Over the years, I’ve heard from many teachers in different situations looking to move towards Proficiency-Based Grading (PBG), or possibly beyond. Elsewhere on this blog, I’ve written very long explanations about grading practices. Here are various grading scheme options presented in a straight-forward manner. If you’re in a situation that seems very different from those listed below, comment and we’ll think of something!
Latest Expectations-Based Grading Scheme
Expectations-Based Grading (EBG) **NEW, added 3.4.18**
100% – Input Expectations Rubric, includes Proficiency Levels
0% – Quick Quizzes, or anything else you want to report a score for
Use this scheme if you have complete control, want maximum freedom, and want to focus on students receiving input.
Zero-Autonomy Quick Fix **NEW, added 8.2.18**
Percentages vary based on wacky school requirements, and don’t matter read about it, here
In each grading category:
1) Create assignments that do NOT count towards the final grade (usually a check box)
2) Create ONLY ONE assignment that DOES count towards the final grade
3) Use a—ANY—holistic rubric to arrive at that grading category grade
Use this scheme if you have absolutely no control, and people are telling you what kinds f things to assign, and how much value to give them.
**Updated Expectations Rubric**
“But it only counts for 10% of the grade” whispered a student as I pointed to our posted DEA rule agreements. I couldn’t believe it. This student really didn’t think it was important enough to Look, Listen, and Ask about Spanish just because I assigned a low grade weight! Over the course of a few weeks, I overheard the same rationale from different students who consistently messed with the CI flow of class. I had no idea 7th graders would be that snarky about grading!
So, I had to adapt my system. My Proficiency rubrics remain solid, but DEA is now 50% of my 7th graders’ Exploratory Language grade (up from 10%), and reduced to two rules; Pay Attention, and Be Prepared. The latter is only used for homework (rarely assigned) or other obligatory school stuff I don’t want in its own category. Otherwise, Pay Attention is our main focus during class. I’ve posted three suggestions on how to acquire a language on a daily basis:
A colleague (let’s just say that there are some who call him……Tim?) asked about using my Grading & Assessment materials and how to make them work for him. I’ve written about a complete overhaul, as well as what to do when you have certain grading categories imposed, but Tim’s situation was different. He was prepared to go full-MagisterP-Grading of only Proficiency and DEA, but had a grading weight scheme imposed upon him of 70/30 (i.e. 70% Summative, and 30% Formative). I won’t discuss how arbitrary these numbers are, or even use the word asinine to criticize such a policy (especially when it comes to language acquisition), but it is what it is for Tim. Let’s look at an option I presented to him…
Scott Benedict just blogged about his current Pagame system, which is essential for a CI class to flow. If class doesn’t flow, we begin to consciously learn. If we do too much conscious learning, we don’t acquire as much. In place of a participation system, I use an adapted version of Bob Patrick’s DEA. I agree with Scott and the grading experts (e.g. Marzano, O’Connor, etc.) that traditional participation scores should be reported, but never included in an academic grade, especially when using proficiency-based grading systems. There is, however, one distinction that I, Bob Patrick, and other teachers using DEA make, that justifies including it in the grade.