Grades

How do I know if the intervention is working?  The majority of my students are excelling with the menu innovation.  However, as of late, I have had a few student who are in my accelerated classes that are used to “getting good grades” who have been unable to achieve at the level that they were used to.  With the menu, a student must show learning that is above and beyond the normal scope of the class in order to achieve an “A”.  I know that there may be philosophical disagreements with this idea but I think that enrichment opportunities are essential for students who display a proclivity for the subject area.  I also believe that because grades are theoretically supposed to communicate what a student knows and is able to do then an “A” is reserved for students who demonstrate achievement that exceeds what is explicitly taught or expected for the grade level.

Filed under Action Research | Comment (0)

Preliminary Results

The first week of the implementation phase is over. We completed the first cycle of the menu and graphing and started the new menu. The first few days were amazing - student motivation was palpable. However, we can only spend 4 days on each body system and consequently some of my students weren’t able to make it to the level that they originally set as their goal. I could sense the disappointment for a few of them. I know that in their failure there are really important lessons to be learned but I am still really torn. On one hand, it is important for them to reflect upon why they were unable to reach their goals and reevaluate their effort, time on task, and motivation. On the other hand, I also think that learning takes place at different paces and that should be accommodated to some degree. However, I really don’t think that the amount of work was overwhelming but I do think that some of them thought that they would be able to coast through and reach their goal without doing much outside of class. Hopefully, I will see more students reach their goals on the new menu.

I had some conversations with a few students who did not achieve up to their potential and was able to encourage them to reflect and make adjustments. From these individuals, I have seen a tremendous change. Personal connection is truly one of the most important variables in learning.

Filed under Action Research | Comment (1)

Action Research Begins

Well, I implemented the intervention for my action research. I designed a “menu” for each of the body systems that are broken into 3 levels of difficulty. Level 1 (C) includes the most basic standards, level 2 (B) includes the more complex standards, and level 3 (A) goes beyond the middle level science standards. Each student must begin with level 1 and reach mastery before beginning level 2. Again, at level 2 the student must reach mastery in order to move on to level 3. For each level the students can choose from a variety of readings, assessments, activities, and labs. When they have completed all of the assessments for the given level, they are instructed to evaluate their understanding using the keys, graph their progress, and then prepare for a quiz. The student must get all of the quiz questions correct before moving on the the next level (for most this requires 2-3 tries). The idea is that they learn to be self-directed and independent in their study because they essentially decide what their grade is going to be and then they work towards that goal. Along the way they are empowered because they select their own learning experiences, see their progress graphically, make adjustments, and celebrate when they successfully complete a level.

So far, I have been doing this for three days and I can already see a measurable difference in student motivation. It is exhilarating to see my students so active and excited about learning. I’ve heard comments like “I wish that all of my classes were like this” and “I like this because I can go at my own pace and not have to just do what the teacher tells me to do.” The students come up to take the quiz filled with nervousness and excitement usually with the sentiment “I want to take the level 1 quiz but I am nervous.” I am not sure how many times in my career that I have actually heard a student say that they wanted to take a quiz. Even students that find school to be ‘boring’ are engaged and excited to see their progress. My only worry is that the novelty will wear off and they will find ways to beat the system.

Filed under Action Research | Comments (2)

Graph for Action Research

 The intervention that Jeff and I plan to implement is having students plot their progress using a graph.  This technique was suggested by Deborah Pickering and Robert Marzano during a conference that Jeff and I attended in the summer of 07.  The graphing process was also delineated in their book Classroom Assessment and Grading That Works.  The basic idea is that students will be able to track their progress, recognize areas of strength and weakness, make adjustments, and hopefully see improvement.  It makes sense to me that this will place the onus for learning in the hands of the student and possibly lead to an improvement in motivation.  

My dilemma is that I am unsure of which assessments belong in the graph.  During the conference, the examples that were included were very general (i.e paragraph writing) where a teacher would offer multiple assessments over time.  However, in science, our standards are so specific that it would be very inefficient to administer and graph multiple assessments for each standard.  The unit that I will be applying this intervention during will be The Human Body.  I am currently thinking of breaking the assessments into the various systems (nervous, digestive, muscular-skeletal, etc) and using separate graphs for each one.  This is the first time that I will be teaching this unit and this idea reflects the structure of our district’s curriculum maps.  I am not convinced that this is the best way to approach this unit from the perspective of reform based science… Any suggestions, especially from those that have taught this content, would be very much appreciated.  

Filed under Action Research | Comment (1)

Rubric for Action Research

In order to conduct our action research on the effect of graphing student progress and subsequent motivation I need to create a global rubric that will be applicable to all of the assessments.  The conference that Jeff and I attended (Deborah Pickering) that inspired us to reflect upon and adjust our grading practice suggested the following 4 point scale.  

• 0 - even with help, the student cannot make any sense of the major understanding
• 1 - with some help, the student can make sense of some of the easier major understandings
• 2 - on their own, the student makes sense of the easier understandings but not intermediate level understandings
• 3 - on their own, the student makes sense of the easier and intermediate level understandings but does not go beyond what was explicitly taught in class
• 4 - on their own, the student makes sense of the easier and intermediate level understandings and goes beyond what was explicitly taught in class

I find that I have 2 quandaries that I need to iron out before I can implement my action research.  

1. make rubric student friendly such that it is specific enough to give valuable feedback but general enough to be applied to multiple assessments
2. translate the score into a report card grade

For #2, I am thinking that instead of a 4 point scale, I will substitute traditional percentages 100 (4), 90 (3.5), 80 (3), 70 (2.5), 65 (2), etc.  so that students are familiar with the format.  My assessments will, however, not be scored on a traditional point scale - instead, the tasks will be organized according to level of difficulty and scored according to the rubric mentioned above.   If you have any ideas, thoughts, questions… please feel free to comment. 

Filed under Constructivism | Comment (0)

Action Research Survey

Jeff and I met to work on our measurement scale for our action research. During our conversation we discovered that we had some biases embedded within our original question that presupposed that using a rubric and graph would lead to more transparency. We decided that if our goal was to see if transparency in grading (using a rubric and graph to measure student progress) truly impacts student motivation then we needed to ask some questions that would parse out whether rubrics and graphs actually do contribute to transparent grading as well as questions related to motivation. Please check out this link and offer any feedback.  You’ll have to copy and paste the url.http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=vCkgxI_2boWz0Nkbl5Umm8Uw_3d_3d

Filed under Action Research | Comment (0)

How do people (including kids) learn science?

Learning science is not monolithic so it is difficult to nail down an answer the complicated question: How do people learn science? In our discussion about this topic, Orlando stated that in order to learn science, a student must be engaged in ‘doing’ science. While I agree with this statement, ‘doing’ science is also very subjective. We did decide that fundamental to the nature of science are the acts of wondering, questioning, observing phenomena, collecting data, analyzing evidence, connecting ideas, debating, and collaborating with peers. Learning science is as unique as the individual learner.

“Inquiry questions aren’t just anything the student is curious about. An inquiry question should seek an answer that clarifies relationships.” (Windshitl and Buttemer, 2000.)

Filed under Constructivism | Comment (0)

How might inquiry be related to social justice?

For many reasons, the inquiry process is more engaging and personally meaningful than traditional, overly structured, “investigative approaches.” Windshitle and Buttemer

In October I attended a three day conference in Albany called “Ending the Gap.” It was a colloquium dedicated to not only opening up a dialog about the disparity in achievement between white and Asian students with black and Hispanic students but to finding solutions to this issue. One recurring theme involved the implementation of inquiry. Traditional teaching that includes preset knowledge base may validate students within a narrow demographic as it excludes students within other demographics. Because of this exclusivity and the perception that it is “official knowledge,” the corresponding discourse is afforded social and political power while also perpetuating social inequalities.

“…in a society such as ours… there are manifold relations of power that permeate, characterize and constitute the social body, and these relations of power cannot themselves be established, consolidated nor implemented without the production, accumulation, circulation and functioning of discourse.” -Michael Foucault

To the contrary, inquiry allows for multiple expressions of the same problem and the construction of knowledge within a social context. Inquiry, by definition, is an act of questioning and problem solving which can be taken up in myriad ways while informed by the cultural context in which it is conducted. In this sense, inquiry is a democratic process which thrives upon the diversity of ideas. Also, the discourse that is generated by inquiry confers power to the individual that might otherwise remain elusive. This connection between inquiry and power substantiates the claim that inquiry can lead to social justice.

Filed under Constructivism | Comment (1)

Action Research Plan

1. Write an area-of-focus statement.

The purpose of this study is to…

• align student NYS intermediate science (Jennie) and Regents Physics (Jeff) standards, assessment, and grades in a way that will accurately reflect what a student knows and is able to do
• improve student achievement by allowing students to learn and grow in an environment safe from adverse consequences by using formative assessment as a learning instrument to evaluate progress rather than to inform a grade
• evaluate the use of student tracking of their learning using graphic means as it relates to student learning

2. Explain its connection to reform-based science education.

This study attempts to addresses the following central aspects of reform-based science education…

Transparency in grading practice. When a student can clearly articulate the criteria by which their progress is measured as well as measure their own progress using the same set of criteria then they can own their learning and take responsibility for the outcome. Also, as students track their learning using graphic measures they can see areas of weakness and strengths as well as trends in their learning. This knowledge is empowering and gives the student the sense that they control their learning and that they ultimately can change it.

3. Define your variables.

Variable	Definition	The way I’ll know it when I see it:
Formative Assessment	An assignment or task that affords a student the opportunity to learn and construct knowledge	Student’s construct meaning
Summative assessment	An assignment or task that gives a student the opportunity to demonstrate (summarize) learning	Student’s demonstrate learning
Grades	Quantitative measurement of learning
Feedback	Evaluative information or data about a student work
Student achievement	Acquisition of knowledge and skill	Student learning and subsequent grades

4. Develop research questions.

• Will aligning summative assessments with grading practice more accurately reflect what a student knows and is able to do?
• Will student achievement increase if formative assessments are not used as criteria for grading?
• Will student achievement improve if a student can track his or her progress graphically?
• Will students feel empowered to improve their learning as a result of these measures?

5. Describe the intervention or innovations.

What are we doing? The goal is to identify a more accurate means of assessment…distinguishing between behavior (turning things in late, attending meetings, whatever), and meeting course goals. Students enter classes with a range of backgrounds and experiences and therefore start at different levels of understanding. Grades should be based on understanding and ability to work with the course materials, not on compliance. We have cudgeled ourselves into believing that we are providing equity by having students complete activities without providing differentiation. In other words, a student who already knows the material completes an activity that offers no challenges, nor stimulation. For the student who is learning the content, this activity could be a learning experience, but not for the former. On one hand we could provide different activities for different levels of learners, but the assessment is still a level experience and tied to course content. A true grade might suggest that a value of a “C” is for basic comprehension, and an “A” should be something above and beyond course expectations.

6. Describe the membership of the action research group.

The participants in my study will be all of my students. The argument we have not answered yet is if we need/want a control. We are not convinced that simply not engaging one class in the research will be enough to offer a point of comparison to those that do participate.

7. Describe negotiations that need to be undertaken.

None needed.

8. Develop a timeline.

• Phase 1 (August – November). Identify area of focus, review related literature, develop research questions, and reconnaissance.
• Phase : January – Pre assessment, implement graphs
• Phase 3: February – Post assessment, collect graphs
• Phase 4: (Note: The main effort should be implemented in February, 2008).

9. Develop a statement of resources.

none

10. Develop data collection ideas.

The data for the research will be collected in several ways. The students will track their learning via a graph/chart that they will maintain. The chart goes from 0-4 on the y-axis, and a-? on the x-axis. Assessments, formal and not, activities, etc. are assigned a letter and scored to a value of 0-4…0 being a complete lack of ability, and a 4 being mastery and above and beyond material explicitly taught.

Data could also include pre and post evaluations of student mechanisms for determining their own understanding of material. Possibly a student attitude survey.

11. Describe your intentions or hopes for publication.

We would like to publish.

Filed under Action Research, Constructivism | Comment (0)

Sub Report

Just the thing that you want when you return from a few days off: the sub report. I was mostly impressed that my students were engaged and well behaved for the three days before Thanksgiving recess that I was in Texas for my brother’s wedding. I took some time the day before I left to frame my absence around the idea that a guest teacher would be taking my place for a few days and that a guest in our space means that they not only do what they normally would but that they should go above and beyond to make our guest feel welcomed. For the most part, this really worked.However, the very last period of the last day before break, all hell broke loose momentarily in my room. I guess that it started with inappropriate banter that provoked the sub to initiate a conversation about respect. She is a former army soldier and had served in Iraq. The students had a lot of questions and comments that quickly digressed into chaos when one student announced “they should feed Iraqis to Africans.” Well, from what I gather, the sub was understandably overwhelmed with the class and called for back-up. It appears that order was restored and some learning was salvaged.However, today I had to pick up all of the pieces. Fortunately, I was able to diffuse this situation without any casualties. I spoke with each party individually and validated their concerns and expressed my own concerns. I encouraged the student who stuck his foot in his mouth to take responsibility and then I convened the group and gave them an opportunity to “heal the wounds.” I actually love mediating these life lessons - it was magnificent. I now look at these glitches in my classroom as opportunities to nurture emotional growth and teach social skills.

Filed under 7th Grade Science | Comment (0)