# data[].attributes.body
Grading

# data[].attributes.headline
What is Standards-based Grading? - TeacherEase

# data[].attributes.subject
What is Standards-based Grading? - TeacherEase

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Basics of SBG

Traditionally teachers focus on teaching, the attempt to deliver knowledge. In SBG they also measure student learning, to understand the effectiveness of instruction. Instead of a single overall grade, SBG breaks down the subject matter into smaller "learning targets." Each target is a teachable concept that students should master by the end of the course. Throughout the term, student learning on each target is recorded. Teachers track student progress, give appropriate feedback, and adapt instruction to meet student needs. Figure 1 shows example report cards that highlight the differences between traditional and SBG.

Traditional grading and SBG also use different grading scales. In traditional grading, students are primarily measured by the percentage of work successfully completed. The assumption is that higher completion rates reflect greater mastery, and earn higher grades. Often 90% achieves an A, 80% a B, etc.

In SBG, grading is based on demonstration of mastery. Students attempt standards-aligned activities (projects, worksheets, quizzes, essays, presentations, etc.). Teachers assess the student output and choose the appropriate mastery level that was demonstrated.

Typical scales are 1-4 and reflect students' increasing skill. 1's indicate that students have little understanding of a concept, and consequently cannot demonstrate any mastery. When starting a new target, many students have no prior knowledge, and begin at 1. As students learn, they can demonstrate partial mastery, and score 2. Once they meet a target, they score 3. Typically 4's are used for students who exceed targets. Figure 2 shows example traditional and SBG grading scales.

Note: Even though 1-4 is popular, SBG grading scales vary widely. Scales can be 1-5, 0-4, use half points, and use letters instead of numbers. Yours may be different.

In standards-based education, teaching is responsive to learning. When starting a new target, teachers present introductory lessons. As students progress, they are offered more complex material. They continue working and learning until they reach the target. Think of SBG as a ladder, where students climb up, "a rung at a time," eventually reaching the top.

After receiving instruction, some students progress immediately, but most do not. It's common for students to be confused, and only partially complete an activity. Teachers regularly provide feedback, reteach, and offer additional opportunities to reach "the next rung." This process requires patience and practice, and is repeated until students reach the target.

SBG is powerful because it provides a framework to regularly measure student progress. When teachers have continuous understanding of students' mastery, they can adapt instruction to better meet students' needs. This causes education to be more effective and engaging.

How Does SBG Improve Education

Now that we've described the mechanics of SBG, let's look at the advantages standards-based education brings to the classroom. Many instructional changes improve student engagement and learning.

Improved Feedback

In SBG environments, better feedback accelerates learning. Instead of simply giving scores like 9/10 or 85%, teachers give feedback about the task performed and skills used. This helps students understand their current areas of improvement, and helps them reach the next level. This positive environment speeds learning and students reach higher levels of achievement -- all while being deeply engaged and enjoying school.

Student Ownership of Education

Learning targets are typically written in student-friendly language, so they can understand the goals of instruction. Targets may be further broken down by rubrics to map out the steps required to reach the "top of the ladder." This allows students to understand the path to success, and enables them to better engage in their learning. When working on an activity, they can self-assess and reflect on their own performance. They can identify areas of improvement and self-direct their activities. This leads to greater ownership of their learning. A typical rubric is shown in Figure 6.

More Relevant Instruction

In traditional classrooms, many teachers mechanically present curriculum to students -- lesson 1 on day 1, lesson 2 on day 2, etc. While there are exceptions (e.g. - early elementary reading), often there is little adjustment to instruction due to learning. Because students learn at different rates, some are bored because the pace is too slow. Others are confused because instruction is too fast. This is a daily challenge in traditional classrooms.

In SBG classrooms, teachers better understand student mastery. At any time, they know which students are at level 1, 2, or 3. This helps teachers offer level-appropriate work. Students at level 1 get activities that help them reach level 2. Level 2 students get activities to climb to level 3. Classrooms often break into smaller groups with students working independently on level-appropriate activities. This is called "differentiated instruction," or DI for short.

In this environment, students are less frustrated by poorly-fitting instruction. School is a more positive experience when course material is relevant and interesting. By improving the use of instructional time, students learn more and make increased academic progress.

Learning Provides Intrinsic Motivation

Some students may be extrinsically motivated by metrics, and strive to improve in measured areas. In traditional classrooms, this often encourages students to "chase points." Many will perform tasks that award points and raise their averages (e.g. - extra credit).

Conversely, it's common to hear students ask, "Will this be graded?" They often will skip any activity not entered into the gradebook, regardless of merit. This creates unhealthy incentives which skew student behavior and attitudes.

In SBG, the focus is on learning and mastery. Striving for mastery is an intrinsic motivator and transforms student attitudes. They learn for their own enjoyment and sustain high levels of effort and achievement.

Emotional Safety and Fear of Testing

At the beginning of each marking period, students start with 100%. Their averages fall as they make mistakes. Students with the fewest mistakes earn the highest grades. Depending on the size of the mistake (e.g. - a zero), it may be impossible to recover and earn a "good grade." This high-stakes environment can create test-taking fear and cause anxiety, which interferes with learning.

In SBG, scores go up as students learn. Final grades are reflective of mastery at the end of the course, so there's little penalty for early mistakes. No event can "ruin" their grade. This creates an emotionally safe environment where students are encouraged to stretch themselves, make mistakes, and learn.

While SBG removes the problem of zeros, it's also common for organizations to allow redo's. When a student gets a poor score, they can often work more on the topic, increasing their learning, and reassess. The ability to reach mastery is celebrated versus the focus on the number of mistakes made along the way.

Accurate Measurement of Learning

One pitfall of traditional grading is inaccuracy. Student averages are highly dependent on the difficulty of work assigned. If teachers present only low complexity activities, students can earn high scores with only a weak command of the material.

The opposite is also true. Highly demanding instructors may present very difficult work, resulting in overly low student scores. Curving and extra credit are used to adjust averages into more appropriate distributions.

In both cases SBG can improve the situation by providing clearer criteria for measuring mastery. Mastery of low complexity work yields lower grades while mastery of higher complexity work provides higher grades. Connecting grades to complexity rather than percentage completion yields more accurate and consistent grades.

How TeacherEase Helps SBG

This document was written by the team that produces TeacherEase, software for standards-based learning. We believe that successful SBG requires good technology, so we built TeacherEase to meet this need. It includes all the tools necessary: committee collaboration, learning targets, rubrics, assessments, instructional content management, data analytics, gradebook, report cards, and parent portal. For more information, check out: TeacherEase: Software for Standards-based Learning.

Additional SBG Videos

For more information, we recommend the SBG-related videos below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This page is an introduction for parents and educators new to standards-based grading. It discusses benefits of SBG and positive impacts on the classroom.

# data[].attributes.headline
Grading Systems - SCHOOL, HIGHER EDUCATION - Students, Grades, Teachers, and Learning - StateUniversity.com

# data[].attributes.subject
Grading Systems - SCHOOL, HIGHER EDUCATION - Students, Grades, Teachers, and Learning - StateUniversity.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Grading Systems - SCHOOL, HIGHER EDUCATION

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With the passage of compulsory attendance laws at the elementary level during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the number of students entering high schools increased rapidly. Between 1870 and 1910 the number of public high schools in the United States increased from 500 to 10,000.

# data[].attributes.body
History of Grading

# data[].attributes.body
How does this match up with GOLD standards?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Copy of College and Career Readiness Standards Chart Only

# data[].attributes.body
Site for creating custom standards-based rubrics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Rubric Maker

Make a standards-based rubric in less than a minute. Common Core ELA and Math, NGSS, C3, Core Art & 21st Century standards.
Sample Rubrics: Writing in Social Studies
CCSS Math Std 6.EE.B.6 + Critical thinking Sample Lessons: Volume of a Ford Escape
Limitations of our History Textbook
Identifying Themes in Literature
Kindergarten W.K.1 writing standard + Creativity standard
QuickStart Lesson Builder

Make a standards-based lesson in as little as 5 minutes! Add an activity or resource to spark higher-order thinking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Free contemporary K-12 curriculum design - ThemeSpark

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ThemeSpark free web-based teacher tool was designed by former teacher David Hunter. The creator of the innovative Zombie-Based Learning curriculum, he founded our parent company EdCourage, Inc. to offer powerful teacher tools that easily add Authentic Learning to standards-based curriculum.

# data[].attributes.headline
Standards-based grading and reporting will improve educationPhi Delta Kappan - Marco A. Muñoz, Thomas R. Guskey, 2015

# data[].attributes.subject
Standards-based grading and reporting will improve educationPhi Delta Kappan - Marco A. Muñoz, Thomas R. Guskey, 2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
discipline-specific examples are available via videos created by Iowa practitioners at SBGVideos.org

# data[].attributes.headline
Educational Leadership:Best of Educational Leadership 2006-2007:Improving the Way We Grade Science

# data[].attributes.subject
Educational Leadership:Best of Educational Leadership 2006-2007:Improving the Way We Grade Science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Summer 2007 | Volume 64
Best of Educational Leadership 2006-2007 Pages 36-42

Jacqueline B. Clymer and Dylan Wiliam

Within the last few years, research studies from around the world have shown that assessment can help students learn science, as well as measure how much science they have learned (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Wiliam, Lee, Harrison, & Black, 2004). Research has also suggested that the use of formative assessment, or assessment for learning, can double the rate of student learning (Wiliam & Thompson, in press). Perhaps more remarkable, such improvements have occurred even when achievement is measured using standardized tests.

To be effective, however, assessment for learning must be integrated into assessment of learning systems. In the United States, this means that in addition to taking into account fluctuations in student learning, teachers must still assign grades. Consequently, educators need to develop and implement a system that supports both the formative and summative functions of assessment-formative, in that teachers can use evidence of student achievement to adjust instruction to better meet student learning needs; and summative, in that teachers can amass the information to provide a final grade for a marking period.

Some years back, Terry Crooks (1988) reviewed more than 240 studies of the effect of assessment practices on students. He concluded that using assessment for grading purposes had completely overshadowed using assessment to support student learning. A more recent review of studies conducted between 1988 and 1997 found that nothing had improved (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Indeed, considerable evidence showed that many common grading practices actually lowered student performance.

The Meaning of Feedback

In reviewing more than 3,000 research reports on the effects of feedback in schools, colleges, and workplaces, Kluger and DeNisi (1996) found that only 131 of these studies were carried out with enough rigor and reported on in enough detail to be reliable. In 50 of these 131 studies, providing feedback actually made people's performance worse. In other words, in almost two of every five carefully controlled scientific studies, performance would have been better had the feedback not been given. When the researchers looked to see what kinds of feedback caused this decline in performance, they found that it was feedback that focused on the person, rather than on the task. When feedback focused on what the person needed to improve and on how he or she could go about making such improvements, learning improved considerably.

In fact, Ramaprasad (1983) reminds us that what teachers often refer to as "feedback" is not something an engineer would recognize as such. He pointed out that a feedback system (a room thermostat, for example) has four essential features. It provides

A way to identify the current value of some system parameter.

A way to set the desired value of some system parameter.

A way to compare these two values, to see whether they are the same.

A way to change the current value of the parameter to bring it closer to the desired value in the event the values differ.

In the case of the room thermostat, there is a device for measuring the current room temperature, a setting for specifying the desired temperature, a mechanism for comparing these two, and, of course, some wires that lead to the air conditioner or the furnace so that if there is a mismatch, we can do something about it. Few students experience comparable feedback systems that help "change the current value of the parameter" (their current level of achievement) and move them toward "the desired value" (mastery of content standards).

Given the evidence about the negative effects of grading practices in U.S. schools, it is hardly surprising that there have been regular calls for abandoning grading completely (see Kohn, 1999). We do not believe that the evidence supports such extreme action for two reasons. First, if teachers do not provide some indication of their students' achievement, then school systems are likely to resort to mechanisms like timed written examinations to do the job. Second, we believe that appropriately designed grading systems can help identify where students are in their understanding and what they need to do to improve.

Assessment that Supports Learning

Black and Wiliam (2004) contended that the starting point for any integrated assessment system must be the formative purpose. Teachers can always aggregate fine-scale data on student achievement to provide a grade or other summary of achievement, but they cannot work out what the student needs to do next on the basis of a grade or score.

The first requirement is a standards-based record-keeping system. For the record to serve as more than merely a justification for a final report card grade, the information that we collect on student performance must be instructionally meaningful. Knowing that a student got a B on an assignment is not instructionally meaningful. Knowing that the student understands what protons, electrons, and neutrons are but is confused about the distinction between atomic number and atomic mass is meaningful. This information tells the teacher where to begin instruction.

The second requirement of an assessment system that supports learning is that it should be dynamic rather than static. Grades based on the accumulation of points over time are counter-productive for several reasons. First, this approach encourages shallow learning. In most classrooms, if students forget something that they have previously been assessed on, they get to keep the grade. When students understand that it's what they know by the end of the marking period that counts, they are forced to engage with the material at a much deeper level. Second, not altering grades in light of new evidence of learning sends the message that the assessment is really a measure of aptitude rather than achievement. Students who think they will do well will engage in the assessments to prove how smart they are, whereas students who think that they are likely to fail will disengage. When assessment is dynamic, however, all students can improve. They come to see ability as incremental instead of fixed; they learn that smart is not something you are-it's something you become.

Assessing 8th Graders in Science

During the 2005-2006 school year, we conducted a pilot study on grading in an 8th grade physical science class in Quakertown Community School District. This suburban district located 30 miles from Philadelphia enrolls approximately 5,450 students. Strayer Middle School, where the pilot study took place, is a Title I school, with 22 percent of students receiving free or reduced-price lunch.

The school's academic year is divided into five marking periods that are each seven weeks long. Each marking period focuses on 10 content standards, which are derived from the state standards. For example, the first marking period in 8th grade physical science focuses on (1) the appropriate use of laboratory equipment; (2) metric unit conversion and labeling; (3) calculating density; (4) applying density (floating, sinking, layering, thermal expansion); (5) density as a characteristic property; (6) the phases of matter (at a molecular level); (7) gas laws; (8) communication (graphing); (9) communication (lab reports); and (10) inquiry skills.

For each content standard, the teacher identifies an evidence base that will verify the student's level of proficiency. For the standard relating to laboratory equipment, for example, the teacher may ask students to do the "clay boat" task, in which they explore buoyancy by comparing the mass, volume, and density of a ball of clay with the mass, volume, and density of a boat made of clay. Students might be required to complete a lab about the density of soda, in which they learn why some cans of soda float whereas others sink, and to pass a lab quiz in which they must measure, without their lab partners, the mass, volume, and density of solids and liquids. For the standard relating to metric unit conversion and labeling, the teacher might ask students to take a quiz on metric conversion, observe the use of units in the lab, and show mastery on relevant test items.

On the basis of this evidence, the teacher assesses each student's performance on each content standard using the following "traffic lights":

Green (Mastery): The student consistently meets and often exceeds the content standard. The student, with relative ease, grasps, applies, and extends key concepts, processes, and skills for the grade level.

Yellow (Developing): The student regularly meets the content standard. The student, with limited errors, grasps and applies key concepts, processes, and skills for the grade level.

Red (Beginning or below basic): The student is beginning to, and occasionally does, meet the content standards, or the student is not meeting them. The student is beginning to grasp and apply key concepts, processes, and skills for the grade level but produces work that contains many errors.

The final grade for the marking period is based on the aggregate level of proficiency displayed in the 10 content standards. "Green lights" are worth 2 points, "yellow lights" are worth 1 point, and "red lights" are worth 0 points. Consequently, the highest score for the marking period is 20 points (10 content standards × 2 points), or 100 percent.

To receive an A, students need to master at least 90 percent of the required content, earning a minimum of 18 points. A student can achieve this with 10 greens (20 points), 9 greens and 1 yellow (19 points), 9 greens and 1 red (18 points), or 8 greens and 2 yellows (18 points). A grade of B reflects 80 percent mastery (a minimum of 16 points), and a C reflects 70 percent mastery (a minimum of 14 points). Students can achieve these points through various configurations of "lights."

At the end of the unit, students take a test to verify their level of mastery in each identified content/skill area. If students do better than expected, the teacher updates their achievement profile with this "latest and best" evidence. If students fail to show mastery of previously mastered content, the teacher interviews them to provide them with additional opportunities to "show what they know" about the topic. For example, if the student misses a question about Charles's Law, which describes the direct relationship between temperature and volume of a gas, the teacher might ask the student to explain the gas law and provide a real-life example. If the interview reveals that the student has not mastered this material, the teacher provides the student with additional practice and multiple opportunities to learn it.

If a student does not master the content by the end of the marking period, the grade for that marking period reflects this lack of mastery. But if the student masters the content by the end of the school year, then that increase is reflected in the end-of-year grade. The end-of-year grade is the percentage of mastery on all 50 standards and not an average of the five marking period grades.

A crucial feature of this assessment system is that no grade is final until the end of the marking period. While students are learning, the teacher maintains a record of the current evidence of achievement. One particularly effective way to keep this record is by using an electronic spreadsheet (see fig. 1). Each row represents a student's performance on the content standards for that unit, and each column represents one of the 10 content standards. The teacher enters 0, 1, or 2 in each cell to indicate the student's existing level of mastery, calculating the final score and grade as previously described.

Figure 1. Screenshot of a Portion of a Teacher Grade Book

One particularly useful feature in Excel that facilitates data analysis is the option to color cells differently. The teacher can give cells different traffic light colors, providing an immediate display of student achievement. The rows indicate the skills and topics that individual students have and have not mastered. The columns show how well the entire class has or has not mastered a specific content area. This information is formative because it helps the teacher adjust instruction to better meet student needs. The data shown in Figure 1 suggest that this group of students has a good grasp of standards 3 and 10, whereas standards 1, 2, 5, and 6 merit further attention.

In the pilot study, the teacher kept the students apprised of their traffic light ratings through weekly progress reports. Individual assignments were not allocated a single color or grade. Instead, the teacher reviewed student work for evidence of mastery on one or more of the standards and recorded this information in a grade book that designated one page for each standard. In a lab report on the density of pennies, for example, the student would receive a traffic light score for the graphing standard, for the inquiry-skill standard, for the calculation of density standard, and so on.

In addition, the teacher commented on individual students' work to coach the students to higher achievement. Students were encouraged to act on the feedback by providing additional evidence of mastery or by revising their work to improve both their understanding and ratings.

Student Reaction

In May 2006, we asked a sample of 19 students to explain the new grading approach. All but one student understood that their achievement at the end of the marking period was more important than their achievement when a topic was first introduced. They understood that they were expected to improve as a result of instruction and not expected to arrive at school already knowing the content.

Many students shifted from a performance orientation to their work, in which the goal is to get the highest grade, to a mastery orientation, in which the goal is understanding (Dweck, 2000). Students said that they understood more, focused more on learning important concepts, and were more relaxed because the teacher judged their performance on the basis of their understanding. One immediate, if unanticipated, outcome was the change in classroom atmosphere. Students became more engaged in monitoring their own learning. They repeatedly asked for clarification, from their peers and from the teacher, to ensure their understanding.

A majority of students preferred this system to the previous one. Several students indicated that the provisional, rather than final, nature of the grading system was an important benefit, noting that it enabled them not only to revise their grades as they improved their understanding but also to see what they were good at and where they needed to improve. Other students noticed that the new assessment system focused more on learning than on performance. Earning points and percentages became less important than understanding the content.

Responding to a question about teacher feedback, several students mentioned how helpful it was to receive feedback that not only indicated what was incorrect but also provided some idea of how to improve or correct it. This greatly helped students revise their work. One student appeared to have intuitively adopted Ramaprasad's notion of feedback, because for him the most helpful part was "just having feedback at all." He noted that comments like "Good job!" which he had received from other teachers in the past, were not really feedback because they didn't provide information about how to improve.

The pilot study also revealed some other notable reactions. Under the new assessment system, two-thirds of the students saw the teacher as a coach, one-fifth saw the teacher as both a coach and a judge, and only one in 10 students saw the teacher solely as a judge. Three-fourths of the students noted that they prepared for tests, and half of these students indicated that this was a change from the previous year. Half the students thought they were doing better in science that year, and half thought they were doing the same. No students believed that they were doing worse in science than the previous year, despite the possibility that their scores could be revised downward as a result of new evidence.

The Effect on Student Achievement

Because this was a pilot study with just a single classroom, any quantitative information about the achievement of this class relative to other classes must be regarded as merely indicative. However, the average score of these students on the final examination in May 2006 was 79 points, with a standard deviation of approximately 14 points. The average score achieved by the equivalent class in 2004-2005 was 73, suggesting that the 2005-2006 class outperformed the 2004-2005 class by 0.4 standard deviations.

A comparison of the two classes' scores on ACT's Explore test established the similarities between the two classes. Although the 2005-2006 class averaged 2 percentage points higher than the 2004-2005 class on the science component of the Explore test, the 2005-2006 class outscored the 2004-2005 class by 3 points on the final exam (after controlling for prior achievement in science), equivalent to a standardized effect size of 0.27 standard deviations. Because of the small size of the sample, this result was not statistically significant ( p = 0.1785), but it is comparable to the effect sizes found in larger studies that have examined the effect of assessment for learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Hayes, 2003; Wiliam, Lee, Harrison, & Black, 2004). Analysis of the students' scores suggests that although the new grading system was, on average, better for all students, it was particularly beneficial for the highest- and lowest-achieving students.

A Caveat for Special Ed

The increased student engagement we saw in the classroom, together with evidence of increased achievement, suggests that this kind of assessment system has considerable potential for enabling teachers to integrate the summative and formative functions of assessment. Several teachers at Quakertown have implemented similar approaches in middle school math, high school social studies, and AP Statistics with considerable success.

Taking this work forward, we need to pay careful attention to assessing students with special education needs. In a genuine standards-based assessment system, teachers need to assess and record what a student can actually do. Many students with special needs may fail to progress beyond the "basic" level; applying a standards-based assessment system would lead to these students getting mostly Ds and F s. As a result, to mark these students' modest progress, some teachers may be inclined to give them credit for mastering a content standard that they have not truly mastered.

We think this is a mistake. The record-keeping system must provide accurate information about what the student can and can't do. It might make sense to "disapply" some standards as inappropriate for some students; consequently some cells in their rows would be empty. But when a cell includes a number, it should mean the same thing for all students. If teachers want to incorporate other information, such as effort or improvement, they can best do this by reporting effort and improvement scores separately so that the information about the student's achievement is clear and interpretable.

Some school districts require teachers to aggregate all information into a single grade that combines information about achievement with a range of other, less objective factors. To maintain the integrity of the standards-based record, however, the teacher needs to separate the assessment of achievement from other factors. For example, a teacher might specify that 50 percent of the points are for achievement, 25 percent are for effort, and 25 percent are for improvement. A student who masters all the standards specified for a marking period gets at least 50 percent, but he or she does not get even a C without demonstrating both effort and improvement from the last marking period. This approach is far from perfect, but at least the achievement record accurately records the student's achievement.

Standards-based assessment systems are a significant improvement over the grading practices prevalent in U.S. schools today. They communicate standards for success, helping students see what they need to improve. They reposition the teacher as coach rather than judge, leading to less confrontational classroom environments. Most important, they support the teacher in using assessment to improve learning rather than just to measure it.

References

Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 5(1), 7-73.

Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (2004). The formative purpose: Assessment must first promote learning. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Towards coherence between classroom assessment and accountability: 103rd yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (part 2) (pp. 20-50). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Crooks, T. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481.

Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

Hayes, V. P. (2003). Using pupil self-evaluation within the formative assessment paradigm as a pedagogical tool. Unpublished thesis: King's College, University of London.

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.

Kohn, A. (1999). From degrading to degrading. High School Magazine, 6(5), 38-43.

Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4-13.

Wiliam, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. J. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice, 11(1), 49-65.

Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (in press). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will it take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the December 2006/January 2007 issue of Educational Leadership.

Jacqueline B. Clymer is an 8th grade science teacher and lead teacher for K-12 science in Quakertown Community School District, Quakertown, Pennsylvania; jclymer@qcsd.org. Dylan Wiliam is Deputy Director of the Institute of Education, University of London, United Kingdom; dylanwiliam@mac.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Summer 2007 | Volume 64 Best of Educational Leadership 2006-2007 Pages 36-42 Jacqueline B. Clymer and Dylan Wiliam Within the last few years, research studies from around the world have shown that assessment can help students learn science, as well as measure how much science they have learned (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Wiliam, Lee, Harrison, & Black, 2004).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Each week brings some new idea that teachers are supposed to implement, while still preparing lessons, grading papers, and keeping their classrooms in some semblance of order. Amid all these challenges, a call to change grading policies can seem particularly unrealistic.

One grading practice that is gaining popularity is standards-based grading, which involves measuring students' proficiency on well-defined course objectives (Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). Although many districts adopt standards-based grading in addition to traditional grades, standards-based grading can and should replace traditional point-based grades.

My school, Montrose High School, is located in a small but rapidly growing rural community in southwestern Colorado. We serve a community that is primarily white but that has a significant Latino population. After spending the last three years implementing standards-based grading in my high school math classroom, I have discovered seven solid reasons for replacing point-based grades with a standards-based system.

Reason 1: Grades Should Have Meaning

An A means the student has completed proficient work on all course objectives and advanced work on some objectives.

A B means the student has completed proficient work on all course objectives.

A C means the student has completed proficient work on the most important objectives, although not on all objectives. The student can continue to the next course.

A D means the student has completed proficient work on at least one-half of the course objectives but is missing some important objectives and is at significant risk of failing the next course in the sequence. The student should repeat the course if it is a prerequisite for another course.

An F means the student has completed proficient work on fewer than one-half of the course objectives and cannot successfully complete the next course in sequence.

Reason 2: We Need to Challenge the Status Quo

Many notions I had at the beginning of my career about grading didn't stand up to real scrutiny. The thorny issue of homework is one example of how the status quo needed to change. I once thought it was essential to award points to students simply for completing homework. I didn't believe students would do homework unless it was graded. And yet, in my classroom, students who were clearly learning sometimes earned low grades because of missing work. Conversely, some students actually learned very little but were good at "playing school." Despite dismal test scores, these students earned decent grades by turning in homework and doing extra credit. They would often go on to struggle in later courses, while their parents watched and worried.

Over the past three years, I have radically changed how I formally assess homework-I don't. Of course, it is essential for students to do homework that is tied closely to learning objectives and for students to see those connections (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001). Systematic and extensive feedback on assignments sends students the message that they can and should do homework as practice. A typical homework assignment for my students consists of a small collection of problems, each of which is linked to a learning objective. At first, I make those connections for my students, but eventually they make them on their own.

When I assign homework, I discuss with my students where and how it applies to their assessments. My goal is to get students to constantly ask themselves, "Do I know this? Can I do this?" To my surprise, my homework completion rates have remained steady over the past three years. Some students don't do all of the homework that I assign, but they know that they are accountable for mastering the standard connected to it. Of course, not every student who needs to practice always does so, but I am amazed and encouraged that students ask me for extra practice fairly regularly.

Reason 3: We Can Control Grading Practices

One of the biggest sources of frustration in schools today is the sense that we are at the mercy of factors we teachers cannot control. We cannot control student socioeconomic levels, school funding, our salaries, our teaching assignments, increasing class sizes, difficult parents, or a host of other important issues. However, we can control how we assess students.

When I approached my principal and district officials with the idea of using an experimental grading system, I received support and encouragement from all of them. In addition, a number of colleagues have been intrigued and want to make standards-based grading work in their classrooms.

If a teacher must use a point system to satisfy an administrative mandate or to use a particular grade book, that teacher can still use a standards-based system. The crucial idea is to use a system that is not based on the inappropriate use of averages. The system must not allow students to mask their level of understanding with their attendance, their level of effort, or other peripheral issues.

I have found that avoiding point values that might appear in a traditional percentage-based system is helpful because parents and students can get confused if they see numbers that look like what they've seen in the past but refer to a different scale. Teachers who have to assign points can avoid this confusion by using completely different numbers. A point value in the range of 1 to 10, for example, would not have the strong associations of a point value of 85, and thus would not be as easily misinterpreted.

Reason 4: Standards-Based Grading Reduces Meaningless Paperwork

Since I adopted standards-based grading, my load of meaningless paperwork has been drastically reduced, which provides time for more important considerations. Standards-based grading enables me to get the most from every piece of paper students turn in.

Writing feedback only on selected homework problems saves my time when marking papers while still giving me a sense of where students are in their learning. These homework assignments and other formative assessments help me judge the progress of the group as a whole before deciding how to proceed.

I don't assess student mastery of any objective until I am confident that a reasonable number of students will score proficiently, and that makes each assessment mean much more. Students who are still struggling after a significant portion of the class has demonstrated mastery can retest individually. The bottom line is that when I review any set of papers, I walk away knowing a great deal more about what my students know than I ever did before.

Reason 5: It Helps Teachers Adjust Instruction

Imagine two different grade books for the same set of students, as shown in Figure 1. Which one of the two better illustrates what students know and what they still need to learn?

[figure currently unavailable]

The standards-based grade book gives a wealth of information to help the teacher adjust instruction. Note that two objectives (1 and 3) may require more class instruction. The notations for Objective 2, on the other hand, suggest that the class only needs practice and one student needs some reteaching.

Students can also see much more information about their learning. In the traditional grade book, Amanda would assume she is in great shape, but standards-based grading reveals that she has not mastered a crucial concept.

Gifted and talented students can be truly challenged in a standards-based classroom because if they show early mastery of fundamental skills and concepts, they can then concentrate on more challenging work that is at higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy or that seeks connections among objectives.

Students who struggle can continue to retest and use alternate assessments until they show proficiency, and they are not penalized for needing extended time. I guide students with special needs to modify their work and, if needed, develop different ways of demonstrating that they've met their proficiency goals. Their working styles can be easily accommodated in this system because modified assignments and assessments require no special adjustments in the grade book. The grade book simply shows where they are in meeting the standards, without reference to how they are demonstrating their learning or what modifications needed to be made.

Reason 6: It Teaches What Quality Looks Like

In the adult world, everything is a performance assessment. If adults on the job make poor decisions or cannot determine the quality of their own work, the results are generally undesirable. Quality matters, and the ability to measure the quality of one's own work is a learned skill.

So how can we teach this essential skill? One way to teach quality is to demand it. We must create an environment where standards can and must be met and where students are not permitted to submit substandard work without being asked to revise.

If we base our grades on standards rather than attendance, behavior, or extra credit (which often has nothing to do with course objectives), we can actually help students grapple with the idea of quality and walk away with a higher degree of self-sufficiency. We can and should report information about student performance in areas like attendance and effort, but we can report it separately from academic achievement (O'Connor, 2007; Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006).

Reason 7: It's a Launchpad to Other Reforms

When I began using standards-based grading, I quickly discovered that I needed to reexamine my curriculum. Each class needed a clear and concise set of standards with precise levels of mastery. This prompted a number of discussions with other teachers in my department, and each year we continue to adapt our objectives. No one can use standards-based grading without clear standards.

In addition to improving curriculum, I have found new ways to use formative assessments and intervention strategies. My work with special education students and English language learners in particular goes much more smoothly because all the modification needed is already built into what I do. I have also been able to work much more effectively with parents by giving them better information.

How do students respond to this style of grading? Of course, their reactions vary. It takes time, discussion, and reflection for students to understand their rights and responsibilities in such a system, and teachers must be patient as students and parents adjust. Many students have expressed increased satisfaction with having a larger degree of control over their grades, although some students do not like the revisions they are required to do. Some struggle to overcome test anxiety and need access to alternate assessments.

As for parents, many of them simply want opportunities for their children to succeed, so they are grateful for the revision and retesting. Each year, parents ask thoughtful questions, with some noting that this method of grading is more similar to evaluation in the workplace.

These seven reasons to change to standards-based grading are merely a starting point. High school teachers need to hold their own practices up to scrutiny and decide whether those practices are worth keeping. By doing so, we unleash a force for change that we can control, with our students and parents as partners.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Seven Reasons for Standards-Based Grading - ASCD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each week brings some new idea that teachers are supposed to implement, while still preparing lessons, grading papers, and keeping their classrooms in some semblance of order. Amid all these challenges, a call to change grading policies can seem particularly unrealistic. One grading practice that is

# data[].attributes.headline
Redesigning Grading - Ed Leadership Article

# data[].attributes.subject
Redesigning Grading - Ed Leadership Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Townsley - Redesigning Grading Districtwide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
discipline-specific examples are available via videos created by Iowa practitioners at SBGVideos.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning Strands for PTECH Business Classes

# data[].attributes.body
Good example of school policy

# data[].attributes.headline
Free contemporary K-12 curriculum design - ThemeSpark

# data[].attributes.subject
Free contemporary K-12 curriculum design - ThemeSpark

# data[].attributes.body
Rubric creator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Rubric Maker

Make a standards-based rubric in less than a minute. Common Core ELA and Math, NGSS, C3, Core Art & 21st Century standards.
Sample Rubrics: Writing in Social Studies
CCSS Math Std 6.EE.B.6 + Critical thinking Sample Lessons: Volume of a Ford Escape
Limitations of our History Textbook
Identifying Themes in Literature
Kindergarten W.K.1 writing standard + Creativity standard
QuickStart Lesson Builder

Make a standards-based lesson in as little as 5 minutes! Add an activity or resource to spark higher-order thinking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Free contemporary K-12 curriculum design - ThemeSpark

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ThemeSpark free web-based teacher tool was designed by former teacher David Hunter. The creator of the innovative Zombie-Based Learning curriculum, he founded our parent company EdCourage, Inc. to offer powerful teacher tools that easily add Authentic Learning to standards-based curriculum.

# data[].attributes.headline
Resources like '6-12 Collaboration Rubric (CCSS Aligned)' | Project Based Learning | BIE

# data[].attributes.subject
Resources like '6-12 Collaboration Rubric (CCSS Aligned)' | Project Based Learning | BIE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Resources like '6-12 Collaboration Rubric (CCSS Aligned)' | Project Based Learning | BIE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explains details about design and use of rubrics

# data[].attributes.headline
A New Kind of Classroom: No Grades, No Failing, No Hurry - The New York Times

# data[].attributes.subject
A New Kind of Classroom: No Grades, No Failing, No Hurry - The New York Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A New Kind of Classroom: No Grades, No Failing, No Hurry (Published 2017)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Mastery-based learning allows students to learn at their own pace.

# data[].attributes.headline
Standards-based grading and reporting will improve educationPhi Delta Kappan - Marco A. Muñoz, Thomas R. Guskey, 2015

# data[].attributes.subject
Standards-based grading and reporting will improve educationPhi Delta Kappan - Marco A. Muñoz, Thomas R. Guskey, 2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

# data[].attributes.headline
Educational Leadership - Summer 2017 - Page 28-29

# data[].attributes.subject
Educational Leadership - Summer 2017 - Page 28-29

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Educational Leadership - Summer 2017 - 31

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Educational Leadership is a magazine for educators by educators and includes among its readers principals, teachers, and administrators of every grade level and subject area. With a circulation of 175,000, EL is acknowledged throughout the world as an authoritative and readable forum of discussion about practices, policies, research, and trends affecting prekindergarten through higher education.

# data[].attributes.headline
Class Rank Weighs Down True Learning - Education Week

# data[].attributes.subject
Class Rank Weighs Down True Learning - Education Week

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teaching and grading schemes that work to select the most talented students often fail to benefit all students and to notice promising students

As they consider reforms in policy and practice, educators face one basic question about their purpose. How they answer it will largely determine how they go about their work, especially in standards-based education environments. It also will establish the direction of their career and how they judge their success. The one basic question: Is my purpose to select talent, or is my purpose to develop talent? The answer must be one or the other because there is no in-between.

If you decide your purpose is to select talent, then you must work to maximize the differences among students, and, on any measure of student learning, you must try to achieve the greatest possible variation in student scores. If lots of students score at the same level on a measure of their learning, discriminating among them becomes very difficult. In order to select the most talented students you must teach and assess learning in ways that allow you to distinguish those students with greater talent from those with less. You must spread out the scores.

Unfortunately for students, the best way to maximize differences in their learning is poor teaching. Nothing does it better. If you want to accentuate the differences among students, then teach them as poorly as possible. A few students will be able to direct their own learning and achieve at a high level, regardless of what the teacher does. But the vast majority of students need guidance and direction in their learning. To learn well, they need to engage in structured learning opportunities and receive support from their teachers. Without such opportunities and support, they're likely to learn very little. Differences in student learning will be maximized, and this variation will be evident in any measure of learning. On the other hand, if you decide your purpose as an educator is to develop talent, then you go about your work very differently. The first thing you do is specify what you want students to learn and be able to do. After clarifying those learning standards or goals, you then do everything possible to ensure that all students learn those things well. If you succeed, there should be little or no variation in measures of student achievement, and all students will attain similar high scores on assessments of their learning. When your purpose is to develop talent, this is precisely what you strive to accomplish.

Standards-based approaches are built on this premise. In standards-based education environments, teachers and students unite in efforts to have everyone learn well. This doesn't mean that standards-based teachers treat all students the same. On the contrary, standards-based teachers adapt instruction to individual student needs in order to help all students develop their talents and master agreed-upon learning goals.

Why class rank?

This fundamental question about purpose relates directly to computing students' class rank. Why do we do it? Why do we believe rank-ordering all students in every graduating class is important and necessary?

In most high schools, students are ranked according to their cumulative grade-point average (GPA). The procedures used to calculate students' GPAs vary from school to school. Some high schools consider grades from all of a student's courses while others include only courses in designated academic areas. Some schools assign equal weight to grades from all courses in computing student GPAs, while other schools employ complicated weighting strategies that attach higher value to grades attained in courses perceived to be more academically challenging (Downs, 2000).

If we go back to the original question about whether our purpose is to select talent or to develop talent, then the answer as to why we calculate cumulative grade point averages to determine students' class rank is clear. Rank-ordering the students in every graduating class has nothing to do with developing student talent. Rather, it is unquestionably about selecting talent.

Determining class rank does not help students achieve more or reach higher levels of proficiency. With the possible exception of the top-ranked student, class rank also does nothing to enhance students' sense of self-worth, their confidence as learners, or their motivation for learning. On the contrary, evidence indicates ranking students may diminish student motivation (Covington, 1992). If we say our purpose is to develop talent, then computing class rank is unmistakably counter to that purpose.

High school educators argue that they're compelled to rank-order graduating students because selective colleges and universities require information about class rank on applications. But, although that might have been true in the past, it is not nearly as prevalent today.

In a recent survey, Eric Hoover (2012) found that only 19% of colleges and universities give class rank "considerable importance" in the application process. Most admission officers expressed serious skepticism about the meaningfulness of class rank. Among the traditional measures of student quality, class rank was "widely described by admissions officers as the fuzziest" (Hoover, 2012, p. A1).

The importance of class rank has changed significantly in recent years because college and university admission officers recognize the striking differences in student populations at different high schools and the tremendous variation in the way high schools compute class rank. Every state has high schools that serve advantaged student populations and send over 80% of graduates to some form of higher education. Every state also has high schools that serve primarily economically disadvantaged students and, often due to factors over which students have no control, less than 30% of graduates go on to higher education. The GPAs and class ranks of students at these schools can reflect significantly different levels of achievement.

David Lang (2007) offered further evidence skeptical of class ranking. In a survey of 232 of the 500 largest public high school districts in the U.S., he discovered that schools varied widely in their ranking procedures. Many systems had inherent flaws that provided incentives for students to enroll in less rigorous classes or to avoid taking additional classes due to potentially detrimental effects on their class ranking. Some high schools used unweighted GPAs while others applied different weights to classes of varying perceived difficulty.

Such differences are especially problematic with the recent rise in scholarship programs for students based on class rank. Several states and state universities offer scholarships to students who graduate at the top of their class or maintain a high GPA throughout high school (Downs, 2000). Other states have "percent plans," where students in a specified top percentile of their graduating class are guaranteed acceptance to a state college or university. In most instances, these plans are a response to the removal of affirmative action policies previously used in the admissions process at state universities (Lang, 2007). By guaranteeing that a certain top percent of students in each high school's graduating class can attend a state university, policy makers can ensure that students from poor and sometimes segregated high schools have access to public universities and will continue to be represented in college classes.

Selective colleges and universities have a vested interest in high schools rank-ordering their graduates. Ranking helps admission officers at these institutions discriminate among the applicants so they can more easily choose the few they will admit. It is the job of college and university admission officers to select talent. The question for high school educators, however, is this: Is your purpose also to select talent? If that is not your job, then why do college and university admission officers' jobs for them? Why compute every graduate's class rank when ranking helps nobody but perhaps the very top ranked students and could be hurting the majority?

Selecting the Valedictorian

A related issue to rank-ordering high school graduates is the process of selecting the class valedictorian. Most educators today recognize the negative consequences of grading "on the curve" and have abandoned the practice. They understand that when student grades depend on their relative standing among classmates, learning becomes a highly competitive endeavor in which students must compete against each other for the few scarce high grades awarded by teachers. But these same educators fail to recognize that the same negative consequences accompany the process used in most schools to select the class valedictorian.

There is nothing wrong with recognizing excellence in academic performance. All educators champion the idea of acknowledging students' outstanding scholastic achievements. All also want to provide incentives for students to work hard and do their very best. But, in most U.S. high schools, the student chosen to be the class valedictorian is the one who attained the highest, weighted grade-point average by whatever procedures the school uses to make those calculations. In other words, the selection process is based on the rank-ordering of graduates with each student pitted against all others for that singular distinction. This often results in aggressive and sometimes bitter competition among high-achieving students to be that top-ranked individual.

Early in their high school careers, top-achieving students analyze their school's selection procedures for picking the class valedictorian. Then, often with the help of their parents, they find ingenious ways to improve their standing in comparison to classmates. Gaining the honor requires not simply high achievement; it requires outdoing everyone else in the class. And sometimes the difference among these top-achieving students is as little as one hundred thousandth of a decimal point in their weighted grade-point average. Stories abound of students gaming the system in order to gain some advantage; about friendships among students ruined by the fierce competition; and about students avoiding classes in dance, music, or the arts because even an A in an unweighted class can bring down their GPA. There are also numerous reports of parents threatening lawsuits because they believed their child had somehow been wronged in the process (Valedictorians, 2012).

Some high schools address this issue by identifying the top 10 ranked students in the class. But while this policy may ease the tension among those top 10 students, it does little for the student ranked eleventh. Plus the choice of 10 is quite arbitrary. Why not 12? Or 20? Or the top 10%, as is used in the percent plans described earlier? Regardless of the number or percent chosen, the result is the same. Excellence is not defined in terms of rigorous and challenging learning criteria. It is defined in terms of a student's relative standing among classmates.

Ironically, the term valedictorian has nothing to do with achievement. It comes from the Latin, vale dicere, which means, "to say farewell." It is the individual selected from the graduating class to deliver the commencement ceremony's farewell address, which is called a "valedictory."

The first reference to the term "valedictorian" appeared in the diary of the Rev. Edward Holyoke, president of Harvard College in 1759, who wanted to include a student among the speakers at the graduation ceremony. Wanting to ensure fairness in the selection process, he turned the responsibility over to the students and later noted that "Officers of the Sophisters chose a Valedictorian." Lacking any established criteria, the Sophisters (senior class members) selected the graduate with the highest academic standing.

Shortly thereafter, colleges and universities moved away from competitive ranking procedures to identify honor students and instead adopted the criterion-based Latin system, graduating students cum laude, magna cum laude, and summa cum laude, - with honor, with great honor, and with highest honor. Such status is generally awarded based on students' cumulative GPAs, typically 3.50 to 3.74 for cum laude, 3.75 to 3.99 for magna cum laude, and 4.0 for summa cum laude. In turn, most colleges and universities also altered their procedures for selecting the student commencement speaker.

Depending on the institution, the valedictorian at a college or university commencement ceremony might be selected by a vote among high-achieving graduates. In some cases, the entire graduating class nominates and then votes for the person who best represents the ideals of the class. Sometimes, the faculty appoints the valedictorian based on a system of merit that takes into account not only grades but also involvement in service projects and extracurricular activities. At some institutions, students compete in an essay contest to give the valedictory speech; at others, the faculty members nominate students for the honor. Only high schools maintain the competitive practice of selecting the valedictorian based solely on students' cumulative grade-point averages.

After the speech

An interesting aspect of the valedictorian selection process is the kinds of students who gain the honor and what happens to them after they graduate. One of the most comprehensive studies of high school valedictorians is the Illinois Valedictorian Project, a longitudinal study of the life paths of 81 high school valedictorians, 46 women and 35 men. This investigation followed the progress of these top high school achievers for 14 years to study the nature of their academic success, its costs and rewards, and its effects on their careers and personal lives. Karen Arnold (1995) summarizes the results in her book, Lives of Promise: What Becomes of High School Valedictorians.

In analyzing over 11,000 pages of interview transcripts, Arnold (1995) found that while most valedictorians were successful, well-adjusted, and psychologically healthy, they were seldom at the head of the class in their careers. Most chose conventional careers as accountants, physicians, lawyers, engineers, physical therapists, and healthcare professionals, and worked well within the system. But few were risk takers or mold breakers, and they were unlikely to change the system. They worked hard and followed the rules, but rarely proposed innovations or explored unfamiliar areas. Arnold summarized the results saying, "Just because they could get A's doesn't mean they can translate academic achievement into career achievement" (Howe, 1995, p. 2).

The question this leaves for educators: Do current policies for selecting the class valedictorian foster development of the traits we most value in students? And if not, what policies might?

Clearly, we should honor outstanding academic achievement, hard work, and perseverance in academic tasks. But what about service, caring, compassion, and a sense of social justice? We certainly want students to understand the system and be able to work within it. But should we reward those who find clever ways to game the system? Do we want students who merely follow the rules, or do we want them to question the rules and propose ways to make the rules better? Do we want students to be risk takers who persist in the face of occasional failure, or do we want them to avoid taking chances and be reluctant to explore new areas for fear that they might not be as successful as hoped?

Alternatives

An increasing number of high schools have resolved this problem by adopting the Latin honor system similar to that used by colleges and universities, requiring a specific GPA to graduate cum laude, magna cum laude, or summa cum laude. Wilson High School in Reading, Pa., made this change after hearing from past valedictorians that they felt victimized by the competition to maintain the highest GPA and that it made high school an unpleasant experience. Under the new policy, Wilson rewards students for academic achievement measured against a standard of excellence instead of comparing them to their peers (Heesen, 2013).

The response of both parents and students to the change at Wilson High School has been overwhelmingly positive. In describing the change, one high-achieving Wilson student said, "I feel that the new system puts the focus on your education instead of competing for a name" (Heesen, 2013, p. 2). The valedictory at the graduation ceremony is delivered by a student chosen by a committee of faculty members, and any senior can audition.

Other high schools have addressed the problem by naming multiple valedictorians. Similar to the Latin honor system, this distinction is based on rigorous academic criteria rather than a ranking of classmates. West Springfield High School in Fairfax County, Va., for example, typically graduates 15 to 25 valedictorians each year. Every one of these students has an exemplary academic record that includes earning the highest grade possible in numerous honors and Advanced Placement classes. Instead of trying to distinguish among these exceptional students, the West Springfield faculty decided that all should be named valedictorians. All of the valedictorians are named at the graduation ceremony, and one student, selected by his or her fellow valedictorians, delivers the commencement address.

Some might object to a policy that allows multiple valedictorians, arguing that colleges and universities give preference to students who attain that singular distinction. But current evidence indicates that this is not the case at the most selective institutions. Duke University, for example, recently rejected 58% of valedictorians who applied; the University of Pennsylvania rebuffed 62%.

In reviewing admission applications and making decisions about scholarships, a recent report by the National Association for College Admission Counseling (Clinedinst & Hawkins, 2012) shows that colleges and universities are more interested in the rigor of the curriculum students have experienced. The top two admissions factors were grades in college prep courses (Advanced Placement) and the strength of the curriculum. Other research similarly revealed that an index composed of the number of Advanced Placement courses taken, the highest level of math studied, and the total number of courses completed is a much stronger predictor of college success than grade-point average, class rank, or standardized test scores (Adelman, 1999). The rigor of the academic program experienced by the valedictorians from West Springfield High School helped them gain admission and win scholarships to many of the most selective colleges and universities in the nation.

Conclusion

Recognizing excellence in academic performance is a vital aspect of any learning community. But such recognition should not be grounded on norm-based criteria that lead to deleterious competition, especially in a standards-based environment. Instead, it should be based on clear models of excellence developed from standards that represent our highest aspirations and goals for students (Guskey & Bailey, 2010). Educators more concerned with developing talent than with selecting talent should take pride in helping the largest number of students possible meet these rigorous criteria and high standards of excellence. Students will too.

References

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the toolbox: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor's degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Arnold, K.D. (1995). Lives of promise: What becomes of high school valedictorians. A 14-year study of achievement and life choices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Clinedinst, M.E. & Hawkins, D.A. (2012). State of college admissions, 2012. Arlington, VA: National Association for College Admission Counseling. www.nacacnet.org/research/PublicationsResources/Marketplace/research/Pages/StateofCollegeAdmission.aspx.

Covington, M.V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Downs, G.C. (2000). Weighted grades: A conundrum for secondary schools (Occasional paper no. 35). Orono, ME: University of Maine, Center for Research and Evaluation.

Guskey, T.R. & Bailey, J.M. (2010). Developing standards-based report cards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Heesen, B.A. (2013, May 20). Wilson to drop valedictorian distinction; Latin honors system will include more seniors. Reading Eagle. http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=478846.

Hoover, E. (2012, December 7). High-school class rank, a slippery metric, loses its appeal for colleges. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 56 (15), A1, A5.

Howe, S. (1995, November 2). Valedictorians don't stay at the head of the class, says education researcher. The Boston College Chronicle, 4 (5). www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chronicle/v4/N2/ARNOLD.html.

Lang, D.M. (2007). Class rank, GPA, and valedictorians: How high schools rank students. American Secondary Education, 35 (2), 36-48.

Valedictorians: Who needs them? [Editorial]. (2012, July 3). Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/03/opinion/la-ed-valedictorian-20120703.

Web Only

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As they consider reforms in policy and practice, educators face one basic question about their purpose. How they answer it will largely determine how they go about their work, especially in standards-based education environments. It also will establish the direction of their career and how they judge their success.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
AMLE - Association for Middle Level Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You've always averaged grades. Your teachers averaged grades when you were in school and it worked fine. It works fine for your students.

Does it? Just as we teach our students, we don't want to fall for Argumentum ad populum: something is true or good just because a lot of people think it's true or good. Let's take a look at the case against averaging grades.

Hiding Behind the Math

Just because something is mathematically easy to calculate doesn't mean it's pedagogically sound. The 100-point scale makes averaging attractive to teachers, and averaging implies credible, mathematical objectivity. However, statistics can be manipulated and manipulative in a variety of ways.

One percentage point is the arbitrary cut-off between getting into or being denied entrance into graduate school. One student gets a 90% and another gets an 89%: the first is an A and the second is a B, yet we can't discern mastery of content to this level of specificity. These students are even in mastery of content, but we declare a difference based only on the single percentage point. The student with 90% gets scholarships and advanced class placements and the student with 89% is left to a lesser path. Something's wrong with this picture.

Early in my career, one of my students had a 93.4% in my class. Ninety-four to 100 was the A range set for that school, so he was 0.6% from achieving an A. The student asked if I would be willing to round the score up to the 94% so he could have straight As in all his classes. I reminded him that it was 93.4, not 93.5, so if I rounded anything, I would round down, not up. I told him that if it was 93.5, I could justify rounding up, but not with a 93.4.

I was hiding behind one-tenth of a percentage point. I should have interviewed the student intensely about what he had learned that grading period and made an executive decision about his grade based on the evidence of learning he presented in that moment. The math felt so safe, however, and I was weak. It wasn't one of my prouder moments.

We can't resort to averaging just because it feels credible by virtue of its mathematics. There's too much at stake.

Falsifying Grade Reports

Consider the teacher who gives Martin two chances to do well on the final exam, then averages the two grades. The first attempt results in an F grade, but after re-learning and a lot of hard work, the second attempt results in an A. We trust the exam to be a highly valid indicator of student proficiency in the subject, and Martin has clearly demonstrated excellent mastery in the subject. When the two grades are averaged, however, the teacher records a C in the grade book-falsely reporting his performance against the standards.

This is strikingly inaccurate when using grading scale endpoints such as A and F, and it creates just as inaccurate "blow-to-grade-integrity" reporting as when we average grades closer to one another on the scale: B with D, B with F, A with C, etc.

Consider a sample with more data: Cheryl gets a 97, 94, 26, 35, and 83 on her tests, which correspond to an A, A, F, F, and a B on the school grading scale. When the numbers are averaged, however, everything is given equal weight, and the score is 67, which is a D. This is an incorrect report of her performance against individual standards.

Thankfully, many schools are moving toward disaggregation in which students receive separate grades for individual standards. This will cut down dramatically on the distortions caused by aggregate grades that combine everything into one small symbol and will help eliminate teacher concerns about students who "game" the system when their teachers re-declare zeroes as 50s on the 100-point scale. These students try to do just enough- skipping some assessments, scoring well on others-to pass mathematically. In classrooms where teachers do not average grades, students can't do this.

No more mind games; students have to learn the material.

Countering the Charge

"Average," "above average," and "below average" are norm references, but in today's successful classrooms, we claim to be standards- (outcomes-) based. This means that assessments and grading are evidentiary, criterion-referenced. A teacher declares Toby is above average, but we're not interested in that because it provides testimony of Toby's proficiencies only in relation to others' performance, which may be high or low, depending on the group. Instead, we want to know if Toby can write an expository essay, stretch correctly before running a long distance, classify cephalopods, and interpret graphs accurately. We don't need to know how well he's doing in relation to classmates nearly so much as how he's doing in relation to his own progress and to societal standards declared for this grade level and subject.

We can't make specific instructional decisions, provide descriptive feedback, or document progress without being criterion-referenced. Declarations of average-ness muddle our thinking and create a false sense of reporting against standards. We need grade reports to be accurate. Distorting Averaging's Intention

One of the reasons we developed averaging in statistics was to limit the influence of any one sample error on experimental design. Let's see how that works in the classroom.

Consider a student taking a test on a particular topic and in a particular format. The student ate breakfast, or he did not. He slept well, or he did not. His parents are divorcing, or they are not. He has a girlfriend, or he does not. He studied for this test, or he did not. He is competing in a high-stakes drama/music/sports competition later this afternoon, or he is not. Whatever the combination, all these factors conspire to create this student's specific performance on this test on this day at this time of day.

Three weeks later, we give students another test about new material in our unit. Have students changed during three week? Yes, hormonally, if nothing else. Add that the second test is on a different topic and perhaps in a different format. On the first test date, the student ate well, but didn't study. He slept well, but his parents are arguing each night. The drama/music/sports performance came and went and he did well in it. He didn't have a girlfriend. For the second test, however, he has a girlfriend, and he studied. He didn't sleep well, however, nor did he eat breakfast, and his parents have stopped arguing which has calmed things down at home.

The second test situation is dramatically altered. The integrity of maintaining consistent experimental design is violated. We can no longer justify averaging the score of the first test with the score of the second test just to limit the influence of any one sample error.

The Electronic Gradebook

The only reason our electronic gradebooks average grades is because someone declared it a policy-not because it was the educationally wise thing to do-so the district uses the technology that supports that decision. Why don't we choose our grading philosophy first, then find the technology to support it rather than sacrificing good grading practices because we can't figure out a way to make the technology work?

How do we do what's right when we are asked by administrators or a school board to do something that we know is educationally wrong? This is a tough situation, but I suggest we do the ethical thing in the microcosm of our own classrooms, then translate that into the language of the school or district so we can keep our jobs.

We can experiment in our own classes by reporting a subset of students' grades with and without averaging them just to see how they align with standardized testing. Sometimes running the numbers/grades ourselves helps us see with greater clarity than just hearing about ideas second-hand.

We can read articles on grading and averaging, participate in online conversations on the topic, and start conversations with faculty members. We can also volunteer to be on the committee to revise the gradebook format.

We're working with real individuals, not statistics. Our students have deeply felt hopes and worries and wonderfully bright futures. They deserve thoughtful teachers who transcend conventional practices and recognize the ethical breach in knowingly falsifying grades. Let's live up to that charge and liberate the next generation from the oppression of averaging.
Previously published in Middle Ground magazine, October 2012

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You’ve always averaged grades. Your teachers averaged grades when you were in school and it worked fine. It works fine for your students. Does it? Just as we teach our students, we don’t want to fall for Argumentum ad populum: something is true or good just because a lot of people think it’s true or good.

# data[].attributes.headline
Is it becoming too hard to fail? Schools are shifting toward no-zero grading policies - The Washington Post

# data[].attributes.subject
Is it becoming too hard to fail? Schools are shifting toward no-zero grading policies - The Washington Post

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
School districts in the Washington area and across the country are adopting grading practices that make it more difficult for students to flunk classes, that give students opportunities to retake exams or turn in late work, and that discourage or prohibit teachers from giving out zeroes.

The policies have stirred debates about the purpose of issuing academic grades and whether they should be used to punish, motivate or purely represent what students have learned in class. Some regard it as the latest in a line of ideas intended to keep students progressing through school and heading toward graduation, akin in some ways to practices like social promotion.

Under a new policy in Virginia's Fairfax County, one of the nation's largest school systems, middle and high school students can earn no lower than a score of 50 if they make a "reasonable attempt" to complete work. And for the first time this year, high school teachers who were going to fail a student had to reevaluate the student using "quality points," making an F less detrimental to a student's final grade. Prince George's County in Maryland will limit failing grades to a 50 percent minimum score when students show a "good-faith effort."

Proponents of the changes say the new grading systems are more fair and end up being more conducive to learning, encouraging students to catch up when they fall behind rather than just giving up. Many believe that giving a student a score of zero for an F - rather than, say, a score of 50 - on even just one bad assignment can doom students because climbing back to a passing grade can seem almost mathematically impossible. And such failures can put students on a path to dropping out before graduation.

But many are critical of the shift, arguing that teachers are losing important tools to enforce diligence and prepare students for college and the workplace. They say that artificially boosting student grades can mask failure and push students through who don't know the material they need to know to actually succeed.

"It reflects this soft bigotry of low expectations around student effort and student behavior," said Michael Petrilli, president of the Fordham Institute, a right-leaning think tank. He said policies that cut students slack send the message that hard work and homework are not important. "Is it because we think certain groups of kids aren't capable of them?"

Rick Wormeli, a grading expert who has worked with schools in the D.C. region and across the country, says grading changes are on the rise nationally, including allowing test retakes and revamping grading systems in ways designed to better reflect how much a student has actually learned. He estimates more than half of U.S. schools are investigating such changes or have made revisions in recent years. "Not everyone learns the same way or at the same pace," he said.

[Fairfax schools consider new grading policy that would eliminate zeros]

The move is intended to give students a chance to recover even if they fail an assignment or a grading period. Some consider a score of zero to be mathematically unjust in any case: a student who earns a zero and then a perfect score on the following assignment has an average of 50 percent - still an F in most grading systems.

"The bottom line is that a zero on the 100-point scale distorts a student's overall grade," said Gregory Hood, principal of James Madison High School in Fairfax County. "A zero provides no information about what a student has learned, and it negatively impacts a student's grade when averaged with other grades."

Many school systems also are moving toward "standards-based grading," which emphasizes evaluating students on what they ultimately learn rather than on work habits, student effort, punctuality or homework.

The philosophy has driven Fairfax County to allow students to turn in work late and to retake major exams if they score below 80 percent; the county also limits homework to 10 percent of a student's grade. Prince George's officials will not allow behavior or attendance as factors in academic grades and will give students a second chance to improve their score on certain tests or assignments.

"Grades are really supposed to be about reflecting student achievement," said Noel Klimenko, director of pre-K through 12th grade curriculum and instruction for Fairfax County schools.

Kevin Hickerson, the president-elect of the Fairfax Education Association, which represents more than 4,000 current and retired school employees, said the new policies push students to keep trying if they do not understand a concept the first time around. It is "erasing the boundaries of time because in the end all teachers are about making sure that students have had proficiency or mastered a concept," Hickerson said.

Segun Eubanks, chairman of the Prince George's school board, said that such changes are no "magic elixir" for kids who struggle but can keep them engaged, knowing they still have a chance to pass or succeed. "It gives them more opportunities to show their skills and knowledge, and to improve," he said.

[At West Potomac High School, taking F off the grade books]

Gaining popularity nationwide, such rethinking of grades already is in place in some individual school districts. Montgomery County has used a "50-percent rule" - prohibiting the use of the lowest failing grades when students make good-faith efforts - for nearly a decade. While teachers have adjusted to the changes, some still do not favor the 50-percent rule. And others suggest that the results can be mixed.

Amy Watkins, a math teacher at Montgomery's Walter Johnson High School, said the practice helps students who really try but may bomb a test; the poor grade counts but it's not impossible to overcome. The downside, she said, is that it also helps some students earn credit for a course "when they have not mastered any of the content." Watkins said these are often students who go on to need remedial classes in college.

[An easy A? Under new rules, these high school students could see grades soar]

Sam Hedenberg, who teaches English to special education students at Fairfax's Mount Vernon High School, has seen the new ideas in action. Two years ago, administrators at his school barred teachers from giving zeroes, making the lowest possible score a 53. "It definitely provides that opportunity for a kid to catch up," Hedenberg said.

But he also has seen students game the system. One student was able to pass his class even though he skipped several essay-writing assignments. "Many students have already started to figure out that they don't have to do very much but they can still pass," he said.

Some teachers think that grades absolutely should reflect a student's work habits - such as whether they participate in class or turn in work on time - and Hedenberg said learning to meet deadlines and to work diligently should be a part of the curriculum.

Theresa Mitchell Dudley, president of the Prince George's County Educators' Association, said that 42 to 69 percent of high school teachers who responded to a recent survey voiced concerns about some of the key recommended changes.

"We have no problem being fair to students," she said. "But if they are not doing the work and not performing, and we give them a grade they did not earn, how does that make them college and career ready?"

Dudley said that the union, which represents more than 10,000 employees, is working with district officials to tweak grading proposals and that fairness to students must be balanced with a need for accountability.

"You can't go to an employer and say, 'Here's my work, it's two weeks late,' and expect that your boss is not going to fire you," she said.

Thomas R. Guskey, an education professor at the University of Kentucky who has studied grading, said the standard A through F grading system has remained unchanged for more than a century. He has proposed upending it entirely, arguing that students should get two grades: one that reflects whether a student has mastered the content and a second that evaluates what he calls "process criteria," things such as whether a student collaborates well, participates in class discussions and turns in work on time. He has piloted the model at several Kentucky schools.

He said school systems should not be taking work habits - such as homework, punctuality and effort - out of the grading equation.

"Those are all really good, but they're different than achievement, and we need to report them separately," Guskey said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is it becoming too hard to fail? Schools are shifting toward no-zero grading policies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
School districts in the Washington area and across the country are adopting grading practices that make it more difficult for students to flunk classes, that give students opportunities to retake exams or turn in late work, and that discourage or prohibit teachers from giving out zeroes.

# data[].attributes.headline
School wants to eliminate "D's" from grading scale | Lexington Herald Leader

# data[].attributes.subject
School wants to eliminate "D's" from grading scale | Lexington Herald Leader

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last fall, Lexington's Bryan Station High School principal James McMillin got permission to do away with extra credit in determining course grades. He wanted grades to be a more accurate reflection of what students know.

Continuing that effort, McMillin asked the Fayette County school board if he can eliminate D's from the school's grading scale and change the grading scale from one based on percentages to one based on points. The board will vote on his proposal July 24 at its regular monthly meeting. Members said Monday that they liked the initiatives.

The 2016-17 grading scale was traditional in that 90 to 100 percent was an A, 80 to 89 a B and so on. Under the proposed new grading scale for 2017-18, the numbers 0 through 4 would be given, with 4 being an A for exemplary work, 3 a B for proficient work, and 2 a C for a developing knowledge of a subject. A zero would be given for no attempt, and 0.1 would be an F for an unsuccessful effort.

McMillin doesn't want students to be rewarded with a D passing grade for giving minimal effort.

"If we allow students to just reach that and be OK with it," then school officials are allowing students to stay at the novice level, he said.

Many parents were consulted about the changes at the high school, which for years had challenges with academic achievement, he said.

At Bryan Station in 2017-18, some grading rules will be similar to the previous year: Participation and following class rules are not part of a grade. Academic points are not deducted for late work. Extra credit and bonus points are not awarded to academic grades. Parents will be notified when students cheat, but instead of earning a zero, they will get a 0.1 for unsuccessful and will have to redo the work. Attendance and homework, called "practice" at Bryan Station, aren't part of the academic grade.

"Grades should tell us what a student knows, understands and is able to do. That's it," McMillin said.

Turning in assignments on time and turning in homework, or "practice work," won't be counted in a grade, but those actions will be noted on report cards and transcripts. Double the number of progress reports will be sent home.

Bryan Station started implementing the policies as part of the new standards-based grading in the 2016-17 school year.

McMillin said there will be new safety nets built in for students to avoid failure. Students will be able to get extra help during a "flex period" built into the school day. All juniors will take a prep course for the ACT. Bryan Station will be an academy school, meaning students will enter medical, information technology, business leadership, and engineering and robotics academies, where academic courses will help students prepare for careers. Teacher lesson plans and class materials will all be online and available to parents and students.

He said he didn't anticipate making other major grading changes for the next few years.

Board member Ray Daniels said after the meeting that he liked the proposal as long as parents could see the previous grading scale on reports so they could better interpret the new one.

"I want to compliment you on your work," board chairwoman Melissa Bacon told McMillin. "I know you have spent countless hours putting that 10,000-piece puzzle together. But you are setting the template for the entire district. We can take what you all have done and mirror that for other high schools."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This school eliminated extra credit. Now it wants to take 'D's' out of the grading scale

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last fall, Lexington's Bryan Station High School principal James McMillin got permission to do away with extra credit in determining course grades. He wanted grades to be a more accurate reflection of what students know.

# data[].attributes.headline
Parents - DMPS Secondary Grading Practices

# data[].attributes.subject
Parents - DMPS Secondary Grading Practices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Standards-Referenced Grading is about better communication. You will have access toward your student's progress towards grade-level standards at your fingertips at all times!

# data[].attributes.headline
Moving to a competency-based assessment system | District Administration Magazine

# data[].attributes.subject
Moving to a competency-based assessment system | District Administration Magazine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Five years ago, Windsor Locks Public Schools in northern Connecticut was designated an Alliance District, meaning it was one of the 30 lowest-performing academic districts in the state and needed help.

The good news was that the designation came with funding to improve instruction, inspiring district leadership to go in a new direction-doing away with traditional letter grades and report cards for a mastery-based approach. The approach stresses the mastery of content and such skills as problem-solving and communicating -in all subjects and grades.

"If learning is truly the measure, then time becomes the variable," says Susan Bell, superintendent at Windsor Locks, which serves 1,530 students at four schools. Assessment should be predicated on whether a student fulfills a standard, not when a school year arbitrarily ends, she says.

Most parents were enthusiastic, but some who were unfamiliar with the concept of competency-based education were apprehensive. The district held meetings and public forums with families and teachers to explain the new approach, eventually getting all stakeholders on board.

Five identities every graduate masters

Creative and practical problem-solver

Responsible citizen

Informed thinker

Self-directed learner and collaborator

Clear and effective communicator

The genesis

The first step for the district was to assess its grading practices, including weighing the pros and cons of traditional average-based grades.

Teachers and administrators worked together in formulating a new approach. "We quickly realized those grade-based systems don't serve students, it serves our need to have something we consider very concrete versus what mastery can lead to," says Bell.

Key behaviors (or "brownie points," as Bell calls them) that tend to be included in a typical grade-such as arriving prepared to participate or completing work on time-were removed and designated as "habits of scholarship." Those behaviors are now evaluated separately from subject mastery.

Educators also worked to ensure that lessons across schools maintain consistency in terms of subjects covered and approach.

The new initiative was first implemented in the 2013-14 school year with incoming sixth-graders. These students hadn't received letter grades in elementary school so they were not affected by the change, and they will be the first class to graduate from an entirely mastery-based program in 2020. The initiative is being rolled out annually grade by grade as the initial group progresses through their education.

And a mastery-based teaching approach has already been introduced, if not fully adopted, in all grades.

Building through PD

Instruction across the district has evolved to meet the new approach, requiring significant PD. Teachers needed to give up traditional grading and instructional practices in favor of exploring expeditionary learning, where students lead their own education experiences through tools such as project-based learning. For PD, the district contracted with EL Education, a nonprofit K12 education organization.

Training focuses on its assessment in daily instruction modules, which provides models of teacher and student work that can be used to develop specific student-engaged assessment practices. The module also encourages teachers to plan lessons from the student's view.

For example, math students act as mathematicians by exploring questions and developing solutions rather than simply solving problems. Such a shift engages critical-thinking skills. The district divided the ongoing PD into groups of up to 30 teachers (out of 180 total), paying about $22,000 per PD group. The total PD price is estimated to be least $132,000 over seven years, Bell says.

Funding was provided by Alliance District grants from the state of Connecticut.

New teaching assignments

When using this approach, students need an intervention structure to get support. To free up teaching positions needed for extended support, the district expanded class sizes.

The shift allowed for three extended day/year teachers per school. Extended day/year teachers provide in- and after-school academic help, working with 10 students at a time in six-to-eight-week cycles.

These educators start their day later so they are available after classes end. They also begin the school year 20 days later and stay 20 days longer, team-teach in classrooms as needed, and pull students from class for help.

The extended support program was initially created through Alliance District funding. It has since become a cost-neutral opportunity thanks to negotiations with the teachers union.

Moving forward

Five years after switching to mastery-based assessments, Windsor Locks is no longer on the list of low-performing districts.

Smarter Balanced assessment scores have improved in math and English, and this past year SAT scores for grade 11 increased. Students also lead parent-teacher conferences, identifying their own strengths and weaknesses. "Our students can articulate where they were, where they are, and where they're going in their learning," says Bell.
Ray Bendici is special projects editor.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Moving to a competency-based assessment system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Five years ago, Windsor Locks Public Schools in northern Connecticut was designated an Alliance District, meaning it was one of the 30 lowest-performing academic districts in the state and needed help. The good news was that the designation came with funding to improve instruction, inspiring district leadership to go in a new direction-doing away with traditional letter grades and report cards for a mastery-based approach.

# data[].attributes.headline
Specifying Behavior with Explicit Roles | Point of Inflection

# data[].attributes.subject
Specifying Behavior with Explicit Roles | Point of Inflection

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Virtual Conference on Soft Skills
Uninvolved students do not learn in any particularly meaningful way, but getting students involved is hard. Participation points? Cold calls?

I rely on students' desire to be involved. When a student actually does not want to be in the classroom, or is afraid to be involved, I use different approaches than that described here. Luckily, most students want to involve themselves, and this article is about helping them do that by defining roles for them.

Defining roles for people makes it easier for them to act because it makes a lot of decisions for them already. Costume parties are easier to participate in when you can crystallize ideas for your outfit on a theme (80's dance party? Wild west? Alice in Wonderland, anyone?). Social dances with defined steps and a "lead" and "follower" are easier to do gracefully because the lead knows he's responsible for leading and the follower knows he's, well, supposed to follow! The definition of the roles takes the responsibility out of some of the participants' actions, which lowers the risk of engaging. And we want as many people engaging as we can get!

This year in my math class I experimented with a method I learned about from CPM, and I found it wildly successful. The idea is to put students into teams, give each team a powerful problem or question to chew on, and to give them the framework they need to chew on it. The roles I gave and the training I used are below.
The Facilitator
The student assigned the facilitator role is responsible for three things: reading problems or prompts aloud to the team, keeping everyone in the team involved, and keeping discussion going when it stalls out. This means the facilitator should now allow Tim to space out or Susanne to answer every question without consulting the others.

To train facilitators, I gave my students a list of phrases they could use. To include people, for example, they could try, "What do you think, Tim?" or, "Can you explain why you think that, Susanne?" To drive a conversation when it seems like everyone is stuck, they could say, "What have we tried so far?" or "Is there anything we could try a little bit differently?" or "Can we work on a different part of this problem and come back later?" We literally practiced saying these things as a class, in unison. You'll have to decide what method of practice is comfortable for you, but please do not think that students will jump right in to using phrases like this without practice, or that they already possess the skills to facilitate a meeting. Only a small percentage of adults have a solid grasp on facilitation techniques.
The Resource Manager
The resource manager in a team is the team's liaison to the outside world. If the team needs a ruler, the resource manager gets it. If the team needs to look something up, the resource manager goes to the computer or dictionary. If the team needs to ask me (the teacher) a question, the resource manager is the one to ask it. When I teach classes in team formations, I actually refuse to speak to anyone in the team except the resource manager. The students think I'm joking at first, but I do it for the same reasons I don't let them sit next to me in study hall.

The resource manager's role has a subtle but important facet: before the resource manager can use a resource, each member of the group must agree that that resource is needed. When a team wants to ask me a question, they must agree on it first, and figure out how to word it. Often, in this process, a team answers its own question, and they all learn how to answer their own questions. When they can't answer it, but do come to agreement about what to ask, they all learn how to formulate a question and narrow down the specifics required to make the answer useful. They know that I'll make them agree on every single question before I answer it, so coming up with concise questions becomes important. The resource manager's role includes orchestrating these discussions.

This role also needs training, and a list of possible phrases. "Is there a single piece of information that would help us move forward?" or, "What information do we already have?" or, "Before we ask Riley what this symbol means, what are our guesses?"
The Task Manager
The task manager's primary role is to keep track of time, make sure that the team is spending appropriate amounts of time on different parts of the assignment, and alert the others when it seems like the whole group is moving off task. This role overlaps with the facilitator quite a bit, but the concreteness of having specific target times is helpful to students and I've never felt like this role is redundant. Especially when the facilitator is busy trying to lead a stuck group, it's helpful to have a task manager to keep track of more administrative details.

As always, when expecting a certain behavior from students, we should show them what it looks like. Training task managers can look like a skit, a list of useful phrases, etc. You can emphasize the task managing you do in your class all the time - instead of saying "please take out your homework," write a schedule for the period on the board ahead of time and say, "I see that it's time to take out our homework."
The Recorder / Reporter
The recorder takes notes and creates minutes, if you will. The notes can be her own, but the minutes must be presented to the team regularly to be sure that they are fully representative of any agreements the team has come to together. These minutes are the final permanent product of the team and can be turned in so that I (the teacher) can give in-depth feedback on a team's mathematical understanding later.

The recorder is also the reporter, who may be asked to give impromptu oral reports of the team's progress to the entire class. Occasionally I ask this of a team that is understanding something fast or in more depth than the other teams, or use a quick round of reports as a closure for a class period.

The training for this role is the hardest, I think. What if you have students that don't have practice writing summaries? This year I practiced with the whole class: we would have a ten-minute discussion and then summarize it on the board, making sure we noted all of the important parts and only the important parts. Still, I was least satisfied with the work I saw from this role throughout the year.

Together, these roles give the students a powerful framework for their behavior during class. Since every student has responsibilities to every other student, disengaging becomes less desirable and also less acceptable to the students. In a large class with no specific roles, if Tim zones out it doesn't really affect anyone else, and Tim doesn't have an easy way to zone back in. With groups and specific roles and responsibility, when Tim zones out his teammates notice immediately, and can prompt him with aspects of his role to re-engage right away. So great!

These roles make me more comfortable with my guilty admission: I don't care very much if the kids learn math. I mean, I'll teach them some math, and when they leave they're going to see more of its beauty and be equipped to use it in society. But which is more important, vector addition or working in a team? Factoring or formulating questions? Integrating or leading peers? Obviously, obviously, the math comes second. It's just lucky that learning math provides so many opportunities for learning the more important things.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Virtual Conference on Soft Skills Uninvolved students do not learn in any particularly meaningful way, but getting students involved is hard. Participation points? Cold calls? I rely on students' desire to be involved. When a student actually does not want to be in the classroom, or is afraid to be involved, I use different approaches than that described here.

# data[].attributes.headline
Walking Through Standards Based Grading: Part 3 and a Teacher Data Tracking Tool

# data[].attributes.subject
Walking Through Standards Based Grading: Part 3 and a Teacher Data Tracking Tool

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I am back for part 3 of this standards based grading adventure (c lick here to read part 1 and click here to read part 2). Not only am I back to share the " HOW?" of standards based grading, but I'm also here to share with you an incredible reporting tool I created that I am so excited about!

Let's get down to business!

I have broken down the how into four easy-to-understand parts:

First is content standards, which to many of us is the Common Core:

The tough job of understanding what the standards say has been done for you. Click here to check out my assessments.

The next part is planning, creating, and implementing a curriculum:

The third part is assessments:

Click here to read Edutopia's article.

The last part is probably my favorite. It's all about the reporting tool. How do we, as teachers, inform our students and their parents of their progress? How do we keep track of all of this data for ourselves as well?

*Before I tell you about these reporting tools, please know that they are for ALL teachers. Not just teachers that use standards based grading! If you use traditional grading (i.e., A-F scale) you can use these also!

Click here to check out the 4th Grade version, click here to check out the 5th Grade version, and click here to check out the 3rd Grade version!

The great thing about these packs is that I have created them not only for teachers using standards based grading, but for ALL teachers. If you are using traditional grading and report cards you can use them too. I have also included pages in these packs to help you plan and group your students for small group instruction or RTI (response to intervention).

Each grade level pack comes with these different binder covers with room to type your name!

I've also included different sized binder spines to make your binders cute! {Very important!! ;)}

Here's a bit more information on these products, as well as ideas on how to use them!

Here are some pictures of the pages included in this pack! With this page below, the standards are written on top and color coded for each domain. There are two versions of this page, one says Pre-Assessment on top and the other says Post-Assessment on top. You can type or write your students' names on the document and either put their score or a check mark under Intervention, At Standard, or Enrichment depending on how well they did on their assessments.

With these pages below, all of the standards are written in number form on the top of the page (still color coded by domain). You can use this as a checklist or you can put students' final grades or assessment grades under the standards. This is great to look at when you need a quick snapshot of how students are doing on a particular standard.

These pages below are great for reporting to parents! I plan to use these as report cards or progress reports throughout the year. Once again, all of the domains are color coded for easy organization and the standards are written out for both parents and students to see.

How awesome is this page below?! You can keep track of all pre-assessments, assignments, formative assessments, and post-assessments for each student. You can also check a color coded box next to each assignment/assessment to quickly see how the student is doing with mastery of the standard, or to quickly place them in small groups for any intervention, re-teaching, or enrichment groups.

If you want to type the above page instead, I have it set up so that you can just click one of the colored boxes and it automatically puts in a check mark for you!

You can then take the above information, and use the color coded boxes to form your groups using this page below. These pages are also color coded by domain, and have the standards written on top. I plan to use these when forming my small groups for instruction or RTI groups. I typically have so many students going in and out of my class for interventions throughout the day, and so many adults that I need to communicate this info to, so this will help all of us stay organized.

Remember that all of these pages are text editable too. This means you just open up the PDF file and type away!

The pages I have shown you are only a small sample of these 800+ page packs! Click here to download a preview of my 3rd grade pack, click here to download the preview of my 4th grade pack and click here to download the preview of my 5th grade pack in order to see more of what's included!

For those of you that have been reading this standards based grading blog post series from the beginning, as promised, click here to grab all of the info in PDF form! This PDF also includes my cupcake analogy poster shown below!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Walking Through Standards Based Grading: Part 3 and a Teacher Data Tracking Tool - Young Teacher Love

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I am back for part 3 of this standards based grading adventure (click here to read part 1 and click here to read part 2). Not only am I back to share the "HOW?" of standards based grading, but I'm also here to share with you an incredible reporting tool I created that I am so excited ...

# data[].attributes.headline
News - Competency-Based Learning Gaining Ground Nationwide | Heartland Institute

# data[].attributes.subject
News - Competency-Based Learning Gaining Ground Nationwide | Heartland Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Windsor Locks Public Schools began by giving competency-based grades in kindergarten through fifth grade. "When this class hit sixth grade, it continued," said Windsor Locks Principal Steve Swensen.

The school's current ninth grade class will be the first to complete an entire K-12 education based on competency and mastery of subjects instead of A's and B's.

"The class of 2020 is the first class that will go through our whole system, and every subsequent grade will be graded that way," Swensen said.
National Trend, Homegrown Initiative
The U.S. Department of Education website states competency-based education transitions schools "away from seat time, in favor of a structure that creates flexibility, [allowing] students to progress as they demonstrate mastery of academic content, regardless of time, place, or pace of learning.

"Competency-based strategies provide flexibility in the way that credit can be earned or awarded, and provide students with personalized learning opportunities," the website states. "These strategies include online and blended learning, dual enrollment and early college high schools, project-based and community-based learning, and credit recovery, among others."
'Significantly Increased Interest'
Schools across the country are implementing competency-based pilot programs, says Karla Phillips, policy director for competency-based education at the Foundation for Excellence in Education, which released "Policy, Pilots and the Path to Competency-Based Education: A National Landscape" in spring 2017.

"We've seen significantly increased interest in competency-based and personalized learning as a whole," Phillips said. "We see this as the next logical step for college and career readiness. We see state test scores that are low proficiency and don't align with increased graduation rates. The pilot programs give the state the opportunity to ask these questions in their own state and develop their own solutions."
Revamped Grading System
Windsor Locks removed homework, behavior, and participation from students' grades years ago, Swensen says.

"Under a traditional system, [grades include] a percentage of tests, quizzes, a homework component, participation, and classwork," Swensen said. "Homework and participation are opportunities for students to make mistakes or communicate misunderstandings. Content knowledge on assessments should be truly reflective of knowledge. Taking those things out of the grades, we realized that a standards-based grading system made more sense in that type of a classroom environment."
'Local Communities Decide'
Phillips says the way schools incorporate competency-based learning varies.

"It's more about flexible pacing than at their own pace," Phillips said. "Local communities decide what it looks like and how to fit the needs of their community and to make sure students have mastered subjects. Every school is approaching it differently."

Cari Strand, curriculum leader at New Haven, Connecticut's High School in the Community Academy for Law and Social Justice, which uses competency-based learning, says schools should learn from one another.

"Other states have made this change, so my hope would be that we'd make this move while in communication with them and could learn from their successes and challenges," Strand said.
Colleges Accommodating
Swensen says parents need not worry about how colleges and universities view students from competency-based schools.

"[Colleges] get transcripts from all over the country and world, and they have to look at the transcript and school and make sense of many learning environments," Swensen said. "As long as the school profile describes that school's grading system, they're not going to be viewed differently."
'It's Very Local'
Changing grading is not all there is to competency-based learning, Phillips says.

"I think it's a long-term initiative," Phillips said. "One of the things that makes it long-term and palatable for politicians is it's very local. It really allows for preservation of local control. There's no requirements. All the state is saying is, 'Let's make sure students are really masters in the field and ready to move on.' That's also why implementation will take a while and look different school-to-school and district-to-district. Communities can really decide.

"As a country, we understand that students learn differently," Phillips said. "Not only the style, but by pace. Students and families want more options and to tailor things more for their children."
Ashley Bateman (bateman.ae@googlemail.com) writes from Alexandria, Virginia. INTERNET INFO:
"Policy, Pilots and the Path to Competency-Based Education: A National Landscape; A Survey of Current State Law and Policy on Competency-Based Education in K-12 Systems," ExcelinEd, Spring 2017: https://www.heartland.org/publications-resources/publications/policy-pilots-and-the-path-to-competency-based-education-a-national-landscape

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Windsor Locks Public Schools began by giving competency-based grades in kindergarten through fifth grade. "When this class hit sixth grade, it continued," said Windsor Locks Principal Steve Swensen. The school's current ninth grade class will be the first to complete an entire K-12 education based on competency and mastery of subjects instead of A's and B's.

# data[].attributes.headline
Are Grades Diverting Focus From Real Learning? | MindShift | KQED News

# data[].attributes.subject
Are Grades Diverting Focus From Real Learning? | MindShift | KQED News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
iStock

Grades sometimes feel like a necessary evil. They are a shorthand measure of how a student is performing in school, but too often the pressure to earn good grades becomes the sole focus for students and parents. Grades are supposed to be a recognition of the learning process a student went through, not the product a student strives for exclusively. But disentangling those things is a challenge, made more difficult by the real consequences of good grades for kids' futures.

Educator Ashley Lamb-Sinclair experimented with not giving grades for the first six weeks of the school year at the high-achieving high school where she works. She was amazed at the intrinsic motivation students had to persist on a task until they improved when the pressure of a grade wasn't present. She writes that she had incredible communications with parents about their children's learning during those six weeks and that the gradeless period went smoothly. That is, until she had to start grading again. As soon as a 100-point scale was present parents and students forgot all the value they had seen in the learning process and focused only on points.

Lamb-Sinclair's article in The Atlantic is a meditation on how educators, parents and students together can shift the classroom dynamic away from focusing on the product - the grade - and towards a realization of all that went into achieving it. Lamb-Sinclair can relate to the quest for achievements, but also reflects on the true value of something like National Board Certification.

Many professionals, including teachers, seek achievements to prove their value just as students do. Receiving National Board certification is often considered the gold standard in achievement for teachers. I have rarely encountered a National Board-certified teacher who was not a quality educator, and principals are consistently impressed when they learn I have the accolade. The value of the certification, though, comes from the process of earning it, not the framed certificate on the wall. Becoming National Board-certified is intensive and challenging. The extrinsic motivation of higher pay, more opportunities, and elevated status might have initially led me to seek National Board certification, but my dedication to improving as a professional guided me through the sometimes grueling process. I remember watching a video of myself teaching, stopping it minute-by-minute, and recording what was going on in the classroom in that instance. In the day-to-day whirlwind of managing student behavior, lesson plans, and grades, I don't have the luxury of such reflection and analysis.

When my students spent three days on a single thesis statement, they practiced similar intensive reflection to when I was working toward becoming National Board-certified. And for both my students and for me, such opportunities are rare. So while parents might see a 96 percent in the gradebook and feel comforted by such a number, many don't actually know the work that led to it. The problem lies when the product itself is elevated above the process, and questions of improving revolve around getting an A and not mastering skills.

The intrinsic love of learning supplants the drive for high marks in the long run. Ours is the type of school that when I input grades into our electronic gradebook system, it is usually a matter of minutes before students knock on my classroom door and parents send me emails questioning single points and marks.

Are Grades Diverting Focus From Real Learning?

Author

Katrina Schwartz

Katrina Schwartz is a journalist based in San Francisco. She's worked at KPCC public radio in LA and has reported on air and online for KQED since 2010. She's a staff writer for KQED's education blog MindShift.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are Grades Diverting Focus From Real Learning?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Grades sometimes feel like a necessary evil. They are a shorthand measure of how a student is performing in school, but too often the pressure to earn good grades becomes the sole focus for students and parents. Grades are supposed to be a recognition of the learning process a student went through, not the product a student strives for exclusively.

# data[].attributes.headline
10 –Point Uniform Grading Scale Approved by State Board of Education - South Carolina Department of Education

# data[].attributes.subject
10 –Point Uniform Grading Scale Approved by State Board of Education - South Carolina Department of Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
10 -Point Uniform Grading Scale Approved by State Board of Education
10-Point Uniform Grading Scale Approved by State Board of Education Columbia, SC - State Superintendent of Education Molly M. Spearman announced that the State Board of Education has unanimously approved the recommendation to adopt a 10-point grading scale beginning in the 2016-17 school year for all high school courses.
"I am pleased to see this exciting change to our grading system," said Spearman. "The adoption of a 10-point grading scale will benefit military and other families as they transfer into South Carolina schools while also providing all of our students an equal opportunity to compete with their counterparts in neighboring states for college admission, athletic and academic scholarships, and national awards. This change will level the playing field for all of our students while maintaining our high academic standards. I am thankful that the State Board of Education has adopted this change," said Spearman.

The South Carolina Department of Education convened uniform grading policy (UGP) working groups, one of which has been examining the current scale and brought forth recommendations on how South Carolina can best adopt the new system. There are considerations that must be taken into account, such as the timing of implementing the new grading scale, merging the calculations for students currently in our school system, and preparing for the impact to the education lottery.

"This is the best decision the State Board of Education could make for South Carolina students," said Mr. Charles Mayfield, principal of J.L. Mann High School, in the Greenville County School District. "It will be fair to students of military families transitioning into South Carolina, for students in dual-credit courses, and for seniors applying to college and seeking academic scholarships. It also benefits our student-athletes. I am very pleased with this outcome and want to thank Superintendent Spearman and the State Board of Education for moving South Carolina forward with this commonsense change," said Mayfield.

"I am very pleased with the hard work put in by the UGP working groups. We will be examining the Hope and Life scholarships, along with the Palmetto Fellows Scholarship to ensure fairness and rigor in the academic requirements to earn them," said Spearman.

"I am very excited that we're modernizing our grading system," said Dr. Luke Clamp, principal of River Bluff High School in Lexington School District One. "We can align our public education's grading system with that of our colleges and universities. This eliminates confusion for students in dual-credit courses, removes the need for our higher education system to convert grade point averages, and makes the entire system seamless and easier to understand for students and parents. I applaud Superintendent Spearman for recommending this proposal and the State Board of Education for their support," said Clamp.
10-Point Grading Scale Conversion Chart
###

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
10-Point Uniform Grading Scale Approved by State Board of Education Columbia, SC - State Superintendent of Education Molly M. Spearman announced that the State Board of Education has unanimously approved the recommendation to adopt a 10-point grading scale beginning in the 2016-17 school year for all high school courses.

# data[].attributes.headline
What if your high school transcript didn’t include grades? - The Boston Globe

# data[].attributes.subject
What if your high school transcript didn’t include grades? - The Boston Globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For years, students have been stacking their high school transcripts with as many advanced courses and A's as possible in an effort to get into the best colleges. But under a radical redesign of the document - being led by dozens of private schools nationwide - the practice of listing courses and grades could come to an end.

Instead, the new transcripts would detail a student's mastery of specific skills, such as the ability to collaborate, think creatively and analytically, take initiative, assess risk, solve problems, or write coherently.

Advertisement

And what about that hard-earned A in calculus? Most schools would stop itemizing courses, credits, and grades on the transcripts. Not even grade point averages would appear.

The idea is to show colleges what students can do, rather than how good they are at memorizing information or taking tests. Supporters say the change should do a better job of predicting which students will thrive in higher education and ultimately in the workplace.

"I think we overvalue content knowledge," said Scott Looney, head of the Hawken School in Ohio, who is the founder and chairman of the Mastery Transcript Consortium , a group of schools that was created to spearhead the revisions and that includes several Massachusetts schools. "If you really think about what makes kids successful in college, it is the ability to think deeply, reason, write well, lead a team."

But a move away from a standardized measurement could create a nightmare for college admission offices, as they grapple with a surge in applications generated by the ease at which students can apply online to multiple colleges at once.

William Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions and financial aid at Harvard College, said high school transcripts and standardized test scores play an important role in the admissions process and "provide a common measure that allows some comparison among applicants from very different backgrounds and academic institutions."

Advertisement

"Secondary school grading systems and transcripts give colleges an estimate of how much a student has achieved day-to-day in the classroom and a way to measure a student's readiness for college-level academic work," Fitzsimmons said in a statement. "We hope that the proposed proficiency-based transcripts will provide such information as well."

The redesign could be the biggest change to the high school transcript since the documents came into vogue more than a century ago, when colleges began setting admission standards for the number of hours students needed to study certain subjects.

Behind the effort locally are some big-name private schools: Phillips Academy, Milton Academy, Noble and Greenough, Newton Country Day School, Brooks School, Gann Academy, and Northfield Mount Hermon. The dean of studies at Phillips is taking a leave of absence to lead the group.

Several experts say that if these schools pull off the change, then public schools - some of which have already been experimenting with alternative transcripts - will follow. Most notably, the New England Secondary School Consortium, which includes education commissioners and public school educators from all New England states except Massachusetts, has been pushing for proficiency-based transcripts for the last few years.

For many of the private schools, the move is about more than just changing the content of a transcript. They want to shift the mindset of students who have become so obsessed with grades that they are whizzing through their studies without realizing what they have actually learned, and they are unwilling to take the kinds of risks necessary to succeed in an innovation economy because they fear failure.

"Students can't think beyond that transcript and see the entire life ahead of them," said Sarah Pelmas, head of school at the Winsor School in Boston. "The pressure has become so intense."

And the course grades on the transcripts reveal little about the kind of work students put into their class and what skills they learned, they say.

Under the redesigned high school transcript, however, college admission officers would be able to see specific examples of student work in just a couple of clicks.

Although the exact design is still being hashed out, supporters envision the transcript would be online and contain three layers of information.

The first layer would summarize a student's mastery of specific skills. Then the admission officer could click on a skill to see how that student's school defined mastery. With one more click, the admission officer could see the various examples of student work that a school used to judge mastery.

"We will run some pilots over the next couple of years," said Patricia Russell of Phillips Academy and interim executive director of the Mastery Transcript Consortium. "Once we think the transcript is working well, we will make it available to any school."

Eliminating courses and grades from the transcripts could create a host of problems, especially for applicants to colleges that require students to have passed certain classes, admission experts said.

For instance, the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education requires applicants to the University of Massachusetts and the state universities to have taken four years of English and math, three years of science, and two years of foreign languages, as well as other courses.

Beyond the requirements, judging an applicant's performance in high school courses - especially those related to the major the applicant hopes to pursue - is useful in determining if the applicant can handle the rigor of a college-level program, said James Roche, associate provost for enrollment management at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

He questioned the need to drastically overhaul transcripts. Many of the skills the consortium hopes to detail in the transcripts are typically conveyed in letters of recommendation the colleges receive, Roche said.

"I'm not sure the world understands how thorough college applications are now," Roche said. "I'm always impressed with the amount of work and energy that goes into the applications and the letters of recommendation."

James Vaznis can be reached at james.vaznis@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @GlobeVaznis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What if your high school transcript didn't include grades? - The Boston Globe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For years, students have been stacking their high school transcripts with as many advanced courses and A's as possible in an effort to get into the best colleges. But under a radical redesign of the document - being led by dozens of private schools nationwide - the practice of listing courses and grades could come to an end.

# data[].attributes.headline
To err is human - and a powerful prelude to learning - The Hechinger Report

# data[].attributes.subject
To err is human - and a powerful prelude to learning - The Hechinger Report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Once a month, this column will examine the insights that science offers about the way people learn, and how such findings could influence schools.
Most of us can remember a moment like this from our school years: the teacher poses a question - maybe it's math, maybe history. You raise your hand, you give your answer with full assurance. And then? You're shot down. You got it wrong.

We remember moments like this because they brim with some of our least favorite emotions: shame, humiliation, self-recrimination, and that gutting sense that you want to melt into the floor. Ah yes, I remember it well.

As it turns out, though, such moments are ripe with learning opportunity. Contrary to what many of us might guess, making a mistake with high confidence and then being corrected is one of the most powerful ways to absorb something and retain it.

In recent years, cognitive scientists have done gobs of research on how making mistakes help us learn, much of it funded by the federal Institute for Education Science. Some findings make intuitive sense. Some are completely surprising. And many important findings that are relevant to teaching are not making it into the classroom, or penetrating very slowly.

Traditionally, educators and psychologists in the U.S. were not fans of allowing students to flounder. B.F. Skinner, the hugely influential 20 th century behavioral psychologist, didn't even like his lab rats and pigeons to err and constructed experiments to shape their behavior toward always getting the task right. "He thought if they made a mistake, the mistake would get entrenched, and you'd have to backtrack to erase it," explains Janet Metcalfe, a professor of psychology at Columbia University, and the author of an impressive scientific review titled "Learning from Errors," published earlier this year in Annual Review of Psychology.

"These wrong approaches are like crab grass, they are hard to get rid of and often have deep roots. You really have to undermine the roots of the misconception as well as strengthen the correct conception."

Robert Siegler, Carnegie Mellon University psychologist

American educators, perhaps influenced by Skinner, have tended to see things the same way. Classic studies by psychologists James Stigler of UCLA and the late Harold Stevenson, detailed in their 1994 book The Learning Gap, compared videotaped lessons in eighth-grade math in several countries. They found that American teachers emphasized specific procedures for solving problems, largely ignored errors and praised correct answers. Japanese teachers, by contrast, asked students to find their own way through problems and then led a discussion of common errors, why they might seem plausible and why they were wrong. Praise was rarely given and students were meant to see struggle and setbacks as part of learning. The difference, the authors believed, is one reason that Japanese students outperform Americans in math.

"Learning about what is wrong may hasten understanding of why the correct procedures are appropriate," they wrote, "but errors may also be interpreted as failure. And Americans ... strive to avoid situations where this might happen."

The American allergy to errors began to ease with a burst of new studies by cognitive psychologists beginning this century. They showed clear benefits to engaging with mistakes-in both verbal and math tasks. For instance, Nate Kornell of Williams College conducted a word-pair experiment in which people were cued with a word (say, tree) and then asked to pair it a related "target" word (say, oak). He found that they remembered the target word significantly better if they had made a wrong guess (like maple or pine) and were corrected than if they were simply given the correct pairing and asked to memorize it.

Numerous other studies have confirmed and expanded upon this finding. Metcalfe and others have shown that on tests involving general knowledge (What's the capital of Australia?), a wild guess doesn't help with learning. "They have to be making a serious stab at the answer," she notes. And it was Metcalfe and colleagues who showed that the more certain you are of your wrong answer, the better you will learn the right one after being corrected.

Why is this? The answer isn't completely clear but it likely involves the fact that making an error rallies your attention - and even more so if you're surprised that you got it wrong. In addition, it is easier to learn something new after you've summoned up your prior knowledge - a process neuroscientists call memory reconsolidation.

There's hard, biological evidence for some of this. By placing electroencephalogram caps on subjects as they play videogames or do other tasks, scientists have identified specific signals in the brain linked to making errors. The first one, known as Error-Related Negativity or ERN, occurs just 50 millionths of a second after the error. That's well before you are even conscious of the mistake! A second wave, called error positivity (Pe for short), comes 50 to 550 milliseconds later and is believed to reflect conscious attention to the error, usually followed by an effort to avoid repeating it.

"By taking the grade off their test I thought they might spend more time looking at what they got right and what they got wrong. I wanted to refocus them on actually learning the content."

Leah Alcala, math teacher in Berkeley, Calif.

As an undergrad at Michigan State, Hans Schroder became so obsessed with error-related brain signaling that, he recalls, "I actually 'married' it on Facebook." He also did serious work on the subject in psychologist Jason Moser's lab there. Past research had shown that these signals relate to academic performance.

"The ERN tends to correlate with grade-point average. It's linked with the ability to recognize when things don't go as expected and to better working memory," Schroder explains. "The Pe is more linked to effort, becoming aware of mistakes and rebounding." While both signals emanate from a brain region called the anterior cingulate, the Pe involves more widespread activity as you allocate mental resources to improve your performance.

Schroder was especially interested in this effort-related activity and wanted to know if it was linked to a person's attitude or mindset about his or her own ability. Stanford University psychologist Carol Dweck kicked off a wave of research in education and psychology with her work - and popular 2006 book, Mindset - defining two distinct "mindsets": the belief that one's intelligence is fixed or that it is fluid and can grow with effort. People with a fixed mindset (as measured on a standard questionnaire) tend to see errors as signs that they are not good at something. Those with a growth mindset see them as signs they need to work harder.

Schroder theorized that people with a growth mindset would have a stronger Pe signal following an error. This proved to be true in studies with both children and adults. Just as important, growth-minded people raised their game more in the wake of an error. For instance, he reports, growth-minded children playing a videogame in which they had to round up escaped zoo animals "were more accurate after making a mistake than kids who were fixed-minded."

How do these psych lab results translate to the messier world of the classroom? A number of researchers are attempting to answer that question with studies that more closely mimic educational situations or by conducting research within schools.

Carnegie Mellon psychologist Robert Siegler, an expert on how children learn math, has delved deeply into the best way to give feedback on student errors. He has shown, for instance, that asking third and fourth graders to explain how someone got the wrong answer and also how someone got the right answer is enormously effective - more so than just asking the child to explain the correct procedure, as teachers so often do. Dislodging wrong ideas is important, he notes: "These wrong approaches are like crab grass, they are hard to get rid of and often have deep roots. You really have to undermine the roots of the misconception as well as strengthen the correct conception."

Metcalfe is exploring that approach in an experiment with eighth-grade math teachers at the Columbia Secondary School for Math, Science and Engineering - a New York City public school affiliated with Columbia University. For the past two years, her team has been monitoring what happens to performance on the state's Common Core Regents algebra test when teachers give frequent practice quizzes followed each time by a review of the students' specific errors, in a continuous cycle four days a week for four weeks prior to the statewide exam.

The results, which have not yet been published, seem promising. "We had a 100% pass rate on the Algebra 1 Regents for eighth grade, which was pretty awesome," says Kushal Patel, a participating teacher. Patel notes that even though the passing grade for special education students is 55 rather than the typical 65, all of the special ed students passed with the higher grade. Performance across the class was even stronger the second year than the first. Metcalfe's team is now analyzing videos of class sessions second by second, looking at exactly what teachers did and how it relates to the errors individual children made. Preliminary results suggest that the improvement in performance was closely tied to the error-focused feedback.

"Being in this environment where we are openly discussing mistakes, where mistakes are good, really opened the door for certain kids who had math phobias," Patel observes.

"Being in this environment where we are openly discussing mistakes, where mistakes are good, really opened the door for certain kids who had math phobias."

Kushal Patel, teacher, Columbia Secondary School for School for Math, Science and Engineering, New York City

And in keeping with a growth mindset, students began to see errors as a path to learning rather than humiliation. When he shared students' errors anonymously with the class, he says, "the kids got really good about saying 'Hey, that's my mistake! Let me talk about what I did wrong.' It was incredible. They got past the shy moment of, 'Oh, I screwed up.'"

Next year Metcalfe will be testing a new system for reviewing errors that combines computerized feedback with teacher-led instruction.

In Berkeley, Calif., math teacher Leah Alcala witnessed a similar change in middle school and high school students when she began spotlighting what she calls her "favorite errors." Alcala likes to hand out test results without grades but with highlights indicating the precise spots in a math problem where things took a wrong turn.

"By taking the grade off their test I thought they might spend more time looking at what they got right and what they got wrong," she explains. "I wanted to refocus them on actually learning the content." You can see her method in an online Teaching Channel video.

Like Patel, Alcala says she was influenced by Dweck's mindset framework. While not everyone in her economically and ethnically diverse classes masters all the math, "what I know for sure is that my kids never give up on my class."

Such robust examples of teaching kids how to learn from their errors remain the exception in U.S. classrooms. Probably the biggest reason, Siegler suggests, is that "the people who write the textbooks don't know about the research findings. There's a lot of knowledge in the psychology of learning that hasn't been incorporated into education." Also, he notes, there's a "common sense wisdom" to focusing almost exclusively on correct procedures. It's what American teachers have always done.

And it's what most of us believe in, the evidence be damned. Metcalfe has found that people are generally unaware of the benefits of bumping up against mistakes. This is true even after they participate in studies in which, again and again, they improve their performance after getting something wrong and being set straight. When asked if they did better in trials where they were given the answer or those in which they erred and were corrected, they chose the former.
This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, the nonprofit, independent news website focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for our newsletter.
"Isn't that amazing!" she says of this metacognitive blind spot. No wonder so many educators err when it comes to errors. "If teachers don't realize that making errors will help learning, they will be like Skinner and say 'I'll just teach them the right thing.' "

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
To err is human - and a powerful prelude to learning - The Hechinger Report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Once a month, this column will examine the insights that science offers about the way people learn, and how such findings could influence schools. Most of us can remember a moment like this from our school years: the teacher poses a question - maybe it's math, maybe history.

# data[].attributes.headline
Matt Townsley | A comprehensive list of standards-based grading articles

# data[].attributes.subject
Matt Townsley | A comprehensive list of standards-based grading articles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A comprehensive list of standards-based grading articles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A comprehensive list of scholarly articles related to standards-based grading. This resource is updated as new articles and studies are published.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is Standards-based Grading - TeacherEase

# data[].attributes.subject
What is Standards-based Grading - TeacherEase

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Basics of SBG

Traditionally teachers focus on teaching, the attempt to deliver knowledge. In SBG they also measure student learning, to understand the effectiveness of instruction. Instead of a single overall grade, SBG breaks down the subject matter into smaller "learning targets." Each target is a teachable concept that students should master by the end of the course. Throughout the term, student learning on each target is recorded. Teachers track student progress, give appropriate feedback, and adapt instruction to meet student needs. Figure 1 shows example report cards that highlight the differences between traditional and SBG.

Traditional grading and SBG also use different grading scales. In traditional grading, students are primarily measured by the percentage of work successfully completed. The assumption is that higher completion rates reflect greater mastery, and earn higher grades. Often 90% achieves an A, 80% a B, etc.

In SBG, grading is based on demonstration of mastery. Students attempt standards-aligned activities (projects, worksheets, quizzes, essays, presentations, etc.). Teachers assess the student output and choose the appropriate mastery level that was demonstrated.

Typical scales are 1-4 and reflect students' increasing skill. 1's indicate that students have little understanding of a concept, and consequently cannot demonstrate any mastery. When starting a new target, many students have no prior knowledge, and begin at 1. As students learn, they can demonstrate partial mastery, and score 2. Once they meet a target, they score 3. Typically 4's are used for students who exceed targets. Figure 2 shows example traditional and SBG grading scales.

Note: Even though 1-4 is popular, SBG grading scales vary widely. Scales can be 1-5, 0-4, use half points, and use letters instead of numbers. Yours may be different.

In standards-based education, teaching is responsive to learning. When starting a new target, teachers present introductory lessons. As students progress, they are offered more complex material. They continue working and learning until they reach the target. Think of SBG as a ladder, where students climb up, "a rung at a time," eventually reaching the top.

After receiving instruction, some students progress immediately, but most do not. It's common for students to be confused, and only partially complete an activity. Teachers regularly provide feedback, reteach, and offer additional opportunities to reach "the next rung." This process requires patience and practice, and is repeated until students reach the target.

SBG is powerful because it provides a framework to regularly measure student progress. When teachers have continuous understanding of students' mastery, they can adapt instruction to better meet students' needs. This causes education to be more effective and engaging.

How Does SBG Improve Education

Now that we've described the mechanics of SBG, let's look at the advantages standards-based education brings to the classroom. Many instructional changes improve student engagement and learning.

Improved Feedback

In SBG environments, better feedback accelerates learning. Instead of simply giving scores like 9/10 or 85%, teachers give feedback about the task performed and skills used. This helps students understand their current areas of improvement, and helps them reach the next level. This positive environment speeds learning and students reach higher levels of achievement -- all while being deeply engaged and enjoying school.

Student Ownership of Education

Learning targets are typically written in student-friendly language, so they can understand the goals of instruction. Targets may be further broken down by rubrics to map out the steps required to reach the "top of the ladder." This allows students to understand the path to success, and enables them to better engage in their learning. When working on an activity, they can self-assess and reflect on their own performance. They can identify areas of improvement and self-direct their activities. This leads to greater ownership of their learning. A typical rubric is shown in Figure 6.

More Relevant Instruction

In traditional classrooms, many teachers mechanically present curriculum to students -- lesson 1 on day 1, lesson 2 on day 2, etc. While there are exceptions (e.g. - early elementary reading), often there is little adjustment to instruction due to learning. Because students learn at different rates, some are bored because the pace is too slow. Others are confused because instruction is too fast. This is a daily challenge in traditional classrooms.

In SBG classrooms, teachers better understand student mastery. At any time, they know which students are at level 1, 2, or 3. This helps teachers offer level-appropriate work. Students at level 1 get activities that help them reach level 2. Level 2 students get activities to climb to level 3. Classrooms often break into smaller groups with students working independently on level-appropriate activities. This is called "differentiated instruction," or DI for short.

In this environment, students are less frustrated by poorly-fitting instruction. School is a more positive experience when course material is relevant and interesting. By improving the use of instructional time, students learn more and make increased academic progress.

Learning Provides Intrinsic Motivation

Some students may be extrinsically motivated by metrics, and strive to improve in measured areas. In traditional classrooms, this often encourages students to "chase points." Many will perform tasks that award points and raise their averages (e.g. - extra credit).

Conversely, it's common to hear students ask, "Will this be graded?" They often will skip any activity not entered into the gradebook, regardless of merit. This creates unhealthy incentives which skew student behavior and attitudes.

In SBG, the focus is on learning and mastery. Striving for mastery is an intrinsic motivator and transforms student attitudes. They learn for their own enjoyment and sustain high levels of effort and achievement.

Emotional Safety and Fear of Testing

At the beginning of each marking period, students start with 100%. Their averages fall as they make mistakes. Students with the fewest mistakes earn the highest grades. Depending on the size of the mistake (e.g. - a zero), it may be impossible to recover and earn a "good grade." This high-stakes environment can create test-taking fear and cause anxiety, which interferes with learning.

In SBG, scores go up as students learn. Final grades are reflective of mastery at the end of the course, so there's little penalty for early mistakes. No event can "ruin" their grade. This creates an emotionally safe environment where students are encouraged to stretch themselves, make mistakes, and learn.

While SBG removes the problem of zeros, it's also common for organizations to allow redo's. When a student gets a poor score, they can often work more on the topic, increasing their learning, and reassess. The ability to reach mastery is celebrated versus the focus on the number of mistakes made along the way.

Accurate Measurement of Learning

One pitfall of traditional grading is inaccuracy. Student averages are highly dependent on the difficulty of work assigned. If teachers present only low complexity activities, students can earn high scores with only a weak command of the material.

The opposite is also true. Highly demanding instructors may present very difficult work, resulting in overly low student scores. Curving and extra credit are used to adjust averages into more appropriate distributions.

In both cases SBG can improve the situation by providing clearer criteria for measuring mastery. Mastery of low complexity work yields lower grades while mastery of higher complexity work provides higher grades. Connecting grades to complexity rather than percentage completion yields more accurate and consistent grades.

How TeacherEase Helps SBG

This document was written by the team that produces TeacherEase, software for standards-based learning. We believe that successful SBG requires good technology, so we built TeacherEase to meet this need. It includes all the tools necessary: committee collaboration, learning targets, rubrics, assessments, instructional content management, data analytics, gradebook, report cards, and parent portal. For more information, check out: TeacherEase: Software for Standards-based Learning.

Additional SBG Videos

For more information, we recommend the SBG-related videos below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This page is an introduction for parents and educators new to standards-based grading. It discusses benefits of SBG and positive impacts on the classroom.

# data[].attributes.headline
Go Back to “Traditional” Grading? – The Thoughtful Teacher

# data[].attributes.subject
Go Back to “Traditional” Grading? – The Thoughtful Teacher

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You want to return to the traditional grading system. Is this what you're wishing for?
10 Reasons to Return to the Traditional Grading System

1. The teacher puts anything they choose into the grade. Test scores, quiz scores, homework, participation, tardies, absences, headings on the right side of the assignment, neatness, responsibility factors, citizenship, miscellaneous behaviors that are important to the teacher, MMPI scores...you name it. (With all that stuff in the mix, what does that "traditional" grade tell you about your child's achievement?)

2. The teacher may or may not impose penalties through the grade, such as zeros or 50% off for late/missing assignments/assessment. (And not give feedback to the student, which was the purpose of the assignment/assessment to begin with.)

3. The teacher is free to ignore the mathematical rules of statistics (measures of central tendency) by putting zeros for missing/late assignments/assessments into grade calculations, thereby having a disproportionate negative effect on the report card grade, and possibly college admissions (This is where the lawsuits could really come from.)

4. The teacher isn't concerned that another teacher in the district, the building, or just down the hall, who is teaching the same subject at the same level, has different grading criteria. Your child could get an A in one class, and a C in the other class - for the same level of actual achievement. This could be due to punitive grading (zeros and 50% off) or different grade cut-offs (90%=A in one class, 94%=A in another class). There's no consistency in the "traditional" system, and your child gets "the luck of the draw." (And it's really tough to get the principal to pull your child out of one class and put them in the other. Building politics play a big part in a "traditional" grading system.)

5. The teacher may collect and give credit for homework without knowing if it was the student, parent, or friend who did the actual assignment. (Check out those busy students in the cafeteria before school starts...lots of homework copying going on there. How does that foster responsibility and character development?)

6. Your child's grade can get dragged down by the poorest performing student in a group work assignment. (Not the way it's supposed to work in group learning situations, but it's all up to the teacher in the "traditional' grading system.)

7. Kids don't learn from mistakes - they get hammered for mistakes. (The learning environment is tense, conflicted, much less effective, and directs student attention to scheming about acquiring "points" rather than actual learning.)

8. Grades can be inflated through the addition of "extra credit" for academic or non-academic factors. (Exactly how does bringing a box of Kleenex factor into a grade that's supposed to indicate level of learning according to standards?)

9. Grades can be severely deflated if the teacher chooses to use grading as a tool to force compliance by punishing students with zeros or other grade reductions unrelated to actual performance linked to an education standard. (The belief that the threat of punishment through grade reduction has a positive effect on student performance is wishful thinking on the part of some teachers. Can they find some evidence out there - research - that punitive grading is a force for improving student achievement? No, they cannot. There is no evidence to support punitive grading.)

10. The acquisition of learning - both for the student and the teacher - is compromised in the "traditional" grading system by the inclusion of "practice" (formative assessment - also known as "assessment for learning") in the report card grade. You can read about this in a report on a 1998 research meta-study by Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam titled "Inside the Black Box." (The saddest aspect of "traditional" grading is that its advocates don't seem to care that we are shooting ourselves in the foot by ignoring this powerful research. The teacher's most effective tool - feedback to the student about learning - is compromised by attaching "credit" to everything a student does. That same feedback loop also gives the teacher information about the effectiveness of their instruction and may suggest to the teacher ways to improve their instruction, and your child's opportunity to learn more effectively.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You want to return to the traditional grading system. Is this what you're wishing for? 10 Reasons to Return to the Traditional Grading System The teacher puts anything they choose into the grade. Test scores, quiz scores, homework, participation, tardies, absences, headings on the right side of the assignment, neatness, responsibility factors, citizenship, miscellaneous behaviors that...

# data[].attributes.headline
Matt Townsley | All Things Standards-Based Grading

# data[].attributes.subject
Matt Townsley | All Things Standards-Based Grading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The purpose of this page is to provide a one-stop portal for all things standards-based grading (SBG). Suggestions and submissions for this page may be sent to Dr. Matt Townsley. Research What does...

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the Difference between Standards-Based Grading (or Reporting) and Competency-Based Education? « Competency Works

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the Difference between Standards-Based Grading (or Reporting) and Competency-Based Education? « Competency Works

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Here in Iowa, competency-based education is gaining traction at the state and grassroots level. In fact, the Iowa Department of Education has launched a multi-year CBE collaborative. Needless to say, it's an exciting time to be an educator in the Hawkeye State!

Meanwhile, a core group of Iowa schools have started to implement a standards-based grading philosophy in middle and high schools. Because of these two movements in our state, standards-based grading and competency-based education are often times incorrectly presented as synonymous practices. As a member of Iowa's CBE task force and through my work as a district administrator in a system that has embraced standards-based grading K-12, I've been in a position to think about and discuss these two topics extensively. When area schools hear about our grading and reporting practices, we are often asked how our system relates to those working towards competency-based educational models. While many of the ideas overlap, I felt compelled to tease out these two education terms in order to honor their similarities and differences.

What is standards-based grading?

Standards-based grading "involves measuring students' proficiency on well-defined course objectives." ( Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006). (Note: Standards-based reporting involves reporting these course objectives rather than letter grades at the end of each grading/reporting period.)

The visual below compares traditional grading with standards-based grading practices.

Traditional Grading System

Standards-Based Grading System

1. Based on assessment methods (quizzes, tests, homework, projects, etc.). One grade/entry is given per assessment.

1. Based on learning goals and performance standards. One grade/entry is given per learning goal.

2. Assessments are based on a percentage system. Criteria for success may be unclear.

2. Standards are criterion or proficiency-based. Criteria and targets are made available to students ahead of time.

3. Use an uncertain mix of assessment, achievement, effort, and behavior to determine the final grade. May use late penalties and extra credit.

3. Measures achievement only OR separates achievement from effort/behavior. No penalties or extra credit given.

4. Everything goes in the grade book - regardless of purpose.

4. Selected assessments (tests, quizzes, projects, etc.) are used for grading purposes.

5. Include every score, regardless of when it was collected. Assessments record the average - not the best - work.

5. Emphasize the most recent evidence of learning when grading.

Adapted from O'Connor K (2002). How to Grade for Learning: Linking grades to standards (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

In our district, secondary teachers are required to abide by the following grading guidelines:

1. Entries in the grade book that count towards the final grade will be limited to course or grade level standards.**

2. Extra credit will not be given at any time.

3. Students will be allowed multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of classroom standards in various ways. Retakes and revisions will be allowed.

4. Teachers will determine grade book entries by considering multiple points of data emphasizing the most recent data and provide evidence to support their determination.

5. Students will be provided multiple opportunities to practice standards independently through homework or other class work. Practice assignments and activities will be consistent with classroom standards for the purpose of providing feedback. Practice assignments, including homework, will not be included as part of the final grade.

** Exceptions will be made for midterm and/or final summative assessments. These assessments, limited to no more than one per nine-week period, may be reported as a whole in the grade book.
Parents and teachers have commented positively after watching a short five-minute video explaining standards-based grading that was used to convey these ideas prior to our implementation dating back to the 2012-13 school year.
What is competency-based education?
Under a competency-based education system, "learners advance through content or earn credit based on demonstration of proficiency of competencies" rather than seat time. (Source: Iowa Department of Education CBE Pathways.)

With so many definitions of CBE available, I settled on principles of competency-based education from Iowa's Guidelines for PK-12 Competency-Based Pathways as a reputable framework, because they were adapted from International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL). I've included the CBE Pathways principles and their descriptors below.
A. Students Advance upon Mastery

Students advance to higher-level work upon demonstration of mastery of standards rather than according to age or seat time.

Students are evaluated on performance and application.

Students will master standards and earn credit or advance in content at their own pace.

They will work through some standards more rapidly while taking more time to ensure mastery on others.

B. Explicit and Measurable Learning Objectives that Empower Students

The relationship between student and teacher is fundamentally changed as students gain understanding of what working with standards requires and take ownership of learning, and as teachers provide the appropriate supports for learning.

The unit of learning becomes modular.

Learning expands beyond the classroom.

C. Assessment Is Meaningful and a Positive Learning Experience for Students

Schools embrace a strong emphasis on formative assessment as the unit of learning becomes modular.

Teachers collaborate to develop understanding of what is an adequate demonstration of proficiency.

Teachers assess skills or concepts in multiple contexts and multiple ways.

Attention is on student learning, not student grades.

Summative assessments are adaptive and timely.

Assessment rubrics are explicit in what students must be able to know and do to progress to the next level of study.

Examples of student work that demonstrate skills development throughout a learning continuum help students understand their own progress.

D. Rapid, Differentiated Support for Students Who Fall Behind or Become Disengaged

Educator capacity, and students' own capacity to seek out help, will be enhanced by technology-enabled solutions that incorporate predictive analytic tools.

Pacing matters. Although students will progress at their own speeds, students who are proceeding more slowly will need more help, and educators must provide high-quality interventions.

E. Learning Outcomes Emphasize Application and Creation of Knowledge

Competencies will include the standards, concepts, and skills of the Iowa Core as well as the universal constructs (creativity, complex communication, collaboration, critical thinking, flexibility and adaptability, and productivity and accountability).

Lifelong learning skills are designed around students needs, life experiences, and the skills needed for them to be ready for college, career, and citizenry.

Expanded learning opportunities are created as opportunities for students to develop and apply skills as they are earning credit.

What are some ways in which standards-based grading and competency-based education are similar?
In both systems...

Students learn specific standards or competencies based on a pre-determined rubric.

Students take more ownership of their learning, because it (learning) is communicated rather than "Project 3" or "Worksheet 4-2."

Using assessments in formative ways is the norm rather than exception.

These two systems may be similar in some contexts. For example, learning outcomes could emphasize application and creation of knowledge in a classroom that uses a standards-based grading philosophy, but, by definition in a standards-based system, this may or may not be the case. Similarly, experiences could be designed around students' needs and life experiences in a standards-based grading classroom, but it is not necessarily the norm.
What are some ways in which standards-based grading and competency-based education are different?
In a competency-based system...

Students advance to higher-level work and can earn credit at their own pace. (In a building, district, or classroom using a standards-based grading philosophy, this is not necessarily the case. Students are likely required to complete x number of hours of seat time in order to earn credit for the course.)

Learning expands beyond the classroom. This may or may not take place in a standards-based grading philosophy. For example, in a competency-based system, a student who learns a lot about woodworking over the summer may earn credit when he or she returns to school the next year. Similarly, students are encouraged to learn outside the classroom so that they can demonstrate competencies at their own, rapid rate.

Teachers assess skills or concepts in multiple contexts and multiple ways. (This may or may not be the case in a standards-based grading classroom; however, it is non-negotiable in competency-based education.)

Summary
A standards-based grading (SBG) philosophy is similar, but not synonymous with, the idea of competency-based education (CBE). SBG is a way of thinking about grading and assessment that more clearly communicates with parents and students how well learners currently understand the course objectives/standards/competencies. CBE is a system in which students move from one level of learning to the next based on their understanding of pre-determined competencies without regard to seat time, days, or hours. A competency-based system may utilize a standards-based report card to communicate student learning; however, the two educational terms are not, by definition, the same.

Matt Townsley joined the Solon Community School District (Solon, IA) central office administrative team in 2010. Prior to his current role, he taught high school math for six years in the same district. Currently, Matt is pursuing a doctorate in school improvement at the University of West Georgia. One of his articles, "Redesigning Grading-Districtwide" was published in the December 2013 issue of Educational Leadership. He regularly presents at conferences and leads professional development on the topics of formative assessment and standards-based grading. He can be reached at @mctownsley on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is the Difference between Standards-Based Grading (or Reporting) and Competency-Based Education? - Aurora Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here in Iowa, competency-based education is gaining traction at the state and grassroots level. In fact, the Iowa Department of Education has launched a multi-year CBE collaborative. Needless to say, it's an exciting time to be an educator in the Hawkeye State!

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we create a culture of excellence in schools? | Teacher Network | The Guardian

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we create a culture of excellence in schools? | Teacher Network | The Guardian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pressures on schools to perform have never been higher, with a constant focus on data, various different league table measures, exam results and the ever-present threat of Ofsted inspections at the first sign of a slip. These might not feel so onerous if they weren't also happening against the backdrop of severe real-term budget cuts to schools, a retention and recruitment crisis, and rapid reforms to GCSE and A-level exam specifications that have left schools scrabbling to keep up.

In this climate, there is a temptation to simply try to get through the changes unscathed, to focus on the data and getting the best possible place in league tables. But this short-term outlook is a barrier to genuine improvement as each action becomes a response to the latest crisis or government diktat.

What is needed instead is a culture of excellence that permeates every classroom, department and school; a focus not on simply getting the best grade, but on getting the best education and creating a lifelong passion for learning.

This shift in focus matters. Research from The Equality Trust suggests that countries with low levels of educational achievement suffer from higher levels of inequality. It concludes that: "The link between educational achievement and high aspiration is a key explanation for the association between low educational achievement and inequality." This is not to deny the importance of qualifications - there is little doubt that educational attainment improves your life chances - but simply chasing data will never lead to a culture of high aspiration from individual pupils. Inequality will remain entrenched and life chances will still be dependent on your parents' background.

I feel lucky to work in a school where excellence is expected from every student, regardless of their background. Students, teachers and visitors are greeted by a quote from Aristotle. "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit." This idea is central to creating a culture of excellence at a school and departmental level.

The following are the steps we have put in place to start creating this culture of excellence.

Raise your standard high

The first step is to agree on what excellence actually looks like in your subject. What can an excellent year 7 geography student do? What are your expectations of the quality of work for a year 12 student in chemistry? In our department, we start planning every new unit of work by coming up with a checklist of what we expect students to know and be able to do. We can then use this to plan the learning and create knowledge organisers for pupils to use at home. This approach means that we are always thinking about the purpose of our subject and considering the best it has to offer.

In department meetings, we share examples of excellent work that pupils have created, and log them so we have a bank of work to exemplify standards. This can then be shared with pupils, parents and colleagues so everyone knows where we are aiming.

These learning checklists and knowledge organisers also help to hand back responsibility to pupils to check that they are on track. They can clearly see what they are expected to know and do, and can seek support for any areas of concern.

Lead the way

Once high standards have been set, we can start ensuring that all students know how to meet them. The bank of excellent work is one way to do this; it can be annotated to explain the criteria it meets and then displayed and discussed.

One of the most powerful ways to support a culture of excellence is through live modelling, where the teacher answers a question themselves and explains their thought process in front of the class. The technique can be adapted so that a piece of work is produced as a class and developed through carefully planned questioning.

Varndean College in Brighton has been embracing the idea of a culture of excellence with a number of working groups looking at various pillars of teaching and learning. One group has been focusing on the use of academic language in discussions to show the standards expected. Complex, subject-specific words are used with their meanings added as an aside. Pupils are challenged on the use of colloquial words in their answers to questions and asked to respond more formally.

Is it excellent yet?

Over the years, I am sure I have accepted any amount of substandard work. There has often been an attitude - from pupils and teachers alike - that work just needs to be done. Now, students have started asking: "Is this excellent yet?" There is now an expectation that work isn't finished until it is excellent, that proof reading and redrafting should be the norm, and that students will do this before handing in work.

Taking it further

I have seen schools around the country focus on encouraging pupils to embrace their education and be willing to work beyond the classroom. At Walton High School in Stafford, pupils are encouraged to engage in additional research to support what they have learned in class. "Each department lists a range of extra tasks that outstanding students in that subject should do, such as visiting historical sites and writing a report or reading specific books," says Jade Slater, assistant head teacher. "Pupils who do all of those tasks achieve honours in that subject, with a celebration evening and displays on the department honours board."

Jenn English, head of geography at Wellington School in Manchester, offers pupils the chance to enter a raffle after completing extension tasks that are designed to enrich their learning.

After the last few years of upheaval in education, it looks as though the dust may be settling. In this period of relative calm, I hope that we will see teachers and school leaders focusing not on data, but on ensuring that all children leave school with an excellent education and a lifelong love of learning.
Mark Enser is head of geography at Heathfield Community College. He writes the Teaching it Real blog and tweets @EnserMark. Follow @GuardianTeach on Twitter, like us on Facebook, and join the Guardian Teacher Network to get the latest articles direct to your inbox.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How can we create a culture of excellence in schools?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pressures on schools to perform have never been higher, with a constant focus on data, various different league table measures, exam results and the ever-present threat of Ofsted inspections at the first sign of a slip.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Implementing Standards Based Learning in Social Studies Courses

(SBL, Flipped Class, Differentiation, & Student Choice)

The following page describes how I implemented a standards based learning (SBL) model into my social studies courses. Before implementing SBL this past year, I had already flipped my class, which included student choice in assignments and differentiation.

The first thing I had to do was identify the objectives my students needed to learn and demonstrate proficiency. For World History, the state (Virginia) did the work for me (see objectives below). For AP US Government I had to create my own objectives based on the College Board outline. World History Objectives , AP Gov Objectives

All of my class activities are tied to the objectives. My classes are a bit different from most classes because I flipped my classes a couple of years ago, and I use choice menus for most student activities. Here's the choice menu for AP Gov Congress and the choice menu for . All of these assignments are formative assessments, which means that they do not count for a grade in the gradebook, but students are provided feedback upon completion of each activity. World History River Valley Civilizations

Summative assessments are also created based on the objectives. What this means in practice is that my tests consist of smaller tests based on each objective. For example, Congress has four objectives, which means that the larger test was broken into four parts. For River Valley Civilizations, the test has five parts since there are five objectives. This took some upfront time on my part to bunch the "same objectives" questions together on the test, but it was worth it. (If same subject teachers are working together in a collaborative learning team, this work can be divided up among team members.)

After the test, each student is given a "Test Results" sheet, indicating their proficiency on the test. Here's the Congress results sheet and here's the . This shows the student on which objectives they are proficient and on which objectives they are not. Students not demonstrating proficiency on a specific objective come in for a second chance assessment (test re-take) only for those objectives on which they did not achieve proficiency, instead of for the whole test. Therefore, students only have to study for those objectives on which they performed poorly, and the teacher only has to create and grade a retake test for the specific objective. River Valleys results sheet

Some teachers freak out because they think they have to create an entirely new test for each objective, which does sound daunting, but I've made the re-takes very straight forward. My Second Chance Assessments (SCAs) are broken down by objective and students have to answer only the objective on which they performed poorly. In about ½ page, students need to write an answer to the objective. Based on their answer, I determine if they have reached proficiency. In a perfect world, I would have a rubric for each of these objectives, but time has not made that possible yet. Here's the Congress SCA and the River Valleys SCA.

What goes in the gradebook and how does that look? The only scores that go in the gradebook are related to student performance on each summative assessment objective. Nothing else. Again, Congress had four objectives, so there were four scores for the Congress test. (Actually five because I also test vocabulary separately.) This means that 100% of the student's grade is based on their performance on the objectives. I understand that a full 100% standards based grading system is too far of a leap for some teachers. I've seen some teachers count the objectives tests as 80% and homework, projects, etc., as 20%.

The upfront time to set up a standards based learning environment is pretty big, but once it is set up, only a bit of fine tuning needs to take place every year.

Frank Franz

franzwh1@gmail.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Implementing Standards Based Learning in Social Studies Courses (SBL, Flipped Class, Differentiation, & Student Choice) The following page describes how I implemented a standards based learning (SBL) model into my social studies courses. Before implementing SBL this past year, I had already flipped my class, which included student choice in assignments and differentiation.

# data[].attributes.headline
CVU Learns: One School's Journey to Standards Based Learning: Communicating with Families in a Standards-Based Class

# data[].attributes.subject
CVU Learns: One School's Journey to Standards Based Learning: Communicating with Families in a Standards-Based Class

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the mistakes we made early on in our transition to standards-based grading and reporting was our communication with parents. Because we understood our students' learning so much better than we had in the past, we assumed that reporting that learning to parents would not only help them understand the benefits of a standards-based system, but also see that we were intentionally addressing both strengths and struggles. So after a quarter of great learning and tracking and assessing, we sent detailed standards-based reports home with a key and a brief explanation. We waited for the praise to roll in.

What we forgot, however, was that most parents really want one thing above all else. They want to know we like their kids. Yes, most also want to know if they are being decent human beings, if they are getting their work done, where they are struggling, and where they are excelling, but if we know their kids well enough to appreciate the quirks, understand the contradictions, and ultimately enjoy the people they have raised, then parents are happy. Our mistake was showing that we knew their students academically, without taking the time to show we knew--and liked--them as people as well.

Having a comprehensive communication plan is vital in all classrooms, but maybe even more so as we transition to standards-based learning. The shift to a completely new method of teaching and grading can be a difficult change for students and parents, and forgetting to communicate what we often do best--which is getting to know our students--can make the transition even harder. Initially, tracking and reporting learning can take a lot of time for teachers, particularly if they are learning a new grade book tool or using technology differently for the first time; the idea of communicating in addition to standards-based reporting can cause stress and force teachers to steal time from other important tasks such as planning or assessing. Even so, it's an essential part of the transition that can make the difference between class- and school-wide implementation success or failure.

In order to help teachers and schools avoid (or at least lessen) this aspect of implementation dip, we gathered suggestions and ideas we have seen teachers in our district use to successfully--and efficiently--build and maintain effective communication plans in a standards-based class.

The Plan: A comprehensive classroom communication plan has multiple purposes, which at times overlap. We have separated them here, but you'll notice that some of the strategies cross parts, making the communication more efficient. Depending on your teaching situation and the number of students, you may need to adjust ideas to fit your context, and you and your colleagues may have other tried and true strategies to add to these lists.

Personal Connections: Parents want to know you care about their kid. This means occasional communications about specific, personal interactions, needs, successes, or other relevant updates.

Personal emails: One teacher takes 20 minutes every Friday afternoon to send personal emails. She keeps a list of students and checks off when she emails their families. The emails are short and positive--one nice thing that the student did that week. She can usually get through 10 students each week, though says she tries to send one positive email to each family within the first month.

Postcards or notes home: Like the emails, this is a great way to quickly connect. One teacher gets a set of mailing labels printed at the beginning of the year and pre-labels postcards (generic ones that the school prints). She keeps these next to her computer and tries to send one a day.

Parent conferences: This is a common way to make personal connections, and teachers we talked to recommended always starting and ending the conferences with positive, personal stories or observations.

Individual comments on standards-based reports (at end of unit, in the portal, or at reporting time): Most standards-based grading and reporting tools allow teachers to enter individual comments. While this can take extra time, a few positive and personal words can go a long way to showing parents you know their kids and care about their success.

Curriculum: Parents want to know what you're doing in class. Letting them know the content you are using to practice important skills can help them feel connected to their kids, and can also give them ideas for conversations at home. If your standards are mostly skill-based, then communicating about content becomes even more important, as your reporting system may not include the rich, engaging choices you and the students are making about content. Some parents are really interested in the curriculum, while others just want to know that there is one, so it's important to find a balance--consider a system that provides layers of detail that parents can access if they choose.

Class and/or team blogs or websites:While it can be time-consuming to keep up a blog or website, many teachers are turning to their students to help, providing a relevant anchor task and another way to work on skills and collaboration. One teacher assigns small writing teams to the task each week, providing guidelines for updates, a chance to include photos, and practice at asking and responding to questions. Another updates his website each unit, providing detailed descriptions of what they will be studying, links to additional videos and related TED talks, and a calendar of summative assessments. In order to ensure the parents see these updates, he sends a group email to the parents.

Google classroom or other LMS (learning management system): Many teachers use an LMS to organize tasks and assignments for students, and these can be used with parents as well. Parents can have access to their students' sites, and some teachers set up views for parents within the system as well.

Common blurb on top of standards-based reports: Most reporting tools allow teachers to write and post a common message for parents and families. This is an efficient way to provide an overview of the curriculum, but should not take the place of more detailed communication for parents who want it.

Weekly emails from students to parents: This is one of our favorites, and can be used for a variety of purposes. One team of teachers has their students write to their families every Friday. They carve out 30 minutes to reflect on the week in a variety of categories, including content, habits, skills, and questions. The students cc their home-room teachers, and the teachers have set up the emails to go directly into a folder (so they don't fill up their inboxes!). The expectation is that this is communication between student and family, but the teachers can monitor what's being communicated if necessary. Parents have loved this, and often reply to their kids (parents are told that teachers will not reply to these emails!).

Habits and Behaviors: Parents want to know their kid is doing what they're supposed to be doing, and what to do (or what you're doing) if they're not. So many parents get in the habit of checking online portals for completion, which can cause misunderstandings and stress when they are not accurate or updated regularly. Constant checking like this can lead to a much greater focus on compliance than on learning, so it's important to develop a system that allows accountability and provides necessary information without distracting from what is most important.

Weekly emails from students to parents: Getting students to keep track of their own work completion can help them practice positive executive functioning skills. Having students include a to-do list in their weekly email keeps parents informed and prevents having to communicate this in other ways. Early in the year, this may require more organization on the teacher's part (ensuring the lists are accurate!), but as time goes on, there will only be a handful of students who need continued guidance (and this is ok--students' executive functioning skills develop at different rates through adolescence). These emails are also a great place to ask students to reflect on their behaviors or habits for the week--providing guiding questions can be helpful. One teacher we know also has a few email templates for students who need more structure, with questions already entered.

Weekly contact from core teachers: Teachers who work on a team can collaborate on this type of communication. One team we work with has 4 teachers and 80 middle school students. They meet once a week to formally talk about students anyway, and during this time they create a google doc list of any significant habits/behaviors or missing work issues that need to be communicated to parents. The core teacher (homeroom teacher) then writes emails home to the students on their list that need communication. They found this system to be effective, and quickly realized that they did not need to email home every time a student missed an assignment--they were able to coordinate with each other to use school time to address most issues, and those that couldn't be resolved could then be communicated.

Summary habits scores in standards-based reports: It's the teacher's job to improve problem habits and behaviors, not just to report them, so we strongly suggest using the formal reporting system for summative habit scores only--and combining this with personal comments and follow up communication as necessary.

Learning: Finally, parents do also want to know how their kid is progressing in skills--where they excel and where they struggle. Some want to know this so they can help at home, some want to know what questions to ask, and others want to make sure their children are progressing as expected. Teachers in standards-based classrooms have LOTS of information about learning to share, and we caution you to work with families to determine the level of information that is most useful and desired. The level of detail we need as teachers is not always what parents need or want, and can lead to overload, frustration, and disconnection.

Unit and/or marking period reports: During these formal reporting periods, teachers will have the most accurate, summative data about the learning targets to report. It's important to let parents and students know that while summative, these current levels of achievement are just that, current. They can change as the learning changes. Make sure there is a simple key with explanations of what they will see, as well as any other contextual information that is relevant to the report. If sending a standards-based report home for the first time, we highly recommend an email or letter prior to receiving it, and an opportunity for questions or feedback after receiving it.

Portal: Many standards-based grading tools offer a portal, where parents and students can check their progress and achievement whenever they want. This can be confusing to parents new to standards-based grading, particularly if you previously had a portal based on completion and points. Be sure to clearly communicate to parents and students about what will be updated and when, how it's different than an assignment-based portal, and all of the other ways they have to see how their students are doing in your class.

There is no single tool that can quickly and comprehensively communicate all of the above purposes at the same time, and wishing that the standards-based grade book tool could take care of it all will just lead to frustration for everyone. Developing new and effective ways to communicate with our families during the transition to a standards-based system may be a bit more time consuming initially, but making sure that families feel included during the changes will provide the safety and trust we all need to improve learning.

Have other strategies you use to build relationships and communicate for a variety of purposes? Let us know!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Communicating with Families in a Standards-Based Class

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the mistakes we made early on in our transition to standards-based grading and reporting was our communication with parents. Because we understood our students' learning so much better than we had in the past, we assumed that reporting that learning to parents would not only help them understand the benefits of a standards-based system, but also see that we were intentionally addressing both strengths and struggles.

# data[].attributes.headline
A New Kind of Classroom: No Grades, No Failing, No Hurry - NYTimes.com

# data[].attributes.subject
A New Kind of Classroom: No Grades, No Failing, No Hurry - NYTimes.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Few middle schoolers are as clued in to their mathematical strengths and weakness as Moheeb Kaied. Now a seventh grader at Brooklyn's Middle School 442, he can easily rattle off his computational profile.

"Let's see," he said one morning this spring. "I can find the area and perimeter of a polygon. I can solve mathematical and real-world problems using a coordinate plane. I still need to get better at dividing multiple-digit numbers, which means I should probably practice that more."

Moheeb is part of a new program that is challenging the way teachers and students think about academic accomplishments, and his school is one of hundreds that have done away with traditional letter grades inside their classrooms. At M.S. 442, students are encouraged to focus instead on mastering a set of grade-level skills, like writing a scientific hypothesis or identifying themes in a story, moving to the next set of skills when they have demonstrated that they are ready. In these schools, there is no such thing as a C or a D for a lazily written term paper. There is no failing. The only goal is to learn the material, sooner or later.

For struggling students, there is ample time to practice until they get it. For those who grasp concepts quickly, there is the opportunity to swiftly move ahead. The strategy looks different from classroom to classroom, as does the material that students must master. But in general, students work at their own pace through worksheets, online lessons and in small group discussions with teachers. They get frequent updates on skills they have learned and those they need to acquire.

Mastery-based learning, also known as proficiency-based or competency-based learning, is taking hold across the country. Vermont and Maine have passed laws requiring school districts to phase in the system. New Hampshire is adopting it, too, and piloting a statewide method of assessment that would replace most standardized tests. Ten school districts in Illinois, including Chicago's, are testing the approach. In 2015, the Idaho State Legislature approved 19 incubator programs to explore the practice.

More than 40 schools in New York City - home to the largest school district in the country, with 1.1 million students - have adopted the program. But what makes that unusual is that schools using the method are doing so voluntarily, as part of a grass-roots movement. In communities where the shift was mandated - high schools in and around Portland, Me., for example - the method faced considerable resistance from parents and teachers annoyed that the time-consuming, and sometimes confusing, change has come from top-tier school administrators. Some contend that giving students an unlimited amount of time to master every classroom lesson is unrealistic and inefficient.

New York City Department of Education officials have taken a contrasting position. The city has a growing program called the Mastery Collaborative, which helps mastery-based schools share their methods around the city, even as they adopt different styles. To date, there are eight lab schools, whose practices are being tested, honed and highlighted for transitioning schools. M.S. 442 is one of them. Some struggling schools hope the shift will raise test scores. But the method is also growing in popularity among high-performing, progressive schools, as well as those catering to gifted and talented students and newly arriving immigrants.

This fall, the Education Department plans to spread the method further, by inviting schools to see how the Mastery Collaborative works, even if they aren't yet considering making the switch. They will be encouraged to attend workshops and tour schools, with the hope, one D.O.E. official said, that they will find elements that they can use in their own classrooms.

Several factors are driving this. The rise of online learning has accelerated the shift, and school technology providers have been fierce advocates. It's no surprise that schools adopting the method are often the same to have invested heavily in education software; computers are often ubiquitous inside their classrooms.

Mastery-based learning can be traced to the 1960s, when Benjamin Bloom, a professor at the University of Chicago and an education psychologist, challenged conventional classroom practices. He imagined a more holistic system that required students to demonstrate learning before moving ahead. But the strategy was not widely used because it was so labor intensive for teachers. Now, with computer-assisted teaching allowing for tailored exercises and online lessons, it is making a resurgence.

Government policy has also contributed to its adoption. Under the federal education bill passed in 2015, states are permitted to forgo single end-of-year subject tests for nuanced measures. In the mastery-based learning world, this is largely seen as a positive move.

Joy Nolan, one of the directors of New York's Mastery Collaborative, said the method gives students more agency and allows them to gain traction, no matter their level. "The mastery approach really puts the focus on you and your growth," she said.

Some of the schools she assists - like the North Queens Community High School - came to mastery-based learning as a way to help disillusioned and at-risk students.

"It's the narrative we want to change," said Winston McCarthy, the school's principal. "We want to change the conversation from 'I'm not successful at this' to 'This is where you are on the ladder of growth.'"

Mastery-based learning, of course, has its critics. Amy Slaton, a professor at Drexel University in Philadelphia who studies the history of science and engineering in education, worries that the method is frequently adopted to save costs. (When paired with computers, it can lead to larger classrooms and fewer teachers.)

Jane Robbins, a lawyer and senior fellow at the American Principles Project who has written critically about mastery-based education, said she finds the checklist nature of the system anti-intellectual. While it may work to improve math skills, it is unlikely to help students advance in the humanities, she said.

Others question the method's efficacy. Elliot Soloway, a professor at the University of Michigan School of Education, contends that students learn by slowly building on knowledge and frequently returning to it. He rejects the notion that students have learned something simply because they can pass a series of assessments. He suspects that shortly after passing those tests, students forget the material.

"Mastery folks don't understand the fundamentals of what learning is about," Mr. Soloway said.

In any event, advocates argue, the current education system is not working. Too many students leave high school ill prepared for college and careers, even though traditional grading systems label many top performers. Last year, only 61 percent of students who took the ACT high school achievement test were deemed college-ready in English. In math, only 41 percent were deemed college-ready.

Even proponents say the system has its problems. Switching to mastery-based learning requires a great deal of coordination. "It's not an overnight thing," said Lisa Genduso, the math coach for M.S. 442. It can also meet with resistance from faculty members who aren't keen on experimentation. The year M.S. 442 moved away from the traditional system, it lost seven teachers.

But Moheeb defended his school's approach. It encourages students to "work on what they're struggling with," he said.

"It's different for different kids," Moheeb said with a shrug.

In New York, where students speak more than 200 languages and arrive in classrooms with varying degrees of proficiency, some schools adopted the method out of necessity.

At Flushing International High School, whose student body is dominated by recent immigrants, mastery-based learning lets students concentrate on learning English. This gets them speaking, reading and writing as quickly as possible, while also rewarding them for picking up academic skills and knowledge. In a biology classroom, for example, lab reports are evaluated on the student's understanding of concepts as well as on a command of scientific vocabulary.

The Young Women's Leadership School of Astoria educates girls who may become the first in their families to go to college. In addition to fulfilling Common Core requirements, assignments are designed to help students learn critical thinking and workplace skills. Students engaged in a group history project, for example, may need to demonstrate that they have learned to collaborate and investigate. For a solo science assignment, they may be asked to demonstrate that they can innovate.

At Moheeb's middle school, the approach has been transformative. In the 2013-14 school year, 7 percent of its students read at grade level, and 5 percent met the state's math standards. Two years later, 29 percent were proficient in English, and 26 percent proficient in math, pulling the school close to the city average.

This year, all the eighth graders at the school who took the algebra Regents exam and 85 percent who took the earth science exam were marked proficient. The scores signified a high point for M.S. 442, teachers said.

To make the system work, teachers used New York State curriculum guidelines and Common Core standards to develop a rubric of every skill students needed before they could move to the next grade. In Moheeb's sixth-grade class, there were 37 skills designated in math and 37 in English. They included the ability to add and subtract decimals; identify, understand and describe unit rate; recognize story elements; and discern what is important in a text.

In lieu of grades, students are assessed on a color-coded scale: Red means not yet meeting the standard; yellow, approaching it; green, meeting a standard; and blue, exceeding it. The scale is designed to be visually appealing and to encourage students to think of learning as a process. To meet grade level for each skill, students need to prove three times that they have acquired it. They may explain to a teacher their process for working through problems as a way to show they understand the material. Or they may perform well on an online test or a quiz.

Progress throughout the year is cumulative, meaning that even if students don't grasp something early on, if they learn it by the end of the year, they will get a "good" grade. The school also has an online point system for behavior.

Ms. Genduso, of M.S. 442, said the approach was introduced at a challenging time for the school. A third of the students at the school require special-education assistance and attend classes that include a number of high-performing students. Even with two teachers (one trained for special education), it was difficult to engage everyone.

"We were not reaching all of these kids," Ms. Genduso said.

In late 2012, educators at the school were trying to think big. Housed on the second floor of a sprawling brick building on Hoyt Street, M.S. 442 was 14 years old and struggling with low test scores and declining enrollment. It had done a poor job of attracting families from the neighboring brownstones, and many of the teachers were dispirited. The school shed its name, New Horizons Middle School, and introduced computers. Some teachers began using computers for in-class lessons. Another group thought it would complement the student advising system. The changes led to conversations about what had been happening inside classrooms and whether a new approach was needed.

Eventually, the school decided to switch to mastery-based education. Still, the move was slow. First, the school offered more hands-on group activities. For a seventh-grade math unit on ratios and proportion, for example, the class opened a pretend catering company. Students practiced their math skills as they figured out pricing and discounts for their menus.

The next year, the school transformed its mentoring program. Students set behavioral goals and logged online. They could determine to be on time more often, do their homework more regularly or talk less in science class. Their mentors noted their goals and the progress made. The platform was a hit with students and with teachers, who believed it empowered children to think about their growth in new ways.

In the 2013-14 school year, educators at the school came up with a list of desired academic outcomes. If students could be motivated by an online log to stop talking in class, perhaps a log would motivate them to learn to write an introductory paragraph or add fractions.

Engaged by the project, Jared Sutton, a 27-year-old algebra teacher, helped develop a software program for grading called the Hive. It's the program that Moheeb uses, via his iPhone or a classroom computer, when he wants to check his progress, which he does multiple times a day.

Parents, however, remained skeptical. While students received end-of-year report cards with their mastery points translated into percentage grades (necessary when applying to high school), many parents were confused by the frequent progress reports detailing dozens of outcomes for each subject. Some simply wanted to know whether their children were passing.

"There can be a real concern that they don't understand," said Noreen Mills, principal of M.S. 442. "But once they understand, they get on board."

On a sunny morning last spring, the new approach was visible in a sixth-grade math class. Signs around the room reinforced the school's philosophy: "Failing proves that you are trying," one read; another, "Being wrong is the key to being successful."

Students in T-shirts and hoodies organized into four groups. At one table, they worked on a conversion problem, trying to determine when a dog owner would need to buy more dog food. The dog owner had 45 pounds of kibbles, and the dog ate 10 ounces a day. The problem tested a math skill they would need to master by the end of sixth grade: "I can convert from one unit of measurement to another."

"He's confused," one boy said of his seatmate, who had circled the correct answer but was puzzled by the procedure. "But at least he got the right answer."

"I don't think we should leave it at that," said Priyanka Katumuluwa, their teacher, who leaned over their desks as she pointed to the problem. Both boys looked up at her, then down again at the page. They were listening intently.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A New Kind of Classroom: No Grades, No Failing, No Hurry

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Few middle schoolers are as clued in to their mathematical strengths and weakness as Moheeb Kaied. Now a seventh grader at Brooklyn's Middle School 442, he can easily rattle off his computational profile. "Let's see," he said one morning this spring. "I can find the area and perimeter of a polygon.

# data[].attributes.headline
Secondary 10-12 - NESD Curriculum Corner

# data[].attributes.subject
Secondary 10-12 - NESD Curriculum Corner

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Secondary 10-12 - NESD Curriculum Corner

# data[].attributes.headline
Acceptable Alternatives in Assessment and Grading | All Things Assessment

# data[].attributes.subject
Acceptable Alternatives in Assessment and Grading | All Things Assessment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tom Schimmer is an author and a speaker with expertise in assessment, grading, leadership, and behavioral support. He is a former district-level leader, school administrator, and teacher.

Assessment orthodoxy is easy, but for those trying to lead (whether by title or by influence) the transformation of assessment and grading practices, orthodoxy often falls short of inspiring or assisting teachers in moving away from antiquated practices. The definitiveness with which some speak of sound assessment practices is great for keynote presentations, for blog posts, and for acquiring followers on social media; however, for those looking to take the first of what might be several steps toward modernizing their assessment and grading practices, assessment orthodoxy can feel quite foreign to the practices they've established throughout their career.

Righteous indignation of how standards-based one is in comparison to others is more divisive than inclusive. The proclamations of you're not standards-based if you are akin to the political conversations of what constitutes a real conservative, a real liberal, or a real centrist; no one has the market cornered on what being real means, and these statements only serve to further undermine the willingness of some to consider the possibilities of modern assessment and grading. Finding common ground through acceptable alternatives is often a way to allow for a soft point of entry into practices where there is more than potential way forward.

Acceptable alternatives are practices that find the sweet spot between the status quo and orthodoxy; they are ways that allow those who are hesitant to feel more comfortable with the prospective change while maintaining the core of the desirable change. Finding these acceptable alternatives can be challenging for two reasons. First, they require at least some knowledge of what others are and are not initially comfortable with; this will identify where the acceptable alternatives can be found. Second, it also requires those leading or influencing change to be flexible with their orthodoxy; fully embracing the alternative practices personally is not required. Change is more emotional than clinical (Heath & Heath, 2010), which means finding ways to make the emotional side of changing assessment and grading practices less aversive should be the priority.

Here is one example. The orthodoxy of sound assessment and grading practices submits that homework is never graded, scored, or leveled for a number of reasons, including the body of evidence regarding effective feedback and the fact that some students take longer to learn. However, there are teachers who believe that if they don't grade homework, the students won't do it. Now, we could stand in righteous indignation and tell those teachers how wrong they are, or we could try to meet them halfway with an acceptable alternative if the orthodoxy of not grading homework feels initially like too much of a departure from their own personal experience and perspective. Again, orthodoxy is easy, but orthodoxy may not move the needle.

An acceptable alternative I've presented to many teachers, given the homework dilemma mentioned in the previous paragraph, is to grade homework temporarily. This means that the teacher would follow their current practices of scoring and recording the homework assignment, but would be willing to reconsider the validity of that homework evidence at a later date when students demonstrate a higher level of proficiency with the very same learning. Several things are true. First, the students' scores on the initial attempts do, in fact, represent the students' current understanding of the learning. Second, the subsequent instruction will increase most (if not all) students' proficiency within that same learning. Third, this increased proficiency will render the initial homework scores invalid and inaccurate. When students know that initial scores are temporary, they are more likely to productively respond to any initial stumbles. Given all of this, the teacher would be wise to remove (or no count) homework assignments when they no longer reflect student understanding so as to ensure that the grades, levels, or summaries accurately reflect the full value of what students' have learned.

To be clear, I believe in the orthodoxy of formative assessment, practice, and continual learning, and while it is not true that grades, scores, and levels always interfere with learning, the research suggests that there is the potential that it can (Kluger & DeNisis, 1996; Wiliam, 2011). I don't think the scoring of homework is the reason students complete that which has been assigned; low quality busy work disjointed from essential learning does more to discourage students from investing in completing their homework assignments consistently. I am, like you, intimately familiar with what the research says about grading formative work and feedback; however, what I believe and know is often irrelevant to those hesitant to take the next step in reforming their assessment and grading practices. While I don't agree with those who say if I don't grade it, they won't do it, I believe that they believe it, which is why finding an acceptable alternative is essential.

Telling people how wrong they are doesn't necessarily inspire them to be more right. Certainly egregious and harmful practices need a more immediate response, and while it is possible to argue the harmful nature of many traditional assessment and grading practices, the goal is always long-term, sustainable change, not just a short-term fix. Acceptable alternatives lead teachers through (not just to) the change process by allowing for more than one step toward the ideal, and while it is possible that some may believe that the acceptable alternative is the desirable, it is important to be clear that this is the first of several steps forward.

Leaders and influencers who pair an internal urgency with external patience typically find that sweet spot that keeps change efforts progressing. The internal urgency is driven by orthodoxy; that changing our assessment and grading practices is an urgent matter. The external patience is driven by acceptable alternatives that allow for a pacing of change that is palatable. The combination of the two sends a clear message that the orthodoxy is the desirable end (thereby preventing the illusion that the alternative practices are good enough), but that there will be overt and necessary patience with the means by which the orthodoxy is arrived.

Acceptable alternatives are not about compromising principles or slippery slopes; they about meeting people where they are so as to make what can be a daunting task of change more personally and professionally manageable. The goal of change is actual change; so thoughtful leaders and influencers understand that if the orthodoxy of assessment and grading practices is interfering with the willingness to take action, then an acceptable pathway forward is the necessary first step.

References:

Heath, C. & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New York, NY: Random House.

Kluger, A., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.

William, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Acceptable Alternatives in Assessment and Grading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tom Schimmer is an author and a speaker with expertise in assessment, grading, leadership, and behavioral support. He is a former district-level leader, school administrator, and teacher. Assessment orthodoxy is easy, but for those trying to lead (whether by title or by influence) the transformation of assessment and grading practices, orthodoxy often falls short of inspiring or assisting teachers in moving away from antiquated practices.

# data[].attributes.headline
Destination, Location, and Directions: A Powerful GPS for Student Success - ASCD Student Growth Center

# data[].attributes.subject
Destination, Location, and Directions: A Powerful GPS for Student Success - ASCD Student Growth Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When is the last time you remember navigating to a new place in your car without the aid of a global positioning system? Since the advent of smart phones, most of us can't imagine driving to a new city or perhaps even within our own cities without the technology of a GPS. At our fingertips we are able to see clearly our desired destination, our current location, and precise directions for how to get where we are going. And each of these components, the destination, location, and directions, reported to us in real time, work together to get where we want to be.

The way that we plan curriculum, assign grades, and provide students with meaningful feedback should work together to provide a powerful educational GPS to guide student success. We can think of the components of the educational GPS in this way: The learning targets and standards are the destination, the grade is the current location, and the feedback is the turn-by-turn directions that guide learning. Let's consider these critical pieces of this educational GPS and how these can work together to support their reaching academic standards.

Destination: Where am I going?

The first step to using any GPS is identifying the destination. No other piece of the GPS has any meaning without a desired destination. For students, the standards or learning targets are the destination. This is where we are going with this lesson, group of lessons, or by the end of the year. Knowing where they are going is a prerequisite for taking in feedback and adjusting their steps in learning. We regularly identify short-term destinations like learning targets. These tell students where we are going to be by the end of the lesson, group of lessons, or unit. Students also need a full understanding of our final destination for the academic year-the standards.

Supporting students to have a full understanding of the destination involves more than including it in our learning management software or posting it in the classroom. We must have dialogue with students to ensure they understand where they are going. They should know how it will look and feel when they arrive. Students should be able to state in their own words the learning targets and standards. They've got it when they can connect the learning targets with one another as a journey to the standards. This dialogue on learning targets may seem like it could take away from the precious time needed to teach the content, but it should be seen, instead, as an investment. Students who are clear on the destination can approach tasks with that destination in mind (Hattie, Fisher, & Frey, 2016).

Location: Where am I now?

As you make your way to your desired destination, your GPS gives you information on where you are and how far this is from your destination. As you look to the moving dot or arrow on your GPS, you expect this information to be accurate, and up to the second. This is the only function that scores on assignments should serve. And as important as the scoring task can feel to a teacher (and to students), the only information that a score is able to give is current location. Like the moving dot or arrow in a GPS, that score tells the students where they are right now toward the destination. But not all grading practices are created equal. And grades aren't even necessary, and maybe aren't the best way, to communicate location.

The GPS does not average your location over time. That wouldn't be helpful at you're your current location is your current location. Similarly, the grade should reflect where the student is right now. Let's consider three students: Chris, Spencer and Maisie. Chris mastered the standard early on and maintained that performance. Spencer made steady progress and mastered the standard in the end. Maisie really struggled for a long time, but in the end, she, too, mastered the standard. If we average their scores, Chris ends up with a much higher score than Spencer, and Maisie receives the lowest score. But they all got there! Shouldn't Maisie also receive the high score? Shouldn't the teacher receive the high score for Maisie? Maisie's performance, in fact, shows that teacher's effectiveness better than the others. Chris came in with a high level of existing skills on this standard. His performance is not evidence of good teaching. He probably would have performed well even with poor teaching. It's Maisie's performance that is the evidence of good teaching. To average grades across a reporting period is like saying, "I don't care if my teaching has any effect on student learning." We hope students improve during the reporting period as a result of our excellent teaching and feedback!
Percentages
Another way we can ensure the clarity of the grade in communicating current location is to use scales that are appropriate for the type of data we have. Percentage grades are among the most frequently used but are not the most accurate way to indicate level of learning. Although debates of logic and philosophy with regard to grading can be interesting, this issue of percentage grades is not a question of philosophy-it's one of sound measurement. When we assign a percentage grade on a paper, this usually means "percentage of items correct." But what does that tell us about level of proficiency toward a standard? We are not able, for example, to say that a student has attained 93% of the standard. Saying that a student got 93% of items correct is not the same as the student has 93% of the standard. It only says they got 93% of items correct, and those items were as difficult or as easy as the teacher decided to make them. This is why a 93% with an "easy teacher" may actually be better than an 83% in a "difficult teacher." Our measures need to be more transparent and precise than this.
What about abandoning grades?
There are many people who call for the abandoning of grades altogether, and there are good arguments for this. After all, the information on current location isn't necessary to get you to your destination. And grades aren't needed for a student to learn. Some assert that without a number as the focus, students instead work to use the feedback that will help them improve. This is certainly an important possibility for us to consider. Ah, but knowing your current location is grounding. Without it, you'd likely be asking, "But where am I? And how far is it?" Like youngsters riding in the car to their vacation destination, students want to know, "Are we there, yet?" Having said that, we should be careful in how we communicate location with students. There is no reason this communication has to look like a typical grade. We can use colors, symbols, or qualitative data to describe location.

Should we decide to abandon communicating grades to students, we likely want to continue reducing data to symbols for our own internal use. These symbols allow us to examine our data for an entire class or entire school in order to improve instruction. When or whether to share the symbol with students is a different question from how we decide to manage data as an educator. But assigning a symbol to represent relative location to a learning target or standard is simply a reduction in data. We reduce data in order to consume the data more efficiently. Do you lose information when you reduce data? Absolutely. But you also gain efficiency in examining a lot of data. Imagine a principal's trying to make decisions about resources, hiring, and professional learning opportunities if all of the student data were narrative. What an insurmountable task that would be! If instead there are symbols attached to student performance on skills or standards, teams and administrators can efficiently consume the data and make well-informed decisions based on how students are performing.

Turn-by-turn Directions: How do I get there?

Without a doubt, the most important function your GPS provides is to give you the directions to get where you are going. You need to know where you are going, and having your location helps you to make decisions, but we all know that what keeps us from getting lost and frustrated are those turn-by-turn directions. For students, this is the carefully-crafted and well-timed feedback that helps students navigate the curriculum. Feedback is among the most powerful interventions available to us (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).

But well-intended feedback isn't always effective. Feedback is only effective if students use it to improve. Feedback should be given as soon as possible, and provide clear information to students on how to close the gap between their current performance and the expectation (William, 2016). And we have to teach students to hear and use the feedback we offer (Hattie, Fisher, & Frey, 2016). We are most effective when we teach students to improve their skills, not only revise a product to improve it. When we can see evidence of student improvement across multiple tasks and performances, we know our feedback was effective. Our GPS is functioning as it should!

Conclusion

As valuable as the guidance a GPS provides, it's important to recognize that navigating with the help a GPS is completely different from hiring private transportation that navigates for you. You still play an active role in your journey, making many decisions based on the information given to you. Similarly, students need the information necessary to play an active role in navigating their own learning, facilitated by the educator. This GPS analogy can provide educators with a mnemonic to remember the purpose of standards, grades, and feedback to ensure that each of these components is working as intended. With a well-functioning GPS, students are actively involved in navigating their learning and focused not in the task of amassing points, but actively engaged and self directed in their growth as learners.

References

Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007, March). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

Hattie, J. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2016, April). Do they hear you? Educational Leadership, 73(7), 16-21.

William, D. (2016, April). The secret of effective feedback? Educational Leadership, 73(7), 10-15.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Destination, Location, and Directions: A Powerful GPS for Student Success

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When is the last time you remember navigating to a new place in your car without the aid of a global positioning system? Since the advent of smart phones, most of us can't imagine driving to a new city or perhaps even within our own cities without the technology of a GPS.