C+Peterson

45 min, 3/1 - Research web for grading information related to PLCs || 50 min, 3/4 - Read & respond to Home & Ch. 1 discussions || 45 min, 3/5 - Listen to podcasts downloaded earlier 1 hr, 3/6 - 20 min. in each class, discuss grading w/MS students || 25 min, 3/8 - Links on resource page; posting and reading 30 min, 3/8 - Post questions for Ch. 3&4, finish resource link reading || 45 min, 3/11 - Read and respond to discussion posts, Ch.3 and 4 45 min, 3/11 - Worked on list || 40 min, 3/13 - Post to discussion, Ch. 5 and 6; read others 40 min, 3/14 - Read the rest of the resource posts 20 min, 3/15 - Read posts and notes from Group 2 || 45 min, 3/17 - Wrote last personal reflections on book ideas & PDP ||
 * __PDP hours and notes/reflections:__**
 * - Large Group Hours - || - Small Group Hours - || - Individual Work - ||
 * 2 hrs - Tues, 2/26 ||  || 20 min, 2/29 - Wiki responses to Home posts
 * || 2 hrs - Mon, 3/3 || 40 min, 3/3 - Write Individual Page directions; post links from meeting
 * || 2 hrs - Wed, 3/5 || 35 min, 3/5 - Post links to podcasts on PLC related issues; download
 * || 2 hrs - Fri, 3/7 || 50 min, 3/8 - Read & respond to most recent posts including Ch. 2
 * || 2 hrs - Mon, 3/10 || 35 min, 3/11 - Finished handouts from yesterday on Chapters 5 & 6
 * || 2 hrs - Wed, 3/12 || 55 min, 3/13 - Writing review for Wed. group meeting & my own
 * 2 hrs, Sun, 3/16 ||  || 40 min, 3/17 - Summarized Ch. 6 & finishing PDP notes from meeting
 * Total - 5 hrs || Total - 10 hrs || Total - 12 hrs 45 min - [|My Final Reflection] ||

Main Points & Reflections on Preface:
 * Questions on grading have been going on forever; different now is that education is standards-based
 * Emphasis on standards should include CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, ASSESSMENT, //and// GRADING/REPORTING
 * Up 'til this point, grading and reporting are the 2 areas that have not changed to reflect standards-based

Main Points & Reflections on Chapter 1:
 * Grades should be consistent, accurate, meaningful and support learning / Grades should accurately reflect standards - PERIOD
 * Consistent = same from class to class (same grade/same subject, across school, district, even state)
 * Accurate = should reflect only achievement, not a blend of achievement & behaviors into 1 symbol
 * Meaningful = a way to communicate what's important to those who should know in an understandable way
 * Support Learning = achievement should be about learning, NOT about "doing the work" or accumulating points
 * Formative Assessment - designed to help students improve -vs- Summative Assessment - designed to measure achievement
 * **INVOLVE STUDENTS IN THE GRADING PROCESS**
 * Grades are forced to serve a variety of conflicting purposes - not good
 * At schools and district-wide, there should be a shared vision of the primary purpose of grades
 * 3 beliefs:
 * fairness - because students are different, fair should not necessarily mean equal; adaptations should be available to all
 * motivation - extrensic motivation does not work for all; can damage attitude toward learning & student relationships; CONFIDENCE (acquired through learning) IS THE KEY TO STUDENT SUCCESS & is intrinsically motivating
 * objectivity and professional judgement - assessments should always be defensible & credible, even though subjective

Main Points & Reflections on Chapter 2: Question - How do we give credit for enrichment activities when students are asked to learn above & beyond the standards?
 * FIXES FOR PRACTICES THAT DISTORT ACHIEVEMENT:**
 * Fix 1 - //No Student Behaviors in the mix//, even though one might believe that this rewards students with other strengths & punishes students who don't behave - Students/parents have right to know the specific level of knowledge without other stuff mixed in; check out [|expanded format reporting] from Ontario; students/parents should be made aware of behaviors and attitudes that hinder achievement (How will we do this?); using frequent descriptitive feedback should have greater impact on behaviors & attitudes than mixing rewards and punishment into the grade; again - STUDENT INVOLVEMENT
 * Fix 2 - //No grade reduction for late work, support instead -// Penalties... 1) can distort achievement records 2) can harm motivation 3) don't necessarily change behaviors, and 4) do not represent the real world; we should not ignore/condone lateness but instead identify it, especially if cronic, & then address it with students/parents for fixes that work; INVOLVE STUDENTS in timeline expectations
 * Fix 3 - //No X-tra// //credit in the mix// - This distorts the achievement record and clouds the issue for communication purposes; when offering x-tra credit we are encouraging the belief that school is about accumulating points rather than about learning what is expected; it's another inappropriate way to manage behavior; look at STUDENT-INVOLVED ideas for additional opportunities to prove knowledge and skills
 * Fix 4 - //No grade reduction for cheating, instead apply other consequences & reassess achievement// - articulate an ACADEMIC HONESTY POLICY (what is ours?); make expectations clear & concise; talk about the importance of academic integrity; discuss plagiarism; INVOLVE STUDENTS
 * Fix 5 - //No attendance in the mix, report separately// - consider p.44 on absent students requiring opportunities to learn what they missed so they can demonstrate understanding
 * Fix 6 - //No group scores in the mix// - Individual evidence only; cooperative learning is great as a learning activity but not as part of summative assessment

Main Points & Reflections on Chapter 3: Questions - Are Big Horn students clear that they all have the same learning targets in a criterion-referenced setting? or do they sense that they are being compared to each other? Also, what about the layout of grades on p. 68 - is this an example to relate a %age grading scale to a 5-point proficiency scale?
 * FIXES FOR LOW-QUALITY or POORLY ORGANIZED EVIDENCE:**
 * Fix 7 - //Organize and report evidence by strands/standards// - Typically, we organize by date and/or assignment type categories; to be truly standards-based rather than standards-referenced, evidence must be organized by standard; ex. - 4 or 5 scores for each strand - some tests, some performance - done with same scale to determine summary grade; especially interesting to me cuz of computerized gradebook entry; see examples on p. 55, 57, 58
 * Fix 8 - //Grades should be assigned based on clear performance standards w/clear descriptions of achievement expecations// - Performance standards, used for feedback and scoring, must be clearly defined, criterion-referenced w/limited # of levels of achievement, described clearly so all involved know what is "good enough"; experienced educators, in teams, are qualified to develop descriptors and levels; student/parent versions should be shared with all; once overall performance levels & descriptors have been written (p. 64), standard-specific and task-specific rubrics should use these levels; exemplars should be used to demonstrate; Performance standards are about achievement (grades - absolute), NOT about progress or growth (reporting only/not for grades - relative); students/parents should be informed about growth but grades are achievement only; keep STUDENTS INVOLVED by clarifying expectations for achievement and give practice at using task-specific scoring tools; lots of food for thought in this section - professional development time should be provided for these very important tasks!
 * Fix 9 - //Grades should be criterion-referenced, not norm-referenced// - Norm-referencing causes problems with student motivation; reasons for criterion-referencing is clear
 * Fix 10 - //High quality assessments are a must// - For high-quality assessments: 1) use proper method for the nature of the learning goals 2) use high-quality exercises and rubrics 3) gather enough evidence to make valid, reliable judgements of proficiency - this may mean differing numbers of samples for students (interesting!) 4) avoid variables that can cause bias (see examples on p. 77)

Main Points & Reflections on Chapter 4: Questions - How does the 50-point scale work on p. 88? How did SCSD1 decide on the current scale with unequal differences in the points per grade? Is it fair, in a 101-Point Scale that 70% of scores are considered failing - are all of those considered below basic? If so, then there are only 31 scores available to distribute to the other 3 levels of proficiency - basic, proficient, and advanced. Food for thought...
 * FIXES FOR INNAPROPRIATE GRADE CALCULATION:**
 * Fix 11 - //Consider the idea that mean may not be the best way to determine grades, especially when varied// - Consider other central tendency measures (median & mode) instead; maybe none of the 3 works well in some situations - use professional judgment; a question - what are the computerized gradebook consequences for these considerations?
 * Fix 12 - //Zeros should not be included in grade calculations// - They don't reflect learning and can have negative effects on motivation; rather than 0, consider Incomplete, which puts the responsibility on the student to complete assessment and get grade changed; policy should be set by school/district so teachers apply it to their own practices; STUDENT INVOLVEMENT ideas = support sessions to complete assessments, student-led conferences

Main Points & Reflections on Chapter 5:
 * FIXES TO SUPPORT LEARNING:**
 * Fix 13 - //Use ONLY summative evidence, no formative assessments or practice// - teaching and learning is our primary responsibility and with grades, we should document only that; learners should be confident that making mistakes along the way is OK - they will not be figured into the grade; formative activities have the most positive impact on low achievers; including homework as a significant part of grades has been done because we believe that it encourages responsible behavior - not so - homework's purpose should be to integrate knowledge outside of the classroom or to prepare for subsequent lessons; homework, in fact, can be damaging to students who don't understand; to INVOLVE STUDENTS, develop assessment plans and share them with kids - see bottom of p. 101-103; end of fix, it appears that including some formative is OK but teachers need to understand the impact; IMPORTANT - students (and parents and teachers) need to be retrained to believe that accumulating points in whatever ways possible is not good - learning and proving what you've learned is what we're after
 * Fix 14 - //When learning is developmental, replace old evidence with new instances of achievement// - a final grade should reflect a final level of proficiency; provide multiple opportunities; previous poor scores should not be averaged in, they should be replaced; if we don't do this, students can't overcome early failures and will give up; it also demonstrates the impact of good teaching and tenacity to get students to meet standards; grading should be an exercise in professional judgement, not only a numerical activity;
 * Fix 15 - //Involve students in the grading process// - students should learn how to monitor their own progress, learn how to communicate that, and set meaningful goals; the grading process is done with them, not to them; examples: let them help develop rubrics, use assessment plans, use peer and self-assessment, use student-led conferences K-12

Main Points & Reflections on Chapter 6:
 * Grades = summary symbols used to communicate student achievement at a point in time
 * Content and performance standards should be the focus of all of these: curriculum, instruction, assessment, grading, and reporting
 * Students should be involved in all of these: assessment, record keeping, and communication
 * Changes will occur when there is professional dialogue about grading and agreement on the guidelines to encourage appropriate grading strategies