How many points is this worth? Changing the conversations with students
By Carly Lacombe, Communication Arts
“I don’t think there was a particular incident that made me think, ok, enough of this grading craziness,” says Gleek (July 2014). “If I were to sum it up in a
single idea, my move to reject traditional grading occurred when I decided that engagement and conversations were to be the
centerpieces of my teaching philosophy.” (As cited in Barnes 2015)
single idea, my move to reject traditional grading occurred when I decided that engagement and conversations were to be the
centerpieces of my teaching philosophy.” (As cited in Barnes 2015)
Two years ago, some of my team members and I realized that we were starting to sound like voice tracks set to repeat. Our audio loop went: I’m so tired of the conversation about an 89.3%., of thinking about what percentages or points would constitute a fair reflection of student work. In spite of our instructional and curricular focus, our conversations with students were always the same…about points and grades and almost never about the learning.
Of course we know that students care about letter grades, and they should. But the focus of our conversations was so grade-driven that turning these conversations back strictly to learning was an arduous and exhausting task. As the opening quotation suggests, we were also sick of the “grading craziness.”
In order to effectively change the conversation, we felt we had to change more than just the assessments or instruction, we knew we had to change the feedback that we were giving students, as well as how students interacted with that feedback. Since our current grading system allowed feedback to be tied to percentages and points, even if attached to a rubric, the learner immediately devalued it after processing the mathematical bottom line.
We knew that in order for feedback to be the driving force behind our conversations we had to more strictly align our grading practice with learning targets. For us, a shift to Evidence-based reporting (EBR) would necessitate that the conversation focus on learning targets in order to succeed. EBR is an evidence-based grading system that uses gradations of learning to report growth and performance, instead of points and averages.
In this system, EBR, grades rise and fall in direct relation to demonstration of mastery of the learning targets. This means that any conversation that begins with, “My goal is to get an A,” immediately moves to an assessment of learning targets mastered and areas for growth. Rather than upcoming assignments entering the conversation in terms of their potential to raise the grade point average, they are brought up in terms of how they can be used to demonstrate skill mastery.
To return to the opening quotation, because the grading system reveals itself in terms of explicit learning targets in the gradebook, it forces a new type of conversation; and evidence-based conversation. These evidence-based conversations constantly scrutinize what learning looks like presently in the evidence the student produced and also what the evidence suggests about future performance.
Evidence-based reporting (EBR), a grading system that is based solely on the interpretation of student-produced evidence, offered us the ability to re-focus students on the learning targets and their ability to meet them. Ultimately this focus on evidence began to diminish the student refrain, is this worth points? A colleague recently articulated what I believe to be one of EBR’s greatest strengths and the greatest reason why I remain committed to this system: it changes the context of the conversation.
First, it forces the context of the conversation to be predicated on regular and effective formative assessment; including the highly individualized information students receive from self-assessment. Second, the context is aligned with the targets that they know they need to master. Third, the conversation is based on student reflection on their progress and to what extent they have an accurate perception of their learning self. Are the able to independently assess their learning?
For example, many times when I conference one-on-one with students in this EBR conversation, we focus on identifying their strengths (in learning targets), their areas for growth, their goals, and their strategies for attaining their goals. I still have students who say, “My goal is to get an A.” Now, however, instead of my response focusing on broad areas for improvement (writing, reading, etc.), or focusing on upcoming assignments that provide opportunities to raise the grade point average, the student and I can identify exactly what learning targets he or she needs to show proficiency in to attain that A.
Although the conversation may begin with “getting an A,” it is immediately directed back to what needs to be learned, demonstrated, and how to do it. This is significantly different from deciphering how many points a subsequent assignment is worth and whether or not a student can do holistically well enough on it to raise the grade from wherever it currently is. It also helps the student to narrow his or her focus and deeply address a developing skill.
For me, the shift to EBR makes these conversations about learning not only best practice, but also necessities to the success of the classroom. It has made me realize that teachers and students must be engaged in evidence-based conversations about learning, constantly.
Of course we know that students care about letter grades, and they should. But the focus of our conversations was so grade-driven that turning these conversations back strictly to learning was an arduous and exhausting task. As the opening quotation suggests, we were also sick of the “grading craziness.”
In order to effectively change the conversation, we felt we had to change more than just the assessments or instruction, we knew we had to change the feedback that we were giving students, as well as how students interacted with that feedback. Since our current grading system allowed feedback to be tied to percentages and points, even if attached to a rubric, the learner immediately devalued it after processing the mathematical bottom line.
We knew that in order for feedback to be the driving force behind our conversations we had to more strictly align our grading practice with learning targets. For us, a shift to Evidence-based reporting (EBR) would necessitate that the conversation focus on learning targets in order to succeed. EBR is an evidence-based grading system that uses gradations of learning to report growth and performance, instead of points and averages.
In this system, EBR, grades rise and fall in direct relation to demonstration of mastery of the learning targets. This means that any conversation that begins with, “My goal is to get an A,” immediately moves to an assessment of learning targets mastered and areas for growth. Rather than upcoming assignments entering the conversation in terms of their potential to raise the grade point average, they are brought up in terms of how they can be used to demonstrate skill mastery.
To return to the opening quotation, because the grading system reveals itself in terms of explicit learning targets in the gradebook, it forces a new type of conversation; and evidence-based conversation. These evidence-based conversations constantly scrutinize what learning looks like presently in the evidence the student produced and also what the evidence suggests about future performance.
Evidence-based reporting (EBR), a grading system that is based solely on the interpretation of student-produced evidence, offered us the ability to re-focus students on the learning targets and their ability to meet them. Ultimately this focus on evidence began to diminish the student refrain, is this worth points? A colleague recently articulated what I believe to be one of EBR’s greatest strengths and the greatest reason why I remain committed to this system: it changes the context of the conversation.
First, it forces the context of the conversation to be predicated on regular and effective formative assessment; including the highly individualized information students receive from self-assessment. Second, the context is aligned with the targets that they know they need to master. Third, the conversation is based on student reflection on their progress and to what extent they have an accurate perception of their learning self. Are the able to independently assess their learning?
For example, many times when I conference one-on-one with students in this EBR conversation, we focus on identifying their strengths (in learning targets), their areas for growth, their goals, and their strategies for attaining their goals. I still have students who say, “My goal is to get an A.” Now, however, instead of my response focusing on broad areas for improvement (writing, reading, etc.), or focusing on upcoming assignments that provide opportunities to raise the grade point average, the student and I can identify exactly what learning targets he or she needs to show proficiency in to attain that A.
Although the conversation may begin with “getting an A,” it is immediately directed back to what needs to be learned, demonstrated, and how to do it. This is significantly different from deciphering how many points a subsequent assignment is worth and whether or not a student can do holistically well enough on it to raise the grade from wherever it currently is. It also helps the student to narrow his or her focus and deeply address a developing skill.
For me, the shift to EBR makes these conversations about learning not only best practice, but also necessities to the success of the classroom. It has made me realize that teachers and students must be engaged in evidence-based conversations about learning, constantly.