Judging from the response to my post about the new grading system that I am employing this semester, there are a lot of teachers currently trying (or considering trying) big leaps of faith in grading practices.  As a sort of testimonial, here is a snapshot of where my adventure stands as of the end of the Third Quarter.  For more information about what these changes are, please check out the link above.

The student response to my introduction of the system in early January was positive.  That’s not a surprise.  Students that normally excel had a chance to improve their low A’s to high A’s.  Students who routinely bomb tests and quizzes saw an opportunity to do an autopsy and correct the grade.  Most surprising, however, is that parents have not complained.  I worried expected that some parents would be confused or concerned about how the new system would work and that my inbox would be overwhelmed.  Instead, I have not received a single piece of email from a single parent about the new system.  The main reason is probably my proactive approach: I put up a clear webpage that explained the system and I added a message to the website where my grades are available for parents and students to view online.

My teammates have engaged me in some spirited and exciting discussions about the philosophy and practicality of my system.  As my colleague Bill Ferriter is fond to say, the conversation has really expanded my own thinking on the subject.  Their Devil’s Advocate has helped me to crystallize my own ideas and clarify the “why” and the “how” of this dramatic change to my grading practices.  One teacher in particular, has been a sounding board for my quotes from Ken O’Connor and has pushed back with real and necessary criticism of what I am doing. I haven’t wavered in my resolve to make this change, in fact, I feel stronger knowing that she has helped me to consider the issues in play.

In the midst of all of this, I was asked to present (along with several others) to a large group of teacher leaders (~180) from all over my district last week.  They gave me fifteen minutes to sum up all of the changes that I made.  My presentation met with an unbelievably positive reaction and I am currently working with over a dozen teachers who want to do something similar in their schools and classrooms.  You can check out my slides below (to see notes from the presentation, click on the slideshow to go to SlideShare):

[slideshare id=1036170&doc=abci-grading-1234844778574342-2]

 

Where does that leave me now?  Well, on a scale of 1 to 10, I’d say that the experiment is currently rating a 7.  I have had some success, but I also haven’t faced many challenges yet.  Third Quarter report cards will be distributed just before our year-round three-week break, and I’m likely to have some questions to answer when I return.  Fourth quarter may prove to be the true test of my ability to communicate the advantages of improved grading practices.

Right now, I have to decide how to remediate those that aren’t getting it, and what to do with those who refuse to retake an Incomplete (earned for an assessment that scores below a C).  Still discovering new questions, while searching for some answers.  Stay tuned for more updates.

P.S.  According to this recent article in the New York Times, even college students confuse the purpose of a grade, expecting their effort to result in a good grade regardless of their mastery of the content.  It’s going to be a long road…

Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education

Dear Mr. Duncan,

I read the piece today in U.S. News and World Report in which you presented your views on the changes needed in the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation.  While some, including this blogger, have expressed concern with President Obama’s selection of yet another Sec of Ed who has never been taught in a classroom, I am still interested in what you have to say about NCLB.

It is reassuring to read your acknowledgment of the problems with NCLB.  I sincerely hope that you follow through on your promise to solicit the opinions and advice of teachers and parents before crafting another counter-productive national edict.

I was most intrigued to read that you have not yet chosen a name for the new legislation.  I would like offer my help, since my colleagues often call upon me when they are in need of a catchy acronym.  I have considered your needs, and I have included some suggestions below.  To keep with the habit of needing an easy way to say every acronym (see the title), I have supplied guidance regarding the appropriate way to say each one:

DODNTINT: “Do, or do not.  There is no try.”  Inspired by the sage advice of Yoda in “The Empire Strikes Back”, and driven by the fact that it doesn’t matter how hard you try only whether you reach the arbitrary goal set for you.  Pronounced “do-don’t-tint”.

DASED: Different Abilities + Same Expectations = Devastating.  Pronounced “dazed”.

FTGWC: Fill the Gap with Children.  Use the increasing number of failing children to fill that achievement gap.  Pronounced “fit-go-wik”.

DMWL: Do More With Less.  A traditional educational war cry.  Pronounced “dim-will”.

DUMB: Duncan’s Underfunded Mandates Bonanza.  Pronounced “dum”.

All of these are hereby protected by the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 license, but I would be happy to discuss further acronym-writing opportunities with you.

Best wishes,

Mr. Science Teach

[polldaddy poll=1349547]