Really enjoy following your thinking. It is similar to the journey I've been on since I started teaching. I realized early on that both grading and grades were at best false proxies. I've been lucky enough to be part of the world languages community with scores of dedicated, innovative colleagues. Our discipline was fortunate because we are small enough to try things without attracting too much blowback as we go. That allowed us to codify a set of standards (your first pillar, which led to adoption of an accepted proficiency scale, and we've had assessment leaders who have developed a variety of valid, reliable assessments (3rd pillar) that can measure an individual's proficiency on a scale from Novice low (beginning language learner of any age) to Distinguished (equivalent of a native speaker with an advanced degree). An individual's age, number of years of study, type of program, language being assessed etc, are not factors -- it comes down to what they know and can do in/with the language. My work has led me to focus on 3 essentials that are similar to your four pillars. The first is clearly defined standards of proficiency (not to be confused with performance). Teachers and students both know what it means to function at the Intermediate Mid level of proficiency. No secrets about what you're trying to accomplish. Second is an external, validated assessment. This also means that a learner in Connecticut or Oregon will be held to the same standard as a learner in Mississippi or Nebraska or California. Someone assessed as Novice High in Delaware has the same use of the language as someone at Novice High in North Dakota. No teacher bias. Third is Proficiency-based credits. It's quite simple -- when your proficiency is assessed at the level agreed upon in your school/district, you get the credit. Not before and no need to wait until the end of a term to keep moving on. No sliding by with a B- or a D and getting further behind as you go. It also puts control over the credit in the student's possession. Want to spend more time and progress more rapidly? It'll pay off. Spend time on your language learning during a vacation? It now has real value. Need to slow down while you focus on other things? No problem (but you won't get a credit just because the calendar says it's the end of the term). This also fundamentally changes the teacher/student relationship. The teacher is not playing "gotcha". In fact, mistakes (which the research shows are fundamentally essential in the learning process) aren't going to "cost you" as a student. The teacher's ONLY goal is to help the learner progress toward the proficiency level and at the rate that the student has set as a goal. Those 3 elements are transformative. 1. Clearly defined and accepted standards (beyond a single teacher or classroom), 2. A valid, reliable external assessment instrument (we have several to choose from) 3. Proficiency-based credits to give true value to student effort. Of course there are other essentials but it's exciting because we are seeing this actually work in classrooms. I love seeing the way this is developing in other disciplines like yours!
Thank you for sharing this informative article on grading for growth. It's important to prioritize student learning over grades, and finding common ground with grading can help facilitate this.
If you're interested in learning more about the Pareto principle of time management, I recommend checking out this article https://productive.fish/blog/pareto-principle/. It explains the concept in detail and offers practical tips on how to apply it to various aspects of life, including grading practices.
Really enjoy following your thinking. It is similar to the journey I've been on since I started teaching. I realized early on that both grading and grades were at best false proxies. I've been lucky enough to be part of the world languages community with scores of dedicated, innovative colleagues. Our discipline was fortunate because we are small enough to try things without attracting too much blowback as we go. That allowed us to codify a set of standards (your first pillar, which led to adoption of an accepted proficiency scale, and we've had assessment leaders who have developed a variety of valid, reliable assessments (3rd pillar) that can measure an individual's proficiency on a scale from Novice low (beginning language learner of any age) to Distinguished (equivalent of a native speaker with an advanced degree). An individual's age, number of years of study, type of program, language being assessed etc, are not factors -- it comes down to what they know and can do in/with the language. My work has led me to focus on 3 essentials that are similar to your four pillars. The first is clearly defined standards of proficiency (not to be confused with performance). Teachers and students both know what it means to function at the Intermediate Mid level of proficiency. No secrets about what you're trying to accomplish. Second is an external, validated assessment. This also means that a learner in Connecticut or Oregon will be held to the same standard as a learner in Mississippi or Nebraska or California. Someone assessed as Novice High in Delaware has the same use of the language as someone at Novice High in North Dakota. No teacher bias. Third is Proficiency-based credits. It's quite simple -- when your proficiency is assessed at the level agreed upon in your school/district, you get the credit. Not before and no need to wait until the end of a term to keep moving on. No sliding by with a B- or a D and getting further behind as you go. It also puts control over the credit in the student's possession. Want to spend more time and progress more rapidly? It'll pay off. Spend time on your language learning during a vacation? It now has real value. Need to slow down while you focus on other things? No problem (but you won't get a credit just because the calendar says it's the end of the term). This also fundamentally changes the teacher/student relationship. The teacher is not playing "gotcha". In fact, mistakes (which the research shows are fundamentally essential in the learning process) aren't going to "cost you" as a student. The teacher's ONLY goal is to help the learner progress toward the proficiency level and at the rate that the student has set as a goal. Those 3 elements are transformative. 1. Clearly defined and accepted standards (beyond a single teacher or classroom), 2. A valid, reliable external assessment instrument (we have several to choose from) 3. Proficiency-based credits to give true value to student effort. Of course there are other essentials but it's exciting because we are seeing this actually work in classrooms. I love seeing the way this is developing in other disciplines like yours!
Thank you for sharing this informative article on grading for growth. It's important to prioritize student learning over grades, and finding common ground with grading can help facilitate this.
If you're interested in learning more about the Pareto principle of time management, I recommend checking out this article https://productive.fish/blog/pareto-principle/. It explains the concept in detail and offers practical tips on how to apply it to various aspects of life, including grading practices.