MeTA musings

We are doing some work with teachers on writing across the curriculum and I am with a group that includes a couple of CTE (career and technical education) teachers.  Conversation has gone to a discussion on projects that include a writing component, but has now focused on 21st Century Skills related to Iowa Core as another component of the project.   

Here is the question:  Collaboration is an important skill, and a 21st century skill.  With our philosophy of not grading behavior, and since collaboration is a behavior, under that presumption it would not be part of the grade.  However, it is a 21st century skill and if collaboration is an integral part of a project -- or series of projects -- couldn't it be a component of the grade?  Has the student learned how to collaborate?

This isn't the first time I've received an inquiry about including a content-neutral standard as part of the final grade!  My thinking stems from some recent work I've done with an elementary school  transitioning to a standards-based report card without letter grades.  After spending some time writing parent-friendly standards, this group of elementary teachers started revising their assessments and creating rubrics aligned with the standards.  Eventually, their focus turned to work habits and citizenship.  The teachers realized a need to observe students (formally and informally) for work habits and citizenship standards using rubrics they eventually created.  In essence, if it's going to be reported and/or graded, it needs to be taught and assessed.

Here was my response to the high school principal's email inquiry:

Hey _____,
Good to hear from you.  As a general rule, we ask our teachers to think about the instruction and feedback provided to students when considering what goes into the grade book.  For example, your accounting teacher will likely know the exact days in which he/she taught, provided feedback, reviewed and assessed payroll withholdings.  This same teacher could quickly tell you when he/she taught, provided feedback, reviewed and assessed the ideas of sole proprietorships, corporations and partnerships.  The accounting teacher would also likely have a rubric for these big ideas to determine what a full and partial understanding of these standards looks like.   

Could he/she point to the time in which students were taught (for example) collaboration, provided feedback on their ability to collaborate and then assessed it?  Does he/she have a rubric in place for this 21st century skill?   In other words, if it's going to be reported and included in the final grade, it makes sense to formally teach and assess it like any content standard.  

Does any of this make sense?

How would you have responded to this high school principal?

Standards-based grading connects student grades to specific learning objectives, provides students with direct and specific information to guide their study, and often involves less grading time for the instructor than traditional methods do.

A while back, I started a personal log of every standards-based grading article I read.  It has turned into a publicly available document growing each month as new articles and dissertations are discovered and published.

It feels like it could be a nice gift for any graduate students currently starting a literature review on standards-based grading.

Enjoy!


Static link: www.tinyurl.com/sbgliterature

NOTE: This content has been updated and is available here.

In my experience and observation, teachers and systems have used one of three systems when converting standards to letter grades in a standards-based grading environment.


In the video above, I suggested each standards to letter grades conversion method has its own limitations, however they also bring with them specific strengths.

Strengths and limitations when considering the Marzano Method

• Some student information systems or grade books may not allow teachers to average standard scores and in turn the teacher would need to do this calculation and override the final grade.
• One limitation of this method is that a student can have a poor understanding of a concept (standard), however it does not dramatically affect the overall letter grade and in turn a grades-driven student may not be driven to continue learning the concept.
• Although a broad scale was illustrated in the video (3.00 - 4.00), it could easily be further broken down to include plus and minus letter grades (i.e. 3.00 - 3.25 = A-).  The conversion scale parallels many schools' grade point average scale.  For some buildings/districts, this may be helpful in communication with parents while in others in may create additional confusion.

Experience it yourself:

1. Invite four teachers in a room to score 20 essays, math problems or lab reports using a 10 point scale. 
2. Look at the diversity of scores among the 20 essays, math problems or lab reports. 
3. Now, ask the same four teachers to score the same 20 student work samples using a *4-point scale.
4. Once again, examine the diversity of scores among the 20 essays, math problems or lab reports. 

Eric and I have embarked upon a new project: a 12 episode video series communicating the most pressing standards-based grading topics we've encountered during our experiences as teachers and administrators.

The first episode (embedded below) describes standards-based grading and provides an overview of the series.


In the second episode, we do our best to flesh out the similarities and differences between competency-based education and standards-based grading.  We will be posting the rest of the videos as soon as they're recorded!

A big thanks goes out to Iowa ASCD for publicizing this video series.

A teacher from a local school district (perhaps in response to a local TV station's news story) emailed me with the following inquiry last week:

Matt,

I had a teacher make the following argument against SBG and I would like your thoughts so I can be as prepared as possible...

They said that some of the more prestigious schools of higher learning are not accepting students grades that went through a SBG system as accurate because of the opportunities to reassess. I believe the example he cited was the Naval Academy.   He indicated that a student was told they would need to attend the U of I for a year to prove themselves before their application would be considered.

Have you heard of this craziness?

Thanks,
[Name]

It is good to hear from you.  I had not heard about the Naval Academy or similar examples.  Here are a few things that may be worth sharing with this teacher and others as it comes up.

• Our high school transcript has not changed, therefore unless college/university admissions offices treat our students just as they have prior to standards-based grading (in other words, the information teachers use to generate a grade for a class has changed to more accurate reflect learning, however a letter grade still exists and is reported)

• While many institutions of higher learning continue to grade the same way they've been doing it for many years, some are slowly evolving.  MIT, for example, freshmen are graded pass/no-pass during the first semester. 

• We know that some students who are homeschooled do not receive letter grades, however they are admitted to colleges and universities across the country based on their evidence of learning such as academic portfolios, ACT or SAT scores, etc.  

In summary, I cannot believe this Naval Academy example is true.  The college admissions representatives and administrators I've talked with over the years readily admit the rigor or grades varies from school to school and that the changes we've made in our district will not negatively impact our students. 

What insights do YOU have for this "craziness?" 
---
Update: 
Thank you, Brad Latzke for pointing out the Hanover Research Council’s Study on 
Standards-Based Grading and College Admissions

I am a district administrator in a mid-size Iowa school district that uses a standards-based grading philosophy.  A number of years ago, I wrote about PowerSchool as a student information system and grade book as a teacher in the context of standards-based grading.   Since that time, teachers in the district across all disciplines and grade levels have started to use standards-based grading.  This system change has introduced a new set of questions about student information systems and grade books that I will attempt to describe in the following paragraphs.

Elementary 
In our elementary building, we have been communicating student learning through a standards-based report card for the past twenty or so years.  No letter grades are assigned.  We use an E (exceeding), P (proficient), D (developing) and AC (area of concern) scale for each student target.

Teachers communicate with parents individually throughout the school year through Friday Folders, phone calls, emails and parent/teacher conferences.  For a variety of reasons, we do not use a student information system for the purpose of communicating student learning.

Secondary
In our middle school and high school, we transitioned to a standards-based grading philosophy system-wide several years ago.  Prior to this change, we had asked our parents to sign-up for daily or weekly email progress reports and emphasized a need to look for assignments in which their student may not have turned in.  The grades reported online could be viewed as a timeline of activities and events written in ink.  Parents may have asked teachers questions such as...

• What can my daughter do to raise her grade?
• Will there be any extra credit available in this class?
• Can my son turn in his missing Civil War project for partial credit?
• Is there any way my child can re-do the Chapter 3 Project?

Today, our grade books report students' current level of learning.  In other words information is written in pencil using a new metaphor: a barometer or thermometer sharing where a student's strengths and weaknesses currently are in the content area.  We encourage our parents to ask questions such as...

• When is the next opportunity to reassess on [standard]?
• When was the last time my student was assessed on [standard]?
• What practice opportunities are available for my son to practice [standard]?
• What standards does my daughter still need to learn?

We use a 4, 3.5, 3, 2, 1 scale with accompanying narratives listed below.

• visually appealing way for students and parents to easily identify students' current strengths and weaknesses;
• ability to sync with student information system (class rosters, course names, current grades) on a daily basis, so that teachers do not have to duplicate data entry, keep up with schedule changes, etc;
• and most importantly, alternative ways to convert standards into a final grade, calculated by the grade book.

Tomlinson and Moon (2013) suggest:

Two common issues with assessment, grading, and differentiation fall into the misconception category. The first has to do with content goals or KUDs, the second with a "standard" for grading and reporting. 

Some educators think of differentiation as having different goals for different students. Not only does this perspective make teaching and learning much more confusing and complicated, but it turns grading into a nightmare. It's essential to know that defensible differentiation seeks to provide multiple pathways and support systems to the same content goals so that virtually all learners can achieve higher levels of success with the same essential knowledge, understanding, and skill. Thus a teacher in a differentiated classroom is not grading students on different goals (with the exception of students with certain IEPs), but rather will provide feedback and grades based on a student's status relative to the same KUDs.

Further, some educators feel as though differentiation calls on teachers to grade struggling students "easier" and advanced students "harder."  That, too, is a misconception.  Differentiation is not about juggling grades....virtually all students in a differentiated classroom should be graded against the same clearly delineated criteria (KUDs) (p. 126).

Referring to late 19th and early 20th century school attendance centers, Thomas Guskey says:

...Although elementary teachers continued to use narrative reports to document student learning, high school teachers began using percentages and other similar markings to certify accomplishments in different subject areas (Kirschenbaum, Simon & Napier, 1971)

...But in 1912, a study by two Wisconsin researchers seriously challenged the reliability and accuracy of percentage grades.  Daniel Starch and Edward Charles Elliott found that 147 high school English teachers in different schools assigned widely different percentage grades to two identical student papers.  Scores on the first paper ranged from 64 to 98, and scores on the second paper ranged from 50 to 97.  One paper was given a failing mark by 15 percent of the teachers and a grade of over 90 by 12 percent of the teachers...With more than 30 different percentage grades assigned to a single paper and a range of more than 40 points, it is easy to see why this study created a stir among educators.

Starch and Elliot's study was immediately criticized by those who claimed that judging good writing is, after all, highly subjective.  But when the researchers repeated their study using geometry papers graded by 128 math teachers, they found even greater variation.  

Via September 2013 Educational Leadership.

-----
(Kind of) Trying out the idea myself

Nearly eight months ago, I started thinking about inter-rater reliability in a typical percentages/points based classroom vs. a 4-point standards-based grading classroom.  A bit of informal research took place during the ensuing weeks to whet my psychometric curiosity.   

Forty (40) certified secondary math teachers in Iowa were given the following activity:  

Prompt:
Fictitious student responses:
























---
Reflection

• When using a smaller scale (4 scoring possibilities vs. 10 scoring possibilities), mathematical logic kicks in: humans are more consistent when given fewer scoring possibilities.
• Even when scoring possibilities are replaced with narratives, humans are still imperfect.
• As an educational system, have our grading practices changed much since 1912?  

On the first day of school, I had the opportunity to share about reassessment (in the context of standards-based grading) with all of our high school students.   I attempted to record the eight minute presentation and ensuing discussion, however I later realized my microphone wasn't turned on.   So, I captured a summary of the message for future students to enjoy.




Related:

• Reassessment without going crazy
• SBG is more than teach, test, reassess [A fable]

Iowa ASCD Competency-Based Education conference - June 27, 2013

"Standards-Based Grading and Competency-Based Education - What's the Connection?"

Session resources here.
Session summary: SBG vs. CBE

Thank you for an engaging seventy-five (75) minutes of learning!

We're nearing the end of the school year which means a lot of educators including myself are doing a bit of self-reflection.  Through several recent conversations with the teachers in my district, it's been exciting to hear about the progress we've made in our systematic transition to standards-based grading.  To further support this anecdotal evidence, student survey data indicates we're doing a better job communicating reassessment opportunities and procedures this spring compared to the fall.  In addition 75% of students agree "I have an understanding of where I am in my learning and the areas that I need to continue to learn." That's reason to celebrate!

At the same time, we still have room to improve in implementing our grading guidelines:

1. Entries in the grade book that count towards the final grade will be limited to course or grade level standards.**
2. Extra credit will not be given at any time.
3. Students will be allowed multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of classroom standards in various ways. Retakes and revisions will be allowed.
4. Teachers will determine grade book entries by considering multiple points of data emphasizing the most recent data and provide evidence to support their determination.
5. Students will be provided multiple opportunities to practice standards independently through homework or other class work. Practice assignments and activities will be consistent with classroom standards for the purpose of providing feedback. Practice assignments, including homework, will not be included as part of the final grade.

** Exceptions will be made for midterm and/or final summative assessments. These assessments, limited to no more than one per nine-week period may be reported as a whole in the grade book.

The biggest "aha" in recent conversations with our extremely dedicated secondary teaching staff has been in the context of reassessments.  The flowchart below has been an eye opener for us.


The recent light bulb moments have taken place when discussing the need for more classroom feedback and informal assessment.  Here's an example of how SBG should not work in a middle school math class:

Mr. Jones teaches the area of a triangle on Monday and assigns some practice problems to complete in and outside of class.  Some of the students complete all of the practice problems.  Some of them do not. All students are provided the answers ahead of time on the board.  Mr. Jones teaches the area of a circle on Tuesday and assigns some practice problems to complete in and outside of class.  Again, students are provided the answers to the practice problems ahead of time.  Some of the students complete the practice problems and some do not.  On Wednesday, Mr. Jones gives all students a quiz on these two standards.  After Mr. Jones looks at the quizzes, he sees that about half of the class still doesn't understand how to find the area of a triangle or the area of a circle.  He thinks to himself, "Well, I'm really glad we have standards-based grading, because these students can reassess."  The next day, he hands back the quiz and tells students what they need to do before they can participate in a reassessment.  When only a few students show up for a reassessment opportunity during the next week, Mr. Jones becomes flustered and wonders why students aren't taking advantage of reassessments.

When I look at the visual above and think about Mr. Jones' SBG practices, I believe he's missing the "classroom feedback and informal assessment" part of the flowchart.  Mr. Jones appears to think standards-based grading is merely teaching, testing and offering reassessment opportunities.

Here's an example of what SBG might look like in a middle school math class:

Mr. Johnson teaches the area of a triangle on Monday.  Before he assigns some practice problems, he asks each student to complete a problem on their small whiteboard and hold it up in the air.  Mr. Johnson can quickly see which students are still struggling to understanding the concept.  Rather than assigning everyone the same practice problems to complete it and outside of class. Mr. Johnson makes a quick adjustment and groups together several students who appear to still be struggling.  They will be working with Mr. Johnson for some of the remaining class time and will also be completing different practice problems than their classmates.  The next day, Mr. Johnson asks each student to view a solution to a completed practice problem that is already written in the board.  Each student must write a brief paragraph explaining if the solution is correct or not and evidence to support their reasoning.  Mr. Johnson walks around the room while students are writing their paragraphs.  Next, Mr. Johnson asks students to pair up and share their paragraphs with each other.  Finally, he asks several students to share their written responses aloud and the class collectively decides what the correct solution is to the problem.
Mr. Johnson teaches the area of a circle to round out the class period on Tuesday.  Rather than assigning practice problems from the text, he asks each student to find the area of a circle found in their home.  Each student will be asked to share their findings tomorrow in class.  On Wednesday, Mr. Johnson decides to administer a quiz that he knows will never land in the grade book.  He uses the quiz as an opportunity to provide written feedback to every student, but only after each student has once again self-assessed themselves in pencil against the standards.  Mr. Johnson writes comments by many of the students' solutions and then circles where each student is on a continuum of understanding for each standard.

Mr. Johnson asks students with relative strengths and weaknesses to pair up for seven minutes during class on Thursday.  Josie understood area of a triangle at a high level, but stunk it up on the area of a circle.  She'll be conferencing with Alex who didn't have a clue on the area of a triangle, but dominated the area of a circle.
Later in the week, all students complete another assessment, but this time it goes into the grade book.  Mr. Johnson feels pretty good about the assessment results, because he had the opportunity to see and hear students' thinking during class and was able to provide them with structured feedback through the ungraded quiz prior to the most recent assessment.   Reassessment opportunities are offered to students after the most recent assessment as well.

This fable is far from the ideal classroom, however I think it illustrates an aspect of standards-based grading that I believe deserves more attention in my own conversations with fellow educators: less grading and more feedback.

EDIT: This is a follow-up to a previous post.  

It's a pretty exciting time to work in my current school district.  About twenty years ago, the elementary school implemented a standards-based report card.  Over the past several years, we've seen a grassroots movement in the area of assessment and grading reform in our secondary buildings.  Dozens of teachers and building leadership teams have visited and/or inquired about what's going on in our high school and middle school, which is one of the reasons we'll soon be co-hosting a standards-based grading conference in eastern Iowa (before you ask, we've reached our registration capacity and the waiting list has been closed as well).

The purpose of this post is to create a "one-stop shop" illustrating various artifacts that document our district's standards-based grading journey and next steps.

What is standards-based grading (SBG)?

Timeline - unabridged; includes implementation timeline and next steps.  

Purpose and Grading Guidelines

• The primary purpose of grading is to communicate achievement status to students, parents and others.
• Secondary purposes of grading include providing feedback to students for self-assessment and growth and encouraging student progress and self-monitoring of learning.

4 - Demonstrates thorough level of understanding of course or grade-level standard.
3.5 - Demonstrates understanding of course or grade-level standard.
3 - Demonstrates a developing understanding of course or grade-level standard.
2 - Demonstrates partial understanding of course or grade-level standard.
1 - Demonstrates minimal understanding of course or grade-level standard. 

The school I work for has been on a standards-based grading journey for the past few years.  Interest from area schools in visiting our teachers' classroom seems to increase each month.  In addition, several neighboring schools have been making some significant progress in their grading reform practices.  We're teaming up to host a free conference (lunch included!) on April 24, 2013.  The target audience is secondary educators who are currently implementing standards-based grading that would like to learn from fellow practitioners who have worked through early implementation dips.

• What does standards-based grading look like in social studies?
• What does standards-based grading look like in a foreign language classroom?
• How do I convert standards to a letter grade?
• How does our school/district make this change systematically?
• How does SBG impact admission into higher education?
• I am a student experiencing SBG for the first time.  What does it look like?  [panel]
• How is standards-based grading a gateway to competency-based education?

In my work with teachers, the topic of reassessment comes up time and time again when digging deep into the work of standards-based grading.

Beyond the practical "how-to" of reassessment, the flowchart below has helped some teachers better understand how the tenets of standards-based grading are grounded in feedback (a.k.a. formative assessment, assessment for learning).



What is missing from this visual?  What doesn't make sense?  

Reality: Providing students multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding may require more time and effort on the part of the teacher.  Reassessments may be initiated by the student, the teacher or both.  

Approaches to consider:
[Note: None of these approaches in isolation are to be considered a “silver bullet.” A combination of these approaches that is flexible, customized to your discipline and is well communicated with parents/students is strongly recommended.]

Increase feedback opportunities prior to assessments that are entered into the gradebook.  

1. Students complete practice assignment and receive feedback.  
2. Students complete exit slip and receive feedback.  Teacher uses exit slip information to shape future instruction.  
3. Students complete quiz and receive feedback on how they’re doing related to the standard.  
4. Students complete another assessment.  Teacher enters current level of learning in the gradebook.  
5. Teacher or student initiates future assessment opportunities.

Drawbacks to this approach: Students may not initially be motivated to try on the early assessment attempts.  [Possible solution: Talk explicitly about students about the value of practice]

Strengths of this approach:  Because students have received feedback multiple times before the standard was entered into the gradebook, more students will have demonstrated a high level of understanding and fewer will require additional assessment opportunities.

Teacher-initiated re-assessments: Looping standards on future assessments.

• After students complete an assessment which is entered into the gradebook, students participate in learning opportunities based on standards they have not yet demonstrated understanding.  For example, students complete covering Quiz A on standards 1-4.  Students later complete Quiz B covering standards 5-8 and 1-4.  

Variation:  Differentiate Quiz B by student.  If Johnny aced standards 1-3, he would only need to complete prompts for standards 5-8 and 4 on Quiz B.

Drawbacks to this approach: Students must wait until the next assessment to demonstrate their understanding.  In addition if all students are completing all of the same assessments, students may complete an assessment on standards he/she has not even thought about since the first assessment which is a losing scenario for the student (similar poor performance) as well as for the teacher (extra work marking the assessment).  

Strengths of this approach: Students are guaranteed reassessment opportunities during class and do not need to learn a new protocol as this approach may seem very natural to them.  In theory this approach caters to timid students who may not otherwise seek out reassessment opportunities.  

Student-initiated, individualized re-assessments: Require students to complete _____ before they can take the next optional reassessment.

1. Johnny completes practice assignment(s).
2. Johnny completes first assessment that goes into the gradebook.
3. Mrs. Smith uses first assessment to differentiate instruction to students.  Johnny and his classmates did not do well on standards one and two, so she devises a new lesson to help the class better understand these big ideas.  
4. Johnny completes second assessment that goes into the gradebook.  Newer evidence of learning replaces old evidence of learning.
5. Johnny is not satisfied with this “not yet proficient” on standard one.  Because he completed his practice assignment, Mrs. Smith gives Johnny three options.  (If he did not complete his practice assignment, he would need to do this first.)  He must complete at least one of the following options before he can complete a third assessment.  
1. Complete extra problems from the textbook focused on standard one.  
2. Respond to a big idea question after watching an instructional video and/or (re-)reading a portion of the textbook.
3. Participate in an outside-of-class individual or small-group tutoring session with the teacher.

Variation: Allow the student to suggest an option for #5.

Drawbacks to this approach: If students can only complete reassessments outside of class, it creates an added burden on students who are involved in jobs or activities during non-school hours.  Timid students

Teacher-initiated, individualized re-assessments: Require students to complete _____ before they can take the next optional reassessment.

Utilize the approach above with a little more teeth.  Require students to complete re-assessments and one of the three options during class.

------------Hold on, what does this look like?-----------------------

Beginning of the unit/semester:
Mr. Townsley gives each student a handout listing all of the standards.  

Monday:
Mr. Townsley engages students in an small group activity in which students use their previous knowledge of Pythagorean’s Theorem to develop a relationship among the sides and hypotenuse in various 30-60-90 and 45-45-90 triangles.  The activity has several checkpoints where groups are required to raise their hand and check with the teacher before they can continue.  During the activity, Mr. Townsley is circling the room listening in on student discourse so that he can direct probing questions towards groups/students that may have come up against common misconceptions.  The last prompt on the activity asks students to generalize the two different right triangle relationships.  Once completed, students end the class by completing a small, carefully selected problem set focused on 30-60-90 and 45-45-90 triangles.  The answers are posted in the front of the room and will be posted online, too.

Tuesday:
As students enter the room, they are asked to complete three tasks:  First, students who may not have internet access or who have not yet checked all of their answers, do so using the answers which are still posted in the front of the room.  Second, students write the numbers of problems they’re still struggling with in the box next to the solution set.  Third, students complete two warm-up problems which ask students to apply their knowledge of 45-45-90 and 30-60-90 triangles.  Students are encouraged to work in pairs or trios if they are experiencing difficulties.  Mr. Townsley circles the room to provide feedback to students as they complete their warm-up problems.  Next, Mr. T. has a decision to make. Will he take the time to go over #12 and #29 from last night’s problem set?  He uses his professional judgement based on student’s struggles and successes the previous day on the activity and their warm-up problems to decide how much time he should spend going over these two problems from last night’s practice set.

Mr. Townsley teaches another standard today and utilizes another small, carefully selected problem set.

Wednesday:  
Students enter the room and complete the same three tasks.  Mr. Townsley teaches another standard (or two) today and assigns a small, carefully selected problem set which also includes a few prompts connected with standards taught earlier in the week.  

Thursday:
Repeat the three student tasks, however the warm-up problems are focused on all of the standards taught so far this week.  Mr. Townsley has a decision to make.  Are his students ready to complete a more formal assessment of the standards taught so far this week?  He uses the information from today’s warm-up to determine that many students appear to be ready, so he hands out a carefully constructed quiz.  Prompts on the quiz have been carefully constructed to assess students’ understanding of all of the standards taught so far this week.  Before students turn in the quiz, they’re asked to assess their own level of understanding of each standard using a rubric at the end of the quiz.  
Friday:
Mr. Townsley spent time Thursday night writing feedback on students’ quizzes.  He also circled where he thinks each student is on the rubric for each standard.  

I stopped by a high school classroom today and in the middle of our conversation a student stopped into his room.

"Hey, Mr. Smith!  I want to retake the test we went over today.  When can I do it?"

As the central office guy that's excited about our standards-based grading journey, I started to wonder if this was setup.

The teacher thought for a moment and then replied:

"Tell me what you've done to study those areas."

The student replied what she planned to do tonight and the teacher then asked her to bring it in to him tomorrow so that he could look at it.

---------
Many of the questions I hear from teachers about standards-based grading implementation focus on reassessments.

• "Won't students reassess every day until they get it right?"
• "What is stopping a student from not doing his/her homework and waiting until the last day to demonstrate understanding?"
• "This will create an impossible workload!"

I appreciate all of the feedback provided this summer during the SBG "How-to" crowdsourcing project.
The goal was to provide a discipline-neutral guide for teachers to use as they begin or continue to implement grading guidelines approved by our board of education.

As promised, here are the current explainers we're using as a part of our district-wide SBG journey.  Feel free to use them in your own classroom or with your colleagues.

1. Entries in the grade book that count towards the final grade will be limited to course or grade level standards.


2. Extra credit will not be given at anytime.


3. Students will be allowed multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of classroom standards in various ways.


4. Teachers will determine grade book entries by considering multiple data points emphasizing the most recent data and provide evidence to support that determination.


5. Students will be provided multiple opportunities to practice standards independently through homework or other class work.  Practice assignments and activities will be consistent with classroom standards for the purpose of providing feedback.  Practice assignments, including homework, will not be included as part of the final grade.