Oct. 10 Entrance Slip -- Thoughts on Assessment

My student bird and teacher bird are almost always at odds. This tension is because I was a student who excelled under the traditional grading model. I now have the vocabulary to describe my student capabilities as "rote memorization." Within the first week of this program, I began to see the shortcomings of this model. I was, on paper, a stellar student. My grade 11 average was 97% and my grade 12 average was 94%; however, I've always struggled with feeling pride in my grades, and I'd conclude this is because it felt like I'd just gotten lucky -- schools were designed for students like me. Yes, I worked hard, but my peers did too, and they did not achieve the same recognition that came with higher grades. I've included a photo of a reflection I wrote in another class on Sept. 11, 2024, which summarizes these thoughts well.

In my EDCP 441 class, we have been deconstructing a lot of my preconceived notions about assessment. Most notably, the arbitrariness of percentage grades garnered from averaging scores. In one of the first classes, our instructor Kevin asked us to describe the skill difference between a student with 82% and a student with 84%. None of us could answer. Because the reality is, that the students likely have the same skill level, but the student with the lower grade either missed a few points on a test or handed an assignment in late. Were the missing points on the test from a true lack of skill or knowledge or was it a minor error such as missing units, a rounding mistake, flipping a sign, or even forgetting to write your name? Are all mistakes equal? Already we're seeing marks as currency to reward diligent behavior and punish simple mistakes. No wonder students are so anxious about tests when they know they're being graded on more than their mathematical ability. Of course, attention to detail is an important skill, but when we reward it the same as the content we are teaching, we make every classroom interaction a transaction. There is more than one way to reinforce learning. 

This, to me, is the greatest argument in favour of proficiency scales because it breaks down skills into definable categories -- I can't explain the difference between 82% and 84%, but I can explain the difference between developing and proficient. Furthermore, this scale focuses on skill acquisition and doesn't punish students who take longer to acquire those skills. Kevin used the example of a driving test to challenge our ideas about the tradition of averaging grades. If you fail the driving test three times and then pass, they don't average all the scores and say "Sorry, on average you haven't demonstrated the necessary skills" -- they give you your license. You showed improvement and you now have the necessary skills because what matters is that you got there in the end. This traditional focus on timelines reinforces rote learning and often pushes students toward cheating. Again, meeting deadlines is important, but so is asking for help or more time when needed.

The proficiency scale is the current preferred method, but I can imagine a new assessment method emerging in the next 20-ish years. The important thing for teachers is to maintain flexibility and follow the research on what is best for students. Student learning should always come before teacher convenience.