Wayfinder Learning Lab

"Learning is about living, and as such is lifelong." Elkjaer.


2 Comments

Making Feedback Visible: Four Levels in Action

Five years ago I was starting to become concerned with the difference between marking and feedback. What was making a difference to my students’ learning and was the effort I was putting into detailed marking worth it in terms of their improvement? In reading Hattie’s Visible Learning for Teachers, Wiliam’s Embedded Formative Assessment and the pdf of The Power of Feedback (Hattie & Timperley), I developed a four-levels feedback template for use on student work.

This post is to share an updated version – I still really like this method of giving timely, actionable, goal-focused and student-owned feedback. It definitely saves me time, but puts the focus of feedback on what’s most important for the student to take the next step. I’ll keep updating, editing and adding to this post.

When giving feedback on a piece of work, I paste this at the top of the student’s assignment, give some comments in the work and check their self-assessed rubric. Before we open individual feedback, I summarise whole-class feedback.

A copyable GoogleDoc version of the grid (and teacher explanation) is here, and to export it as pdf, click here.

……….o0O0o……….

Why present feedback this way?

Screen Shot 2013-11-03 at 9.22.37 PM

Hattie & Timperley, Four Levels of Feedback. Click for the pdf of ‘The Power of Feedback.’

Feedback addresses three questions:

  • Where am I going?
  • How am I going?
  • Where to next?

Feedback is timely, actionable and needs to be more work for the learner than the teacher.

  • Clarity of achievement so far: goal-referenced, tangible & transparent.
  • Understanding “the gap” between where the learner is and where they need to go next (not necessarily the top bands)
  • Timely. Using a system like this saves time   in grading/giving feedback, makes it more  accessible to digest (is user-friendly) and can be easily reviewed for the next time the student works towards similar goals.
  • Feedback first, then grades. Not presented together, to enforce student reflection & action.

 

Making The Four Levels Work

  1. Goals and outcomes need to be clear – do students & teachers have a shared understanding of what success looks like at different levels of achievement?
  2. Feedback needs to be ongoing. Students are taught to self-assess in the drafting stages and feedback (not grading) given on the drafts with plenty of time to take action before submission.
  3. Students self-assess before submission. Even better – they can peer-assess and give feedback. If tasks are differentiated, this does not present a collusion challenge.
  4. Teacher gives feedback in the grid, on the front page of the work (or in an accessible place):
    1. Check the student’s self-assessment against descriptors
    2. Check the assignment, making comments only on actionable next steps – not an overwhelming number, as this can increase the perceived “gap” for students. Students who want and will take action on very detailed marking can request this in follow-up.
    3. Summarize feedback in the grid: task-level, process level and self-regulation level.
    4. Link to support resources where appropriate
    5. Record grades out of sight of student.
  5. Teacher places value on interaction with feedback by giving class time to digest & reflect
    1. Give “whole class” feedback on common issues and note needs for later workshops
    2. Students read their feedback: table and comments.
    3. Students synthesise this into a “feed-forwards” note to self. Showing this to the teacher and a shared agreement on the next steps releases the grade, not before.
  6. Next time the task type is attempted, the first thing students do is open the feedback and set achievable, specific goals to “level up” based on the feedback & feed forwards.

……….o0O0o………..

Reflections in Practice

I worried initially that the pushback from students would be that I wasn’t grading enough. This didn’t happen for a couple of reasons:

  1. We made explicit the reason for doing this and I keep no secrets about the “magic” of learning from students. I explain and demonstrate what works in learning and why we do things this way.
  2. Most students like seeing the next steps really clearly. We’re not all aiming for top levels right away – we’re aiming for progress upwards.
  3. We talk about “the gap” a lot, and our quest to close the gap in prep.
  4. I already know what the grades are likely to be, as we invest time in class for drafting, feedback and conferencing. I expect students to show their work and take action on feedback.
  5. I will happily take a piece of work back and sit with a student, giving really detailed marking and justification if they request it. This rarely happens and it is usually one or two who are working at the very top of the rubric. This is far more efficient and effective doing acres of marking for large classes, the bulk of which won’t have an impact.

References

Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007) The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. Vol. 77 no 1 (pp 81-112). https://www.jstor.org/stable/4624888 (includes diagram above)

Wiggins, G. (2012) Seven Keys to Effective Feedback. Educational Leadership Magazine. Vol. 70 no. 1. (pp 10-16). www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept12/vol70/num01/Seven-Keys-to-Effective-Feedback.aspx   (and related: EL Takeaways Poster http://inservice.ascd.org/seven-things-to-remember-about-feedback )

Dylan Wiliam Centre: Ten Feedback Techniques That Make Students Think (poster). https://www.dylanwiliamcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/10-Feedback-Techniques.pdf

……….o0O0o………..

More Resources on Feedback & Grading

 


1 Comment

What If..? MyIB & MOOC PD

 At a recent MYP Coordinators’ network meeting we were discussing how – despite lots of moves towards quality control and great efforts by the IBEN team – we still had occasional concerns on the reliability of the received message from online and face-to-face (f2f) workshops. Whether this comes from an unclear message, a side conversation, a misunderstanding across languages or the participant’s personal filter, we don’t know, but it led me to think about what steps might be taken to reduce the likelihood of misunderstanding. 

If this is already in the pipeline, I’d love to know more about it…

……….o0O0o……….

The Proposal: IB MOOC-style short courses

In the early stages of the MYP/DP teacher’s experience, the coordinator needs to know that the teacher knows the basics correctly, knows how to access the correct information and knows how to correctly operate their guide/criteria or other requirements. As unglamorous as it sounds, this seems to call for a reliable delivery method to build a baseline knowledge; a way to check the guides have been read and understood, with some reliable tasks and worked examples. A new teacher with a well-learned foundation of knowledge and skills in their subject area will be better equipped for interactive, inquiry-driven approaches in their later experiences in workshops and school-based PD.

edx-3001Over the last decade, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS) have become popular: where a university or institution has developed a great set of course materials, they post them online in a structured format for free participation – see Coursera, EdXUdacity and many more at Class Central. Typically these courses work in self-paced (enrol and get working) or cohort (timed start and end) models. Although it has been estimated that only around 5-6% of participants complete the course they enrolled for, they offer learners the opportunity to try courses at a university level that they might not have access to otherwise. They democratise learning. Furthermore, many of the courses can be verified with an optional low-cost certificate after completing the course and assessment successfully – and this is where I see the opportunity for IB professional learning.

……….o0O0o……….

My IB as a MOOC Platform

In the current model of IB professional learning, online and f2f workshops are a great way to build a working knowledge of the programmes and make connections with colleagues from other schools. However, they are expensive and many schools have limited resources to support multiple attendees; if a workshop does not have the intended impact on the participant, it can feel like a waste of resources.

What if IBPD developed a series of short content-delivery courses in the MOOC-style so that access to the required, vetted and updated knowledge was open to all? Participants from anywhere with an internet connection could take short courses to update their understanding, at no cost: new teachers, existing teachers, those in IB schools and those who might want to be. Think a course in the style of Google Certified Educator Level 1: it doesn’t need to be ‘taught’ as all the materials are online (subject guides!), but has activities to demonstrate competence in the skills. Similarly, on the path to becoming a Microsoft Innovative Educator you can collect badges & certificates through a personally-relevant pathway.

Anyone could join in, everyone would get the same reliable information. 

my-ib-updatedTo get verified/certified, the participant would need a MyIB account. The participant or school would pay a small fee (around US$100 is common on verified MOOCS), complete the assessment and receive a digital certificate. This would be great in supporting in-house professional learning (particularly when guides update). Typically sending one teacher on a workshop costs my school up to $2,000 in workshop fees, flights and accommodation; that’s a lot of potential MyIBMOOC certificates. I’d love to have something like this form part of a differentiated model of in-house professional learning.

Would this model be appropriate for new teachers entering a school? Moving school, country and system can be daunting enough; taking on a full workshop out of context is not always effective. After all, we don’t know what we don’t know, and although we need to get up and running quickly, we don’t usually have great questions until we’ve taught it a while. I’d love to be able to share a couple of ‘learn the basics’ short-courses with incoming teachers, to relieve their stress and help them tune in to their new programme.

What if completion of an entry-level MyIBMOOC was required for registration into a workshop? Would this reduce the impact of inappropriately-placed workshop participants on the workshop outcomes? As the demand for IB workshops increases, it puts more pressure on the stellar work done by the IBEN team. Would this model reduce pressure on the WSL pool and ensure participants are at the right starting point to move forwards with the group effectively?

……….o0O0o……….

Design Principles for a Successful MyIBMOOC

What design specifications might make this model work? Here are some to get started. If you think of more, please add them in the comments below, or find me on Twitter.

  • Short &  focused. Long online courses are a draaaaaaag. A short course doesn’t need to deliver three days of f2f content; units on assessment & getting started in your subject, global contexts, being a personal project/EE supervisor or any other programme elements would be great.
  • Always up-to-date and linkable. “What’s the page number?” is an IBEN mantra, and the same should be true here. Don’t hide information where it is hard to access, especially where accuracy is important.
  • Clear assessment, focused feedback. We need to know that what we know is correct. Save the discussions for deeper-dive workshops, this idea is for building foundation knowledge only.
  • Translateable. Clear and concise content might later be translated into other working IB languages. Here in Japan, as more “Article 1” schools come online, would this help get schools up and running?
  • Platform agnostic & light. Of course, it needs to work on all broswers, not be blocked in any countries and not be so data-heavy that it can’t work in areas with slow internet.

What do you think? If this is already in the pipeline, I’d love to know more about it…

 

 


8 Comments

Bold Moves for Schools

This is a quick-and-dirty review of a book that ticks all the boxes for a curriculum nerd like me: Bold Moves for Schools, by Heidi Hayes Jacobs & Marie Alcock, from the ASCD (2017, 207 pages).

It’s a practical and comprehensive, yet concise and quotable handbook of where to take curriculum, learning and leadership for modern learners. Educators in international schools will see many familiar themes emerge, from student agency and creativity in the curriculum to effective assessment, learning spaces and teacher development. There is much here that can accelerate a well-implemented IB curriculum (or standards-based learning model), and this book will sing to coaches or coordinators as it does to me.

“Innovation requires courage coupled with a realistic sensibility to create new possibilities versus “edu-fantasies”. Moving boldly is not moving impulsively or for the sake of change. Moving boldly involves breaking barriers that need breaking.”

As a “pragmatic idealist” I like how the book connects a future-focused, genuinely student-centred education to the best of what we’re already doing. It avoids falling into the trap of trashing the traditional, instead framing bold moves through the antiquated (what do we cut?), the classical (what do we keep?) and the contemporary (what do we create?). Jacobs & Alcock insist throughout the book that these bold moves are mindful, that we are not “throwing the baby out with the bathwater” and that “meaningful curriculum composition versus meaningless imposition” is the goal.

How can we build a genuinely exciting contemporary educational experience that keeps the joy in the learning, the future in mind and the students in the driving seat? Through a systemic approach that focuses on what works and what could be: one which empowers teachers as self-directed professional learners and curriculum architects. For anyone trying to effect change in an existing (long-established) system, well-reasoned handbook is worth a look and resonates with my belief that we need always to respect the journey in our work.

“What is most critical is that the outcome reflect quality.”

I hope that much of what is in this book is not new to most curriculum leaders – particularly in the IB context – but it is great to have a volume that pulls it together in one place, with practical resources. This would make a great book study (guide here) for curriculum leaders and teachers. You will find interesting surprises, resources and provocations littered through the text, worthy of further discussion.

You may even make some bold commitments as a result…

Bold Moves 3 Elements

Three big ideas in Bold Moves for Schools.

Quick follow-up: I was at a Bold Moves Bootcamp with Marie Alcock recently, and it was great. There is a post about one of my outcomes (a DOK4 filter for transfer) here.

…………o0O0o…………

Check it out

Without being too spoilerific, here are some useful links and resources from the book:

 


5 Comments

Webb’s DOK4 & Transfer

115013bI recently took part in a fabulous Bold Moves Curriculum Mapping Bootcamp, by Dr. Marie Alcock at ISKL. I was there to think about next steps for curriculum planning at CA, and it was a great opportunity to pick the brains of a true expert (and get lots done). I like the bootcamp model for PD: short, focused and with the opportunity to take immediate action with great feedback from colleagues in similar positions.

DOK is not a wheel of command terms

dokwheel

Not a Wheel. [John R. Walkup]

Through one of the discussions about high-quality assessment, Marie dug into Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework. She asserted that it’s not a “wheel” of command terms as is often presented, but a way of framing how deeply students need to know and use information, skills and concepts.

Similarly, DOK is not the same as Bloom’s Taxonomy, and is not a pyramid or a hierarchy of knowledge that “peaks” at DOK4. DOK4 can be accessed from any of the other three levels, and effectively sits in parallel. For a decent explainer of how DOK levels work, see this by Erik Francis for ASCD Edge – I used his DOK descriptors in my rough teacher plansheet tool below.

In practical terms, as explained by Marie, students should be able to access DOK4 from any one of the other DOK levels. This means that DOK4 can act as a filter for transfer.

How else can the student use the knowledge, skills and content at this level? 

So… in curriculum and task design and differentiation, teachers can set up situations for all students to pull their learning (even if only at a recall/DOK1 level) through to DOK4 by applying it in a new context – as long as it is the same skill/target. For example, this might mean taking a scientific skill and applying to a new experiment, or a writing technique applied to a new genre. This is knowledge augmentation.

MYP Teachers will see the immediate connections here to level 7-8 objective descriptors in the criteria (“correctly applying x in unfamiliar contexts”). This calls for some careful task design.

……….o0O0o………..

Teacher Plansheet: A Practical Use

Transfer is a notoriously difficult skill to teach, even though it is included in the ATL framework, and so I sketched up this planning tool (pdf) in the hope that it can visualise how DOK4 can be used as a filter to make transfer explicit. Follow the arrows as you think about putting a target standard or learning outcome to work. What level (DOK1-2-3) is expected of the student? How else (DOK4) could it be used? For some excellent, practical resources on applying DOK in the various disciplines, check out Dr. Karin Hess’s Cognitive Rigor and DOK rubrics and resources.

……….o0O0o……….

Transferring the Transfer: Thinking Collaboratively

How else might this tool be put to use? Here are some quick thoughts on how this might work with the collaboration of the relevant experts or coaches in the school.

  • Technology Integration: using the DOK4 filter as an opportunity to amplify and transform (RAT model) the learning task (but still meet objectives).
  • Service Learning: In moving from “doing service” to service learning, could this be used to help frame students’ focus on planning, or post-service reflection? As students learn about issues of significance, how can they put it work through transfer to meaningful action? As they reflect on their learning, can they connect new and existing disciplinary knowledge?
  • Interdisciplinary Learning: How can students take their learning and use it meaningfully in a context that requires transfer between disciplines?

……….o0O0o……….

 


3 Comments

“This will revolutionize education.”

Note (2018): If my inbox (edumarketing fluff) or the internet (hyperbole) are anything to go by, this video is still as relevant as when Derek posted it 4 years ago. Not a lot more recent, but still memerific, here’s another post on Eric Jensen’s Google quote

……….o0O0o……….

Being in a tech-rich school, we have access to a lot of different platforms, tools and ideas. We have a good group of educational technology leaders in the school and a pretty strong focus on putting the learning first when choosing and using educational technologies. Nothing is blocked and teachers are given opportunities learn more about (and try) different platforms, ideas and strategies using technology. Sometimes the best tech is low-tech; other times systems like Hapara help us to differentiate more subtly, give feedback more readily and think more carefully about task design, scaffolding and criteria.

Derek Muller (the awesome @veritasium), released this video and I was reminded of how poor some #EdTech implementation can be. This video gives a brief history of #EdTech hyperbole, from the ‘moving picture’ to the laser-disc, each step along the way seeking to automate the art (and science) of teaching. When the focus is on how teachers can be replaced by tech or simplistic educational inquiry (is X tech better than Y tech to do Z simple transmission process?), then the resources and energy spent on the technological innovation are wasted.

“What limits learning is what happens inside a student’s head. […] What experiences promote the kind of thinking that is required for learning?” 

It has become a cliche in #EdTech now to say “it’s about the learning, not the tech,” and that’s a great thing. The mantra sticks, and hopefully it forces us into careful thought about how we choose and use #EdTech tools. Learning is social, critical and personal; it requires the guidance of an expert, caring teacher and it needs inspiration, motivation and perseverance.

If we think about it this way then, as Derek says, we can evolve education, if not revolutionize it.

……….o0O0o……….

Now if only the companies that keep sending advertisements to my school and i-Biology inboxes for weak platforms (and worse PD) would watch this…


Leave a comment

Growth Mindsets in Differentiation & Feedback

Nothing suggests 'loser' quite like a table for one and a book with that cover blurb. ;)

Nothing suggests ‘loner’ quite like a table for one and a book with that cover blurb. 😉 #GrowthMindset

After reading/hearing so much about Carol Dweck’s Mindset over the last couple of years, I was finally able to read the book on the train from London to Bath. I’d become so familiar with the ideas that it felt like 200+ pages of déjà vu, although the main messages are perhaps worth reinforcing.

It’s an easy read, in a style similar to Pink, Goleman, Gladwell and co., though I did find myself skimming over yet another American sports example (Woods, Wooden, Jordan, Wie, Yankees, McEnroe). There were some interesting sections on leadership, parenting and relationships, though I was really looking for more practical advice on how to build growth mindsets in my students.

Some key messages for parents and educators

  • A fixed mindset is seen as a personal success or failure, a (permanent) label on a person of their worth.
  • Fixed-mindsets value ability over effort and when effort is put in it is in order to affirm one’s status at the top; they might be seen to ‘learn’ a lot as they perform highly in tests and assessments, but this may be due only to the effect of their achievement affirming their fixed mindset.
  • Fixed mindsets see difficulty as a weakness or threat and so may not put in the effort in case they fail.
  • Growth mindsets embrace the challenge of difficulty and see the value in learning as a journey.
  • Growth mindsets demonstrate resilience in failure and use difficulties to set workable plans for improvement
  • Growth mindset leaders and teachers embrace their own personal learning and seek to develop learning communities: it is OK to not know… yet.
  • Growth mindset leaders take time to listen, learn and evaluate fairly. They surround themselves with knowledgable inquirers and weed out the fixed mindset culture of fear and/or affirming status. They might be lower-key than the high-powered fixed-mindset hero-leaders, but they build a more sustainable and trusting culture.

Feedback and Mindsets

Samudra, determined to ride the space tower thing at LegoLand. Photo (c) Stephen Taylor.

Samudra, determined to ride the space tower thing at LegoLand. Photo (c) Stephen Taylor.

It is clear that our words and actions as parents and teachers reinforce kids’ views of themselves and their behaviour adjusts accordingly. By focusing on personal feedback (praise or criticism), we may affect the mindset of the child, either reinforcing the ego or damaging the student’s motivation to improve. By focusing on tasks and processes, looking at how we can improve, we might help students develop more growth mindsets. A good strategy for effective feedback that builds on the growth mindset might be Hattie’s Three Levels (Task, Process and Self-regulation).

Differentiation and Mindsets

When we focus on ability-related feedback, conversations or behaviours are we limiting the growth mindset? Dweck suggests that this is compounded when the curriculum is ‘dumbed-down’ and that having high expectations for all students, coupled with valuable feedback, will increase achievement. Sounds obvious, but may not always play out in class. Avoid the temptation to make the curriculum easier for the ‘less able’ students and instead Differentiate Up from a core. Challenge everyone, support everyone.

Approaches to Learning and Mindsets

We all want our students to do well, but more than that we should want them to love learning and become enthusiastic lifelong learners. Taking steps to weed out fixed-mindset behaviours and language from our classes and our cultures in order to develop strategies towards becoming more growth-oriented might bring us part of the way. This is where we can start to see the importance of the Affective skills clusters of the IB’s Approaches to Learning, and will likely be an area that requires significant teacher (and parent) professional development. Coupled with a strong curriculum and high-impact teaching and learning and we might just get there.

I used to think you were smart.” Calvin and Hobbes strip that neatly sums up fixed vs growth mindsets, used on p40 of Dweck’s Mindset.

………..o0O0o………..

I’ll admit, the idea of Mindset seems a little too neat for me – we are more nuanced and complex than either-or (which she recognises in the book). Personally, for example, I would see myself as very growth-mindset in that I seek development, learn more and reflect on everything; however, I can take perceived failure or criticism very personally, which is a more fixed-mindset trait. I also recognise that the book is aimed at a mass-market audience, and so there is much reference to ‘our research’ without a lot of depth. I would prefer a more academic, education-focused edition of this, with fewer popular-culture, big-CEO or sports stories and more about how this has been investigated.

As a tool for teachers, the language of fixed vs growth mindset will make it easier to have conversations with students and parents, and we can develop or make use of strategies that reinforce the nature of learning as a growth process. I am looking forward to seeing how schools start to put some of these ideas to use in their development of the Approaches to Learning.

I have added this book to the MYP Coordinator’s Bookshelf , but would really recommend any of the other books as good reads before moving onto this one. 

………o0O0o……….

This is a total cheese-fest, but anyone who says they don’t like Dolly has a heart of stone. Her recent single, Try, does a pretty neat job of capturing the Growth Mindset and the role of effort in success – and it’s the theme song for her literacy charity, Imagination Library.


1 Comment

The Gradebook I Want

As the MYP sciences roll into the Next Chapter and we mull over the new guides, objectives and assessment criteria, we have the opportunity to reflect on our assessment practices. The IB have provided a very clear articulation between course objectives and performance standards (see image), which should make assessment and moderation a more efficient process.

There is a clear connection between the objectives of the disciplines and their assessment descriptors in all subjects in MYP: Next Chapter.

There is a clear connection between the objectives of the disciplines and their assessment descriptors in all subjects in MYP: The Next Chapter.

Underpinning these objectives, however, are school-designed content and skills standards. These are left up to schools for articulation so that the MYP can work in any educational context and this is great, though it does leave the challenge of essentially tracking two sets of standards (or more) in parallel: the MYP objectives and the internal (or state) content-level standards. In a unit about sustainable energy systems, for example, I might have 15-20 content-level, command term-based assessment statements, each of which could be assessed against any (or many) of the multiple strands for each of four MYP objectives.

As I read more about standards-based grading (or more recently standards-based learning on Twitter), I become more dissatisfied with the incumbent on-schedule assessment practices presiding over grading and assessment. I want students to be able to demonstrate mastery of both the MYP objectives and the target content/skills but I am left with questions:

  • If they score well on a task overall but miss the point on a couple of questions/content standards, have they really demonstrated mastery? How can I ensure that they have mastered both content and performance standards?
  • If they learn quickly from their mistakes and need another opportunity to demonstrate their mastery on a single content-level standard (or performance-level standard), do they need to do the whole assignment again? What if time has run out or there is not opportunity to do it again?
  • As we move through the calendar in an effort to cover curriculum and get enough assessment points for a best-fit, are we moving too superficially across the landscape of learning?
  • More importantly, is the single number – their grade – for the task, a true representation of what they know and can do? How can I present this more clearly, to really track growth?

My aim with all this is to encourage a classroom of genuine inquiry (defined as critical, reflective thought), in which I know that students have effectively learned a solid foundation of raw materials (the ‘standards’, if you will), upon which they can ask deeper questions, make more authentic connections and evaluate, analyse and synthesise knowledge. 

Lucky we have Rick Wormeli videos for reference. Here he is on retakes, redos, etc and it is worth watching (and provocative). There is another part, as well. If you haven’t seen them yet, go watch them before reading the rest of this post (the videos are better, TBH).

……….o0O0o…………

What do I do already? 

  • Lots of formative assessment: practice, descriptors on worksheets, online quizzes.
    • In each of these, there is a rubric connecting it to MYP Objectives
      • Each question is labeled with the descriptor level and strand (e.g. L1-2a, L5-6b, c).
      • I don’t usually give a grade, though do check the work. Students should be able to cross-reference the questions with the descriptors, carry out their own ‘best fit’ and determine the grade they would get if they so desire. This puts feedback first.
    • Learning tasks usually include target content standards
  • Drafting stages through Hapara/GoogleDocs to keep track of work and give comments as we go
  • An emphasis on self-assessment against performance descriptors and content-level standards (and goals for improvement or revision).
  • I use command terms all the time: every sheet, question, lesson where possible.
  • Set deadlines with students where possible and am flexible where needed.
  • In some cases reschedule assessment or follow up with interview or retake (but not as standard practice). As Wormeli says above (part 2): “at teacher discretion.”
  • Track student learning at the criterion-level (MYP objectives), though with current systems (Powerschool), not in great detail at the objective strands (descriptors) level (e.g. A.i, A.ii, A.iii).
  • I do tests over two lessons, giving out a core section in the first, collecting and checking in-between classes. In the next session, this is supplemented with extra questions that should allow students to take at least one more step up. For example, a student struggling with Level 3-4 questions would get more opportunities to get to that level, whereas another who has shown competency will get the next level(s) up.

What do I want to do? 

  • I want to also be able to effectively track every student’s growth in the content standards and develop deeper skills in inquiry (critical reflective thinking).
  • Develop a system for better tracking learning against the individual strands within each criterion (e.g. A.i, A.ii, A.iii).
  • Better facilitate development of student mastery, allowing us to move further away from scheduled lessons and into more effective differentiation and pacing.

What would help? 

I would really like a standards-based, MYP-aligned, content-customisable gradebook and feedback system that is effective in at least three dimensions:

  • Task-level to put levels for each task, each of which might produce multiple scores, including:
    • Various target content-level standards
    • MYP objective strands at different levels of achievement
  • It would need to allow for retake/redo opportunities for any and all standards that need to be redone – not necessarily whole assessment tasks. 
  • It would have to focus student learning on descriptors and standards, not on the numbers, in order to help them move forwards effectively. Students would need to be able to access it and make sense of it intuitively so that they could decide their own next steps even before I do.
  • It would super-duper if the system could produce really meaningful report cards that focus on growth over the terminal nature of semester grading.
What would a three-dimensional gradebook look like?

What would a three-dimensional gradebook look like?

 

Here is Rick again, describing another approach to a 3D gradebook:

………..o0O0o………..

Taking It To Twitter