not just student homework-turning-in abilities)
- Instead of using cumulative-points-earned as the basis for student grades, use progress towards a set of “standards (or “learning goals”, or “knowledge criteria,” or “whatever you’d like to call them”).”
- These standards describe specific areas of knowledge or expertise that students should gain. For example, “I can explain the law of gravity and understand what factors affect the strength of gravitational force.”
- Grades in your gradebook should help students realize where their understanding is great and where it’s lacking.
- Knowing they flunked “Quiz: Chapter 7″ isn’t helpful. Knowing they got 6 out of 10 on “I can explain why stars transition from one stage to another as they progress through their life cycle” gives the student valuable information that allows them to focus their remediation.
- A grade on a standard is not set in stone (until exam time). Students can re-assess on any standard at any point in the school year. Grades can go down if the student shows a lack of understanding later in the course.
- This should allow a students’ grade to more accurately reflect their actual learning rather than be punished for not learning something before a big test when they knew it by the end of the course. Likewise, the student who crams successfully for the big test then forgets it all should have a grade that better reflects actual understanding.
I know! Sweet, right?
Fortunately, I’ve been blessed with a personality that’s totally fine jumping into a project without having worked out all the details ahead of time. Unfortunately, I’m going to have to explain this whole SBG thing to quite a few students, parents, teachers, et cetera, in just a few days.
Tomorrow I’ll share what I’ve got so far in the “details” folder.
___________________________________
Summer…that magical time where I look forward to reading, thinking, and relaxing…but in actuality it usually gets eaten up quickly by either Master’s projects (last summer) or landscaping projects (this summer). Obviously my posting to this site has been drastically reduced the last couple months. There a few things floating around my head that I’ll probably post on later this summer, but for now, here’s a quick run down of what’s going on:
Project Climate
I really don’t fell that I’ve yet done the project justice in this space- either in explaining what it is or reflecting on how it all went the first time around. The more I think about it the more impressed I am with my students and how well it went down. There are lots of glaring issues to be fixed with the project- but despite all of those I’m extremely happy with the level of thinking, collaborating, and learning the students exhibited throughout the project. The trick this summer will be to figure out exactly how to tighten it up as well as implement it in three classes simultaneously (instead of just implementing it in one class this past spring). If you have no idea what I’m talking about, check out the project overview, student blogs, and past posts on the project.
Master’s Project
With the conclusion of the inaugural Project Climate I’ve also reached the end of my Master’s program. I was able to write up some reflection and analysis of how Project Climate went (a topic of future posts) and officially submit my project and apply for graduation. My adviser has encouraged me to publish the project- if you know of any journals that would be a good fit for Project Climate please drop that knowledge in the comments.
Twitter
I’ve really been inactive with Twitter this summer. With school over and my focus switched to projects around the home I just haven’t felt like I’ve been in the edu-flow much lately. While I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing (it’s good to occasionally take some time away from various aspects of our lives), I really do miss the camaraderie and knowledge sharing that goes on via Twitter. I have no thoughts of quitting Twitter for those of you who were worried (or hopeful) about that. P.S. I’m @WillyB, if you’re not following me and you’d like to. No pressure.
Standards Based Grading
My big education-related project for this summer is to take a good look at Standards Based Grading and try to figure out a way to use it in my classes. Since simply dropping the use of grades altogether isn’t something that would be looked upon kindly, SBG seems to be a great way of really getting at what grades are supposed to measure: student learning. I’ve been saving up Shawn Cornally’s SBG posts over at Think Thank Thunk as well as a few other resources for just this occasion. I’m always open for SBG-related resources and implementation ideas- If you’ve got ‘em, dropping them in the comments would be greatly appreciated.
___________________________________
I’m definitely overdue for a bit of in-progress analysis of Project Climate (as described here). We’ve been at it for a few weeks now, and we’re in the final stages of the project as a whole.
Makin’ me proud
- Quality of product. The quality level of the students’ writing and thinking on climate change related topics is impressive. Take this student’s entire work, for example. The posts are a great mix of information, opinion, and insight.
- Staying engaged. I was afraid as we began this project that students would grow tired of it and lose momentum and enthusiasm. So far this hasn’t been an issue, and the level of engagement seems to have increased somewhat as students became more comfortable with the format.
- All of you. We’ve gotten quite a good response from those of you in the Twitterverse & beyond. Students really enjoy getting comments from people outside of the school and from around the world. I’m not sure this would’ve been possible without twitter.
- Rethinking learning. A student’s reflection & self-evaluation of the project says it more eloquently than I could phrase it:
As far as the learning part goes, I’m not sure anything I have learned would be on a test. I have learned things that no one could learn from a text book because they are objective to the point of teaching people the facts. I haven’t learned the facts, I don’t know the carbon emissions of countries by heart, I don’t know all the projects people have set up to help solve global warming, and I don’t think that I should. I have learned far more important things. I have learned that you don’t have to be wealthy to help others, maybe it’s even the opposite. I have learned that you can fix a problem you didn’t cause. I have even learned that people of different cultures and different native language can work together to make a big difference.
The not so great
- More parents. I stink at parental involvement. I should’ve done a better job at communicating with parents and getting them involved in the project. I sent out a letter early in the semester explaining what we’d be doing, but didn’t do much since then. Next time around this needs to improve.
- Self-evaluation. I wanted students to be intimately involved in the assessment of their work. Unfortunately I didn’t get started on doing this with students until recently. Self-evaluation will still play a role in the students’ final assessment of their work, but I didn’t set up the framework early enough to have it play a major role.
- Not enough experts. I managed to make contact with a couple scientists who were willing to help out- but I should’ve put forth a better effort to get people working in and around climate change issues involved
- That great story. I don’t have a student who was totally struggling and then suddenly became engaged in the project and subsequently committed their life to being a climate scientist- or anything close to it. Some students aren’t as engaged as I’d like- many of the same who weren’t as engaged pre-Project Climate. I’m not sure if this is really a negative or just the way things are. I would’ve preferred if all the strugglers suddenly became over-achievers, but perhaps that’s a little optimistic.
- Lack of local knowledge. I haven’t done a great job of sharing what we’re doing within my own school as I have with those online. I’ve told a few other teachers and a couple administrators about it, but I’m not sure any of them have actually looked at any students’ work. I’m not so great at self-promotion, especially in person.
Next time around
I’d like to run this project again in future years. From my (biased) perspective, the students are actively involved in selecting their specific topics and as such are finding it easier to really dig into the content. Student learning seems to be high. Classroom happiness is high. It’s a fun time to be in the classroom. However, we’re spending essentially 5 weeks studying climate change. Is that too long? Is the depth of learning worth the loss in breadth of learning? Will students bomb the standardized tests because we traded electricity & magnetism for Project Climate? Will I get support from the administration in the future?
Help ‘em out
Students are still writing and reflecting on issues of climate change. They’d still love your thoughts and comments on their posts. Check them out:
________________________________
As the project introduction date loomed closer and closer I was getting more and more nervous. “Am I really ready for this? Do I have everything together? Will the students buy in?” I’m not sure I’ve ever been so nervous about unveiling a big project despite being more prepared than I’ve ever been.
Setup
The project introduction date has come and gone, and we’re nearly done with our first full week. I’ve mentioned this project in the past, since it’s kind of a big deal, but if you’ll allow me a brief overview of the setup:
- Students are blogging in teams of four. Each week of the project a different student is “editor.”
- Students individually select a topic of interest under the broad umbrella of “climate change.”
- Students research their topic, investigate their topic, and attempt to contact experts in their topic.
- Students write posts to share their learning and reflections along the way.
Come join us
As part of this project students are required to contact people who actively work in and around issues that relate to climate change. Although I want students to learn from experts in the field, I’d also like them to get perspectives and feedback from people of all types outside the classroom. I invite and encourage all of you to comment on any student posts. You can find my students on these 5 team blogs:
Great stuff
As of this posting, students are just starting to blow up the blogosphere with some great posts. From looking at the energy bill, to the BP oil spill, to tropical diseases, to positive effects of climate change, to the effects of climate change on the clothing industry, there are many good thoughts and ideas being put out there.
Now I’m worried they’re working at such a high level that there isn’t much room to improve. 
_________________________________
In the spirit of years gone by: Have a great one!
  _______________
______________________________
Joe Wood dropped a comment on my last post (Where I Stand: IWBs) that helped to rethink my stance a bit on the IWB. I’m pretty surprised by this, since I really have thought about the “IWB dilemma” quite a bit and wasn’t anticipating changing my position any.
What stays the same
Okay, so most of the opinions I spelled out in my last post haven’t changed. I’m still not a big fan of IWBs. Starting from scratch, they would not be my first choice for a tool to help improve instruction and transform the classroom. That being said…
What has changed
Many schools aren’t starting from scratch. Many teachers who have similar thoughts that I have are still being force-fed IWBs. My school has, or will soon have, an IWB in every classroom. There’s a significant amount of professional development time being thrown together focusing solely on using IWBs. Joe pointed out that this can open doors to talk about effective instruction as well as become a springboard for teachers who might otherwise be resistant to technology. Sure, I’m not happy about the purchase of IWBs for every classroom in our district, but I need to stop complaining about the unchangeable past and start focusing on how I can use what we’ve been given to bring about positive change.
What’s next
- Try to get myself back on the IWB training team (I declined the invitation earlier this year). It might be too late for this.
- Re-familiarize myself with the IWB. I’m not really looking forward to this but I need to know what I’m talking about.
- Work to convince my administration to set up a professional development program similar to what Joe described- with a focus on improving instruction.
- Look to build off of the IWB training to introduce non-IWB specific tools (i.e. Google Docs, Ning, Moodle, or other collaborative, connective tools) and further the discussion about what makes good instruction beyond IWBs.
I’m pretty sure I can convince the powers-that-be that focusing on improving instruction is a worthwhile goal, though we’ll see if that will translate into an improved professional development program.
Bonus
Joe dropped a link to his district’s ActivBoard User Group site, which includes a boat load of resources on the topic. Check it out.
_______________
Image credit: Poster in my room, taken by me.
Interactive White Boards, that is. Those technology pieces which are popping up in classrooms all over the world as part of the “modernization” of schools. Let me go on the record. I’m not a fan.
My own district invested heavily- IWBs are now in every classroom in the district and are the focus of the only regular professional development being offered in the district. Since I’ve gained a reputation as the “tech savvy teacher” people are often surprised when I’m critical of them. This post is mostly a way for me to sit down and sort through my thoughts on the matter in the hope that it’ll help me when I’m explaining my position to my shocked colleagues.
My story
I was notified that I would be receiving an IWB last fall. I didn’t necessarily feel that it would improve what I do in my classroom, so I told the powers that be that I didn’t really need one. From my perspective, I was trying to save the district a little money. While it wasn’t quite so blunt, I was effectively told I didn’t have a choice in the matter: I was getting an IWB.
Once it was installed I started playing around with it. I decided since this thing was already installed, I should try to find ways that it can improve the teaching and learning in the room. I spent several hours importing existing slide decks, creating new slide decks, learning all the fancy moves, searching Promethean Planet, and so on. I even attended a training session offered at our school.
Perhaps I started out with a biased view that negatively affected my exploring, but in the end I felt less confident about the power of IWBs than when I started.
Things they aren’t:
Collaborative. I don’t get it. I’ve often seen and heard people describe them as a means to improve collaboration between students. The ability to collaborate on an IWB is hampered by the fact that only one person can use the board at a time. Since most of my classes are 20+ students and there’s only one IWB, I struggle with how this can be used collaboratively. Maybe if I had 4-5 IWBs in my room I could make it happen. Most classrooms have had a large-form presentation technology that allows for limited simultaneous use for some time now (hint: chalk/white boards). At least on a whiteboard I could have 5+ students writing at the same time.
Student-centered. IWBs have been touted as helping to create “student-centered classrooms.” I couldn’t disagree more strongly. If anything they help reinforce teacher-centered instruction by keeping the focus of the classroom at the front of the room- providing support for large group lectures at the expense of decentralized student groupings. Having students come to the front and drag tectonic plates around doesn’t make it student-centered. Many people have pointed to the student-voting systems (ActiVOTE, etc.) as a way to make the technology more student centered. Sure, it’s an improvement but, (1) it still promotes teacher-centered instruction, (2) they’re not free, and (3) if the saving grace of IWBs are voting devices, couldn’t you just do away with the IWB?
Proven effective. I’m not saying IWBs can’t do cool things and perhaps even inspire otherwise technophobic teachers into trying out new things. However, many people cite Marzano’s study as definitively proving IWBs significantly improve student achievement. I disagree, but don’t take my word for it: Read Jon Becker’s five-part peer review of the study. He knows much more about educational research than I probably ever will.
Transformative. There’s been a lot of talk about how technology can transform the educational system through connecting students to information and experts and empowering students in their own learning. As mentioned earlier, IWBs reinforce traditional teacher-in-the-front instruction. A side effect of this is that they stifle transformative technology from being implemented and promoted. IWBs are often touted because they can be adopted immediately without requiring any restructuring of instructional styles- which seems to be in direct opposition to many people who justify them as promoting “21st Century skills.”
Things they are:
Expensive. OK, so many technologies are expensive (laptops, LCD projectors, etc.)- what I’m mainly concerned about is the dollars spent vs. improvement in learning. Most of the benefits in going from overhead projectors to IWBs seem to be focused around the LCD projector’s ability to project what is on the computer screen. I haven’t found much the IWB can add to instruction that I couldn’t do with just an LCD projector. Laptops, in my opinion, offer opportunities for more instructional flexibility, student empowerment, and true-to-life experience than IWBs, and thus are preferable (see next).
Only found in classrooms. Unless our students become teachers, it is unlikely they’ll ever use an IWB again after graduation. Laptops, on the other hand, are ubiquitous. Teaching students how to use laptops to follow their passions and fuel their learning are skills that can carry over after they leave school.
Things they shouldn’t be
A public relations tool. Too often school boards and higher-ups see the shiny, fancy technology that are IWBs and see it as an easy way to improve the public perception of the school. Simply dropping an IWB into every classroom doesn’t improve learning, and they shouldn’t be sold as such.
Dismissed. While I’m obviously not a big fan of IWBs, I find myself getting upset when I hear teaching simply dismissing them without first looking into what they are and how they might be used. This probably has little to do with the IWB itself than the attitude it betrays. The reason behind my dislike IWBs (at least I tell myself) is because I’ve spent time investigating their pros and cons- not simply because they’re “different” or “new.”
Your opinion?
Many of you have experience with this issue and have differing opinions. If you are a big fan, please explain your position to me. I’d really like for IWBs to be a game-changer, I’m just not seeing it right now.
____________________________________
“They just didn’t understand where Excel would be useful for them.“
-Overheard a a recent district tech committee meeting by an individual who recently gave an Excel workshop.
I, for one, have no problem finding value.
Exhibit A: Iodine Clock Reaction
The Iodine Clock Reaction demonstrates incredibly well the effect that temperature, concentration, and catalysts have upon the rate of a chemical reaction. The results are clear and the reaction itself is a fan favorite (watch it). As a result, I’ve always included it as a lab. However, it requires preparing a lot of solutions. Added on top of this are the calculations I had to do each year to figure out how much solution to make and the mass of all the reactants I needed. The calculations took almost as long as preparing the solutions (and I have to do them each time around since I have different numbers each semester).
I realized last year that although it would take longer to set up initially, if I could create a spreadsheet that automatically calculates all those amounts for me it would save me boat loads of time in the long run. This semester it took me a grand total of 5 seconds to do all my calculations for this lab. I updated it this year with some conditional formatting that makes sure the total volumes of solution it kicks out provide me with a little extra.
Check it:
This is a copy of my original spreadsheet, so feel free to kick the tires and look under the hood. If you can think of a better way to do it, I’m open to suggestions. View it in Google Docs if you’d like to play around.
Exhibit B: WolframAlpha
I haven’t (along with most of the world) been floored by WolframAlpha. It does some neat tricks, but it isn’t (a) easy to use, and it (b) doesn’t meet 99% of my searching needs. I used it now and then to find how long I’ve been alive or what time the sun sets, but that changed when I realized it did some nifty calculations for solutions. Want to calculate how many grams of potassium iodate you need to make 900 mL of a 0.2 Molar solution? Done.
Documents:
- Handout for the iodine clock reaction lab
______________________________
A major problem with public education is tradition. “This is just the way things are done here,” is a refrain that I’ve heard many times in my own short career. One of my take-aways from TEDxNYED is this: The tools and services to make schools modern and relevant are available, but schools need to overcome their “traditions. I’ll avoid a breakdown of what individual speakers discussed. Instead I’ll try to comment on the broader spectrum of themes and reactions.
Themes
Theme #1: Education should be open. To me it seems obvious that a high quality education should be treated more like a universal right than something only available to those in nice neighborhoods of rich countries. I think many of the educators I know as well as the speakers (& hopefully you, reader), would heartily agree. However, it’s quite clear that the current schooling system puts an awful lot of faith in for-profit corporations to provide educational content. Clearly this doesn’t have to be the case. Many schools and educators are resistant. Why? “Because that’s the way things have always been done.”
Theme #2: Education should be social. This definition of social goes beyond using collaborative groups within your classroom. Instead (as Andy Carvin did such a great job illustrating) we should empower our students to set up collaborations without our classrooms to help tackle real problems. John Dewey noted that learning is socially constructed and this movement towards using social networks to connect people around a common problem seems to flow quite nicely from that idea.
Theme #3: Better Problems = Better Learning. Whether intentionally or not, as educators we tend to shelter our students from real-world problems. We don’t think our students are ready yet, don’t know how to connect students to the problems, or are afraid of relinquishing our control over the students. Many speakers pointed out the fact that one of the greatest motivations for learning is attempting to solve a really good problem. Hats off to Dan Meyer who did his typically great job showing us what that actually looks like in an Algebra classroom.
Theme #4: Do it for the kids. Chris Lehmann makes this case so well. Make schools a place of great relationships and great learning. We can’t continue allowing schools to be places students detest. While Michael Wesch and Dan Meyer’s talks didn’t focus on the topic, they’ve both been great advocates to creating educational environments that focus around positive relationships with students as a cornerstone (see here and here, respectively).
Reactions
1: I’m much cooler online. This was the first large event I’ve been to with loads of people I’ve talked to through Twitter and blogs in attendance. I’m not so great at walking up to people cold and introducing myself. As a result I didn’t meet nearly as many people as I would’ve liked.
2: It’s great to meet locals. I had the opportunity to meet Dan Agins, who is the only other educator on Twitter (that I’m aware of) from Southeastern Connecticut. Perhaps it’s a bit ironic that we first met in NYC instead of SE CT, but regardless of location it’s nice to connect with people nearby. Let’s hope we’re just the beginning of a larger trend in the area.
3: Advice to sink in slowly. So much knowledge was dropped in such a short period of time at TEDxNYED that I’m really looking forward to the videos of the talks being posted online. There were several talks that I’d like to hear again to help me clarify my thoughts and ideas on the topic.
4: Post-TEDxNYED furor. There seems to have been a pretty big, “TEDxNYED-was-great-but-what-does-it-actually-do-to-improve-education” reaction from many attendees. I was surprised that this seemed to be a major reaction. Perhaps that surprise is the result of me being a edu-conference newbie working in a school/district/state which doesn’t sport a very high population of educators who are familiar with the ed-tech world. For me, this event was a reminder that I’m not crazy. A reminder that there are a lot of smart people out there who are on the same page. For me, that re-invigoration was necessary. It’s easy to get worn down by the head-against-brick-wall experience that can be day-to-day teaching.
5: Oh, the irony. Coming back from my TEDxNYED weekend I had the honor of administrating practice CAPT (Connecticut’s standardized test of choice) to 14 year old students that may very likely not even be graded. I’m sure the feeling was similar to Icarus‘ transition from delight in flying to despair in falling.
___________________________________
|
Ben Wildeboer. 9th grade science teacher, etc.
|
