Dec 16 Record keeping, standards and New Ideas!!

December 16, 2011

RecordKeeping

I have been displeased with my folder method of tracking grades for some time but was having difficulty creating an alternative.  I had originally decided to create a divided version of the open grid they have now.  Formative homeworks and practices are recorded in one column, artifacts (aka pop quizzes or assessment-like scenarios) in another and summatives (aka big tests) would be in a third.  After DeSoto visited, I created a second version, modeled on theirs.  This one has the standard written at the top instead of the abbreviation present on the divided version.  It also features a graph where students plot their scores on the grid for a more visual representation of a student’s trend of learning.  Only artifacts and summatives would be recorded on this grid.  I like this later version because of the more visual version of the trend of learning, the ease of seeing the standard above the grades and the use of only artifacts and summatives.  I feel like having the students record all of their formative assignments is data overload.  Now, I love data as much as the next analytical chemist but this is just too much for the kiddos, to record EVERYTHING they do.  The artifacts are a good representation of how a student would do on a test, where a formative assignment shows what they know with their notes and friends in a comfortable situation.  But what I want doesn’t always coincide with what the students think or will do. So I pitched it to my students, both my honors chemmies and the students who stayed after school with me yesterday.  Most of them liked the graphing one.  They liked the idea of it being more visual and they also liked the idea of only recording artifacts and summatives.  I also told them about the power law that Pinnacle uses that I was trying to recreate, which I will discuss in the next section, and they really liked that as well.  I have not decided yet if I will try to implement all these improvements in chemistry.  Overall they are a really awesome group that is really flexible and tolerant to all my changes and crazy ideas but I hate to just throw everything we’ve done this semester out the window. . . even though it is not serving our purposes. . . and the definition of insanity is doing the same thing only to expect different results. . . . So I guess I should introduce some of these changes J

Grades

So. . . since I made this new tracking sheet with the graph, I got to thinking about the power law again.  DeSoto talked about it and I felt like a total n00b because I had no idea what it was.  The way they described it was looking at the trend of assessment scores instead of averaging things together.  This concept works so much better and provides an even truer reflection of student achievement than the traditional averaging.  It has long been a complaint of grading that student scores are always lower at the beginning because the student has not had time to mastery the material.  The brain has not had time to integrate the new information.  Thus the student has a poor score, let’s say a 2, on an early assessment.  Later on the student masters the material and really steps it up to achieve a 4 on a much later assessment.  By traditional grading, those two scores are averaged, resulting in a 3.  Even though the student mastered the material, she is still haunted by that first attempt.  I had attempted to rectify that through reassessment opportunities but the power law allows for an even greater efficacy in correcting that error.  Prior to now, I had no idea how to do the “power law” in excel but I think I’ve figured it out.  There is a “trend” function on excel that, according to my reading, does a rough approximation of this power law.  I didn’t think it would be this hard to find a mathematical explanation of the bloody thing.  This means that I can in fact count artifacts as part of the term grade, without averaging them together and reestablishing the old paradigm of punishing first attempts.  Supposedly, this power law weights later assessments heavier than earlier ones, meaning that the earlier pop quizzes will have less impact than the bigger summative tests. 

My difficulties arise from the fact that the way I have my standards set up currently, there is a 2.a, a 2.b, a 2.c, and so on.  I only have 11 “standards” but each one has 2-8 pieces.  I will have to find a different way to word and organize my standards so I don’t have 15 trends to follow for each student.    And, since we are still using a points, I will still have to find a way to combine all standards into one grade. . All this means that I have to do better about having multiple artifacts and multiple assessments for every standard.  This is most certainly a process.   

Standards

At lunch, we were talking about different ways to organize standards and track them.  Right now, I have my standards set up to where I have the larger titles (atoms, compounds) as the “power standards” and then the nit-picky pieces (history, configs, wave equations) as the little a, b, c below that larger one.  I’ve been tracking each little piece separately so far because they are such different concepts with different difficulty levels.  If I’m going to do this “power law” trending to come up with the grade for a standard, I would have to look for the trends of these little pieces and then somehow put them all together to get the grade for that standard.  I could average them. . . but the evils of averaging are something I am trying to avoid. . . so I would almost have to look for a trend among the pieces.  That wouldn’t be any better than the averaging because the pieces are all so different.  I think I’m going to have to start looking at assessments as a whole, without separating them into these smaller pieces.  The smaller sections could be present in the verbal standard but as for grading and recording, it would all be recorded as simply “standard 2”. 

December, SIS

December 8, 2011

December is always a difficult month.  In addition to the regular world stress of holiday shopping, family visits and holiday decorations, no one wants to be at school.  Students are squirrely.  Everyone’s forgotten everything they need to know for the final and somehow it all has to come together before December 19^th.  All in all, it makes for a very stressful month.  *Steps off soapbox*

                So I finally caved.  SIS has caused too many problems and too much confusion between administration, SSD teacher and others who need regular access to student grades but have not talked with me at length about my grading system.  Prior to now, I had been putting the 5-1 grades in SIS and telling students to ignore the SIS percentage and average their grade together themselves.  The aforementioned other people were unaware of this truth or forgot or didn’t understand or whatever the case may be and multiple students were being reprimanded for a grade that wasn’t correct.  So I translated the mastery levels into the percentages by the same chart I use at term to assign term grades.  It’s really a lose-lose with this bloody thing because the mastery level gave invalid percentage but the percentages, while closer to their actual grade, are still not correct and put the emphasis back on points.  However, the saving grace with the percentages is that now I can confidently say their grade on SIS is a reflection of 100% knowledge.  There is nothing to inflate or deflate a student’s grade other than their performance on a summative assessment event. 

Nov 29, 2011 Standards

November 29, 2011

Standards

So I came to a “well duh” realization yesterday.  I have been implementing standards based grading.  Tests are chunked according to the standards being assessed.  Each standard is given its own grade. . . and then I go and average them together to get one grade for a test.  You moron! (I say to myself).  I just did what we complain so much about the points system.  Granted, the student can look at the separated scores and see which section was weaker but students are so engrained to look only at the final score that most aren’t putting it together.  They aren’t seeing how, for example, standard 2 was weak in the first assessment, on the benchmark midterm and on the final.  Since tests like the benchmark midterm and final are cumulative to the point of assessment, they cover several standards.  And dingbat that I am, I’ve been putting them all together, reinforcing the mindset I am trying to hard to chance.  What I need to do is just have multiple scores for one test and LEAVE IT THAT WAY.  The assessments need to be recorded with their standard and not as an average somewhere.  Funny how we, as teachers, think so hard and spend so much time plotting and planning and possible scheming when the answer we so desperately seek is plain as day in front of our faces.  Ugh, I’m so annoyed with myself.  I suppose I could make adjustments at semester.  Stop the averaging and put in multiple scores.  I don’t think it will mess with anyone’s understanding of the system.  If anything, it should make it easier to track patterns.  I still need to decide what I’m going to do about that tracking sheet for next year.  The one I use currently is too wide open and that makes it harder to keep assessments vs practice straight.  I think I might use the version I’ve mentioned before that includes a separate section for practice/formative, artifacts and summatives. 

Nov 22, 2011 Hindsight 20/20

There comes a time in the school year where it behooves one to pause a moment and look back.  I have made so many changes, done so many new things this year that I have really lost count.  I feel like my classroom is more open, more organic, more student-directed and though I still have a long way to go, I feel that I have taken a large step in the right direction.  Often times, as teachers, we forget how long it takes students to form habits, to understand and learn to think.  So many students have never been asked to think on a critical level and that takes time to learn.  Here we are in November and the students are just now learning to reason, to draw their own conclusions and to analyze what’s in front of them.  For some, it will take even longer.  I still fight the points/grade mentality everywhere.  However, just like it takes time for students to learn a new skill, it takes even longer to deprogram old skills.  We have trained students to respond only to points and external motivations, ignoring internal motivations and conclusions.  Students have learned that compliance earns grades and points are everything.  So many teachers that I speak with are afraid of standards based grading or anything similar because they feel it takes away their power.  Without the points, how will you motivate students to learning, to complete homework, to do anything at all?  My response to that is “have faith”.  I have seen student connect their homework scores to their test scores and see how practice really does make perfect.  I’ve seen students man up to the fact that they haven’t done any practice or outside work and regret that fact.  You have to create a climate where students are free to fail so long as they try again, where students are free to try and try again but doing nothing is never an option.  It takes time, effort and lots and lots of reminders.  A good work ethic and desire to succeed is more important now than ever but for some reason it has become harder to cultivate.  On some levels, being a teacher is harder than ever.  There are more distractions to battle, more expectations to meet.  Everyone seeks to pass the blame instead of offering suggestions for improvement.  But at the same time, it is more fun than ever.  I am not bound by the traditional test.  I can utilize a wide variety of assessment types.  I have more toys than ever: robots, apps, cell phones, computers, clickers, tablets, smart boards and on and on.  And the rewards of being a teacher never change.  It’s always worth it.

ALF meeting notes 11/16/2011

AFL notes 11/16/2011

Plan for next year

·         Behavioral consequences for behavioral problems

o   Not reading, not completing homework, not doing., . . something

o   Instead of taking away points, you serve a detention that afternoon/next day to complete the work. 

·         Detailed syllabus

o   Detailed options for retakes/summative assessments

o   Detailed daily expectations

o   Definitions of SBG, summative, formative, feedback, etc

o   Behavioral consequences for missing work, incomplete assignment

o   Grading scale/mastery levels explained

o   Formative assessmentsà expectations, grading, importance

o   Advisory requirements

§  Reassessments/reassessment price done during advisory time

·         Differently weighted standards???

o   Some are more important than others and should be weighted as such. Use percentages

·         Student checklist/score tracker

Personal Notes

·         Goal setting. . . so good, but how to teach it. . . back to journals!  Focus on concepts, not assessment tools (get an A, turn in homework doesn’t work)

o   Weekly reflections on progress, necessary improvements

·         Need to redo standards and student checklists (formative, artifacts, summative)

o   MAYBE NOT. . . SEE DESOTO CHART

§  Graphing instead of just listing scores

§  Stapling assessments for one standard together and keeping them in the folder.  Practice stays elsewhere

§  Maybe next year require binder and go through set up/organization repeatedly

·         How to include behavioral/nonacademic components

o   Averaging them together puts behavior back in the grade which is the problem we are trying to rectify currently. . . need a separate way to indicate it. . .

o   Doesn’t SIS have a behavior grade section?  Off to the side of the end-of-term report?

·         Interdepartmental projects

o   Do the experiment with me, write the paper with Beth, do the historical connection with Steve. . .

·         Look at MO Frameworks to develop “Behavioral Standard”. 

o   Needs a REALLY good scoring rubric

·         So can we not use SIS next year?  Please?

·         Power-Law calculations used to calculate learning trend

o   Pinnacleà Global scholar

o   Most recent grades count more than early stuff

§  Oh my goodness it’s wonderful

§  Have to put all the level 1 (teacher guided) in on the same date, all the level 2 in on the same date, etc. . . because otherwise pinnacle calculates it wrong. . .

§  Do we need DOK levels in this?

·         5-0 scale

o   5-A+

o   4-A

o   3-B

o   2-C

o   1-D

o   0-F

·         Graphing progress instead of just the chart.  Kids can SEE the trend

·         Marzano Conjunctive Scale (green assessment for learning book)

o   To get an A, you have to have no 3’s on any standards

o   To get a B, you have to have no 2’s, etc

o   There’s no averaging

·         DeSoto has behavior as a separate grade. . . not averaged into the academic grade

·         Need report card rubrics for each standard

·         Do we really need a 5?

Nov 17, 2011 DeSoto Visit, what is advanced?, DOK

November 17, 2011

DeSoto Visit

Yesterday was our quarterly meeting of our AFL group.  These meetings are always great because we have the chance to sit and think and put our heads together about the problems we are facing.  We had about 8 teachers from DeSoto come to visit and talk about the ways they had implemented SBG in their school.  Oddly enough, they were all middle school or lower.  No high school teachers were on board.  Anyway, it was wonderful.  They solved half of my problems in the first 5 minutes.  They use an online gradebook called Pinnacle that allows not only standard based score but also formative/summative/diagnostic assignments as well as being an intuitive system that looked for patterns.  They talked a lot about the “Power Law” which is something with which I was not familiar.  I had been saying that there had to be a better way than averaging grades to report a student’s progress.  Apparently this “power law” is that way.  It weights recent progress higher than earlier assessments and looks for learning trends.  After 4 assessment hits, it looks for the trend.  Anything less than that and it defaults to average.  I was just beside myself with excitement over meeting these people who were a step ahead of me and had all these great ideas on solving the many issues I had encountered.  

Are all assessments created equal?

I was a little bit confused on their use of “levels”.  They said they entered all of the level 1 grades on the same day, all the level 2’s on the same day and so on.  I think they were referring to DOK and amount of teacher support.  But if these grades are entered as assessments, they count towards the learning trend.  Most of the CLE’s, frameworks and common cores are applied type scenarios with written expectations.  If those are the expectations, meeting them should be proficient. . . so what’s advanced look like?  If you are using DOK levels, a student might be able to get a 4 on a DOK 1 or 2 assignment but not be able to achieve that DOK 3.  We went round and round on this yesterday.  We agreed that all assessments should contain DOK’s 1-3 but the DOK 3 was the part that was necessary to achieve advanced.  Ultimately, it seems like there will have to be a set of criteria that must be met for a student to achieve an A.  They must demonstrate proficiency on all DOK 1 and 2 and achieve advanced on the applied DOK3 stuff to achieve an “A” in the course. 

The second issue we encountered also dealt with this idea of the importance of application.  One of the math teachers and I were discussing how some standards don’t seem to have that additional application level that makes “advanced” possible.  Often times those kinds of questions come from combining whole standards together.  The statement was made that then the standards should have been together from the start but I don’t know that I agree with that.  Material still has to be taught in chunks and the bigger the chunk, the more difficult it becomes to separate the material in to assessable pieces.  Thus you would end up with two types of assessments:  the DOK 1 and 2 material for which proficiency is required and also the combination application assessments which allow for the “advanced” placement.  It will be difficult to come up with a consistent  means of determining grades though. 

I thought I had this all figured out and then we brought up the question of “so what does advanced look like?” and it just all went to pot. 

Questions for Consistency

As I mentioned, several other teachers are going to be piloting the same system as me, well a similar system.  One of the greatest complains with points grading is the inconsistencies.  Thus, we want to make sure we, as a group, are consistent in our implementation of SBG and AFL.  Here are a few of the issues we need to address:

·         Number of levels

o   I use a 5-1 scale.

o   4-1 is used for EOC’s

o   4-0 has been suggested, as has 5-0

·         Zeros

o   I’ve been putting in 1’s for no data but I dunno about the logic of that. . .

o   Will we use them at all? 

o   How will we use them?

·         Missing/late work

o   This pertains particularly to missing/late summative grades like papers, presentations and lab reports.

o   Again, I am using 1’s for assessments

o   For homework and practice, I grade anything any time they turn it in. 

o   Zeros?

o   Rules for accepting it?

·         Retakes

o   I allow retakes on everything, given the completed retake ticket.

o   Allowed on all tests? Some tests?

o   Protocol for retakes?

o   Full credit, partial credit, no credit?

o   Admission price?

·         Homework policy

o   For me, it’s just practice

o   Just practice?

o   Part of summative grade?

o   Recorded? Not recorded?

o   Collected and graded or not?

·         Percent conversions

o   Basically, 5=A+, 4=A-, 3=B-, 2=C- <2=F.  I have some smaller gradations in there because the + and – factor into GPA. 

o   How will the mastery levels be converted back into percents for the regular grade card?

I will add more as we come up with these questions and the responses we generate. . . . stay tuned!

October 26, 2011 Changes for next time

October 26, 2011

Changes for next time

As I proceed through this venture, there have turned up quite a few issues that cannot be corrected until next year.   This entire SBG system is a jump for most students so to alter things drastically again would be unwise.  My students, overall, are incredibly flexible and patient with me as I try new things, discard them, and try again.  Several changes will come as a result of consistency and streamlining with other teachers who are going to be starting their own pilots next year.  Below are a few of the changes I know for certain I want to make next year.

·         Artifacts

o   In addition to homework, artifacts will be available in a basket in the front of the room for students to prove what they know without the help of other students or notes.  This should help students who feel they know the material and suddenly realize on the test that they are unable to perform the requested task alone.  Essentially, they are “quizzes” but will not affect student grades. 

o   A second option is to call the pop quizzes I often give “artifacts” to be separately recorded as such.

·         Checklists

o   Next year, the checklists on which students monitor their own grades will have three sections: practice, artifacts, and summatives.  This way they will be able to see how much practice they have completed, how well they did on the practice, how those scores compare to the artifact scores that require students to perform as they would on a test and see how all of this compares to the summative scores that are received. 

·         Retake tickets

o   This will be instituted from the get-go next year.  So far I LOVE them.

·         Rewriting/ Adjusting Standards

o   I am not happy with the order of my standards.  Study of the periodic table should come before naming and bonding.

o    St2 for honors is too large.

o    Ideally, I still want to create one set of standards that just has HC next to the standards that are for honors only. 

o   Another ideal would be to create, as Eureka has, core curricular objective.  Ideally, these standards would collectively describe what is covered over one term/quarter of instruction.  It might be hard to keep it that organized, though, since several chapters come back and build on previous ideas

o   Power standards are another idea I need to toss around.  Some standards are considerably more important than other, being one of the major ideas any student having taken my class should know.  This would require percentages, with some standards being worth a greater percent of the class.  That would be a challenge in SIS though. . . . I just hate percentages, personally

·         Behavior grades

o   This one is a toughie.  Even Ken O’Connor agrees that behaviors are important and should be reported.  However, since we are still using a points based report card, that grade would have to be averaged in with the learning grade essentially creating the same problem already seen in grades.

Getting Started

October 21, 2011

Starting suggestions

I thought it might be beneficial for me to throw out a few suggestions for anyone interested in attempting a journey similar to mine.  This is essentially the process I have followed. 

 

1.       Come up with standards

§  It will take a few tries, but start with CLE’s, throw in your curriculum and rephrase

·         The CLE’s have never seemed clear to me so I created my own standards and referenced the CLE’s.

·         Don’t always start with CLE’s.  You know you teach the CLE’s.  Start with your wording and reference the CLE’s

§  Get them all typed up then you can rearrange it.

·         Just type.  That’s the easiest way.  You’ll never have the perfect order, just one good enough for now.   

§  Could also start with state standards and use a, b, c to clarify under standards.

2.       Determine how you want to assess these standards

§  Backwards design!

§  Will you use a 5 level scale, 4 level scale, points . . .

§  Retakes fall in this category too

·         Will you allow retakes?

·         Will students retake same test, entire test, parts of test?

3.       Come up with grade book setup

§  Will you grade homework?

§  Will you record homework?

§  Will you use percentages or mastery levels?

§  How many assessments are necessary to know mastery?

§  Will you use bound paper grade book, binder paper or excel?

4.       Determine if there are any necessary changes to your classroom practices

§  Most of the time, little needs to change. 

§  The classroom will naturally shift itself to a focus on learning and away from points or that has been my experience. 

The best advice I can give is just to start.  You will never find the perfect approach and odds are you will never be completely happy with the system you have created.  I know I’m not.  I am immensely pleased with the progress and changes I have seen in my classroom thus far but it is far from perfect.  Every day brings a new set of challenges and every group of students is different and requires a slightly different approach.  But the rewards are well worth it.  I’m seeing students excited about learning, students who ordinarily give up are striving for better, exceptionally bright students are learning and not just looking for the points game.  It really is amazing. 

October 21, 2011 and Reassessments

October 21, 2011

Artifacts

I am still struggling with this idea of artifacts.  After talking with students, it is apparent that many of my students do not need the large amounts of practice that I hand out.  By requiring homework to be turned in for a grade, it is punishing the students that get the concepts on the first try.  That is one of the greatest arguments for standards based grading and assessment for learning.  Man I love the chemistry systems of grading/reporting.  Anyway, I had originally told my students that they needed to choose an assignment each week to turn in as a homework grade.  After discussion with other teachers, I decided to require the artifacts once a week to make sure students weren’t procrastinating too badly.  However, with the ABC block schedule that my school uses, I do not see my students every day to remind them and here we are on Friday and I have received nothing.  So I’m attempting to rethink this. . . . here’s my new idea:  artifacts will be comprised of 3-5 exemplary problems from the chapter being studied.  A student must complete three of these artifacts before the chapter test.  These will be the homework grades for the chapter.  The chemistry students (both honors and general), most of whom are younger than the physics crew, have surprised me with the amount of homework they do and practice they complete without the worksheets being taken for a “grade”.  I’m hoping physics will be the same way.  I will still assign homework and suggest that they turn it in for me to grade for correctness but only the artifacts will be taken as grades.  They are to be completed alone and without the help of notes, etc, effectively making them like little quizzes but they can be completed at the student’s leisure. 

Assessments

Thus far I am pleased with my retake tickets.  We will see if this alters the number of retake requests I get because this does require the student to do more work before I will allow them the retake opportunity.  I do believe this will force students to study and review the material before they attempt the retake which is definitely a good thing. 

Overall

I still feel like this whole venture has been supremely successful at taking the emphasis off points and refocusing everything on the learning.  The students and parents have also adapted far better than I ever could have hoped.  I think the main difficulty for anyone attempting this venture would be to remain flexible.  As I move through the school year, I am constantly finding things that I do not like, ideas that are not having the desired effect or suggestions that fall flat entirely.  One has to be able to take that failure in stride and come up with a new idea fairly quickly.  All it takes is persistence. 

October 18, 2011 Student responses and midterm troubles

October 18, 2011

Classroom changes

I feel like I am barreling through the material.  There isn’t enough time for reflection, improvement and mastery.  I’m currently grading midterms and they are terrible.   It’s incredibly disheartening.  The students aren’t retaining anything. . . I need a better mousetrap.  I’m beginning to think I need to make more changes to the way I teach/the way I structure my day.  Fridays (or whatever the last day I see the students for the week) needs to be some kind of reflection day.  Perhaps, set aside time to reflect on what they’ve learned, have some kind of proof problem to prove they’ve learned it. . . I would like to go back to a system similar to the one I experimented with my first year of teaching.  In that unit, students were given a folder containing all the information for a particular unit.  I gave one, maybe two lectures and then the practice was the responsibility of the student.  There were three quizzes that had to be taken by particular drop dead dates and then a test that was taken.  If I were to do something like that, each concept would have 3 or 4 “proof problems”.  Perhaps they could be kept in a basket or folder on the front table.  Once students believe they are ready for the quiz, they have to complete the “proof problem” and turn it in.  Then they make take the quiz.  The due dates gives students the ability to move more at their own pace but I do not know if general chemistry is mature enough to budget their time appropriately or responsible enough to do the practice they need.  I just feel like one third the class gets the idea and is ready to move on while another third just needs practice and a last bit has no idea.  Why do they seem to make such great progress and then bomb the test? 

I think my next step will be to offer retakes for the benchmark.  Originally, I had said the benchmark grade was permanent but the grades are so awful I don’t feel I have a choice.  Students will be returned their benchmarks and a “retake ticket” form.  It will have three sections.  First, students will have to explain why they achieved the score they did.  If it matches their practice scores or not is one way, or they could explain why they did or did not study or on what concepts they were still unclear.  Secondly, there will be the test itself containing space for the student to explain the correct answer (not why they got it wrong but why the correct answer is the correct one.  Math counts as explanation).  Thirdly will be a space for students to explain how they will better prepare for the retake.  Once this is completed and discussed with me, I will allow them to retake the test.  I like this idea better than the homework proof because it forces them to review and study by making them go back over the test. 

Student Response

Last entry I mentioned how I was going to introduce the idea of artifacts into my physics class since they were not using the AFL system and I could see if it was easier or effective at all.  I immediately noticed the difference in the mindset of students between physics and my AFL chemistries.  My chemistry students, by and large, have stopped asking about points and instead are focusing on learning the material and improvement.  Many of them are redoing assignments simply for the reinforcement and practice as well as asking for even more practice assignments.  Physics immediately saw this as a “get out of homework free” card.  We will see how it goes as time progresses.  I am notorious for testing different homework systems so I do not think tweaking this as time progresses will throw my students for a loop.  As always, the students who practice and do their work will do the homework I request regardless of the rewards or consequences and the students who skimp on homework and practice will skimp no matter what the rewards or consequences. 

Overall I do still feel the student response is positive.  I feel like they are focused on the learning and not the points and can communicate their learning effectively through the mastery levels.  But. . . it does slow down the amount of curriculum I can cover.  Is that ok?  I need a way for the killers and go-getters to move on while the folks who need more reinforcement to practice. . .

Consistency, changes, artifacts

October 11, 2011

Overall

Busy busy busy!  I still love it.  I think everyone should do it.  And I’ve said as much at the PD meetings we have.  I cannot wait til next year when I can attempt to use this same system in physics.  It is so much easier when directly compared with the old way of doing things like I am in physics.  It is amazing how easily the students have adapted to the system and how much more they trust it.  I feel like they no longer think grades to be arbitrarily assigned but see the levels as a mark to be exceeded.  Even general chemistry is catching on and beginning to ask for more practice to learn the material. 

Consistency

I am very excited to say that three other teachers are going to attempt to pilot their own standards based grading systems next year.  That said, we are working together to make sure that our systems are as consistent as possible. . . which is proving to be easier said than done.  We are currently trying to decide what the non-negotiables are: homework policy, grading scale, retake policy, reparations for missing work, etc.  And it is proving quite the task.  We all teach different subjects-history, English, math and science- and that is making it difficult to streamline our approaches.  With such different material, it is difficult.  However, consistency is important since one of the biggest complains about the current system is the lack of consistency. 

Changes

I want to attempt this idea of “artifacts of learning” as opposed to recording everything.  Right now, I grade, record and put into SIS all homework that I assign and grade.  It is making me crazy.  With students turning in homeworks on different days, different times, some late, some on time, some in pieces, it is very difficult and time consuming to find that particular key, grade it, find the one box in SIS where it goes and put it in.  But, I like having lots and lots of data.  I am an analytical chemist by training and I like data and visible patterns.  So I am thinking that I will grade everything still, but I will not put it in the online system.  I think I will still record it in my paper grade book and then if I see a pattern of lacking in practice contact the parents but this recording every little detail is just not working.  I don’t have that much time.  Instead, I will implement this idea of “artifacts” that demonstrate a student’s mastery of a concept.  These will go in SIS to be visible online and are nonnegotiable.  They must exist, whether the student mastered the concepts the first time or the 15^th time.  This will be implemented in physics, so I won’t have to battle the tweeky SBG already in effect. 

·         Three artifacts (on average, some standards are bigger/smaller) will be given per standard

·         These artifacts will be due at spaced out times throughout the unit.

·         Only one artifact may be a homework assignment

·         The other artifacts may be teacher-student conference, staying after school, a question on a pop quiz, or any other assignment that takes place individually within the confines of the classroom

·         If artifacts are not turned in, the student will be assigned a 0 and parents will be contacted to inform them the student must stay after the next tutoring day to complete the artifact. 

·         If a retake is requested for a particular standard, an additional artifact is necessary. 

Hopefully, this will alleviate some of the difficulties in finding time to enter all these individual grades that span the entire year in the grade book.  This will also allow students, again, to be able to do the amount of practice they require to master the concept.  Each day, I have a few more students understand why I do the homework this way and see, often for the first time, the importance of homework and out of school practice.  I also hope that, when this is moved over to the chemistries, that this will deter students from rushing into the retake.  By requiring an additional artifact, I’m not just looking at the numbers but also looking at the quality of work as well. 

Issues

Benchmarks, midterms, final exams, whatever you want to call them. . . they are a problem.   Most schools require some kind of midterm exam but it falls in the middle of a standard it seems.  It made deciding what to do with said assessment difficult.  I have decided to keep it as a permanent summative grade that cannot be retaken.  This benchmark indicates retention as it tested standards 1 and standard 2 as well.  For general chemistry, it works out better and falls at the end of general’s shorter standard 2.  My biggest issue remains the time it takes to put all these helter-skelter assignments in the online grade book.