Still Trying to Determine Proficiency in Standards Based Grading

Published: 2024-12-13 10:05 AM

Category: Grading | Tags: standards based grading, sbg

Year 15 in teaching, another post on grading. I'm still using standards based grading and I'm still thinking (overthinking?) how to represent student progress on each standard.

I've gone through several scoring style changes. Most recently, I've switched from my old four-point scale to a two-point representation, mostly based on an old post from Kelly O'Shea on her SBG system. Students are given a 0-1-2 score on any skill we work on in class. A 2 means they've demonstrated the skill successfully. A 1 means they've got some work to do and a 0 is reserved for "No evidence." It's simplified my scoring and I think students have a better overall understanding of what "showing proficiency" means in practice.

My deeper struggle is how to represent the final result to students. Each of the feedbacks they get through a unit points them to in-progress fixes. In other words, small errors in their processes get caught and they're able to fix those things on the next attempt. They can see the linear growth from 1's on assignments to 2's. But what about at the end of the unit? How is all of this wrapped up?

Like Kelly, I've decided that tests are the "hard limit" check. If it's not perfect on the test, then it does not show proficiency. All semester, I've been putting that standard score is more or less based on the test attempt. So, even if they've been proficient up until that point, mistakes on a test will cause me to hold off putting that last binary yes/no on the skill into the book as completed.

Kelly's rationale is that the test should be their best true demonstration of understanding, and I agree with that mindset. It's a controlled environment in which they're asked to do the thing correctly. This requirement also helps reinforce the fact that copying and/or otherewise doing unauthentic work leading up to tests is a waste of time for the student becuase the still have to be able to perform the skill at the end of the day.

To help collect evidence over time, I've got a little web app students can use to see their progress on standards. All feedback goes on their papers but it also goes into this app so they can watch their progress throughout the unit. A student may be showing proficiency on a skill throughout the practice work only to be hit with a "not proficient" based on that test. I'm trying to reconcile that story in my mind so that it makes the most sense for them.

The message I need students to really internalize is that learning is a process. Tests are a way for me, the teacher resposible for fostering and reporting their growth in the content, to check that growth reliably and with validity. Reporting their standard proficiency based on the test is the best true check. Their growth up until that point is their indicator for what to fix leading into that final check in the normal flow of the class.