There are times when I am reminded that the World does not always work the way I pictured it. There is a thesis and antithesis as well as Yin and Yang. An interesting concept is whether legal and illegal have any correlation
to right and wrong. There is often a type of “Fire and Water” in the education field stimulated by the assessment
of learning or the assessment for learning argument. This is where the crux of my philosophical pondering initiates.
Is grading a true measure of learning? This is a profound concept to grasp. Researchers have been saying for
decades that we need to rethink schools and champion systemic change. At the granular level we must ask
ourselves “What does a grade mean?” I read an article once which purported that a hard earned B was better
than an easy A. Upon intricate examination of learning, one must fathom the concept of mastery.
Often there are times when assigning a grade may be more a reflection of compliance rather than the gauge of a student’s intrinsic thirst to learn and explore all facets of the material. Schlechty (2002) defines ritual engagement as, “The immediate end of the assigned work has little or no meaning or direct value to the student, but the student associates it with extrinsic outcomes and results that are of value-for example, reading a book in order to pass a test or to earn a grade needed to be accepted at college.” These students typically receive A’s but are they learning and growing. “But they got the grade!” Deep Practice (Sun, 2014) is that in which produces days or even weeks of
growth in a matter of minutes or hours. Can you grade Deep Practice?
Scale development of essential learnings are a powerful measure of authentic learning that places expectations into clear and concise language. If we understand that 3 is skill mastery and 4 is advanced, then we can determine where the child is performing, how much growth they demonstrated, and when they attained targeted achievement. With the 100-point scale there are simply too many gradations to successfully pinpoint a student’s actual performance level. In many cases teachers are uncomfortable with the simplicity of scales because letter grades, 100 point scales, and percentages are all we have known concerning performance measurement. Do we know what learning actually resembles? I believe teachers do know and that we are often distracted or even fooled because historical performance tracking does not relate well to what we know about student mastery or skill attainment. Quantitative measures of behaviors encompassing knowledge are extremely difficulty to apply effectively to obtain a true reading. Case in point, apply what you understand about the almighty IQ Test. Once, it was coveted by scientists and universities as the ultimate measure of student potential. They theorized that high IQ equaled future success.
IQ has lost most of its luster and thunder over the years as more effective measures have been discovered to identify an accurate image of what a student is capable of doing. Now IQ is considered one of many factors in making decisions. This is an exciting time where educators can remold the landscape of education by defining learning in comprehensible terms. I, for one, am thrilled to be learning different lexicon where grades are not intended to denote the end. Instead, precise criteria should be developed to accomplish this feat.
Posted by John Schilawski 9/23/14
to right and wrong. There is often a type of “Fire and Water” in the education field stimulated by the assessment
of learning or the assessment for learning argument. This is where the crux of my philosophical pondering initiates.
Is grading a true measure of learning? This is a profound concept to grasp. Researchers have been saying for
decades that we need to rethink schools and champion systemic change. At the granular level we must ask
ourselves “What does a grade mean?” I read an article once which purported that a hard earned B was better
than an easy A. Upon intricate examination of learning, one must fathom the concept of mastery.
Often there are times when assigning a grade may be more a reflection of compliance rather than the gauge of a student’s intrinsic thirst to learn and explore all facets of the material. Schlechty (2002) defines ritual engagement as, “The immediate end of the assigned work has little or no meaning or direct value to the student, but the student associates it with extrinsic outcomes and results that are of value-for example, reading a book in order to pass a test or to earn a grade needed to be accepted at college.” These students typically receive A’s but are they learning and growing. “But they got the grade!” Deep Practice (Sun, 2014) is that in which produces days or even weeks of
growth in a matter of minutes or hours. Can you grade Deep Practice?
Scale development of essential learnings are a powerful measure of authentic learning that places expectations into clear and concise language. If we understand that 3 is skill mastery and 4 is advanced, then we can determine where the child is performing, how much growth they demonstrated, and when they attained targeted achievement. With the 100-point scale there are simply too many gradations to successfully pinpoint a student’s actual performance level. In many cases teachers are uncomfortable with the simplicity of scales because letter grades, 100 point scales, and percentages are all we have known concerning performance measurement. Do we know what learning actually resembles? I believe teachers do know and that we are often distracted or even fooled because historical performance tracking does not relate well to what we know about student mastery or skill attainment. Quantitative measures of behaviors encompassing knowledge are extremely difficulty to apply effectively to obtain a true reading. Case in point, apply what you understand about the almighty IQ Test. Once, it was coveted by scientists and universities as the ultimate measure of student potential. They theorized that high IQ equaled future success.
IQ has lost most of its luster and thunder over the years as more effective measures have been discovered to identify an accurate image of what a student is capable of doing. Now IQ is considered one of many factors in making decisions. This is an exciting time where educators can remold the landscape of education by defining learning in comprehensible terms. I, for one, am thrilled to be learning different lexicon where grades are not intended to denote the end. Instead, precise criteria should be developed to accomplish this feat.
Posted by John Schilawski 9/23/14