# data[].attributes.body
Tiering assessments can occur when educators tailor assessments to meet the individual student where they are (especially with their readiness levels in mind), while still adhering to standards. Specificity is a blanket theme within the ideas of tiering, as focsuing on one topic and tailoring your work to your student are vital for successful tiering. Increasing complexity and challenge are two ways to hold students accountable, as they will have to deepen their dedication to understanding the subjects. Additionally, rubrics for the various tiers may be made for accountability. This can do with readiness levels.

I believe it's appropriate to the extent that students are fully dedicated to their learning; this can be intitiated with Wormeli's concept of "learning contracts." I also believe that "choice boards" for big mastery assessment projects can aid in this   negotiation. This gives students agency in demonstrating their learning, and I always leave room for negotiating with what's on the choice boards. For example, each board always has a "free choice" box, like on a bingo card. After my seventh and eighth grade students read the board, they choose a box and write a proposal for their project. If they choose the free choice, in ELA, each project includes a writing component and a creative component. However, if students are passionate enough to have reasons to do just one of the above, I'll allow them to negotiate a new project. I've found that that negotiation allows the speak of passion students have for their learning to become a blazing flame.

# data[].attributes.body
Tiering can be defined as the way that educators adjust assignments and assessments according to students and their varied learning styles, readiness, and interests. Tiering is important because it is a form of differentiation. In order to ensure that all students are being held accountable for the established curriculum goals and standards, teachers should start the tiering at the standard. Students should be able to demonstrate mastery of the standard in multiple ways. Advanced students should be given tasks with increased complexity. Students should be given learning menus so that they have an opportunity to demonstrate mastery of the content that works best for them. This makes the task interesting and relevant for them.

# data[].attributes.body
Brendan Strickland

Tiering is a necessary response to differentiation and particularly necessary in the current post-pandemic climate. To tier an assessment is to ask more of a student who can give more, and less of a student who can give less on an assessment. When discussing assessments, it seems as if the default assumption is that we are discussing serious, summative assessments, but if we flip that script and discuss assessments as formative, how could we dispute the necessity of such a practice? In a high school class (such as mine) in which there are over 5 grade levels of separation in reading benchmark between the highest and lowest student, it would be absurd not to attempt to tier assessments in order to measure the lower student's progress up the reading benchmark level. The alternative is to leave the student who is already behind in the dust. That is not our vocation.

It is absolutely appropriate for a student to negotiate content mastery. Whether or not those negotiations will be successful is up to the teacher as it remains the teacher's final decision, but it is an act of epistemological arrogance on the part of a teacher to assume that a student, while young and inexperienced has -nothing- to offer in a conversation about how to prove how they should be assessed, and how they might prove what they know. This is why negotiation has a vital role in the classroom, as negotiation itself in my class can be a form of assessment. Making a good argument and building a case is absolutely a fundamental part of critical thinking and argumentation, and that's a key component to a vibrant English education.

# data[].attributes.body
We “tier” learning for students success, and we do the same with assessments. If students need more, fewer, or different approaches to learning and assessment. Teachers responds to students effectively, where we make sure all students learn the material. I like tiering assessments in parts or sections, especially for projects. I also do review and create study guides for them. I hold students accountable by having them self grade their homework, meet deadlines on time, and tell me their level of understanding periodically. I feel that in some cases, it is appropriate for students to negotiate with teachers about how they will demonstrate mastery. Every student learns differently and at their own pace. Students should sell advocate for themselves and communicate their concerns to their teacher. We want our students to be successful with their learning and meeting the learning objective.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Tiering is a form of differentiation.Teachers would tier assessments to meet students readiness levels. Not all students are the same, students need to be met at their level so that they are able to progress at a level that is appropriate for their learning. We can't expect students to master specific grade level skills if they have not mastered other skills needed. That is where tiering and differentiation come into play.  We as educators tier to meet the needs of their students.
2. We tier assessments while still holding students accountable by implementing “learning contracts”. Learning contracts are a great tool to use to get students involved in their learning. It allows for students to look back as an agreed upon set of goals and to be responsible for their own learning. Another way is implementing checkpoints for assignments that have multiple parts and deadlines. Incorporating negotiation and accountability, allowing for soft deadlines can be useful for students to advocate for themselves and their needs as a learner. There are assignments that require hard deadlines.
3. It is very important for students to negotiate with teachers. Students are the best resource to comment on their own learning. Students need to advocate for themselves to make sure they are receiving any support that is needed. What is important is teaching students how to advocate and negotiate their own learning needs. This will allow students to either one ask for help or two, be more confident in their learning ability.

# data[].attributes.body
Wormeli’s book describes tiering assessments as helpful identifiers for students' academic goals. Tiering allows students to complete tasks in various formats and helps the teacher provide different opportunities to enhance engagement with the content. With multiple benchmarks, the teacher and student can assess and evaluate each skill used to complete the task throughout the performance. Using this form of assessment can help students and teachers understand each person's levels of mastery. In addition, Tiering provides opportunities to students to take ownership of their learning while holding them accountable.

# data[].attributes.body
Tiered assessments provides students the opportunity to see themselves progress through material, while also allowing the teacher to see where a student may be struggling, or at what point within the skill being taught might the student be stuck with. Providing tiered assessments differentiates the classroom so that students can look at the same content in more ways than one, therefore providing more challenging material or work for them to overcome. This can give data to the teacher as to what generally needs to be worked on within a particular content area.

Two ways to tier assessments and hold students accountable is to allow students to decide on how long they work on each particular task, and to provide a sort of "Cornell" style of material presentation. With students determining and creating their own rules, they might be able to want to use what they know, or find out more in order to show that they can progress through the material with ease. With Cornell-styled presentation, this would mean that the teacher provides questions that the students must answer, and each question allows the student to do the "research", or progress through the different tiered assessments to come up with answers for those questions proposed at the beginning of the lesson.

In terms of it being appropriate for the student to negotiate for their demonstration of mastery, it is fully dependent on the teacher. A teacher who has effectively taught and formative assessed their students might be met with students who want to show that they have mastered the material in the most effective way possible, meaning that the students can go above and beyond what they have learned and been assessed on to demonstrate mastery. An ineffective teacher, however, may come across students who do not want to take the class seriously, because they know that the teacher does not take the class seriously and has ineffectively taught the students.

# data[].attributes.body
Why would we tier assessments? Tiering is another form of differentiation, and accounts for the varied readiness levels, interests, and learner profiles.  I have explored grouping students by learning style (kinesthetic, visual, audial), as well as “sparketype” (what type of work sparks interest).  Different learner profiles often lend to “lateral adjustments” according to Wormeli.  Tiering, however, is a vertical differentiation measurement.  We do this so all students can meet an established learning goal rather than a quantitative standard - this eliminates discrimination against students pre-disposed to a lower learning level or style.

In order to still meet established curriculum goals while tiering assessments, the following should be considered: “the equalizer” - what can the student do to achieve the desired outcome? What are different means of communicating understanding of this? Lastly, should students be allowed to negotiate how they will demonstrate mastery of content, or is this up to the teacher? Wormeli brings up “learning contracts” which essentially provides the student with a real-life skill of negotiation and commitment through choice.  Students can negotiate the time line for completion in this method, and how they will show mastery (type of assessment).

# data[].attributes.body
Why would we tier assessments?

Teachers would tier assessments in order to adjust the content to the level of the student’s current skills. Some content given without regard with student’s current skill level may overwhelm students or not stimulate them enough. Differentiation expert, Dr. Carol Ann Tomlinson calls this “ratcheting” up or down the challenge level (Wormeli, 56). Some students need the ratcheting of the content so they can develop their foundational skills while other students may want to fine tune their own.

How do we tier assessments while also holding students accountable for the established curriculum goals?

Learning contracts are a great way to keep students accountable to meeting goals or requirements. In essence, “While the teacher may decide what objectives will be addressed, the student has an opportunity to negotiate the time for completion and how to obtain and demonstrate a level of mastery”  (Wormelli, 61).  This method allows for students not to feel pressured to be up stop standard right then and there, but know they have a time-limit to their mastery. These learning contracts are not to be taken lightly. If broken, the student must return to learning with the rest of the class.

Is it appropriate for students to negotiate with teachers about how they will demonstrate mastery of content?

Yes, it is appropriate because teachers are not able to read the minds of students during lessons to objectively know a students understanding. The most we can do is to observe it through their classwork, assessments, and work habits. With so many other variables going on, student communication with a teacher is a must. As long as deadlines are met and expectations are set, student negotiation with teachers should be more than appropriate.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Wormeli, tiering in assessments to alter the dynamic of tasks allows for a differentiated classroom so that students can meet tasks in various formats.  To meet established goals in the curriculum, students can be held accountable by having to meet various benchmarks, checkpoints to meet requirements as a student.  Students can also demonstrate mastery of content, by coming to terms with the teacher to reach certain goals for a particular assignment.  Tiering assessments allow the teacher to provide expectations for students at each point that a benchmark is set.  At these different benchmarks, both the student and teacher can reflect and evaluate the student’s performance at each task.

# data[].attributes.body
Tiering assessments changes the challenge level and provides differentiation by meeting the standard in different forms. Wormelli mentions how the lowest tier should be the standard or benchmark performance. Tiers should be created based on the current students we teach, not pre-determined levels. Tiers can be as simple as more time, but the level of complexity should stay the same.

It is appropriate for students to negotiate with teachers about  demonstrating mastery. This gives students different tiers to demonstrate their understanding in the content area. On a personal level, students may lean toward certain projects based on whether they are mainly visual, kinesthetic, or auditory learners.

# data[].attributes.headline
Alexis Buhler   -                                                According to Wormeli, teachers tier assessments because students have varying readiness levels. We tier assessments while also holding students accountable for the established curriculum goals by  designing the on-grade-level task and raising the challenge level. That way we maintain focus on the learning outcomes and balance between the two. Additionally, it is important to break down the subset of skills while also staying focus on one concept/task. Adjusting challenge level is an important element to successful differentiation. Wormeli lists a number of ways to increase or decrease complexity of an assignment such as the Tomlinson Equalizer. Wormelli notes that learning contracts serve as vehicles for tiering assessments that allow students to negotiate with teachers about how they will demonstrate mastery of content.  Learning contracts combine teacher and student designed tasks: students can work at their own pace and choose how they will obtain and demonstrate mastery in the objective the teacher assigns. They are effective when they clearly designate the student's responsibilities, the teacher's expectations, and potential consequences if they do not live up to those expectations.                 

# data[].attributes.subject
Alexis Buhler   -                                                According to Wormeli, teachers tier assessments because students have varying readiness levels. We tier assessments while also holding students accountable for the established curriculum goals by  designing the on-grade-level task and raising the challenge level. That way we maintain focus on the learning outcomes and balance between the two. Additionally, it is important to break down the subset of skills while also staying focus on one concept/task. Adjusting challenge level is an important element to successful differentiation. Wormeli lists a number of ways to increase or decrease complexity of an assignment such as the Tomlinson Equalizer. Wormelli notes that learning contracts serve as vehicles for tiering assessments that allow students to negotiate with teachers about how they will demonstrate mastery of content.  Learning contracts combine teacher and student designed tasks: students can work at their own pace and choose how they will obtain and demonstrate mastery in the objective the teacher assigns. They are effective when they clearly designate the student's responsibilities, the teacher's expectations, and potential consequences if they do not live up to those expectations.                 

# data[].attributes.body
According to Dr. Rick Wormeli, tier assessments are "emphasizing the adjustments we make in assessments according to students’ readiness level," (Wormeli pg. 56). He compares this process to a differentiation method known as 'ratcheting,' which scales an assessment up or down in challenge level. He recommends starting with the established standard as a base-line, adjusting according to students' ability to meet the standard. As students progress through their tiered assessments, they should be moving upward in challenge-level; allowing them to build up their specific skills and concentrations over time. In terms of a student's ability to negotiate how they are assessed: 'negotiate,' is a strong word. While students' abilities, skills, and readiness levels should be factored into their assessment, which can be 'negotiated,' over the course of the semester through assessments and observation; allowing students to 'negotiate,' in the full sense of that word, could be potentially problematic. Students would be inclined to choose the assessment that doesn't challenge them or assess the necessary skills of the chapter or unit. Instead, students may be able to choose from a list of assessment options. Still, this might just be my perspective based on my experience with middle school students.

# data[].attributes.body
Tiering assessments helps meet the needs of all students and it helps provide differentiated instruction. Since students learn differently, teachers would tier assessments to meets students where they are. It helps us become more effective teachers. Teachers should start with tiering for the standard or benchmark and then move up. The complexity of tasks can gradually change. We should create tiers for the students we teach, not a predetermined imaginary group. Teachers have to adjust according to who we teach since every class is different. Students have varying needs and interests, so they should be allowed to show mastery of content in a variety of ways. When you give them options, there is more opportunity for success. Giving students a learning contract is a great tool where students can “buy in” on how they will show mastery and the time allotted to complete it.  This allows for more student autonomy and helps keep the students on task with a clear goal in mind.

# data[].attributes.body
A tiered assessment is a formative assessment that blends instruction with assessment. While it is possible to tier a summative assessment the process makes most sense during the formative process as it allows students to begin learning where they are while simultaneously assessing their mastery of course content. A tiered assessment allows for students to address mastery of the content area at their current challenge level of production so that students with lower level abilities still have an avenue to present knowledge without being challenged outside the scope of their comfort zone and students with higher level abilities are able to display both their skills and their content mastery.  While a tiered assessment can be used to differentiate content mastery across different skill levels it does fall short when it comes to skill evaluation if the skills required to complete the lowest tier of the assessment are beneath the course goal benchmark. This is why tiered assessments are best used as formative assessments to help students work toward a skill level appropriate to the summative assessment while still keeping pace in all content areas.
Students should always be allowed to negotiate their evaluation with their teachers even if the answer is no. What differentiation is really attempting is to replicate the personal relationship required to facilitate true learning with a bureaucratic process. To that end the goal is really to establish a real personal connection with each student and an understanding of their current skill and content mastery. All personal relationships depend on negotiation as a primary force in driving said social dynamic forward. If the student is hampered in their ability to negotiate or reconcile with the teacher then the process of differentiation stagnates. That said, sometimes the standard is the standard and a student has to put up results or fail. This by no means should limit the poorer students from passing the class. No summative assessment should be impossible for any one student in the class to complete.

# data[].attributes.body
Tiering assessments help teachers address the needs of their students. Tiered assessments allow educators to challenge their high achieving students while also supporting their low achieving students. We can tier assessments while also holding students accountable by creating a learning contract with mutually agreed-upon sets of assessments and expectations. Wormeli explains that a learning contract must “clearly list the student’s responsibilities, the teacher’s expectations, and the consequences for not living up to those responsibilities and expectations” (62). We must make sure that the assessments truly measure whether the students have met their goals. It is appropriate for students to discuss with their teachers how they can demonstrate mastery of content. When teachers involve their students in the assessment process, students tend to be more willing to work hard to meet their goals.

# data[].attributes.body
Tiering assessments can help us identify and reflect with our students how our academic goals are being met. For any given unit, students will be expected to perform a skill or concept at a particular level of thinking (e.g. Bloom's Taxonomy). As the text mentions, "It's helpful to list every skills or every bit of information a student must use in order to meet the needs of the task or assignment successfully" (57). In this process, teachers may come to more easily identify they ways in which they can hold students accountable for curriculum goals. Standards can often seem difficult to translate not only into a unit, but into daily lessons. But to "focus on one concept or skill" (57) after gathering and tiering all the variables can perhaps make it easier to translate objectives and assessments to students who may prefer or need to demonstrate  mastery of content in their own way.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Tiering, which is described as adjusting assessments based on our students' "readiness levels," is important so that each student can work at a level that challenges them individually, yet still meeting the standard(s) and producing content that is measurable.  At the very minimum, students should be meeting the basic expectations  and it's essential that educators put an emphasis on only one concept. In my content area (ELA), there are so many components to a lesson that it can easily become overwhelming for students to achieve all skillsets. Once students are comfortable focusing on one component/skillset, then it is recommended to slowly integrate more to achieve "tiering." Another important reason as to why we tier assessments is so that we can appropriately challenge our students, reinforcing concepts, and integrating an element of complexity.
2. Educators can tier assessments, while still holding students accountable for the established curriculum goals by incorporating a "learning contract." Learning contracts "allow students to work at their own pace and on skills or in content areas that best meet their needs and interests." This is beneficial because both teacher and student become involved, allowing the students to feel in charge of their learning. Checkpoints, or deadlines, can also help students to be held accountable and also gives them an opportunity to go above and beyond on the task.
3. I think it can be appropriate at times for students to negotiate with teachers about how they wish to demonstrate their mastery, however, teachers should refine options before letting them choose or "negotiate." The end goal should be having our kids be competent, so if we refine their options, we are subtly narrowing down the assessments which they can negotiate. Students should become more independent, and in order to foster this, we should be allowing a space for dialogue to happen to prove their mastery at each individual level. By allowing this, students can be in charge of how they wish to accomplish the assessment.