I should be going to bed, but I was thinking about how I present standards-based grading. One thing has been gnawing on me since one of my admins asked me something. She was asking where I considered proficiency to be within my SBG. She and another science teacher started it last year and she's giving a PD to volunteers next week. I have a 4-point scale. We have a 10-point grading scale. I used a book by Marzano to come up with this scale 2 years ago and I'm happy with it. Do I consider proficient to be level 2? Level 3? Level 4? Does it change per student? Is it universal? I go with level 3. That's mid-B level work. Level 4 is 100%. Level three and a little understanding of application gets them to an A. I'm totally cool with that (though alternate viewpoints are welcome).
But. BUT. BUT!
I don't think I've expressed to my students how much this 4-point scale means to me and how much thought I put into it. Additionally, I use the carrot of "reassessment" waaaay too much (to ease the pressure). My link for them to request even says "Reassess". I think I need to make a major point of expressing how I came up with the 4-point scale and why the scale is important (and not necessarily the grade). I need to have them define what proficient and mastery means to them. I also need to make a change in vocabulary from "reassessment opportunities" to "opportunities to further knowledge" or some such. (It does need to be short enough to make a good bitly.) The reassessment will come as a natural progression. I'm really hoping that these rubric for each skill will eliminate a good portion of reassessments (or at least the mandatory ones for D's and F's) and that it will create a natural path for "opportunities to further knowledge" (or some such).
"Learning Ops"?
"Re-learning Ops"?
"Extra man"?
"Continuing Learning Ops?"
"Do Over"
I need help here. I'm certainly open to suggestions below.
No comments:
Post a Comment