"Even our brightest students..." Part II

In a recent post, I spent a lot of time criticizing the attitudes of students--including myself. Even back then, I knew that I was being pretty pessimistic about the future, and that bothered me.

So I tried to find out if my outlook was accurate.

A few things I should say before I start:

The students that I work with have only had--at most--two flavors of standards-based grading. Whenever I refer to SBG in this post, I'm generally referring to Chris Ludwig's approach, because that's the one I've seen in action and debated.

With that out of the way...here's what I've found:

1. Some students agree with me--even though SBG is preferable to a points-based system, it wouldn't be widely accepted.

2. Some students don't like SBG. Period.

So, basically...nothing new. I've been hearing both of those all year, typically when I'm, for some reason, describing SBG in a group setting--and someone else jumps in and says either:

"Yes! I really like standards-based grades!" and then goes on to explain why, or the student will say:

"But standards-based grading [is confusing/kills my grade/is hard]!"

Why is that second response even there? I think the answer is quite simple: students on the whole--especially after over ten years of grades--are so used to viewing a single letter grade as an achievement or as something that communicates some sort of information about them that many simply don't get why that's really not the case.

What I'm about to say has been said many times, but in a summative system--which is basically all I've seen for the past eleven years--grades are developed by building points that often become meaningless. I've heard teachers say, "Now, if you can just remember that the answer to Question 14 is C., you'll get more points for the test." And before this year, I didn't really have a problem with that. But when grades simply become who brought in the most Kleenex and could remember certain answers to a test (and, of course, forget them five minutes later) it's ridiculous to think that they have any meaning.

And the more I think, the more I believe that some students really don't want them to. After all, when we're signing up for the ACT and the SAT (and, after all, that's our only chance to get into a good college), we meet pages like:

 and

 

Since grades obviously matter so much, students have to get the best ones they can! Right? RIGHT?!?

Now, those of you with incredible memories will recall that, at the beginning of this rambling, I mentioned that there are some students who agree with me--that SBG is preferable to a summative system. And it's these guys that give me hope. I look around and I see classmates' posts (like this one and this one) and I realize that SBG really did bring out a different level of learning in many students--and that they appreciate it.

Students like those two--self-motivated and willing to adapt--are the only reason I believe there is a chance for SBG to become widespread. They know about this idea, support it, and hopefully they will continue to spread it in discussions, like I've been trying to do all year. After all, many people do not know about these non-traditional grading/instruction methods--as I've said before, before the 2010-2011 school year, I had never considered either.¹
 

Ok, I've rambled enough by now. Seriously, though, if you don't think I'm giving an accurate representation of students, yell at me. On this issue particularly, I really want to know what you think.

---

1. Of course, some may suggest that teachers should be forced to use SBG so that we can let more people know about it. I disagree, because I think that, if a teacher is going to make this change, they should make it because they understand the reasons behind it--because they truly believe that the conventional method of assessment is flawed.

"Even our brightest students suffer with % point systems rather than #sbar"

I wrote my last post while sitting in my hotel room between "workshops" at the Colorado state FBLA conference, so I ran out of the room before throwing it onto Twitter. Then, two of my favorite edu-people out there did it for me, adding their own comments:

 

Then came:

Ever since the small discussion that ensued, in which I stated that I wasn't certain that students would really embrace this change, thoughts on these ideas have been bouncing around my head. And the more time I spend on this, the more certain I am that not everyone would be won over by the idea of SBAR.

Here's the two main reasons I can think of:

Reason 1: At first glance, it translates to more work and more accountability.

An example: I'm in a certain points-based class in which an assignment was supposed to be completed over spring break. It's a pretty important assignment--much of what we have done since then has revolved around it.

I have an "A" (insert eye-roll here) in this class.

And I never did this assignment.

We have accumulated enough points since then that the impact of this missing 25 points has been diluted. From looking at a grade sheet, you'd never know that I was anything but an exemplary worker.

Now, from the way I understand SBAR, there's no way I could pull that off.  My missing work wouldn't have been absorbed by everything else--and students know that. I've often heard someone say, "Oh, I already have all of the points, so it won't matter if I don't know what is going on for the rest of the year." (And that's almost a direct quotation.)

Because kids know that they can hide things they don't understand, many wouldn't want to give this up. After all, grades have become so important to many people (and I have to plead guilty) that often times we resort to "what gets me the best grade is going to be best."

Reason 2: It's new.

There. I said it. Students, at least around here and including myself, tend to be pretty conservative when it comes to massive changes. There was essentially unanimous disappointment ("Oh, man! That is so stupid!") about merging the high school and middle school. Even though it would make practical sense, many students do not want to merge the eight tiny school districts in a thirty-mile radius of La Junta. And multiple times this year, I've heard comments along the lines of, "I hate that new grading system of Ludwig's!" (Of course, then I typically jump in and ask why. I'm then often met with, "I actually have to work.")

The point is that, simply because we've been going along with this system for twelve or thirteen years, able to hide our weaknesses and our struggles, I don't think that we would embrace a change in the opposite direction.

Of course, I could be wrong. Let's hope so. 

Scripted Learning

Looking around the edublogosphere, it seems that many other edubloggers have their own catch phrase they use to build the rest of their blog around. Dan Meyer has his "pseudocontext," while Chris Ludwig has his "skills-based grading." I've actually had my own phrase in my head for the past week; I simply haven't had the initiative (or time or energy!) to type up a post about it.

Here it is: scripted learning. I admit it may not be an entirely original phrase (as a minute of Googling proves) but I came up with it myself, so I'll keep using it.

What is scripted learning?

At the risk of sounding too much like Jonathan Burk and Frank Noschese and their "pseudoteaching," I think there are two main signs of scripted learning:

1. The student is drilled in how to do something, with no real understanding of why this works or how to apply these ideas to other situations.

2. The student is then only willing to accept this method of solving a problem, because "that's how the teacher said to do it."

My sister was recently telling me about her preparations for the CSAP (Colorado Student Assessment Program) and she mentioned that she would "get in a lot of trouble" if she did not read through the questions first, underline certain passages and do everything "exactly the way [the teacher] said." 

Sound a little scripted to you?

Now, I recognize the fact that these are test-taking skills, not actual everyday instruction, but aren't scenes like this everyday occurrences in many classrooms? I'd be willing to bet that I am the only person in our school who has actually examined the proof of the quadratic formula. Even though it's right there in the textbook, a few pages away from the homework problems, curiosity has been squashed by this process of "do it this way. Don't ask why or how it works. Simply accept it."

Of course, no one would ever come out and say that. I don't think that's the intent, but often, that becomes the effect.  

Then, of course,  there's the second main warning sign of scripted learning: the assumed infallability (or maximum efficiency) of the given method of solving a problem. Time and time again, I will be working with a peer, and they will choose an elementary, clumsy, and roundabout way of solving a given problem. When I try to explain a more streamlined solution, I'm often met with, "But that's how (insert teacher name here) said to do it."

This, to me, simply demonstrates a lack of understanding to the deeper methods at work here. In the case of the quadratic formula, if you're going to derive it by completing the square on the general equation, you have to really understand the method of completing the square and why it works--otherwise, how can you solve an equation without any numbers in it?

Of course, I'm being undeservedly hard on teachers here. Students share just as much of the blame--after all, we're the ones who accept this. I have yet to meet a teacher who, when I began the "Why?" series, would not give me a valid solution.

But perhaps there is a better way. I'm here to offer my plea for bright students everywhere. I've often been asked by our district's GT advisor if I feel "challenged." Really, there's no reason why I shouldn't. I'm a sophomore in a plethora of senior/advanced junior classes. 

However, I think that the meaning of "challenged" is interesting here. If you want it to mean simply doing harder things--harder math problems, deeper essays, and more esoteric sciences--then of course I feel "challenged." But I like to think that there's a kind of "challenged" beyond that--beyond scripted learning, where the student has to really understand everything in order to simply survive. My biology class this year is a perfect example of this--it's the first class where I can say that I've really had to work so that I don't sink.

Why? It's because I don't have a teacher who tries to hold my hand and show me what they think I should know. Instead, I have a teacher who's willing to let me go where I want to. The poor guy may have students feel like they're teaching themselves, but hey...he's taught me more than I've learned in most other classes combined.

Now that's not scripted. 

The Quintessential Question

Recently, I was examining a grade sheet for a class whose grades are calculated by adding up all of the points earned and dividing by the points possible. I admit that's not too exciting. However, my mind needed some form of distraction and started playing around with the numbers on the sheet. Then, I began to notice some anomalies.

Consider the following situation, which I put into a graph:

There are two students, Bob (the black line) and Joe (the red line) whose understanding of the content material does not match their grades.

Allow me to explain this (unrealistic and overly simplistic) situation. There are two students, Joe and Bob. Their understanding of a certain idea will be mapped by five various assignments (worksheets, tests, etc.) and will be averaged together at the end for their final grade on this concept. Each assignment is worth one hundred points, and no one assignment will be weighted above the others in the final averaging.

Now, Bob's (black line) understanding of the subject is superior to Joe's (red line). However, on the day of the first assignment, his girlfriend breaks up with him, his grandmother dies, and he falls on ice and breaks his arm. He's somewhat distracted, and he lets it get to him--in fact, he only earns 60 of the 100 possible points. Joe, however, is having a good day and is able to guess his way through this assignment (it's all multiple choice) and aces the paper. In addition, he brought in a box of Kleenex, so he was able to tack on 10 more points to his "grade."

Here's where the problem comes in. Bob actually understands the subject matter, and is able to receive all of the 100 points possible on the four following assessments of his knowledge. He is consistently able to demonstrate that he knows what he is talking about.

Joe's luck, however, does not continue to hold out. On the next assignment, he only earns 95 of the potential points, then 90, then 85, and so on, losing 5 points from his score each time. If these assessments are truly gauging the knowledge these students have, then shouldn't we conclude that Joe does not fully understand the material--and shouldn't we also conclude that Bob's grade should be higher than Joe's?

However, at the end of the series of assessment of knowledge, Bob's and Joe's grades are equal--a 92%, 460 points earned out of 500 points possible. Although I may be becoming a parrot, this is the primary flaw with using averages to determine a grade: averages include the history of a student's understanding instead of the student's current understanding.

This seems to be the question every edublogger asks: Which is more important, the history or the present?

To me, it's clear that the answer is the present. What about you? 

The Grading Instinct

I have a nine-year-old, incessantly creative sister. Yesterday, we were taking a Sunday afternoon walk when she had an idea: Why can't we clean the water in gutters before depositing it in oceans? (I have a feeling that the water cycle has been stressed in her science class lately.) 

After we made it home, she continued developing this idea--to the point of writing a "book" on it (complete with table of contents). Once it was finished, she proudly walked up to Dad, handed it to him, and said, "What grade would you give this?"

Grades. They're the nemesis of students (and many teachers!) everywhere. But I must say that I think it's somewhat sad when the first thing a nine-year-old can think of after she's finished an independent project is to ask for a grade.

At the risk of recycling what every other edublogger has ever written, it seems to me that the real question is what role grades play in an educational system. Are they superfluous and redundant and have no real meaning, or are they a vital and essential system that tell all of the knowledge a student has?

I intentionally overstated both sides of this story so that the strengths and weaknesses of both sides could become more apparent. But still, does a report card with simply a final letter grade really give anything but an overview of a student's "knowledge" within several different subjects? What about the overlap within certain subjects? After all, most physics classes depend at least somewhat on mathematics. Should there be a way to display the student's understanding of the overlap of these materials?

Then, we should spend some time evaluating the role that grades play within the lives of students. The prime example here is my sister asking for her "grade" on her book. She felt that she would not know the value of the work if she did not have a grade on it. She also attends a school where, like many schools, late work earns a zero. Of course, this drives me crazy. After all, all it really says is that if you don't demonstrate understanding of a certain topic by a certain date, you must not understand the topic.

Right?

I've intentionally left many questions unanswered here, simply because I don't feel that I have the level of expertise necessary to answer these questions. However, I do want to know what you think. Let's share ideas and see how this develops.