[ola] Re: Grading questions - Proficiency & Performance
- From: "Cathy Bird" <cathy.bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ola@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 08:28:12 -0700 (MST)
I found Arnold's post in the ListServe...and think it is a very calming
piece of thought. I would love to hear someone say "I give grades for
this, quizzes are like this, and this" but until then, Arnold's thoughtful
reflections on Performance and Proficiency gives me insight, and calm.
Merci, Cathy
-------- Arnold, from Spring 2013 ------
Good Day to all,
I have spoken with Caleb about a recent exchange and he asked me to
respond
publicly. One of the conversations I have been following is the debate
about
grading. I know schools are pressuring grades based on "proficiency" but,
unfortunately, it often seems that their wishes for "proficiency grading"
runs counter to their insistence on sticking to traditional grading
practices. This is an issue that will eventually be resolved, once
"proficiency" is better understood, or at least has a common definition.
This leads me to the discussion of proficiency and performance. One
problem
I have encountered in proficiency-grading (specifically in foreign
languages
as other subjects are not my focus) is that administrators are asking for
a
"proficiency grade" every few weeks. With all due respect, there is a
disconnect with this thinking. It's like proclaiming who finished where in
the Indianapolis 500 after 150 miles. "The race isn't finished yet but I
want you you to tell me who finished where." If we know (and we do) that
it
takes time-on-task to reach a proficiency, assigning a proficiency grade
at
a quarter or a trimester is a mis-use of the term.
As Caleb mentioned, he has been trained to recognize patterns and identify
levels of proficiency. But in the classroom we are not seeing proficiency.
We are seeing performance. Performance is an indication of how one might
do
in a proficiency assessment but it is not proficiency. Recognizing a level
(i.e. "that was a good response at Intermediate level") in a classroom
topic, where the student is being supported by others students, a teacher,
words on the board, a topic that has been developed and has been practiced
is a sign of "performance." In order to ascertain "proficiency" that
student
would need to be subjected to a number of level checks and probes over a
variety of level-appropriate topics to determine if the level could be
sustained. Proficiency is not concerned with which topics have been
studied
or in what context a person learned a language. It is a wide-open
assessment
of ones ability to sustain a level. Sustain is the key word. One good
sentence at-level is cool, it is an indication of performance. But
assessing
proficiency requires me to follow up with a series of questions on that
topic to see if that level can be sustained. Then that process is repeated
on another topic, then probes to find the level of unsustained language
are
required, all to determine the level of proficiency. It is a process that
requires a specific protocol and structure. If it is not followed, you do
not prove a level of proficiency. So most of what we see in a classroom is
performance. Again, that performance MIGHT be an indication of their level
of proficiency, and often is, but accurately getting the sub level
requires
a full-on assessment that is a proficiency assessment.
Going back to grading What I have just addressed is why proficiency
grading every few weeks is not possible. If the goal is IL for the end of
the year, how can you assign a grade based on her proficiency? Is she
there
yet? After 6 weeks of class? Of course not. It takes time-on-task. So you
are not grading based on proficiency, you are grading based on
demonstrated
performance. (BTW, that requires rubrics) After 6 weeks saying "I think
Sara is an Intermediate" might be better stated as "Sara is showing
indications of performing at the Intermediate level in these areas: asking
questions, communicating in complete sentences, creating with the language
to give personal meaning, and in these tasks: A,B,C"
I know I have ruffled some feathers in this group. So be it. I am
outspoken.
Don't expect any changes soon. I do have a great deal of respect for the
OLA
group and for the enthusiasm and energy and dedication to teaching and
learning. The community you built is amazing. Darcy continues to amaze me
with her efforts to bring about changes in how people teach and learn
languages. Learning languages takes time. Learning how to teach
effectively
is an art that develops over years and years. Don't give up. Give
yourselves
and your students permission to succeed and to fail on occasion. This is
how
we grow.
The grading issue is a hassle and a distraction. My experience tells me
that
administrators (coming from the national level) will morph the whole
proficiency grading movement into something totally different in the next
few years. And they won't consult you about it. And if they do, they won't
understand why you can't be more like math. So be patient and don't be
distracted by all that noise. Stay focused on what you are striving to do.
Smile, nod your head, do the best you can with what they give you, and
stay
focused on teaching languages to kids. Anyway, that is my opinion.
Have a great summer.
Arnold
---------------------------------------
Cathy Bird
Middle School French
Colorado Academy
303-986-1501, x.2622
-----Original Message-----
From: ola-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ola-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Thomas Hinkle
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 7:07 AM
To: ola@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ola] Re: Grading questions
My recollection was that Arnold was pretty opposed to mapping
proficiencies directly to grades.
The thing that jumps out to me about your grading currently is the 10%
class participation grade -- I would think that should be a much bigger
part of the grade in an OLA classroom. Their learning is predicated on
their participating in the environment; if they don't do that, there is
very little they can learn, so the grade should be weighted accordingly.
As far as grading proficiency, it is complicated to map to letter grades.
We've been spending a lot of department meeting time discussing this and
where we've come out in recent department meetings is to say that what we
need to identify and target are the behaviors we want to see in a
rehearsed or practiced task, behaviors that are appropriate to students
learning and that will push students towards the next level. It is not
trivial to map from the performance guidelines directly to these
behaviors, though. For example, we want NH/IL students pushing themselves
toward intermediate behaviors, so our rubric identifies as "A" lots of
things that are intermediate behaviors, with the idea that in a
particular, intentional assessment, kids can and should do these things in
order to stretch toward the next level. Under "C" we've identified things
that largely represent backsliding for kids into novice behaviors
(constant listing, etc) -- the behaviors we expect kids to be able to
handle and that we want to push them beyond.
Here's our work so far to create rubrics on this basis:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1angdptJCy1AO7sGkt-GqWeU7jPphIrb0TabmzC
KN9DI/edit?usp=sharing
The thing is, a grading rubric is not the same thing as a proficiency
standard which is not the same thing even as a performance standard.
In a (relatively) traditional school, we use grades and rubrics to tell
students how far they are along toward mastery, what they need to do to
make progress toward a skill, and what they should do on a specific task
-- all of these purposes are different, and the conflation of them makes
for complicated work.
Tom
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:55 AM, Ashley Uyaguari
<auyaguari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> No. Not dense at all. It's so new. We will elaborate. I'll do a search
> for old list serve emails for you. I believe Arnold has written about
this.
>
> Nanosh, is there a way for Cathy and others to go to old emails before
> they joined?
>
> I recommend a mopi training for helping with this too. Especially with
> Arnold because he relates it back to classroom application.
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, Cathy Bird wrote:
>>
>> What does that mean? I am sorry if I appear dense here, but how do I
>> evaluate and give a letter grade/percentage for writing? or oral? Do
>> you give NM an A and NH a B? I had planned to evaluate students on
>> their progress from one level to another, but that isn't something I
>> can evaluate yet...only one month in.
>>
>> And what are your tests? Open ended writing? What about quizzes? I
>> know what to do in traditional, but need more explicit ways of
>> equating a grade for the work done in class.
>>
>> Cathy Bird, via iPad
>>
>> On Nov 5, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Caleb Zilmer <caleb_zilmer@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>>
>> I don't know about anyone else, but I have gone almost entirely
>> proficiency/performance. 90% of the grade (50% tests, 20% final and
>> 10%
>> quizzes) is based on what they can do other the language.
>>
>> That's an important note, actually: it's about what they CAN do, not
>> what they can't do. I have stopped nitpicking discrete points if
grammar, etc.
>> Can they communicate a message at approximately NM, NH, IL? Good
>> enough! It makes the grading go much quicker and easier, and more
>> students succeed, too
>> :)
>>
>> Enviado desde el iPhone de Caleb Zilmer
>>
>> El 05/11/2013, a las 17:28, "Cathy Bird"
>> <cathy.bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> escribió:
>>
>> Hello, OWLers. I need some help. I am in my first month of OWL in my
>> French 1 class and it is time to get some grades in the book. I have
>> a number of grades from the first month of traditional, but nothing
>> really from the past month of OWL. Originally I imagined giving
>> grades on HW, class skills (ie: OWL goals), writing and speaking, but
>> it is as clear as mud right now.
>>
>>
>>
>> My standard break-down for grades is 20% Homework; 25% Quizzes; 25%
>> Tests/Projects; 10% Participation; 10% Preparedness; 10% Citizenship.
>> I feel good with HW, participation, preparation, and citizenship
but
tests?
>> Quizzes?
>>
>> Here is what I have
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. During English week, I said that students would earn 10 points
>> per day 6 pts for speaking in L2 and 4 pts for homework being done.
>> I did not assign a lot of homework, but I did note who had done it or
>> not, so I have a homework grade for them.
>>
>> 2. I evaluated their alignment with OWL goals and gave them
>> feedback, asked them to argue with me if they felt I was off base,
>> but I feel a little uncomfortable grading that document. Is meets
>> an A, approaching a B, and just beginning a C?
>>
>> 3. I gave them a pre-assessment writing activity that I could
grade
>> as a quiz/test. It was a homework, rather than an in-class assessment.
>>
>>
>>
>> Any thoughts or ideas would be greatly appreciated. Merci
>>
>>
>>
>> Cathy Bird
>> Middle School French
>> Colorado Academy
>> 303-986-1501, x.2622
>
>
>
> --
> Ashley Uyaguari
>
> Spanish Teacher 6/7/8
> Team Curriculum Coordinator
> Innovation Academy Charter School
> Tyngsboro, MA 01879
> 978-649-0432 x3301
>
> This email may contain confidential or privileged information. If you
> are not the intended recipient, please advise by return e-mail and
> delete immediately without reading or forwarding to others.
>
--
Thomas Hinkle
English & Spanish Department Coordinator Innovation Academy Charter School
Other related posts:
