I have run in to some big issues with my district and school using proficiency grading. This is a huge shift in thinking that is going to take time, maybe years, to fully accept and adapt to. I was informed by my district that I would have to change from using proficiency scores (exc, pro, dnm, etc...) to letter grades. I told them I would do letter grades at the quarter and the end of the semester, but not at progress reports. Parents, students and administrators are so accustomed to ATM grades, where as proficiency is looking at growth over the long term. It is difficult for them to realize that a "D" in October is not the same thing as a "D" in January. It is almost impossible for them to trust the idea that as they progress over the semester, that their grade, too, will improve. There have been many tears and frustrated emails, but I stick to my guns on this issue. Kids are so used to starting in September with the grade they will end the semester with. It freaks them out to see a C or D at this point if they are used to getting As and Bs. Another problem is the weight we assign to progress report and quarter grades. (ie. you can't play sports if your GPA is too low at the quarter,etc...) I have asked the admin to support those of us using proficiency grading, but it's hard for them to understand as well. We are so used to awarding good behavior (turning in work on time, not being tardy, having good study habits) with a good grade and focusing on the practice aspects of class (homework) - In my class, class time is homework and studying - the kids who may be failing their other classes for what happens once class is over, are doing well in my class because all that matters is what they do while they're here with me. It's really going to be have to be a total cultural shift that will take time. JoAnna Coleman Spanish Teacher Wilson High School 503-916-5280 ext. 75231 joannac@xxxxxxx http://profecoleman.wordpress.com/ ________________________________________ From: ola-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <ola-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Cathy Bird <cathy.bird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 7:28 AM To: ola@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ola] Re: Grading questions - Proficiency & Performance 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