OK, so it has been about a week since the last brain dump…time for another. Lots of turkey between then and now. 🙂 I hope everyone had a restful weekend.
Last time, I left off explaining that my grade 12 students and I were going to come to a consensus about a grade that represents their learning in the first chemistry unit. For this to happen, the students and I each had some homework to do first:
- Students completed a self-assessment based on the overall learning goals for the unit, assigning themselves a level (1-4) for each item. After that, they had the option of assigning themselves a grade or grade range) that they felt represented their learning so far.
- Using my data (from product, conversation, and observation) I assigned each student a grade range based on their progress (75-80, 80-85, etc.)
Students submitted their self-assessments to me so that I had time to read their comments. The majority of students in my two classes have submitted their self-assessments for the first unit. I will say that I was relieved that about 80% of the self-assessments were in agreement with my grade assessment. I had been nervous about this process, anticipating that I might have some debates on my hands. It turns out there was little need to worry about this.
I have chosen a couple of examples from the student self-assessments to share to illustrate points of interest.
This student (a high achiever) knows that they made an uncharacteristic (small) error on their test, and used their self assessment to tell me that they felt it did not represent what they had learned and advocate for another opportunity to show what they know. I liked the self-advocacy here. I am open to providing more opportunities for students, but need to make sure things remain manageable for me (time wise) and them (with each passing day we are more removed from this content, and I don’t like the thought of them spending time preparing for another opportunity when they have new content in all of their classes every day).
This next example was the best one to illustrate student over-estimation; we were 10% off in our suggested grades in this case. I will say that this student does a much better job expressing themselves orally than on paper, and the levels I recorded reflect some conversations we had during lab activities. I agree with the student that their understanding is probably better represented by a higher grade, and am open to adjusting the evaluation if I have more evidence to support the adjustment. The issue we are running into is that we are in the thick of our next unit, and most of my conversations with students are about new ideas and concepts rather than things we worked on two weeks ago. I’ve been thinking about how to best address this; if this student wants to demonstrate their understanding again/differently we most likely need to be able to find time together outside of class time. Not a big issue, but if I imagine 50 students wanting to do so, the idea feels overwhelming. Something to think about.
And, finally, evidence that some students are taking this VERY seriously. Check out this detailed analysis…I had 3 – 5 with this level of depth – students telling me the whole story of their learning. I had a conversation with this student and got the sense that this level of depth was what they felt was required to justify the levels they assigned. I can understand their motivation to make a strong case for themselves, but if you read this one you’ll see that the student has regurgitated some of their understanding here, rather than simply focus on their specific strengths and needs. Another indication that more guidance may be required to stay focused in the self-evaluation process.
OK, that’s it for now. Next I plan to write about the next cycle and the adjustments I can make to improve the process.