Standards Based Grading and Reporting MARIE ALCOCK PHD Modified from Tom Guskey’s work and Bob Marzano’s work Materials available at .

Standards Based Grading and Reporting

MARIE ALCOCK PHD

Modified from Tom Guskey’s work and Bob Marzano’s work

Materials available at http://www.lsalearning.com

Agenda for Today

1. What is the purpose of standards based grading and reporting?

1. Standards based & Standards aligned (referenced)

2. Grading & Reporting

3. Rubrics & Proficiency scales

4. Grading & Scoring

2. What should we consider when designing a reporting tool?

1. Impacts on instruction & policies

2. Steps for designing assessments

3. Work session

1. Assessment #2

2. Include proficiency scales

Support Resources:

1. Local research: http://www.relnei.org/news/bridge-event-standards-based-grading.html

2. Samples: http://www.ernweb.com/public/standards-based-report-cards.cfm

3. Samples: http://www.ernweb.com/public/grading-struggling-learners.cfm

4. Training and PD support: http://www.schoolimprovement.com/experts/thomas-guskey/

5. Active and archive research: http://www.marzanoresearch.com/resources/proficiency-scale-bank

Standards Based & Standards Aligned

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?

Definitions types of grading and reporting

Standards Based Grading and reporting based in

relation to standards and students can move up or down to other sets of standards once mastery is achieved.

Product grades are only reflection of what current performance is in relation to identified standards student is working on. (transparent grading and reporting)

Standards Aligned A.K.A. Standards-Referenced

Teachers give students feedback on a set of defined standards

Students DO NOT move up on down on sets of standards

May include other factors such as rules compliance, attendance, social behaviors, attitudes, level of effort, etc. (non-transparent grading)

EXAMPLE

Standards Based

Sally – 2nd grade student

Time

Standards LVL

Performance on

standards

Rubric /Grade

1st Grade 1 3.0 3 / A

2nd Grade 1 3.5 3 / A

3rd Grade 2 3.0 3 / A

4th Grade 2 3.5 3 / A

Standards Aligned (Referenced)

Sally – 2nd grade student

Time

Standards LVL

Performance on standards

Rubric /Grade

1st Grade 2 1.5 2 / C

2nd Grade 2 2.0 2 / C

3rd Grade 2 3.0 3 / A

4th Grade 2 3.5 3 / A

Grading & Reporting

A QUEST FOR

MEANINGFUL GRADES

Bloom’s Question to Education

Find Develop

Two Problems with Reporting

We do not agree on the purpose

We do not agree on what counts

Problem #1 = Purpose

Most common purposes

Most Important

?

Least Important

?

Sample: Survey Results Most Important

Sample: Survey Results - Least Important

Problem #2 = ElementsAmong these elements, how many would you advocate including in a report card grade?

Three Criteria in Transparent Grading

Product Criteria

Process Criteria

Progress Criteria

The standards or content & skill expectations

The habits of mind, behaviors, study skills, and/or

dispositions expected from learners (i.e., personal

responsibility, social responsibility, perseverance, rules

following etc.)

The growth in learning from beginning to end of experience.

Reporting on a set of standards

4

3

4

3

Sample Standards Based Report

Meaningful grades are:

AccurateConsistentMeaningfulSupportive of

learning

Two Major Conclusions from Research

1) Grading is NOT essential to the

instructional process

Teachers can teach without grades

Students can and do learn without

grades

2) Reporting should always be done based

on clear criteria and never on a curve.

CHECKING is ESSENTIAL for LEARNING

Checking is Diagnostic

Teacher is Advocate

Student is still able to Improve Performance

Product is descriptive feedback to student (Prescription)

Grading is Evaluative

Teacher is Judge

Student is Sorted

Product is evaluative feedback to student (Autopsy)

Right Not right yet

Next Steps

1, 2, 4, 5 3 Review Basic Math facts 0-10

6, 7, 8, 9 Redo HW 1.4

10 Practice lining up place value problems (5)

Rubrics & Proficiency Scales

WHAT EXACTLY IS THE DIFFERENCE?

Definitions

RUBRIC For Producing a “grade” or “score” or

“Next steps learning plan”

Organized around any number of targets or goals

Proficiency Scale

For producing an assessment or report aligned to clear standards

Organized around any number of test items or tasks

3 2 1

Target Criteria

1

Above Target description

At Target description

Below Target description

Target Criteria

2

Above Target description

At Target description

Below Target description

Scale Level Test Items

2.0 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 10

3.0 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14

4.0 9, 13, 15

RUBRICS

Evaluative DescriptiveNum. Objective Proficient Developing Feedback

1

Focus/Introduce the

Topic

Orients the reader by introducing the topic

Writes for an intended audience (formal style)

Attempts to introduce the topic

Attempts to write for an intended audience (formal style)

2

Organization

Organizes ideas and information into logical introductory, body and conclusion

Groups related information into paragraphs or sections, including formatting (e.g., headings)

Uses linking words and phrases appropriately to connect ideas within and across categories of information

Attempts to organize ideas and information into a paragraph structure that includes an introduction, body and conclusion

Grouping of ideas lacks cohesion (e.g., list-like, rambling, or repetitive)

Attempts to use some simplistic linking words to connect ideas

Proficiency Scale

Grading & Scoring

Proficiency Scale

Really just three levels…

Grading / Reporting

Possible Conversions

Proficiency Scale

Traditional 100 Pt Scale

Rubric

4.0 A+ 100 4

3.5 A 95 4

3.0 A- 92 3

2.5 B 85 3

2.0 B- 80 2

1.5 C 75 2

1.0 C- 70 1

0.5 D 65 1

0.0 F 50 0

Sample Scoring System – not numeric

SAMPLE Reporting ToolLITERACY 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

Reading

Phonics and Word Recognition

Fluency

Key Ideas and Details

Craft and Structure

Integration of Knowledge and Ideas

Range of reading – Text Complexity

Writing

Types and Purposes

Production and Distribution

Research

Range

Speaking &

Listening

Discussion

Presentation

Language

Conventions

Knowledge of Language

Vocabulary

Sample Standards Based Report

SAMPLE Reporting ToolMATHEMATICS 1st

Quarter

2nd Quarter

3rd Quarter

4th Quarter

Operations &

Algebraic

Thinking

Write and Interpret Numerical Expressions

Analyze Patterns and Relationships

Numbers &

Operations- in

Base ten

Understanding Place Value System

Perform Operations with Multi-digit whole numbers and with decimals to hundredths

Numbers &

Operations -

Fractions

Use Equivalent Fractions as a strategy to add and subtract fractions

Apply and Extend previous understandings of multiplication and division

Measurement &

Data

Convert Like Measurement units within a given measurement system

Represent and interpret data

Geometric measurement: Understand concepts of volume

Geometry

Graph points on the coordinate plane to solve real-world and mathematical problems

Classify two-dimensional figures into categories based on their properties.

SAMPLE Reporting ToolMATHEMATICS 1st

Quarter

2nd Quarte

r

3rd Quarter

4th Quarte

r

Operations &

Algebraic

Thinking

Write and Interpret Numerical Expressions 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0

Analyze Patterns and Relationships 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5

Numbers &

Operations- in

Base ten

Understanding Place Value System 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0

Perform Operations with Multi-digit whole numbers and with decimals to hundredths

3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5

Numbers &

Operations -

Fractions

Use Equivalent Fractions as a strategy to add and subtract fractions

2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0

Apply and Extend previous understandings of multiplication and division

3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0

Measurement &

Data

Convert Like Measurement units within a given measurement system

2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0

Represent and interpret data 1.0 1.5 1.5 2.0

Geometric measurement: Understand concepts of volume

2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0

Geometry

Graph points on the coordinate plane to solve real-world and mathematical problems

2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0

Classify two-dimensional figures into categories based on their properties.

3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5

Impacts on Instruction and Policies

WHAT CHANGES?

Instructional Implications

No zero – “Get it done” Refine, refine, refine Do it again until you know it Learn, learn, learn how to do better = formative Not average, Best performance = summative Consequence fits the crime… Resilience

A simple idea supported by research

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec13/vol71/num04/Simple-Is-Not-Always-Easy.aspx

1. Set clear learning objectives.

2. Use an anticipatory set to focus and engage students in their learning.

3. Present information and model new knowledge or skills.

4. Provide students with opportunities for deliberate practice.

5. Use regular formative assessments to check for student understanding.

6. Reteach as needed, using individualized interventions targeted to learning

needs.

7. Confirm understanding before moving on to new content.

Steps to Designing Assessments and Report Cards

Big Picture Steps in the Process

Prioritize Standards Write Proficiency Scales Align Teaching Materials

and Resources Dissemination to Teams

and Reporting Tools

Specific to this Week’s work

How to Prioritize StandardsStep 1 Analyze Standards

Documents

Step 2 Select Preliminary Prioritized Standards

Step 3 Categorize Prioritized Standards

Step 4: Review the Final Categories

Please Bring: Copy of Year-Long Context Copy of Grade level

Standards Common Assessments if

created

WORK SESSION TODAY

Task for Today

1. Identify the standards for the second assessment using your year-long context.

2. Complete a proficiency scale template for each standard(s)

3. Identify how many assessment items there will be for each level (2.0 / 3.0 / 4.0)

4. Write assessment items

Partial Bibliography

Block, J. (1971). Mastery learning: Theory and practice. Dallas, TX: Holt, Rinehart, and Wilson.

English, L., Dickinson, G., McBride, J., Milligan, J., & Nichols, J. (2004). Throw out the lifeboat: Staying afloat in the age of efficiency and effectiveness. Education, 125(1), 104–110.

Fullan, M. (2011). Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for Strategic Education.

Gawande, A. (2013, July 29). Slow ideas. The New Yorker. Retrieved fromwww.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/07/29/130729fa_fact_gawande

Goodwin, B. (2013). Teacher leadership: No guarantee of success. Educational Leadership, 71(2), 78–80.

Guskey, T. R. (2007). Closing achievement gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom's "Learning for Mastery." Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(1), 8–31.

Hunter, M. (1985). What's wrong with Madeline Hunter?Educational Leader ship, 42(5), 57–60.

Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., Bangert-Drowns, R. L., & Slavin, R. L. (1990). Effective ness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265–299.

Slavin, R. E. (1989). On mastery learning and mastery teaching. Educational Leader ship, 46(7), 77–79.

https://edc.adobeconnect.com/_a1002235226/p4vifhrw0ai/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec13/vol71/num04/Simple-Is-Not-Always-Easy.aspx