ehs competency-based grading & reporting shifts & rationale
TRANSCRIPT
EHS Competency-Based Grading & Reporting
Shifts & Rationale
SHIFT IN HIGH SCHOOL CREDIT
Before – Credit awarded by attending a high school course and receiving a passing grade
Competency – Credit awarded by mastering all competencies in a high school course (e.g. math)
▫Concepts & procedures▫Problem solving▫Communicating & reasoning▫Modeling % data analysis
RATIONALE FOR HS CREDIT SHIFT•Meets NH Minimum Standards (2008-2009)
▫High school course competencies for credit▫Assessment methods for competencies
•Provides opportunity to learn in or outside the classroom/school ▫Physical education competencies by sports,
physical fitness facility attendance, etc.▫World language competencies through life
experience, travel, etc.
SHIFT IN MASTERY OF CONTENTBefore – Overall course grade of ≥ 65%
▫72% Algebra I
Competency – Competency grade of C- or better (≥ 70%)
▫C Concepts & procedures▫C- Problem solving▫C+ Communicating & reasoning▫C Modeling & data analysis
RATIONALE FOR MASTERY SHIFT•Defines mastery as C- or better to receive
credit•Raises the academic bar for all students•Supports Common Core State Standards
in which students must be competent to move onto next course or level
•Supports Epping School District Mission to produce competent, confident learners
SHIFT IN ASSESSMENT
Before – Individual teachers decide assessment methodology
▫Students taking same course have different requirements
▫Students taking multiple courses have different requirements in each content area
After – School-wide assessment methodology ▫4 to 6 Summative assessments per quarter▫8 to 12 Summative assessments per semester
RATIONALE FOR ASSESSMENT SHIFT•Addresses parent concerns
▫Inconsistent assessment practices used in same course and other courses
▫Inadequate number of assessments used to determine student’s grade
•Provides more opportunity for▫Students to demonstrate their learning▫Teachers to evaluate student learning and
intervene when students are not learning
SHIFT IN GRADINGBefore – Individual teachers determine grading methodology
▫Students taking same course have different requirements
▫Students taking multiple courses have different requirements in each content area
After – School-wide grading methodology ▫Formative assessments 10% (during learning
period)▫Summative assessments 90% (end of learning
period)
RATIONALE FOR GRADING•Addresses parent concerns
▫Inconsistent grading practices in same course and other courses
▫Too much emphasis on formative assessments rather than what my child knows and is able to do
•Prepares students for career and college▫Acknowledges importance of practice (formative)▫Places more emphasis on demonstration of
knowledge and skills (summative)▫Aligns with NECAP, SAT, AP testing
SHIFT TO REASSESSMENT
Before - Some teachers gave students the option of reassessing for a failing grade or to improve a grade
After – All students may reassess for a failing grade or to improve a grade
RATIONALE FOR REASSESSMENT
•Failing is not an option•Students learn at different rates and in
different ways•Students have bad days•All students can and must learn•Students must be competent to receive
HS credit•Shift to passing grade of 70%•Cultural shift to learning
SHIFT TO MORE INFORMATIONBefore – School reports overall course grade• 75% Algebra I
After – School reports 3 measures of learning• Overall course grade (0 to 100%)
▫Evaluate student passing & completing work• Competency content grade (A+ to C-, N or I)
▫Award high school course credit on content mastery
• Competency skill grade ( 1 to 4)▫Evaluate student learning habits & process skills
RATIONALE FOR REPORTING SHIFTReports • If student is completing and passing assessments• What student knows and is able to do• What skills student is using during the learning process
Meets • NH Minimum Standards – reports mastery on course
competencies to receive credit• NEASC Standards – reports learning expectations
(content & skill competencies)• A Framework for 21st Century Learning – reports 21st
century content & skills (content & skill competencies)
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
EHS REPORTING & GRADING SYSTEM
Issues:
1. Overall Averages not accurately displayed on the Quick Look Up Screen
2. Not knowing what competencies are assessed within each assignment
3. Reassessment4. Discrepancy between Competency
grades and overall course grade
Overall Averages not accurately displayed on the Quick Look Up Screen
•Teachers did not enter grades below 70%, instead they recorded it as missing (see below)
Inaccurate grade display
Accurate grade display
Quick Look Up –Message (forthcoming)Click on the blue quarterly grade for more information about assignment scores.
Click on the Standards Grades tab for more information about competency grades.
Quick Lookup
Standards Grades
Attendance By Class
Exp
Last Week This Week
Course Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 S1 S2
Absences Tardies
M T W H F M T W H F 12-13
12-13
12-13
12-13
1(A) . . UTA . TR . . Algebra II Concepts Pender, Jacqueline S
A- 91
B- 82
N 5
I 86.5
11 11 2 2
1(B) . TR . . Credit Recovery Lab
Mlcuch, Dan B -- 1 1 0 0
2(A-B)
TR TR SST--Automotive Tech I Nienhouse, R
B+ 89
B 84
-- B+ 89
16 16 0 0
3(A) . . . TR . . Civics Page, Joy C
C 75
C 74
N 58
C 74
9 9 0 0
MISSED ASSESSMENTSBefore – Missed summative assessments were not recorded anticipating student making up the work
Recommendation – Missed assessments are recorded as a zero (0)*• Averages in & lowers the reported overall course
grade• Yields an incomplete (I) for competency content
grade
*If assessment is completed, new grade will be recorded
FAILED ASSESSMENTSBefore – Failed summative assessments were not recorded anticipating student reassessing
Recommendation – Failed assessments are recorded*• Averages in and lowers reported overall course
grade• May yield a “not yet competent” (N) for competency
content grade if average is less than 70%
*If assessment is retaken, improved grade will be recorded
COMPETENCIES ASSESSED
Before – Reported formative and summative assessments did not clearly indicate the competencies being assessed
Recommendation – All reported assessments will clearly indicate the competencies being assessed
Before
After
REASSESSMENTBefore
• All students had to reassess summative assessments below a 70%
• Some students are not reassessing for missed, failed or incomplete assessments or in a timely manner.
• Some students are not electing to take the original assessment.
Recommendation• Is no longer mandatory but recommended • Reassessment Plans must be initiated within 5 days of
receiving the grade assessment.
Discrepancy between Competency grades and overall course grade
For students scoring below a 60% on formative assessment, competency grades have been inflated. The overall grade has been accurately reported.
Changes to language in the Grading and Reporting Guideline• Pg. 2 – students must pass all competencies each
quarter to earn credit.• Pg. 3- Overall grade is the average of all assessment
scores for that term. Each assessment is linked to one or more competency.
• Pg. 5 - Earned grades will be recorded in PowerSchool.• Pg. 5- Students who choose not to complete formative
assessments will lose the right to reassess.• Pg. 6 – Reassessment plans must be submitted within 5
days of receiving the graded assessment.• Pg. 7 – A 5 day “buffer period will occur to the close a
quarter to allow for reassessment.
Things that remain the same…
•Semester grade is the average of Q1 & Q2 overall course grade.
•Semester grades are recorded on the transcripts and used to calculate cumulative GPA
•Students who do not earn credit must plan to recover credit.
•Teacher change of grade forms remain the same.
90/10
summativeaverage formative average
80 100 75 50 25 0
90-10 82.0 79.5 77.0 74.5 72.080-20 84.0 79.0 74.0 69.0 64.070-30 86.0 78.5 71.0 63.5 56.060-40 88.0 78.0 68.0 58.0 48.0
2.0 difference between 90-10 and 80-20 grading scales