Grading for Equity week 7: Practices That Value Knowledge, Not Environment or Behaviour, cont. (Chapter 10) #Grade4EqChat

 

The Grading for Equity Twitter chat is tonight at 8pm EST, although some West Coasters have been coming in later and taking part somewhat asynchronously -- there are no late penalties in this chat! This week, we will be continuing the discussion of biased grading practices with chapter 10: Practices That Value Knowledge, Not Environment or Behaviour (continued)... aka the Homework chapter. Please feel free to join in the discussion! Here are this week's questions:

1. What, in your opinion, is the purpose of homework, especially in physics or science classes?
2. Think about students in your class who routinely do not complete homework. What sorts of things might be stopping students from getting homework done?
3. How do you count homework in your current grading practices? If a student does not complete homework, what is at stake for them?
4. Feldman argues that we actually encourage cheating by giving points for homework; b/c students know they'll be penalized for not doing it, copying seems a reasonable strategy. Have you seen this to be true? How can we avoid inadvertently encouraging cheating?
5. How might we support our vulnerable students - those who need more time to do homework or those who have fewer supports and resources outside the school - and who most need the practice that homework is designed to provide? 

Incidentally, in one of his questions at the end of the chapter, Feldman suggests comparing marks/grades of a class with and without homework and participating categories. I've done something similar to this (with quizzes & looking at different weights for assignments, eg, since I've never "counted" homework or participation), and it can be eye-opening. Highly recommended.

Last week's chat is archived in this Wakelet You can access all the past chats from the resources section. See you tonight!

Grading for Equity week 6: Practices That Value Knowledge, Not Environment or Behavior (Chapter 9) #Grade4EqChat

 

This week the Grading for Equity Twitter chat (8pm EST) will be examining biased grading practices with chapter 9: Practices That Value Knowledge, Not Environment or Behaviour. Please feel free to join in the discussion! Here are this week's questions:

1. What sorts of activities do you award extra credit for, if any? If there are things you routinely offer extra credit for, why have you not made those activities required parts of your curriculum?
2. What is your policy for late work? Do you deduct points? How might you reevaluate your late work policy to give students time to learn and master content?
3. When students cheat, do they get an automatic zero for a grade? Is this the best punishment for cheating? Are they made to re-do the assignment on their own? What else might work to rehabilitate student learners? 
4. ”Some consider cheating on an assessment ... as a signal that though she is struggling, she is still engaged and cares about her success.” Do you agree? Could cheating be a sign of greater engagement than if a student simply skipped the assessment?
5. Which student behaviours do you grade?  How can students be taught how participation and effort are means for learning, not ends in themselves?

Last week's chat is archived here. You can access all the past chats from the resources section. See you tonight!

Grading for Equity week 5: Practices that are Mathematically Accurate continued (Chapter 8) #Grade4EqChat

This week the Grading for Equity Twitter chat will be digging deeper into chapter 8: Practices that are Mathematically Accurate (continued). Here are the original questions (the twitter versions will be edited somewhat for space):

1. Do give students a grade “bump” when they have shown improvement or growth over a term? By allowing (and encouraging) students to demonstrate growth over time through improved performance, and recording that most recent performance, do we still need to include a bump, or does the improved score itself recognize and reward growth?
2. How easy should it be for a student to be able to calculate her own grade? Does the traditional “average” method allow for this? Would standards-based-grading allow for this? 
3. In physics & science, we necessarily do a lot of group work (e.g. labs, presentations, etc.) What is your current strategy for group grades? Does it align with the Grading for Equity pillars? If not, how could you make it do so? 
4. Think of an example in the professional workplace in which group work (or more likely, called “collaboration”) is expected. What is the rationale, and how is the effectiveness of that collaboration determined? How could we apply this to grading? 
5. What are your main takeaways from the past two chapters on mathematically accurate grading practices? What changes so far, if any, will you make to your grading system? 

Last week's chat is archived here. You can access all the past chats from the resources section. See you tonight!

Grading for Equity week 4: Practices that are Mathematically Accurate (Chapter 7) #Grade4EqChat

This week in the Grading for Equity Twitter chat, we are finally digging in to the meat of the book. We'll slow down a bit; fewer questions and only one chapter per week.

This week, we are looking at chapter 7: Practices that are Mathematically Accurate.

1. What grading scale do you currently use? What are your thoughts about it now that you’ve read this chapter?
2. If you’ve assigned a zero, was it intended primarily to affect students mathematically or psychologically? Knowing that it is mathematically unsound and demotivating as well as inaccurate, does that change your opinion of it?
3. Did you have any particular light bulb moments while reading this chapter?
4. What other ideas in this chapter would you like to discuss? Do you have any concerns?

Last week's chat is archived here. You can access all the past chats from the resources section. See you tonight!

Grading for Equity week 3: The Case for Change (Chapters 5 & 6) #Grade4EqChat

 

The Grading for Equity Twitter bookclub continues apace. Last week we studied chapters 3 &4, which introduced us to the problems in our current grading schemes. 

That was pretty eye-opening. I always think my 'system' is fair, but if you're juggling 7 different systems, it really doesn't matter. I wish my school would agree to agree on some things, even if it isn't my first choice.#Grade4EqChat

— Jill McLean (@jillmclean27) August 3, 2021

I'm thinking of a line of best fit. We are supposed to look at most recent, most consistent marks (which can be interesting in grade 9/10 sci -- bio/chem/phys/earth&space cafeteria course), but at least it allows us to "ignore" outliers. #Grade4EqChat

— Andrea McPhee (JarvisCI) (@ms_mcphee) August 3, 2021

This week we will be looking at chapters 5 & 6, continuing with The Case for Change and A New Vision for Grading. Feel free to join in, even if you haven't read the book! Here are the questions:

1.  Are students motivated to achieve success or to avoid failure? What specific actions, policies, or words by teachers cause students to experience one type of motivation instead of the other?
2. Do you think of your tasks at work as performance or mastery goals? What affects how you define the goal? How does this affect how you pursue the task?
3. In what ways do schools and classrooms send a message of competition for achievement?
   How does your school's treatment of awards and honors promote or undermine a growth or fixed mindset?
4. Review your classroom's current grading policies through the pillars of our vision: How accurate are they? How bias-resistant? How motivating?
5. How much does this book's vision for equitable grading match against your school's overall vision? How likely is it that your school community could agree on this vision?
6. How much does this book's vision for equitable grading align with your own, personal vision for grading? What concerns do you have about this vision? What are your hopes?

See you then!

Grading for Equity week 2: The Case for Change (Chapters 3 & 4) #Grade4EqChat

Last week's Twitter chat went really well. Please join in, even if you haven't read the book or aren't a physics teacher! I've archived the tweets, and you will always be able to find them on my Resources page.

We had a great discussion about some of our philosophy and current grading practices.

Part of my 1st day speech is to tell them they will do work I will not grade but I promise not to make it busy work, that I will have purpose behind what we are doing and they can always ask me why. I should be able to tell them why (if they can't tell) or I shouldn't assign it.

— Bree BarnettDreyfuss (@BarnettDreyfuss) July 27, 2021

It does require a change in the process, but I've found that the culture of the class is so much more positive. This is worth our time. #Grade4EqChat

— Jill McLean (@jillmclean27) July 27, 2021

One big takeaway: No more grading homework!

A6: So many! One thing for sure: Not grading homework next year.

#Grade4EqChat

— Kristin Newton (@KNewtonPhysics) July 27, 2021

This week we will be looking at Chapters 3 & 4, which focus on why we should be changing our grading practices. Here are the questions we'll be answering:

1. Thinking about how others have responded to your mistakes: How have helpful responses impacted you and your effectiveness? How have unhelpful responses impacted you and your effectiveness?
2. Recall something you learned to do outside of the school context. What motivated you to learn and to continue learning when you struggled? 
3. How effective are the use of points for students who are the least motivated and engaged? How might the use of points—the addition and subtraction throughout a student's day—affect those students' relationships with adults and their self-concept about whether school is “for” them?
4. What confidence or uncertainty do you have that two teachers in your school would assign the same grade to a student?
5. Are there teachers with reputations as “hard” or “easy” graders? What, specifically, defines them as that? How does this categorization make you feel? How does it make that teacher feel? How do students react?

See you tonight! The rest of the schedule is posted at this tweet.

Grading for Equity TwitterChat Mondays 8-9pm EST #Grade4EqChat

Several of the physics PD sessions I've attended this summer have mentioned Grading for Equity by Joe Feldman, and how much we'd like to have a discussion about it. So, in the interest of pushing myself well outside my comfort zone, I'm hosting a weekly Twitter chat. It will no doubt have a physics education slant to it, but all educators are welcome to participate, even if you haven't read the book.

The chat will be on Mondays from 8-9 pm EST until October 4. The current plan is to look at 2 chapters per week to begin with, moving to 1 chapter per week for part III. We'll use the questions at the end of each chapter as a starting point for discussion. 

I'll post, from my Twitter profile, a new question about every 10-15 minutes or so. We use the Q# / A# format. Remember to include #Grade4EqChat somewhere in your tweet so others will find it.

TDSB teachers can access the book and in print through the Virtual Library. For Ontario teachers, it is available online through the OCT library. For teachers elsewhere, check and see if it is available through your board or district or professional organization.

The schedule will be