# data[].attributes.headline
Whats the Deal with Proficiency Based Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
Whats the Deal with Proficiency Based Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Whats the Deal with Proficiency Based Learning

# data[].attributes.body
Belvidere School District 100

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"One consistent finding of academic research is that high expectations are the most reliable driver of high student achievement, even in students who do not have a history of successful achievement."
-Doug Lemov

Proficiency-Based Learning is a key component of flexible and personalized pathways set forth in Act 77 and the State Board of Education's Education Quality Standards. Vermont public schools must provide students with flexible and personalized pathways for progressing through grade levels and to graduation. These resources can help educators and families understand some of the changes that are taking place in Vermont schools.

Section List

Spotlights on Equity Resources

Educational equity means that every student has access to the resources, opportunities, and educational rigor they need at the right moment in their education, whatever their race, gender/identity, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, language, ability, family background, or family income may be. (Adapted from CCSSO, Leading for Equity) The Spotlights on Equity Resources below provide a list of considerations and resources for the purpose of supporting equity and access across content areas, emphasizing high quality and culturally sustaining learning opportunities for all students.

Vermont Student Voices
Return to Section List
What is Proficiency-Based Learning?

The focus of proficiency-based learning is on students' demonstration of desired learning outcomes. Students gain the skills, abilities, and knowledge required in an area of study, along with those necessary to be successful in college, career and civic life. Proficiency-based learning is designed to identify and address gaps to provide equitable learning opportunities for every student. This is in contrast to traditional systems which advance students based on seat time. Read more about " What is proficiency-based learning? ".

Return to Section List

Proficiency-Based Learning and Project-Based Learning Connections

Project-based learning is a "teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working for an extended period of time to investigate and respond to an authentic, engaging, and complex question, problem, or challenge" ( PBL Works). Learn more about the approach and how it aligns with proficiency-based learning through the ongoing Project-Based Learning document series. Readers are encouraged to interact with the documents following the order found in this Project-Based Learning Document Sequence and listed here:

Foundations of Project-Based Learning: Facilitator's Guides

Members of the Agency of Education's (AOE) Proficiency-Based Learning Team designed and delivered a professional learning (PL) series - Foundations of Project-Based Learning - to support Vermont educators in developing the knowledge and skills needed to begin shifting their instruction to a Project-Based Learning (PjBL) approach. More information on the PL can be found online. Information on and recommendations for delivering a similar PL series on PjBL can be found below:
Return to Section List

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"One consistent finding of academic research is that high expectations are the most reliable driver of high student achievement, even in students who do not have a history of successful achievement." -Doug Lemov Proficiency-Based Learning is a key component of flexible and personalized pathways set forth in Act 77 and the State Board of Education's Education Quality Standards.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lessons From a Competency-Based Education Experiment

# data[].attributes.subject
Lessons From a Competency-Based Education Experiment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lessons From a Competency-Based Education Experiment

# data[].attributes.headline
Extempore Proficiency-based language learning 

# data[].attributes.subject
Extempore Proficiency-based language learning 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New blog series! Proficiency-based language learning | Part 1.1 Blog Breakdown

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Standards-Based Grading (Nampa School District)

# data[].attributes.headline
Standards Based Grading Made My Kid Average

# data[].attributes.subject
Standards Based Grading Made My Kid Average

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Today's guest post is written by frequent Finding Common Ground blogger Lisa Westman. Lisa is an instructional coach specializing in differentiation for Skokie School District 73.5 in suburban Chicago. She taught middle school gifted humanities, ELA, and SS for twelve years before becoming a coach.
Recently a friend called me in a panic. She was beside herself because she had just received her seventh grade daughter's new standards-based report card. My friend relayed that her daughter (who was formerly an "A" student) was now " just average " according to the new report card.

I asked my friend if the report card had the word " average" on it and my friend said, " no." She elaborated that her daughter had received all "meets" and no "exceeds" on her report card, and, therefore, her daughter was now, " just average."

I calmly responded that "meets standards" does not equate to average. I clarified that a standards-based grading system does not neatly align to the traditional grading system we experienced in our schooling. I explained that standards-based grading is a much more pragmatic and informative way of reporting student progress than the traditional A-F approach.

I expected my friend to accept this explanation and settle down, but instead, her emotions escalated, and she replied, " well, my daughter's teacher thinks standards-based grading is stupid, too."

" We are the stories we tell ourselves." Joan Didion

Many school districts that have made the switch to standards-based reporting have been met with reactions like the one illustrated above. And, although I was surprised by my friend's response, I shouldn't have been. Reactions like hers are to be expected when identities are threatened, and eliminating traditional grading practices poses a threat to many people's identities.

How so?

The A-F/100-point traditional grading system has been in place since the early twentieth century. This means all parents and grandparents of students currently in kindergarten through 12th grade, plus the vast majority of today's teachers experienced school with a traditional grading system.

Based on the grades we received as students, we told ourselves we were "good" or "bad" students. We used our grades to tell ourselves which subjects we were "smart" in and which ones we weren't. We used our grades to compare ourselves to our peers. Our parents used our grades to compare us to their peers and their peers' children. We used our grades to determine if we were cut-out for certain careers. We allowed grades to tell us many stories about who we were. For better or for worse, these stories have played a part in shaping our identities as adults. Therefore, when we remove a critical piece of our identity formation (traditional grades) we may, consciously or not, feel threatened.

We will be uncomfortable for a little while. Ultimately, just like us, our children's identities will be shaped, in part, by the educational experience they have. However, if implemented correctly (as extensively researched and reported about by Thomas Gusky and Rick Wormeli) standards-based reporting should allow students to identify as individual learners, rather than comparably "good" or "bad" students.

The concept of standards-based grading is not easily enacted by teachers, nor is it easily understood by parents. Rather, this change is a work in progress which requires both educators and parents to work together to relearn what we have been taught in the past about grades.

While this shift is difficult for both educators and parents, it is the educators who must lead the charge, and be the first relearn ( watch this video for some inspiration on relearning). The way in which educators share information about standards-based grading with parents is crucial for successful implementation. If educators are positive, admit that change is hard, and stick with the change because it is in the best interest of students, parents will follow suit. However, if educators protest, criticize, or are ambivalent about the benefits of standards-based grading, parents will will react similarly. Educators must model the reaction they hope to elicit from parents and students.

To effectively communicate with parents, educators must put to rest some of the widely-held fallacies about grading like the three listed below:

Fallacy #1: Parents need letter grades to understand their child's performance.
Reality: Traditional grades give the facade of understanding because they use familiar words and measures. Consider a report card that lists: Math: A, Reading: B+. Parents understand the words math and reading. They understand that an A is the highest grade and a B is close to an A. But, the reality is, this communication does not actually tell parents anything about what was learned. Math and reading are too broad of categories to offer any insight and the letter grades could mean a variety of things, many of which have nothing to do with reading or math.

Now what? Standards-based grading is an opportunity to create a common understanding of exactly what is being assessed. When teachers take care to ensure assessments are appropriately aligned to the standards they are assessing, the assessments become a vehicle for dialogue between students, parents, and teachers to adequately discuss where students are in their learning progression and where they are going.

Fallacy #2: Letter grades are more objective.
Reality: Once again, an A-F system creates a facade of objectivity. Using a percentage attached to a letter (93% = A) feels objective. But, what isn't necessarily objective are the tools used to garner those scores. When I taught English, I often struggled to determine the critical difference between an 89% and a 90% on a student's narrative writing assignment. When I taught social studies, I assumed the multiple choice tests I created were completely objective due to the right/wrong nature of the questions. I didn't consider, however, the inherent bias of the questions since I had written them.

Now what? There is a reason teachers are part of a PLC/team and there are reasons why these teams are encouraged to meet frequently. This is a time for teachers to discuss topics like objectivity. It is no longer frowned upon for educators to admit that learning is not an entirely empirical process. Learning is complex and, therefore, grading is complex, too. When we look at student work as a team, engage in dialogue about assessments, and come to a consensus as to what "meeting standards" is, we are making the reporting process as objective as possible.

Fallacy #3: By the time we shift to standards-based grading, there will be a new fad, and we will have to start all over again.
Reality: It will take time for individual school systems and the educational system as a whole to fully embrace this change. It is likely that once we become comfortable with this change, there will be additional amendments to the way we grade. But, such is life. This is part of what all successful industries do to stay relevant. They makes changes to improve processes, gather new information, and make more changes to improve processes again.

Next Steps: Don't lament about the process. Don't worry about what the future holds. We are doing what is best for students with the information we have right now. Celebrate the progressive and long overdue steps we are taking to use grading as an indicator of learning rather than symbol of finality.

Questions about this post? Connect with Lisa on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Standards-Based Grading Made My Kid Average (Opinion)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Standards-based grading is sending a message to some parents that their children are average. This comes as a shock to those parents who have always heard their children exceeded expectations with traditional grading. We are at a crossroads with grading, and we should be clear on what...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This story is one of three that we're featuring on the question of class participation. For other perspectives, see "Class Participation: Let's Talk About it" and "Encouraging Introverts to Speak Up in School."
"Stop counting participation as part of a student's grade."

As a professor of teacher education at Montclair State University, every time I teach our unit on assessment, I begin class with this statement. Usually, there's a nervous giggle that spreads around the room, and my students wait for me to say, "Just kidding." But I'm not, and neither is my colleague Meg Riordan, who for years has been supporting Expeditionary Learning leaders and teachers to implement a clear vision for students' learning that includes standards-based grading: separating academic achievement from the habits that support it-such as participation, effort, or timeliness.

Imagine two students. They both receive an 80 as their final course grade. Ideally, that number should reveal what each student did or did not understand about the content and demonstrate her ability to perform particular skills. But what happens when the teacher includes "class participation" as 25% of the grade? Student A might have received a 90 on the final comprehensive exam or project, which assesses content and skills. Or maybe Student A received a 65 but, due to constant participation in class, benefited from a boost to her grade.

When a grade combines evidence of learning with class participation, its meaning is distorted-not only for students, but also for teachers, parents, and institutes of higher education. If grades should primarily communicate student achievement, how is one grade that includes participation and achievement to be clearly interpreted?

We suggest that teachers stop counting class participation as part of a student's grade-a move that not only increases transparency about actual learning but also acknowledges introverted students.

We realize that this approach may challenge assumptions. Many of us have encountered grading policies during our K-12 schooling and higher education where up to 25% of a grade rests upon participation. At the highly regarded Harvard Business School, " participation often accounts for 50% of the total course grade." Why might including participation as a portion of a student's grade be tricky and particularly difficult for introverted learners? Let's explore.

A classroom participation grade generally rewards students who are active communicators. Sometimes, it even includes a teacher's perception of students' behavior. It may help teachers to "manage" the class and perhaps compensate for students who struggle in other areas; thus, the student who works hard, but continues to fall short on tests, may find a grade increase when class participation factors in. What for many expressive students provides a boost, for introverted students creates a barrier. The quiet learner who finds traditional classroom discussion challenging may be penalized by a teacher who interprets introversion as disinterest or silence as confusion about the content.

However, introverted or quiet learners may have various reasons why they don't participate as actively as their more extroverted counterparts. Some quiet learners include students from cultures that do not expect them to challenge their teachers' ideas, ask questions, speak without prompting, or debate with peers. Other students might simply value listening and thinking as much as participating in discussions. The spontaneous nature of some discussions may be difficult for introverted learners who need time to process ideas before sharing them with a group.

When class participation becomes mixed into one grade with academic achievement, overall academic grades no longer communicate what we believe they should communicate: evidence of learning. Instead, participation becomes a motivator for a portion of expressive, extroverted students and a roadblock for less verbally communicative, but no less knowledgeable or interested, learners.

The solution we propose in order to honor all learners-the extroverted and introverted-is standards-based grading, in which the academic grade reflects what students have learned about the content, what students know and understand about a topic, and what students are able to demonstrate about skills or knowledge through multiple assessments.

Usually, this is when my student teachers go nuts. They argue that the qualities measured in class participation-engagement and communication of ideas-matter in the real world. And we agree! What concerns us is confusing these qualities with evidence of learning. We suggest, therefore, that qualities that support learning be evaluated with a separate grade-a grade for what Expeditionary Learning calls "Habits of Scholarship."

In Leaders of Their Own Learning, Expeditionary Learning authors Ron Berger, Leah Rugen, and Libby Woodfin explore how a standards-based grading system provides clarity for students, teachers, and families. Curriculum is guided by standards called learning targets, which support all instruction and assessment. Students' progress towards learning targets is assessed separately from habits of scholarship (sometimes called habits of work), which include qualities like responsibility, revision, participation, or preparedness. These habits are articulated so that "students know what behaviors are expected and what they look and sound like in the classroom." In this way, all learners have a clear vision of how achievement is determined and an understanding of their roles in contributing to their successes.

Including participation into a grade that is intended to reflect evidence of learning results in a murky understanding of students' achievement. What part of the grade reflects actual knowledge or skill, and what part is participation or effort? The traditional approach to including participation into one letter or number grade also reinforces classroom participation that supports superficial conversation-talking for the sake of "earning points." It penalizes the quiet, introverted student, who might be listening and creating space for thinking and reflection. When we grade learning separately from participating, we offer teachers the opportunity to create a classroom structure where listening is as valuable as speaking and where the meaning of a grade becomes clear to students, teachers, and families.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This story is one of three that we're featuring on the question of class participation. For other perspectives, see "Class Participation: Let's Talk About it" and "Encouraging Introverts to Speak Up in School." "Stop counting participation as part of a student's grade."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
It’s Time to Stop Averaging Grades - AMLE

# 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…

# data[].attributes.headline
How 2nd and 3rd Graders Feel About Grades

# data[].attributes.subject
How 2nd and 3rd Graders Feel About Grades

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Second and Third Grade Students Feel About Grades

# data[].attributes.headline
ACTFL-Proficiency-Based Instruction: Input & Interaction in World Language Education

# data[].attributes.subject
ACTFL-Proficiency-Based Instruction: Input & Interaction in World Language Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Proficiency-Based Instruction: Input & Interaction in World Language Education

# data[].attributes.headline
Beyond SBG: Why Equity Must Be a Part of Grading Reform

# data[].attributes.subject
Beyond SBG: Why Equity Must Be a Part of Grading Reform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beyond Standards Based Grading- Why Equity Must be a part of grading reform

# data[].attributes.headline
12 Steps to Creating a Successful Retake Policy

# data[].attributes.subject
12 Steps to Creating a Successful Retake Policy

# data[].attributes.headline
Rick Wormelli's Response to Parent Concern Around Mastery Based Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Rick Wormelli's Response to Parent Concern Around Mastery Based Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's a story that every teacher has heard--and if they've been in the classroom for a couple of years, recognizes from personal experience:
The teacher is relatively new, and working hard to build an effective practice (in this case, a band program). She goes away for three days, to a conference, leaving behind sub plans which involve sending students to the computer lab to craft a PowerPoint on composers. Only five of her 67 students submit any work. Her question to the Band Directors Group professional network: How do I not freak out on Monday? How do I handle this?
The post hit a nerve--she has about 50 responses so far. What's surprising to me is how many are bent on blame and punishment: What an incompetent sub! Give 'em all zeros! Candy and a free day for the five compliant ones! Make sure your administrator backs you up, then nuke 'em--that's how they learn.

Just what they learn from these retaliatory strategies--or the impact on a young teacher trying to nurture enthusiasm and membership in a school music program--seems unimportant. Kids blew off an assignment--make sure their grades reflect that choice. (The words "choice" and "choose" appear frequently in the comments.) Get tough. They deserve it.

I once wrote a blog about a similar experience I had as a teacher. I assigned a big project, giving my students six weeks to complete it, and a lot of what teachers call scaffolding: things to read, ideas to help them select and shape their work, graphic organizers and outlines, the option of working singly or together. I had more than 300 students at the time, and over 90% turned the project in on time.

When the work was turned in, I realized it would take me weeks to read/listen to the projects, provide feedback and grade them. I offered the 25 or so students who hadn't completed the project a grace period of a week to turn something in--since I wanted to make sure they engaged with the assignment's materials and ideas. All but one or two of the original non-completers finished the work--and what was submitted was mostly of acceptable quality. A handful were top-notch. I also got a couple of thank-you messages from parents.

That blog also drew a lot of ire. From teachers. The word most teachers chose was "unfair"---unfair to the kids who did the work on time. Unfair to let students think they would get a reprieve in the (here it comes) real world. Unfair to other teachers, who insist on meeting deadlines and punish kids who don't.

I've been musing about this. These are the questions that emerge for me:

What were the teacher's learning goals for this assignment? Were they communicated to the students? If the goal was "keep kids busy and out of the band room for three days," then the outcome was predictable, even if not defensible.

How do our students--all our students, from kindergarten to Chemistry--perceive classes taught by substitutes? What do teachers say to their students about subs and days when they must be absent? What do teachers say to their students about what can be accomplished with three days in a computer lab?

What does it tell our students when compliance matters more than acquiring knowledge or skills? When getting a good grade becomes the only goal?

How "unfair" is it to students who must work or mind siblings, that other students have long blocks of discretionary time available for schoolwork? Can we ever provide equitable opportunity for all students, equitable access to time and materials for optimum learning?

The two mega-issues that emerge whenever teachers talk about missing assignments and justifying their actions toward late work are grades--always grades--and the idea that we owe kids "real" experiences to prepare them for the big, bad world where they will be presumably be working in a few years. Paul Thomas, in an excellent piece on grading and late work has this to say:

My fellow Education Week Teacher blogger Starr Sackstein has been pushing educator thinking on grades for years. She also had a brilliant blog on late work last week, where she wrote this:

In the case of the young music teacher and the chorus of "Off with their heads!" that followed her post--a lot the recommendations felt like habitual, unexamined teacher practice: I always give half-credit for one day late OR I wouldn't waste important class time talking about it--just tell them to check the on-line gradebook.

The only upside I see is that the novice teacher who asked for help got it--and there was enough variety in the responses to prove that there is no one right way to address common problems. I wish her well. And I'm guessing she won't use the assignment again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Missing Assignments--and the Real World (Opinion)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The two mega-issues that emerge whenever teachers talk about missing assignments and justifying their actions toward late work are grades--always grades--and the idea that we owe kids "real" experiences to prepare them for the big, bad world where they will be presumably be working in a few years....

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Redos and Retakes Done Right (Educational Leadership)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Despite evidence that grading as punishment does not work and the mathematical flaw in the use of the zero on a 100-point scale, many teachers routinely maintain this policy in the mistaken belief that it will lead to improved student performance." ~ Douglas B. Reeves*

With all of the emphasis on change in education, it makes sense to look at our grading practices for some possible answers. The use of zeroes for missing work is a good place to start.

The average of 0 and 100 is 50. On most grading scales, 50 percent is still an F. The average of 50 and 100 is 75. On most grading scales, 75 percent is a C. In both cases, the student has an F and an A, yet the final outcome of each case is strikingly different. Why?

Most teachers give zeroes for missing work. The hole created by the zero grade is larger than the hole created by any other grade designation on the most commonly used scales across the country. If a student receives multiple zeroes in any given term, he or she is likely going to want to give up. And who can blame her?

In many cases, a student who's accumulating all those zeroes might be one of many middle schoolers who struggle with organization, and it's not necessarily for a lack of trying. In a Psychology Today piece, Professor Nancy Darling of Oberlin College explains how the organizational demands of middle school can "outstrip" the cognitive gains of early adolescents. Having five or six teachers in five or six classes-each with books, schedules, notes and assignments that need to make it from school to "home" and back to school-is overwhelming and, for some middle schoolers, nearly impossible.

Students who have less adult support or supervision at home may have even more difficulty completing homework in a timely manner or on a consistent basis-increasing the risk of being adversely disadvantaged by the zero grade. Students living in poverty may be responsible for caring for younger siblings. In high school, they may need to work in order to help with expenses.

While hosting a Saturday homework session at my school just a few months ago, I tried brainstorming with a student's mother about how the student might get some of her work done at home. The mother immediately cut me off with, "There are six of us in an 800-square-foot apartment. It isn't going to happen."

Now, imagine that my student has five recorded scores: three missing assignments, one B and one A. In many classes, her grades look as follows: 0, 0, 0, 17/20, 19/20, bringing her total grade to 36/100, a daunting F.

Now, imagine there is a way for her to prove partial completion for her three missing assignments despite not turning in the hard copies.

Remember the old spy movies where the secret agent breaks into a dark office in the middle of the night, pulls folders from a file cabinet, yanks out classified documents and hurriedly starts snapping pictures with a miniature camera? Time is ticking and the agent rushes to finish the photos, get the documents back into their proper folders and escape before he is discovered. The documents are the key. The agent knows he cannot take the originals, so he settles for pictures. Pictures offer proof.

The same is true for our students. Most cell phones now have digital cameras installed. To clarify, this is not a substitute for turning in work. As long as the evidence is captured and saved, it is a backup plan for avoiding the damaging impact of zeroes on a student's grade. Parents can be educated and encouraged to join in, too. A cultural shift might occur. Students can begin to see their phones as tools for success rather than toys for social media and games.

As a teacher, I am willing to give up to 60 percent for digital proof of completion, not an automatic 60 percent. I can think of no good argument against this. Such grading practices advocate for students rather than working as adversaries against them.

Another solution is to make homework represent a smaller percentage of the overall grade for the class. If homework fell into a 10 to 20 percent category, for example, the impact on the course grade is less severe. Couple this with awarding partial credit based on observational assessment, and students actually stand a chance of coming back from multiple failures.

As teachers, it is our job to set kids up to succeed, not to fail. Changing some of our grading practices and homework policies is a good place to start, and our guiding question must be: "Am I grading in a way that makes sense?"There are multiple ways for students to demonstrate understanding, show proof of effort and earn partial credit; handing in a hard copy should not be the only thing that counts.

*Reeves, Douglas B. "Leading to Change / Effective Grading Practices," Educational Leadership (February 2008), 85-87.
Donohue is a middle school English and social studies teacher in Monroe, Washington. He also teaches college courses in English, public speaking and education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Despite evidence that grading as punishment does not work and the mathematical flaw in the use of the zero on a 100-point scale, many teachers routinely maintain this policy in the mistaken belief that it will lead to improved student performance." ~ Douglas B.