I love this article! I remember, when things were not graded and there was freedom is thought, I did the best and learned the most! Maybe education is about freedom to think differently :)
Thank you. I couldn't agree more. I wish I could toss grades completely, in favor of narrative comments. And, of course, Paulo Freire was writing about this long ago.
Hello Sharon, thank you for sharing this, it is a very interesting read! Out of curiosity, how did you handle the discussion while crafting the rubric? Was it done in class, or online? Did you provide guidelines to prevent the conversation from unraveling? Thank you for your insight!
Great questions, Giulia. The first time, I explained the idea in class but the conversation started outside of class, led by two peer mentors during evening mentor session. These were students who had taken the class with me previously, so good guides for the experience and expectations. I did coach them in advance. They came back to me with the 3 categories (mastery, effort, and participation). The following day, we took a whole class period to discuss details within each category and we added a personal goals category (students had set individual goals the week before). That in-class session started with small group discussion, brainstorming on the whiteboard, and then lots of whole class, back and forth questions to refine/define everything on our list. I didn't do much except guide that conversation and write on the whiteboard. I drafted our notes and posted them on google docs. Students had a week to add comments/questions. Then I brought the semi-final draft to one class meeting and we took a little time discussing it (not the whole period). We endorsed that version and agreed it would be a living document we could refine if needed.
Since that first time creating the rubric, I now start with last year's criteria. I still always set aside some evening/weekend mentor session time for these conversations. I've found this is a safe space for students to ask each other and their peer mentors honest questions (I'm not present). We still spend some in-class time discussion the specifics, but not as much time as that first class!
Thanks for another thoughtful article recounting your journey to provide your students with more and more useful feedback. Sounds like it is a big improvement.
The game changer for me when it comes to assessment is to approach from a completely different position. The best examples to date are the ACTFL Proficiency Scale in world languages (https://cla.umn.edu/language-center/programs/language-testing/actfl-testing/actfl-level-descriptions)and the NCSSFL/ACTFL Can-Do statements (https://www.ncssfl.org/linguafolio-linguagrow/2017-can-do-statements/). Instead of assessing how students do relative to at teacher's or professor's expectations, I've started advocating a Proficiency-based approach. This is actually a huge change and sets the students up for future learning after your course if that's beneficial for them. Let's say you start with a course such as "Cell Biology". Obviously, there would be a wide range of expectations from an introductory course to a graduate course in the topic. You then develop a proficiency scale from Novice Low to Distinguished and figure out specific criteria that would cover content and practice for each level. You might think of Novice Low as someone taking their first course and entering with little background, and Distinguished would be the equivalent of someone with an advanced degree in the area.
Obviously the professor establishes the expectation that in order to get an A in the class, students may need to perform at the Novice High for example in CB 101 and Advanced Mid for CB 401. Along with that you establish a set of "Can Do" statements that accompany each level. Students have a very clear idea of expectations for the course and for the professor. No bait and switch ever. If they can show that they know (in agreed upon ways established ahead of time) and can function at the required level, they get an A. If not, they don't. It could be set up so that Novice High in some categories but Novice Mid in others by the end of the course would be a B or C or whatever you've set up ahead of time. It also lets them know how to progress, should they want to, after completing your course.
This is a really brief view of the switch to proficiency (as opposed to "performance" on tests, quizzes, papers, etc) but I hope it can serve to help you think about some possible next steps in your quest.
Thanks, Still Lighting. I like the idea of giving my students more guidance on the mastery front, and the "can do" statements seem like a good starting place. Defining mastery or proficiency is hard, especially with students who expect to find the one right answer. I avoid these types of questions in favor of fun and complicated real world questions. On a separate note, it looks like language teaching is your gig. While I'm sure language instruction is very different from STEM instruction, I tell my students they should request college language credit for passing immunology. There's so much jargon to learn!
I sure believe you on complicated and large language of science! Probably more vocab needed for that than is expected in beginning HS language classes!
I also have found various AI apps to be a TREMENDOUSLY good starting point for developing proficiency scales for other subject areas. And you can make them drill as deeply as you want to help students know what all is needed. I also avoid using the term "mastery". Does anyone really master cell bio, for example, even when they have mastered the content for your course? I bet there's always more to it than you have time for in a single course. I think "mastery" gives them a false sense of "completeness". I guarantee no one has ever "mastered" French 302 -- for one thing it's a totally artificial construct. It doesn't exist outside of a professor's requirement but students never think about that. Anyway, thanks for the stimulating work you're doing and for pushing my thinking.
I love this article! I remember, when things were not graded and there was freedom is thought, I did the best and learned the most! Maybe education is about freedom to think differently :)
Thank you. I couldn't agree more. I wish I could toss grades completely, in favor of narrative comments. And, of course, Paulo Freire was writing about this long ago.
Hello Sharon, thank you for sharing this, it is a very interesting read! Out of curiosity, how did you handle the discussion while crafting the rubric? Was it done in class, or online? Did you provide guidelines to prevent the conversation from unraveling? Thank you for your insight!
Great questions, Giulia. The first time, I explained the idea in class but the conversation started outside of class, led by two peer mentors during evening mentor session. These were students who had taken the class with me previously, so good guides for the experience and expectations. I did coach them in advance. They came back to me with the 3 categories (mastery, effort, and participation). The following day, we took a whole class period to discuss details within each category and we added a personal goals category (students had set individual goals the week before). That in-class session started with small group discussion, brainstorming on the whiteboard, and then lots of whole class, back and forth questions to refine/define everything on our list. I didn't do much except guide that conversation and write on the whiteboard. I drafted our notes and posted them on google docs. Students had a week to add comments/questions. Then I brought the semi-final draft to one class meeting and we took a little time discussing it (not the whole period). We endorsed that version and agreed it would be a living document we could refine if needed.
Since that first time creating the rubric, I now start with last year's criteria. I still always set aside some evening/weekend mentor session time for these conversations. I've found this is a safe space for students to ask each other and their peer mentors honest questions (I'm not present). We still spend some in-class time discussion the specifics, but not as much time as that first class!
Thanks for another thoughtful article recounting your journey to provide your students with more and more useful feedback. Sounds like it is a big improvement.
The game changer for me when it comes to assessment is to approach from a completely different position. The best examples to date are the ACTFL Proficiency Scale in world languages (https://cla.umn.edu/language-center/programs/language-testing/actfl-testing/actfl-level-descriptions)and the NCSSFL/ACTFL Can-Do statements (https://www.ncssfl.org/linguafolio-linguagrow/2017-can-do-statements/). Instead of assessing how students do relative to at teacher's or professor's expectations, I've started advocating a Proficiency-based approach. This is actually a huge change and sets the students up for future learning after your course if that's beneficial for them. Let's say you start with a course such as "Cell Biology". Obviously, there would be a wide range of expectations from an introductory course to a graduate course in the topic. You then develop a proficiency scale from Novice Low to Distinguished and figure out specific criteria that would cover content and practice for each level. You might think of Novice Low as someone taking their first course and entering with little background, and Distinguished would be the equivalent of someone with an advanced degree in the area.
Obviously the professor establishes the expectation that in order to get an A in the class, students may need to perform at the Novice High for example in CB 101 and Advanced Mid for CB 401. Along with that you establish a set of "Can Do" statements that accompany each level. Students have a very clear idea of expectations for the course and for the professor. No bait and switch ever. If they can show that they know (in agreed upon ways established ahead of time) and can function at the required level, they get an A. If not, they don't. It could be set up so that Novice High in some categories but Novice Mid in others by the end of the course would be a B or C or whatever you've set up ahead of time. It also lets them know how to progress, should they want to, after completing your course.
This is a really brief view of the switch to proficiency (as opposed to "performance" on tests, quizzes, papers, etc) but I hope it can serve to help you think about some possible next steps in your quest.
Thanks, Still Lighting. I like the idea of giving my students more guidance on the mastery front, and the "can do" statements seem like a good starting place. Defining mastery or proficiency is hard, especially with students who expect to find the one right answer. I avoid these types of questions in favor of fun and complicated real world questions. On a separate note, it looks like language teaching is your gig. While I'm sure language instruction is very different from STEM instruction, I tell my students they should request college language credit for passing immunology. There's so much jargon to learn!
I sure believe you on complicated and large language of science! Probably more vocab needed for that than is expected in beginning HS language classes!
I also have found various AI apps to be a TREMENDOUSLY good starting point for developing proficiency scales for other subject areas. And you can make them drill as deeply as you want to help students know what all is needed. I also avoid using the term "mastery". Does anyone really master cell bio, for example, even when they have mastered the content for your course? I bet there's always more to it than you have time for in a single course. I think "mastery" gives them a false sense of "completeness". I guarantee no one has ever "mastered" French 302 -- for one thing it's a totally artificial construct. It doesn't exist outside of a professor's requirement but students never think about that. Anyway, thanks for the stimulating work you're doing and for pushing my thinking.