Things that bug me, part one million and 26

I've been known to complain too much, and this really is a minor thing.  Still...

My son's quiz question:
Why is voting a good way to have a voice in your community?
a. Voting is easy
b. Voting helps make towns and cities better places
c. Voters choose who will help make decisions for the community

The answer guide of course says c, but you could easily argue b.  That's what my son chose.  And, he got it marked wrong.

It's not that he got it wrong that bothers me.  It's that he didn't get a chance to explain why he chose that answer, as he told me.  They never went over the questions as a class.  This is a golden opportunity for students to justify their answers with rationale and logic.  At the very least, the teacher should explain why a given answer is correct and others wrong.  But instead, students won't have a chance to learn and engage in dialectic discussion.

The answer sheet said c.

Around the Blogosphere - 7/28

A couple of quick jabs from the internet for your perusal:

Shelly Blake-Plock over at TeachPaperless responded to the same question about whether educational games suck that I took on recently.

What I came away with was a feeling that we're approaching this whole matter of gaming and education from the wrong direction. As a longtime educator and gamer, I'm thinking we should go at this from a different angle.

Instead of trying to make better 'educational' games, why not take an educational approach to the classics of gaming as it exists today?

Think about it: we don't ask authors to write 'educational' books so that we have something to teach in school. Rather, we choose books to read and use in teaching. Likewise, we should choose games to 'read' and use in teaching.

In the same way that you can learn about American history from reading Huckleberry Finn, you can learn about economics and cooperative activity by 'reading' World of Warcraft. In fact, gaming -- especially that of the MMOG variety -- has come so far, we really shouldn't have much of a problem teaching all sorts of logic, learning, and abstract thinking via playing and analyzing games that were never originally meant to be 'educational'.

In all honesty, I really like this perspective of basically adding metacognition and reflection to the playing of industry games, and his analogy to novels is very poignant. Still, it doesn't address what Mark Prensky would advocate, that being to take all your learning objectives and deliver them through gaming instead of traditional instruction, because "gaming is where students learn best." It brings up an interesting way to frame the question; should games be used in school as textbooks are or novels are?

Also, (hat tip to Matt Townsley) Rick DuFour of PLC fame has weighed in on the issue of grading and homework in a well-written piece. He starts by pointing out the various definitions teachers have of what a grade represents, and even if teachers agree a grade represents the level of mastery of a student, often their grading practices don't follow their beliefs. Here are his suggestions:

Therefore, I submit the following propositions:

1. Homework should be given only when the instructor feels it is essential to student learning. If, for example, the teacher believes that by practicing a skill and receiving prompt and specific feedback students will learn at higher levels, homework is very appropriate and should be assigned.
2. The teacher then has an obligation to monitor the homework carefully and provide individual students with precise feedback based on their specific needs.
3. If the work is deemed essential to a student’s learning, that student should not have the option of taking a zero but instead should be required to complete the work. This necessitates a coordinated, schoolwide approach to responding when students do not complete their work because there are limits as to what an individual teacher can require. The schoolwide response should be timely, directive (non-invitational), systematic (not left to the discretion of individual teachers), and should never require the student to be removed from new direct instruction.

Which I couldn't agree more with. And for kicks, he adds this anecdote:

My friend and colleague Bob Eaker elected to stop having all fifth graders in the school he was leading complete the annual homework project of building a replica of a frontier fort because, as he put it, “We discovered some Dads just built better forts than others.”

Correct Use of Zeros

Cathy Vatterott has an excellent article at the ASCD blog on the grading practice of giving zeros. She highlights a proposal by the Houston Independent School District to eliminate the practice of giving zeros (a good thing) with giving unearned 50% marks (a not-so-good thing).

First, an excellent analysis of the power of zeros:

Why do students get zeros on homework? Because we allow students not to complete work. Zeros are an easy way out—simply label students lazy for not completing homework (without trying to figure out why), and the teacher is absolved of all responsibility. Zeros punish the vice of laziness, but is laziness the reason most students don't complete assignments, especially homework? I don't think so.

I'd add two things; good teaching is not predicated on punishment, but rather of learning. So, we shouldn't be in the business of "punishing for the vice of laziness". Regardless, a zero really isn't punishment. You want to punish a student who is lazy? Make them turn in the assignment!

Which, Vatterott is already ahead of me:

I think the better solution is a "Zeros Aren't Permitted" (ZAP) program, an increasingly popular idea where zeros are used merely as placeholders until work is made up or excused.

My own grading practices as a teacher eventually evolved into that practice, and it was one of the best classroom management practices I could have. Students, knowing that they couldn't pass the class unless all assignments were handed in and done well were more likely to do them well the first time. And even if they did procrastinate and turn them in late, at least I had something to assess their knowledge for the different course outcomes.

Vatterott puts this in perspective:

ZAP makes more work for the teacher and administrators, but it puts the emphasis back on learning. As we continue to move toward more standards-based grading and the argument rages about how to "hold students accountable," are we all asking the same question? Is it "How many assignments have the students completed?" instead of "How much have the students learned?" Grades should reflect what a student knows or can do, not what work he or she has completed.

Around the Blogosphere - 4/11

Quickly around the blogosphere-

• Everyone should have a school law blog in their reader. The one I follow is the Edjurist by University of Kentucky professors Justin Bathon and Scott Bauries, where they recently have looked into the merit (or lack thereof) of "time-out rooms", as well as the protection of internet speech. Their most recent post is a question about backchannel conversations during school board meetings. Backchanneling is using Twitter or other tools to carry a conversation (or even just broadcast something) over the internet during an event. This is the term for the process I mentioned when looking at Twittering during student presentations. Bathon mentions that while this has great potential for information dissemination (not to mention democracy), it might be interesting if the school board meetings don't hold close to FERPA regulations. In other words, have some discretion if specific student information is discussed in the open.

• We in Iowa are insulated from an ongoing debate that has reached intensity. While we discuss the issues of whether to reform, the debate nationally is centering on how to reform. E.D. Hirsch, proponent of the "core knowledge" approach to standardizing curriculum, has an op-ed piece in the New York Times this week defending the validity and merit of standardized "bubble-filling" test, arguing that the main problem is the passages in those tests are arbitrary, and should rather be linked to the required reading of the curriculum. This touched off quite the debate with rebuttals, which led to rebuttals, which led to rebuttals.

• Hirsch didn't spark as much conversation as Arne Duncan did with his wistfulness for the 6-day, 11-month school calendar. And most of the conversation was shock and disbelief. The irony is we were just looking at a 4-day week for energy efficiency, and now the conversation is taken dramatically the other way. Seems like the roughly $500 million/yr. we would need to give every 3rd-12th grader a netbook computer would be much easier and much more likely to transform education than the trillion dollars/yr. we would need to extend each teacher and educational employee to a 275-day contract, but what do I know? I don't work for the government, I have to follow a budget...

• And finally, Matt Townsley touches on the question about student information systems and formative assessment I mentioned yesterday. Excellent example of how to do this, with screen shots from his SIS. There was discussion at the Iowa Core meeting that Anamosa High School was also pioneering in this field.

The broader discussion of course, is of the merits of traditional grading. I encourage schools to have the conversation about why we grade, and what the purpose of assessment really is. And, discuss if there is a place for standards-based reporting structures (or the tamer cousin, "standards-referenced" reporting structures). You know my thoughts.

More pitfalls of grading

Max Roosevelt from the NY Times has a piece on the negative consequences of grading in higher education (free subscription req'd). A summary of the pitfalls:

• Grade inflation from high school leads students to think that the default grade is an A, not a C.
• Students achieved grades in high school through a test preparation model, and they think this "magic formula" will translate into good grades in college
• Students equate a grade with effort, as high schools often give, rather than achievement.

For a summary quote, Roosevelt mentioned:

If students developed a genuine interest in their field, grades would take a back seat, and holistic and intrinsically motivated learning could take place.

Or if grades were eliminated altogether...

Eliminating grades in higher education

While many might correctly say that my desire to eliminate grades in K-12 education is a radical thought, it seems there is more and more discussion about just such a plan in higher education institutions.

The journal Inside Higher Ed has an article on this very issue. They report the following from the Association of American Colleges and Universities annual meeting:

When organizers of the workshop had audience members describe their experiences with grading, the closest they came to a fan was an associate provost who admitted that he saw grade inflation as completely out of control and said that for more students at his and similar institutions, the grade-point average range is around 3.4 to 3.8. It seemed that everyone else in the room had been motivated to attend by their sense that the system isn’t working.

Top issues for this are similar to what Iowa high schools might experience: grade inflation, grades "squelching intellectual curiosity", grade inconsistency from one class to another, and grades being an overall drain on the positive atmosphere of the class.

One interesting tidbit from Kathleen O'Brien, one of the provosts attending:

One thing holding back colleges from moving was the sense of many people that doing away with grades meant going easy on students. In fact, she said, ending grades can mean much more work for both students and faculty members. Done right, she said, eliminating grades promotes rigor.

And in other news, D'arcy Norman reports on one specific "fringe" professor who unilaterally decided to go gradeless. Norman offers good perspective on the need for mass acceptance, which we are still a ways from:

Isolated professors willing to risk their tenure by experimenting with gradeless classes will be perceived by the public as being “lesser” classes, not up to “the standards” of measurement. When a society only understands assessment of learning in terms of letter grades and curves, anything else is perceived as meaningless liberal garbage. Even if it is actually a profoundly powerful experiment in meaningful teaching and learning.

What is needed is a larger shift away from grades and numerical metrics of assessment. And that kind of change just isn’t possible with a lone professor tilting at that particular windmill. But, maybe, the concept has now gained a bit of public awareness, and subsequent experiments may meet slightly less resistance.

This will be the big challenge for schools, as there is large amounts of inertia from public expectations that the traditional grading system is the only thing possible. The questions to continue to ask: Who do grades serve? Do they help students learn (which is our objective)? Or do they serve to rank and sort, helping other institutions?

Call for Action: Get Rid of Grades

Of all the calls I make, this will be the one with the most inertia. The easiest logistical one to do and the hardest to get done. There will be too much dragging of feet on this one.

We should eliminate grades in our schools. Not assessment, but grades. They are more than outmoded... they are harmful for our kids.

Now, before I'm pigeon-holed as Alfie Kohn, I should say... well, you are right. My thoughts do mirror his very closely. But I've reached my conclusion through my own experiences. I have yet to see grades help kids.

THE HARM OF GRADING
Here is what I have seen. I have seen many, many conversations about the grade and not the learning. Many of those have been with the students. Many more of those have been with parents, on behalf of their students, of which many times involves some shady half-truths being said by the students to the parents, causing a tense conflict based on misconceptions. And why would students give shady half-truths (it's not my fault... the teacher didn't accept my work)? Grades are often further incentivized by money for A's and grounding for F's. You would do some shady half-truths too.

Many of those conversations have come between me and myself. I've agonized over the correct number of points to have a quiz so that it fit within the grand grading scheme for the course. I've had to balance objectives against objectives on the value of their points. I've had to scrutinize grades down to the half-point. I've spent much of the time I should have been helping students getting better on grading.

And, that's the biggest problem. Grades do not help students get better. Students accept what is given. The grades promote mediocrity. Think about the message... here is an objective, and you scored about 80% on it, which fits you in about halfway in our class. There's no impetus to improve on the 20% you've missed out in, because as many teachers have in their grading schemes, the chance to make up the missed points takes away the consequences for missing the original deadline. So, we can't have that, can we?

One maxim I live by in education, if something is worth knowing, it is worth knowing 100%. And, students should keep working on it until they get 100%. And, all else should be eliminated or enrichment.

Which brings up to what I saw as a principal. Teachers would hand out grades and assume that their work is done as well, and they would move on to the next item. After all, students were in control of their grades. There's this unwritten rule that grades absolve a teacher from having to re-teach material.

One of the best ways to judge the quality of a teacher is to set up a hypothetical: If three-fourths of your students got F's on the latest quiz, what is running through your mind? The not-so-good teachers will blame the students... they aren't studying. Or, perhaps the parents... they aren't making sure the students study. The good teachers will blame, or at least, point responsibility to themselves. What can I do to help students so that they learn this material, they will think. That is after all, the point of school, that students learn the material--not to be the judge of who is learning and who isn't.

And, that leads me to the 3rd thing I saw. They only rank and sort kids. They are a big way of saying "How do you compare to everyone else?" We never get a chance to have students compare themselves to... themselves. Never to look at how much they have grown, or what they have left to do. Never to let them have individual goals and plans. No, they are judged against everyone else, and then reminded over and over about how they do. Think of the message that printing honor rolls and having awards assemblies based on grades does for students. Is there any reflection on these things about what we have learned? No. Just who received what grade.

And, it isn't like grading is a science. How about this quote from Paul Dressell of Michigan State University:

A grade (is)... an inadequate report of an imprecise judment of a biased and variable judge of the extent to which a student has attained an undefined level of mastery of an unknown proportion of an indefinite amount of materials.

If we are going to base all of our worth and value of educational achievement in something, it should be something a little more descriptive than a "C+", whatever that can mean.

THE BENEFITS OF GRADING?
The first that proponents will mention is that grades motivate students. Nonsense. Well, not to learn, at least (perhaps it motivates them to jump through hoops to gain the grade they would like). When students focus on the grade, the learning, and the benefits of the learning in of itself, become secondary.

Is that the type of motivation you want? Imagine having an employee who says to you "How much do I have to do to get a raise?"

When learning becomes secondary, grades determine the curriculum. Teachers begin to choose assignments that are easily quantifiable. They come up with absurd distributions (this test on verb conjugation will be as many points as that essay we wrote last week, despite only 10 minutes being spent on it). And, all conversations with students... and parents revolve around it. I felt like I partook in a ritual dance each parent-teacher conference. Instead of discussing what the student knew and didn't know (and how that set them for their future), we talked about what they needed to do to get a B.

Bottom line: if you can't get your students to do an activity without the threat of a grade being given to them, you need to start questioning the relevance of your material and your ability to engage learners. And, hopefully you are meeting your rule of 88.

A second, far-distant objection is that colleges depend on grades. That, without honor rolls and valedictorians and all the other methods of ranking and sorting, colleges won't know who to select. Given that half of students drop out from college, I'm not putting too much stock in colleges' selection criteria. If colleges want to improve the selection process, we can partner with them, but their relying on us to do something harmful to kids is not partnership... we are being taken advantage of, at our kids expense.

WHAT, THEN, IN ITS PLACE?
The answer is a standards-referenced report card. List out your standards. Show models of how students in the past have met those standards. Then, allow students some flexibility in 1) prioritizing the standards and the meaning they have on their future plans, and 2) how they achieve those standards. Let students create a portfolio. Develop better formative and summative assessments, whose data show students where they sit. Let students adjust their learning on the basis of that data.

Let students demonstrate their learning by demonstrating their work to their parents. Have the portfolio or presentations replace report cards. Put the emphasis on what the student has learned, not the hoop.

And let me not forget this: Let students collaborate and learn in coexistence. They don't have to be cut-throat to go for the best grade or feel the need to cheat to achieve. They don't need to make base lies to cover up for a poor grade. Getting rid of grading puts all people--the student, their fellow classmates, the teacher, and the parents--on the same side.