# data[].attributes.body
Is anyone familiar with the practice or read the book?

# data[].attributes.headline
Most assessments in today’s classrooms are based on a 100-point scale. The improper use of this scale can lead to incorrect student achievement scores.

# data[].attributes.subject
Most assessments in today’s classrooms are based on a 100-point scale. The improper use of this scale can lead to incorrect student achievement scores.

# data[].attributes.body
The range of scores between classrooms is one source of error associated with the 100-point scale. This type of scale provides little to no reflection of the difficulty level of each assessment. Weighting items differently from assessment to assessment and the uneven level of difficulty is akin to changing the scale that is being used from one assessment to the next. Tracking student achievement over time using the 100-point scale can be tremendously difficult due to the wide range of scoring provided (p. 41).

# data[].attributes.headline
Formative scores should never be averaged to arrive at a student’s summative score.

# data[].attributes.subject
Formative scores should never be averaged to arrive at a student’s summative score.

# data[].attributes.body
Averaging may seem like a logical way to determine a student’s cumulative score at the end of a unit; however, this method is antithetical to the key principles of formative assessment. When a teacher tracks a student’s formative scores for one unit, the student’s scores will generally show a progression of learning. This means that a student’s scores will likely be lower at the beginning of a unit than at the end. Therefore, if a teacher averages a student’s formative scores to calculate a summative score, the resulting summative score would be lower than the student’s actual current level of skill, as it would give early scores the same weight as later scores. To avoid inaccurate summative scores, teachers can give more weight to scores at the end of the unit, which generally best reflect students’ level of mastery

# data[].attributes.headline
A well-written scale can be thought of as an applied version of learning progression.

# data[].attributes.subject
A well-written scale can be thought of as an applied version of learning progression.

# data[].attributes.body
A scale should make it easy for teachers to design and score assessments. To be most useful, scales should be written in student-friendly language. The teachers should introduce each scale to the students and explain what is meant by the content with each score value. Below is an example of a generic scale (pp. 44–45).

# data[].attributes.headline
Student-friendly scales should have examples of what it would look like to provide a correct answer for the score of 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 content.

# data[].attributes.subject
Student-friendly scales should have examples of what it would look like to provide a correct answer for the score of 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 content.

# data[].attributes.body
Scales that have been rewritten in student-friendly language should provide students with clear guidance as to what it would look like to demonstrate score 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 competence (see Table 3.7 for an example of a student-friendly scale). It is much more likely that students have really considered and come to understand the goals when teachers give the class the opportunity to rewrite the scale(s) in their own words (pp. 46, 141)

# data[].attributes.headline
In lieu of formative assessments and summative assessments, the terms formative scores and summative scores can be used to describe how teachers employ assessments in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.subject
In lieu of formative assessments and summative assessments, the terms formative scores and summative scores can be used to describe how teachers employ assessments in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
Assessments have many forms and many uses, two of which are to provide formative and summative scores to students. The word score, rather than assessment, in the terms formative score and summative score relays that the essential difference between the two is not their format, but their purpose in the assessment process. Teachers record and track formative scores from individual assessments as indicators of students’ knowledge or skill at particular moments in time. In comparison, summative scores are final scores based on the pattern of students’ responses over time. Teachers may base each score on a number of common assessment forms, such as obtrusive, unobtrusive, and student-generated assessments. However, formative scores are used for tracking progress, while summative scores express students’ mastery of a topic, generally at the end of a unit (pp. 27¬–28).