Group items tagged

She started by sharing a few articles about the weaknesses of common grading practices with the entire middle school faculty

Then she invited all faculty to research, examine, and imagine ways to align grading to their vision for progressive and equitable education

first learned how many common grading practices were created during the Industrial Revolution and are based on century-old beliefs about teaching, learning, and human potential that have long since been debunked. By continuing to use these practices, we contradict our current understanding about effective teaching and learning

After studying the research about grading and learning about research-supported grading practices that are more accurate, more bias-resistant, and develop intrinsic motivation in students, the pilot group of middle school faculty members was excited to start using them. These more equitable practices included using alternatives to the 0–100 scale, not including behavior in the grade, ending extra credit, using rubrics, and developing a culture of retakes and redos

Students were less stressed, and classroom environments felt more relaxed and supportive of learning.

Grade inflation decreased

Grades are more accurate and less biased

Students’ motivation increased

Changes to grading practices leverage other aspects of programmatic reimagining

The main reason why the ESBC is gaining a reputation as Germany’s most exciting school is that its experimental philosophy has managed to deliver impressive results.

“In education, you can only create change from the bottom – if the orders come from the top, schools will resist.

Optimally, competencies are broad enough that student pathways and demonstrations of proficiency can be vastly different, organized to encourage and nurture student passions and questions.

Competencies sit above standards in terms of grain size.

competencies tend to encompass an interrelated set of skills, knowledge, aptitudes, and/or capacities.

competencies are often constructed as groupings of related skills or attributes that are purposefully designed to be explicit, measurable, transferable, and empowering to students

Competencies define skills that are practiced and developed continuously. They are not “one and done,” like many standards, which are course-based and attached to specific grade levels or bands.

in truly competency-based systems, PLDs are not attached to specific grade levels

we believe strongly that we must guard against tying PLDs to age-based grades or cohorts.

PLDs are guideposts to mastery

When learning outcomes are defined in terms of the application of skills or the synthesis and creation of new knowledge, we’re then talking about a much more sophisticated assessment type

competence is about successful application of skills and knowledge to achieve a particular purpose, not simply to show basic levels of understanding

In a true competency-based system, students can’t fail. Instead, students receive concrete and specific feedback on their work, and are provided with opportunities for additional practice and support in order to develop and demonstrate growth in their competencies.

As competency-based education gains ground in formal K-12 schooling, there is a very real chance that the movement could lose the “spirit” of its intent and become yet another, albeit more refined, form of standards-based learning

Quite differently, competency-based models reach back centuries, with early apprenticeship learning that created pathways for mastery and gainful employment. Think: Medieval craft guilds, masonry, baking, carpentry, shoemaking.

But the first problem with this seductively simple script change is that praising children for their effort carries problems of its own, as several studies have confirmed: It can communicate that they’re really not very capable and therefore unlikely to succeed at future tasks.

what’s really problematic is praise itself

It’s a verbal reward, an extrinsic inducement, and, like other rewards, is often construed by the recipient as manipulation

Moreover, praise communicates that our acceptance of a child comes with strings attached: Our approval is conditional on the child’s continuing to impress us or do what we say.

We need to attend to deeper differences: between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, and between “doing to” and “working with” strategies.

If students are preoccupied with how well they’re doing in school, then their interest in what they’re doing may suffer.

A 2010 study found that when students whose self-worth hinges on their performance face the prospect of failure, it doesn’t help for them to adopt a growth mindset.

Even when a growth mindset doesn’t make things worse, it can help only so much if students have been led — by things like grades, tests, and, worst of all, competition — to become more focused on achievement than on the learning itself.

And this brings us to the biggest blind spot of all — the whole idea of focusing on the mindsets of individuals.

Ironically, the more we occupy ourselves with getting kids to attribute outcomes to their own effort, the more we communicate that the conditions they face are, well, fixed.

But why have so many educators who don’t share that sensibility endorsed a focus on mindset (or grit) whose premises and implications they’d likely find troubling on reflection?

I’m not suggesting we go back to promoting an innate, fixed, “entity” theory of intelligence and talent, which, as Dweck points out, can leave people feeling helpless and inclined to give up.