Secondary Grading Committee

2010-2011 DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN Identify and implement high impact strategies such as review of grading policy, tasks assigned to students, alternative scheduling, and common assessment to ensure high expectations for students. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Greg Anthony, Streamwood High School Steve Juracka, Bartlett High School Judith Arman, Canton Middle School Robert Keck, Kimball Middle School Barbara Bettis, Larsen Middle School Robert Kling, Bartlett High School Steven Lauridsen, Larkin High School Lana Brozik, Eastview Middle School Darlea Livengood, Larkin High School Raul Castillo, Elgin High School Terri Lozier, Streamwood High School Tim Cordina, Abbott Middle School Mike Miner, Streamwood High School Gina Crespo, ESC Effie Rouse, Elgin High School Kathryn Castle, ETA Ed Russell, South Elgin High School Jerry Cook, Gifford Street High School Judy Scrima, Kenyon Woods Middle School Lorie Fuller, South Elgin High School Jeff Smith, Canton Middle School Kristen Gac, Bartlett High School Mary Sotiroff, Elgin High School Kari Hernandez, Tefft Middle School Tresa Tolley, Gifford Street High School Perry Hayes, Ellis Middle School Noe Velazquez, Ellis Middle School Jack Janezic, ETA OUR CONSULTANT Dr. Connie Kamm Senior Associate at The Leadership and Learning Center • Taught in every grade level from k-college, HS Principal in Ohio for 10 years • Has written chapters for books on assessment, accountability, decision-making, and creating change EXPECTED COMMITTEE OUTCOMES • A review of current grading policy and practices • Specific guidelines (principles) for fair and effective grading (make recommendations to Instructional Council) • A gradual phase-in of a policy – develop a timeline • A district-wide secondary level grading policy for Board approval COMMITTEE DETERMINED PURPOSES FOR GRADING • To encourage student growth • To reflect on student knowledge – to know what students know • To reflect on the effectiveness of educator practice and programs • To communicate student achievement ( for students, parents, educators, colleges & universities) • To progress monitor by providing accurate reflections and feedback on student progress (for students, parents, and other stakeholders) COLLECTED DATA ON CURRENT POLICIES & PRACTICES Middle and High School Handbook Grading Policies CATEGORY IN HANDBOOK Central AMS CMS EVMS EMS KMS KWMS LMS TMS BHS EHS LHS SHS SEHS Gifford GRADE REPORTING/GRADING p.36 P.21 P. 18 P.29 p.28 p.25 p.9 SCALE NO PE SCALE ONLY GRADE CLASSIFICATION P.1 P.27 P.23 P.24 P.26 P.9 8 GRADE WEIGHTING FOR CLASS P.1 P.31 P.26 P.25 P.28 P.10 RANK 9 GRADING PHILOSOPHY P.29 P.28 ACADEMIC DISHONEST/ P.19 P.20 P.23 P.1 P.23 P.29 P.24 P. 9 CHEATING POLICY 8 PROGRESS REPORT P.24 P.21 P.29 P.25 P.26 P.29 P.10 HONOR ROLL P.26 P.18 P.21 P.22 P.24 P.18 P.22 P.27 P.2 P.30 P.25 P.26 P.29 0 PASS/ FAIL P.26 P.2 P.21 P.26 P.26 P.29 0 LEARNING STANDARDS P. P.28 P. 26 P.26 P.28 P.25 P.26 P. 30 31 ACADEMIC POLICY P.21 HOMEWORK POLICY P.23 P.19 P.19 P.24 P.19 P.21 FINAL EXAM POLICY P.36 P.1 P.25 P.9 9 AUDIT P.1 P.27 P.23 P.24 P.27 8 HOSPITAL/HOMEBOUND P23 P25 STUDENTS MAKE-UP WORK VACATION P16 P19 P22 P21 P38 P39 P32 P35 P25 P15 PE POLICY P26 P20 REEVES CALLS FOR GRADES THAT ARE: Accurate: The same work by the same student should receive the same grade even if teachers are different. Timely: The student can associate feedback with the work that was generated. Fair: The work is compared to a standard. There is mastery of concepts or skills. Understandable: Students and parents clearly understand how grades are earned. They see a clear relationship between actions and grades. Effective: There is clear evidence of increased student performance or achievement as a result of the feedback or grade. KEN O’CONNOR SUGGESTS 15 FIXES 1. Don’t include student 5. Don’t consider behaviors in grades. attendance in grade 2. Don’t reduce marks on determination. “work” submitted late; 6. Don’t include group support the learner. scores in grades . 3. Don’t give points for 7. Don’t organize extra credit or use bonus information in the grade points. book by assessment 4. Don’t punish academic methods (quiz 1, test dishonesty with reduced chap 6). grades. 8. Don’t assign grades using unclear performance standards. KEN O’CONNOR’S FIXES CONTINUED 9. Don’t assign grades 12. Don’t include zeros in based on student’s grade determination when achievement compared evidence is missing or as to other students. a punishment. 10. Don’t rely on evidence 13. Use only summative gathered using evidence for grades; assessments that fail to formative is practice. meet standards of 14. Don’t summarize quality. evidence accumulated 11. Don’t rely on the mean; over time; emphasize consider central more recent achievement. tendency. 15. Involve students. REEVES & O’CONNOR SUGGEST DISTRICTS SHOULD: Look for Trends vs. Averaging Grades Try this exercise. How would you describe the temperature for this week? Which line shows a more accurate description. Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Average 90 89 92 Not 90 91 92 77.7 degrees degrees degrees measured degrees degrees degrees degrees 90 89 92 Not 90 91 92 90.6 degrees degrees degrees measured degrees degrees degrees degrees SEVEN GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF GRADING (DEVELOPED BY U-46 SECONDARY GRADE COMMITTEE) 1. Grades should reflect proficiency on well-defined standards-based learning targets that are clear to all stakeholders. 2. Grades should be based solely on academic performance using formative and summative assessments. 3. Grading scales should be devised to give equal incremental value to each grade division. 4. Students should be expected to complete work for credit (late-work accepted). 5. Students should be given multiple ways to demonstrate their knowledge. 6. Feedback should be timely, specific, and related to learning targets. 7. Students should be given multiple opportunities to reach proficiency on specific, standards-based concepts and skills. SOME THINGS WE CAN DO RIGHT AWAY #2 Grades should be based solely on academic performance using formative and summative assessments. #3 Grading scales should be devised to give equal incremental value to each grade division. #4 Students should be expected to complete work for credit (late work accepted). #5 Students should be given multiple ways to demonstrate their knowledge. SOME THINGS WILL TAKE TIME TO WORK ON #1 Grading should reflect proficiency on well- defined standards-based learning targets that are clear to all stakeholders. #6 Feedback should be timely, specific, and related to learning targets. #7 Students should be given multiple opportunities to reach proficiency on specific, standards-based concepts and skills. Professional Development 2011-2012 Roll out 4 Guidelines 2012-2013 Roll out 3 Guidelines 2013-2014 NEXT STEPS The Secondary Grade Committee meetings (September, December & February) with Connie Kamm to make sure we are on the right track and to prepare further professional development materials. Additional professional development sessions may be provided on the following topics: • Common Core State Standards/IELP and their curricular applications • Differences between formative and summative assessments and creating samples of these types of assessments • Inter-rater reliability for grading student work .

Load more