A Twitter conversation prompted this post. While doing a quick Twitter check before bed
last night, I ran across @stopsbg and the associated website stopsbg.com. Whoa.
After a few exchanges, it was evident I could not argue my point using
the limited characters of Twitter. I don’t
think I will ever convince this party of anything, but I like to re-hash things
for myself sometimes.
I have to preface this by saying that my perspective
comes mostly as a 7th grade Life Science teacher. I do a lot of work with other content areas
in the middle level and some work with science at the high school level, but
ultimately I know the level I teach the best.
From the stopsbg.com website, it seems like the biggest concern is the
result of Standards-Based Grading (SBG) after high school. Perhaps my perspective is moot.
First, SBG isn’t something all in itself. It is one tool/strategy from a multitude of
strategies that are aimed at improving what we do as educators. Whenever I try to think about these ideas
about education, I always to try think about John Hattie’s work from his book Visible Learning. The central premise of this book is that
almost everything in education “works.”
Our goal isn’t to find something that works, it is to find something that
works really well. He tracks what works
best using something called an effect size and charges teachers to “know thy
impact,” which is to say that to not be satisfied with simply knowing that you
made AN impact, but to know how large of an impact you make.
I may be oversimplifying things, but my takeaway from
Hattie was that we need to have clear goals of our teaching. These goals need to be clear to both the
student and the teacher. In addition to
these clear goals, interested parties need to know where students are in
relation to these goals so appropriate adjustments can be made. Those adjustments are how we can help the
student move forward. Perhaps they need
some remediation to get caught up, perhaps they are right on target, or perhaps
they are ready to storm ahead. We need a
classroom that purposely and properly identifies these students and provides
the appropriate avenues.
So the above paragraph sounds like a bunch of
edu-speak. What does it mean, what does
it look like? We need clear goals, or
standards, or targets, or objectives, or whatever you want to call them. Our standards documents provide insight on
what those are. We need to work as
teacher teams to make sure we all agree on what they are. For example, I have a standard that is called
“Explanation and Argument.” It comes
from information gathered from A
Framework for k-12 Science Education to help student achieve the
performance expectations outlined in The
Next Generation Science Standards.
In order to do well on the standard, student are to be able to make a
claim about something, supply or identify evidence that supports that claim,
and explain how that evidence supports the claim using scientific
reasoning. Another standard I have is
called “Survival and Reproduction.” Part
of this standard is the understanding of simple genetics. Students need to understand how genetic
traits are passed on from generation to generation and how scientists can
deduce the genetic makeup of an organism by observing the offspring.
I know these goals, as do the people in my
department. We studied the standards and
come to the conclusion. Students know
these goals, but in a slightly different way.
I don't tell them, “Hey, you need to know how scientists can deduce
genetic makeup of an organism by observing the offspring.” Instead, I use intriguing examples from
nature to spark their curiosity and we practice the deduction and argument process. Oh, by the way, I (like most teachers) have
about 150 students spread across 5 classes with all sorts of different needs
and current background knowledge. I’m
not special, every teacher has a similar situation. I need a way to figure out what students know
and what they don’t know, and then let them know their precise situation so we
can move as far forward as possible.
This is where assessment comes in.
Part of that is conversations with students while they are working on
examples that we come up with. Part of
it observation. At some point though, I
need them to sit down and prove to me they get it. And we do that periodically too. So then, we take a quiz to see what is up.
At this point, nothing is different from any other good
teaching. Formal assessments where a
grade is given is where things change. Now,
a grade is given in two different categories: Explanation/Argument and Survival/Reproduction. I have
students who can make an “OK” argument but don’t have a great understanding of
genetics. Conversely, and more commonly,
I have students who get the whole genetics thing, but can’t set up an argument well. In both of the above situations, in my “traditional”
grading practices when I started teaching and how I think a lot of teacher
grade now, both of these students would receive a mediocre grade. I am not inclined to say what because that is
dumb, but it would probably be “passing” and not “excelling.” When parents and or students ask what they
could do to do better, the response is, “study harder/better.”
Enter Standards-Based Grading. These kids get grades in two different
categories. I literally have students that approach me that
say: “I see that I get the Survival and Reproduction part which I know goes
with genetics, but what how do I do better in this Explanation and Argument
category?” We have a conversation about what the difference is between evidence
and reasoning in this situation while we bring up how we did this in the
past. We do a little more practice that
is TARGETED on what needs to improve.
And then sometimes a student asks if they can “redo.” No, not directly. But, as a prepared teacher I have other
assessments in store. I’ll let them show
me how well they can produce an argument using evidence using a different assessment
in the short term or we will discuss when this will naturally come up again
because of the design of the class.
Not only can I help students who have the confidence and
drive to approach me with questions, I can also target groups of kids who are
trying to sneak under the radar. Again,
with traditional grading, both students would have received a mediocre
grade. Some kids are OK with
mediocrity. With SBG, I can figure out
what is causing that, and invite (make/compel) them come in and learn it
better. I don’t want a kid to leave my
class that doesn’t understand genetics at least at a basic level. Using SBG, I can identify whole groups of
students and work with them. Based on
their grade, I have a reasonable idea as to where they are and can provide
small group remediation, followed by directed practice, followed by another
quiz where they can prove to me if they now understand.
No, this does not happen with traditional grading.
Sure, traditional grading can have clear goals. Traditional grading should still go through
the same formative feedback loops. But
at the end of the day (or unit), the data is useless to remediate students who didn't
get it. It is a ton of work to go back
through to figure out the issues…so most teachers don’t. They move the whole class on and tell them to
study harder next time.
SBG encourages students to ask more specific questions
about their learning. Also, it allows
confidence to build in students. Very
few quizzes are total flops. There is
almost always at least something they did OK at. Not only that, if they did poorly across the
board we can make small steps. Since I
know what they know and don’t know, I can be more helpful. And then, once those kids start doing a
little better, they know they can do it, and they now will hold themselves to a
higher standard. Students where were OK
with a “2” a few months ago know that they should be at a 3 or 4. I have a couple dozen of those examples from
this school year along.
Remember, it comes back to clear goals and feedback to
and from the students about those goals so a teacher can “know thy impact.” SBG, when done well, is an efficient way to
know your impact.
No comments:
Post a Comment