6 Fundamentals to Facilitating Change

I’m a pretty straight-arrowed rule follower, and I’ve never considered myself a rabble-rouser. So several years ago, when I got called into the principal’s office, I suffered a mini-anxiety attack. With my heart palpitating and my spores gushing sweat, I feebly sunk myself into a chair opposite of the principal’s massive desk, seemingly hoping to hide behind it.

“Reed, you gave 15 INCOMPLETE grades. Incompletes are only to be used in extreme situations like when a student misses several classes because she was sick. Go back to counseling and fix this.”

With that--and no opportunity to defend myself--my shift to Standards-Based Grading grading had hit another roadblock. I had a great relationship with both the director of school counseling and the registrar, so I was pleased to see them together as I entered counseling department. Obviously, they knew why I was there, and they reassured me that it was no big deal. The registrar let me in on a little secret, another teacher had also given a significant number of incompletes, and from her perspective, the only problem with incompletes was that it required more work for her since she would have to manually enter the new grades. She continued, “We can’t accurately calculate GPAs when a student has an INC. Other than that there’s really no problem with incompletes except that it’s something different.”

With that I immediately understood: different isn’t always good. This is especially the case when it goes against a long-standing school policy.

After I explained to the registrar that students received incompletes because they had not completed a significant assignment or did not demonstrate the required mastery of a strand or unit, the registrar offered a temporary solution, “Reed, give them the F or whatever, and then come back with a grade change form and I’ll change the grade. It’ll end up being the same amount of work on this end.”

I appreciated her understanding and willingness to work with me. Of course, I had already explained to the students and their parents why I had given Incompletes and what needed to be done, so I went back to my office space and started making phone calls.

While this wasn’t how I wanted to spend my time, it offered an opportunity for me to reflect, “Standards-Based Grading has been good for my students and assigning Incompletes (in my classroom I called them ‘Not Yets’) on assignments had led to improved academic performance.  What could I have done differently? What did I need to do going forward? What had I done wrong?

As an educator, I sought to constantly tweak, change and improve, but clearly I had taken a few missteps in my journey towards Standards-Based Grading. Through reflection I identified six areas where I erred.

6 Fundamentals to Facilitating Change

1. Change requires honest dialogue and courageous conversations. Internally, I had identified a problem and a solution but not wanting to rock the boat, I did not involve others when I should have.
2. Educational change requires support from many people. By providing information to others, along with the rationale and supporting research, I could have increased support and avoided conflict.
3. There’s nothing wrong with starting small and sharing. I had been flying solo on my Standards-Based Grading journey, but I could’ve expanded my efforts to include other teachers from my PLC or my team. Doing so would’ve ensured ongoing dialogue, increased validity and improved fidelity.
4. Change efforts must be organized. Had I been more organized and done a better job of coordinating my efforts with others, I could have avoided cynicism and conflict. By creating a specific plan with the help of others, the change to Standards-Based Grading would have been more valid.
5. Anticipate problems and emotional reactions, including your own. My principal rightfully felt like the carpet had been pulled from under him as I--unintentionally--broke school rules, and I also became very frustrated. I did not anticipate emotional attachments to educational policies, nor did I proactively plan for problems.
6. Expect cynicism. To reduce the rampant cynicism among most school staffs about educational improvement, restructuring endeavors should be well organized and coordinated. A written and/or visual model of the change effort can be developed and posted, including timelines, activities, task force members, and their responsibilities

Educational policies should be synonymous with change. Ongoing restructuring and improving should be a valued norm. Such innovation must be appropriately managed to ensure positive results. Doing so will ensure that we meet the needs of our students.

Two Conversations that Emphasized the Need for Standards-Based Grading

This past week I overheard two conversations that reminded me of the need for standards-based grading.

Conversation 1: in produce section of grocery store between a parent and a middle school teacher who I’ll call Mr. Smith

Parent: Good to see you Mr. Smith. How’s Jon [another pseudonym] doing?

Mr. Smith: Jon’s one of my best students. His test scores are always among the best in the class. I think he had the highest score on the last test.

Parent: That’s great! He really enjoys your class.

Mr. Smith: Thanks. He's a pleasure to teach. 

What's wrong with this conversation?

Simply, why is the teacher comparing Jon’s performance against other students? Assessments and grades should be used to provide meaningful feedback in relation to learning objectives. Grades should never be used to rank and sort students. I'm sure the teacher meant well and the parent was clearly pleased with this impromptu progress report, but does the parent truly know How's my child doing?

Conversation 2: overheard at a basketball game

Parent: Did you get your test back?

Middle school student: (Sheepishly) Yes.

(Parent tilts her head and gives her daughter “the eye.”)

Student: I got a 60. But everyone did badly.

(Long pause as parent simply stares through the child.)

Student (with cautionary optimism): She gave us an extra credit assignment to pull up our grade.

Parent: Get it out and start working on it.

What's wrong with this conversation?

I applaud the teacher for recognizing that the entire class struggled on the test (assuming the student didn’t make it up). But instead of assigning an extra credit assignment to raise students’ grades, the teacher should be reflecting on her own professional practices to ensure improved achievement. This should include re-teaching and re-assessment.

While some extra credit assignments do equate to increased learning or mastery of the objective, most extra credit assignments dilute the meaning of grades. For example, in this case, it sounds as if the student simply needs to complete additional work to raise her grade; meaning the quantity of work becomes more important than the quality of the understanding.

If, as the student stated, most students did poorly, it’s not a learning problem. It’s a teaching problem that requires corrective action.

Four Standards-Based Grading Principles Relevant to These Conversations

1. Grades should focus on results rather than activities. Emphasis should be on learning and not competition and completion.
2. Assessments provide information for students AND teacher.
3. If a particular concept or skill is worth assessing then it’s important enough to teach and teach well.
4. Teachers should follow assessments with high-quality corrective actions and students should be given additional opportunities to demonstrate mastery.

Grading Group Work in a Standards-Based Classroom

The other day, Ms. Snider approached me with a simple query, “Do you have a minute to discuss grading of my group project?”

The ensuing conversation centered around two questions:

1.     Should the group be assigned one grade?

2.     How can we assess for individual learning and provide meaningful feedback to each individual?

We began with a resounding “NO!” to the first question.

Both of us believe that a grade stands for what each student learns, so this was easy. But, as we explored the subject in more detail, we soon realized that assigning the group one grade actually defeats the purpose of a cooperative assignment. Ms. Snider shared a story of her daughter, a high-achieving student, who often felt pressured to pick up her group mates slack. Like many students, her daughter felt it easier to do their work than to wait for them or to work with them.

Is it any surprise that a lot of our top students, cringe at the thought of group work?

We had our starting point: individual students will be responsible for their own learning and will receive their own grades.

Our next challenge was to determine how students would be held individually accountable while still relying on each other to successfully complete the assignment. Although this was a new project for Ms. Snider, she knew exactly what she wanted the students to learn and what skills they would acquire. That led us to our next question:

How can we assess learning and provide feedback?

After much back-and-forth, we stumbled upon the following idea. Periodically, each student reflects on his/her own contributions to the group and on his/her own learning. (Sometimes this might be daily and at other times it might be weekly.) We immediately began to craft a rubric, but then another idea hit us. Why not have the students share their own experiences and have the class create their own group participation rubric.

This, of course, led us to our next problem. Ms. Snider teaches some of our best students—students who are highly grade-motivated. Some would undoubtedly grade themselves harshly, while others would unfairly inflate their grades. To counter this, Ms. Snider came up with an outstanding idea: After each self-reflection, lets allow the students time to share their own rating and give the other members of the group time to provide feedback.

For the student who grades herself harshly, this would be easy. For the student who inflates, his/her grade the task would be more difficult for the group mates, but the ability to provide truthful and honest feedback is an important skill. Additionally, this would take some of the pressure off of students having to actually assign their peers a grade (an idea we nixed).  Again, we could use the same student-created rubric to help this process.

While great ideas were flowing from our conversation, we hadn’t yet discovered a way to accurately assess student learning. We were getting closer though.

Last year, I remember watching Ms. Mathews’ students create a Rube Goldberg machine. Along the way, she peppered the students with individual questions, and after presenting their machines, students were asked more detailed questions. Her questions required students to demonstrate their knowledge; their reflective nature also shed light on the entire group experience.

Ms. Snider took Ms. Mathews’ ideas to the next level, “You know what? That’s a great idea.” With increasing enthusiasm, “I think we can go one step further. Why not have the other students in the class ask questions—and I mean real questions after each group’s presentation?”

Finally, we started to discuss two very important individual components. First, all students would be asked to grade themselves according to the class-created rubric. Finally, each student would be required to demonstrate his or her knowledge of the assignment through an additional assessment—perhaps a test or an essay.

We were definitely on to something. As the project progresses, I’m sure Ms. Snider will improve upon the ideas we generated.

What started as a simple conversation morphed into something much more complex. Our focus centered around 4 basic, research-supported premises:

1.    No group grade will be assigned

2.    Students will not be told to grade each other. Students will, however, provide meaningful and honest feedback to their group mates.

3.    Reflection is critical to the learning process.

4.    Targeted, well-crafted and specific questions will be used to assess student learning. This will provide meaningful feedback and can be used as both for both formative and summative assessment.

****

By the way, I need to give Ms. Snider’s project a plug. This is not a group project in which students simply gather facts, arrange them neatly on a poster or PowerPoint, and then spit them out during a presentation. Ms. Snider’s project required students to think for themselves, to pose questions, to think creatively to solve problems and to rely on each other. I can’t wait to see the end results.

A Late Work Policy That Supports Learning

In my first fifteen years of teaching, I struggled to develop an effective, fair and student-learning centered late work policy. My policies changed from year to year. One year, I’d accept no late work. The next, I’d accept any and all late work with no consequences.

I faced four conflicts as I tried to create a policy that maximized student learning while instilling responsibility.

Conflict 1:

I want each of my students to be responsible and submit their work in a timely manner.

-VS-

In the “real-world” deadlines are often negotiated and extensions are often granted.

Conflict 2:

As a teacher, I need to maintain a pace to meet curriculum requirements.

-VS-

Given the choice, I’d rather students submit work late than not at all.

Conflict 3:

Late penalties may deter students from turning in work late.

-VS-

Late penalties don’t work for many students who are consistently late turning in work. 

Conflict 4:

Given no due dates, students rush to finish assignments and will turn them in at the last possible moment (i.e. right before the end of the marking period)

-VS-

Firm due dates are needed to allow me to provide feedback and meet reporting dates.

After much experimentation, I eventually created a policy that maximized student learning while emphasizing timely work completion. Here’s how it works.

Each assignment/assessment includes both a due date and a deadline date. The deadline date is the absolute last day an assignment/assessment could be turned in. As long as the work was completed by the deadline, students could earn full credit.

Students who did not complete work by the due date were required to complete a missing homework sheet. By quickly reviewing these sheets, I could determine which students needed additional academic support versus who needed help managing their time.

A couple of other items of note:

• Often I involved students in setting the deadline date. This collaborative process created buy-in and simulated real-life negotiations.

• My grading program, allowed me to create a footnote if an assignment was turned in late. Keeping track of such information was vital.

• For students who were chronically late completing assignments, I worked with their parents, other teachers, guidance counselors, etc. to communicate deadlines (emails, text messages, posting assignments online, creating student contracts, etc.)

• This policy actually helped students learn to better manage their time. For example, Susan was an excellent student who was involved in many extra-curricular activities and took several challenging classes. On Monday, I assigned a mini-assessment project on the Roman Empire with a due date of Wednesday and a deadline date of the following Monday. On Monday and Tuesday, Susan had several hours of homework from her other classes and she had away soccer games both nights. Instead of rushing to complete all of her assignments, Susan was able to concentrate on completing her work for her other classes and could dedicate the necessary time and effort later in the work on her Roman Empire project.

What are the advantages of this policy?

1.     Grades are linked to learning not to behaviors (poor time management)

2.     It makes the entire process more manageable for both students and me

3.     It enables me to work with students who have trouble completing assignments and provide timely feedback to all students

4.     It gives me an opportunity to help students learn AND build relationships with the students as I work closely with them

What is your late work policy? What do you like or not like about my policy?

Redos and Retakes

One of the seminal moments in my life as an educator occurred about fifteen years ago when my school’s administration required teachers to practice mastery teaching with an emphasis on allowing redos and retakes.

Of course, the teacher’s lounge was abuzz with questions and critiques of the new policy. Redos and retakes took the brunt of the criticism.

Today, I’m an unabashed believer in retakes and redos; my “answers” to the more common criticisms follow.

Over the years, I’ve become more comfortable with redos and retakes thanks to my own experiences, my colleagues, and, in particular, the writings of Rick Wormeli and Ken O’Connor.

Complaint 1: Students need to be held accountable

I agree, students must be held accountable for learning.  So which policy holds students to a higher standard? One in which we allow students to fail or skim by with a D or one in which we use redos and retakes to ensure student mastery?

Students need multiple chances to grow and learn. Each teacher’s goal should be for ALL students to master the essential learnings.

The research of Carol Dweck shows that if we teach students that their intelligence can increase, they will do better in school. In her ground breaking book Mindset, Dweck speaks of the benefits of a growth mindset, meaning that people believe that they can improve their abilities by dedication and hard work. As teachers, we must ensure students view failure as part of the natural learning process and an opportunity to improve. The long-term consequences of one’s mindset impact the entirety of a person’s life. As teachers, we play an important role in instilling a growth mindset in each of our students. We must teach our students to rise to the challenge of our high expectations, to continuously learn, and we must reward them for their sustained efforts.

Requiring students to master their learning through redos and retakes until they meet your high expectations demands far more of the students than letting them accept a failing grade.

Complaint 2: Students will take advantage of retakes by not doing their best the first time.

Honestly, this was one of my greatest concerns when I first began allowing redos and retakes. I was soon assuaged that it wasn’t a problem. Because the redo/retake required an additional commitment (time and effort), students never banked on getting to redo it. 

Complaint 3: This isn’t how the real world works.

Really?

Last time I checked, you’re allowed to take driver’s test, SATs, ACTs, GREs, Bar Exams, and MCATs multiple times. Honestly, it sounds pretty pompous and petty for any teacher to say, my quiz on Chapter 6 is more important than any of the aforementioned tests.

Could you imagine how many people wouldn’t have their driver’s licenses if it was one and done? Confessional: I wouldn’t—parallel parking got me the first time.

When you enter your doctor’s office, does the diploma and certification on his/her wall distinguish whether it took him/her 1, 2, or 3 times to pass the MCATs? Of course, not.

I’ve since left the classroom and have entered administration. I wish I could say that every teacher has met every deadline, but I can’t. For a variety of reasons—some good and some bad—deadlines are missed all the time. And this is not unique to academia.

Need other examples?

• The publishers who suggest corrections and modifications before the author resubmits his work reject authors.
• Bosses would ask to see/hear a presentation before the young businessperson presents it to clients. 
• The apprentice plumber who works side-by-side with a master plumber who continually provides corrective feedback.

When it comes down to it, pretty much every “real world” job allows for redos and retakes. The investment capital makes it impossible to fire an employee for one failure. We must invest in our students by reteaching and retesting whenever they don’t meet our standards.

Complaint 4: They won’t have the opportunity to redo work next year in….

They won’t have time to redo work in college.

Let’s dissect this bit-by-bit. First, I don’t think it’s a true statement. Although I haven’t stepped foot on a college campus in two decades, please allow me to share one of my own experiences. One of my most challenging college classes was US History, Part 1.  Everyday, upon entering the class, we were greeted with a five-question multiple-choice quiz. If we scored below a 4/5, we were required to write an essay covering the chapter(s) covered by the quiz. Students were assigned either a passing or failing grade for each chapter. The professor’s message to me was clear: each student bears the responsibility for his/her learning. Nothing less than a 4/5 is acceptable. Not only did this instill in me grit and responsibility, I also learned the material.

As a ninth grade World History teacher, when students entered my class on the first day of the year, I wanted students who were proficient in world geography (the 8^th grade social studies class). I could care less, if it took the student one day or the entire year to master the geography curriculum.  

Our high school recently held a roundtable in which we invited recent graduates to return and speak to students and teachers. A teacher posed the question about redos and retakes to the college students. Unanimously, the students voiced their approval of redos and retakes. One high-achieving student stated, “[The teachers who allowed redos and retakes] set a high bar; one that challenged us to do our best.”

Another student chimed in, “I felt better prepared for college because I had to master it [the content].”

These students experienced firsthand the value of redos and retakes. Through practice, re-teaching, feedback and retakes, these students mastered the learning and developed a growth mindset. To be adequately prepared for their next year, whether it’s 1^st grade or college, students need to know the content and the skills.

Complaint 5: It’s not fair to the students who do well the first time.

The ability to retest should not be limited to low-achieving students. High-achieving students benefit from retests and retakes. When a high-achieving student scored a B on a test, he/she was often the first to sign-up for a retake.

Side note: Knowing that they have the opportunity to redo/retake a quiz or test, I’m willing to bet that the high-achievers will be less likely to cheat because they know they have a second chance.

Anecdotally, only rarely did I have any of my high-achievers complain about my retest policy—No, it wasn’t because they didn’t voice their concerns to me. I heard plenty of complaints about my projects, my lectures, my expectations, etc.  Those who did complain most likely were used to an educational system that distinguished between the elite and non-elite.

Conclusion

We must move away from the I taught it; I tested it; Most of the students got it philosophy. Instead we must ask ourselves, “When students don’t get it, what do we do?”

We must answer, “We reteach and re-assess.”

Click here to read 12 Steps to Creating a Successful Redo and Retake Policy

Sources

Dweck, Carol S. Mindset. London: Robinson, 2012. Print.

O'Connor, Ken. How to Grade for Learning: Linking Grades to Standards. Arlington Heights, IL: SkyLight Professional Development, 2002. Print.

Wormeli, Rick. Fair Isn't Always Equal: Assessing & Grading in the Differentiated Classroom. Portland, Me.: Stenhouse, 2006. Print.