The Number One Problem: they won't do it if I don't grade it

Every school and district that I visit has the same number one problem: Students and other stakeholders (admin, caretakers) are focused on points not learning.

I get to travel around the country and beyond and talk about assessment in world language classes. I am so lucky. I have my dream job! In all of my day-long assessment workshops, I ask teachers to identify their number one grading problem from a brief list.  Their problem: students and other stakeholders are focused on points, not learning.

This is the Numbers = Learning mindset. Or Grades = Compensation. Or Compliance= Learning. 

Every. Single. School. This comes up a lot on various social media groups too. 

Now, I've already written at least one blog post where I talk about this (OK, actually this one and this one) but today, I want to address this issue head-on and in a very direct (and possibly blunt) way.  

Who's problem is it to solve? 

The first thing that we need to be clear on: it's OUR problem, and it's OUR problem to address. 

Other stakeholders have a role, of course, but we don't have much influence on them. But our own actions, assessment decisions, and words are (usually) under our own sphere of influence. So...

Teachers: This is OUR problem. 

What I observe is that although everyone is having the same issues, everyone seems to just shrug their shoulders and say "that's the way it is" and/or not try to do anything about it. As if it's one of those things, like gravity, or needing oxygen to survive: something immutable, unchangeable, and completely out of our control. 

It is just not true. 

As teachers, grades and grading are very much in our realm of influence. The way we approach grades and grading is under our control!  

Yes, of course we have guidelines, departmental expectations, etc. And yes, often those guidelines are absolutely bananas and completely unreasonable and one more thing in an absolutely maddening heap of unreasonable things that are asked of teachers.  

Within all of that: we are a significant part of the system that creates those guidelines and expectations.  We are the teachers who are trying to better ourselves and our practice, the thought-leaders, and the department heads. (I know this for a fact simply because you are reading this! You care enough to learn more.) 

Additionally, we have an awful lot of influence over our own classroom practice. We can influence the culture of grades and grading in our classrooms, and maybe (eventually, or depending on your role), in departments, schools, and districts. 

We can shift the culture of grades and grading in our own classroom.

One caveat: Assessment systems and expectations and beliefs are so incredibly varied across the US that it is unlikely that any one teacher will be able to follow all of my suggestions, and you might choose not to because you don't like them! However, I bet there are one or two things you CAN do that will make a difference. 

Honestly, if a Numbers = Learning mindset is your biggest problem with grades and grading, why wouldn't you try to change what you can? So let's get started. 

Solution #1: Make grades meaningful. 

There is a technical term: "hodgepodge grading". What this means is that everything is tossed into a grade book to make up a grade: tests, quizzes, in-class activities/worksheets, homework, behavior, projects, presentations, note taking, exit tickets, bell ringers, participation, preparedness, and a whole lot more. 

Don't believe me?  If you just google "Spanish 2 syllabus" or "French 1 syllabus", you will find a huge range of things that are included in grades.  

Aside from the massive equity issues in grading for accuracy, participation, preparedness, behavior/compliance, and homework, what do any of those tell us about what a student knows and can do in the target language? 

Wait, doesn't accuracy tell us what a student knows and can do? 

Well, yes, AND. 

The problem with accuracy: Accuracy is not even expected of Advanced-Low speakers of the language- that is, the minimum proficiency level for teachers (in most states).  Learners are supposed to show increasing accuracy as they move up the proficiency levels, but remember: errors in accuracy (e.g. gender agreement, subject verb agreement, conjugation, etc.) are not even marked on the AP exams. 

Read that again!

So how do we make grades meaningful? 

• Link performance descriptors to number or letter grades. Read more here: What goes in the gradebook (Deskless Classroom) and Grade for Proficiency (The Comprehensible Classroom)
• Stop giving extra credit. For anything. 
• "Assess what students know and can in the target language, and minimize or exclude everything else" - Martina Bex. 

Solution #2: Say this instead

Censor yourself. If at any point you find yourself saying "this will be graded" or "you better do this for the grade", stop, take a breath, and say this instead: "I can't wait to see what you can do."

If you answer questions like "is this graded?" or "how much is this worth?", stop, take a breath, and say this instead: "show me what you know." 

When you threaten students with grades ("this will be graded"), you are indicating that you don't care what the students know or can do, you just care about their numbers. The grades. The compensation. THE COMPLIANCE. Even if that is the furthest from the truth! Your words and actions are what students hear / see and make meaning from. 

Every time a student asks how much it is worth, they are calculating the benefit/cost of doing it, doing it well, or not doing it. They are treating grades as compensation. 

With enough consistency, most will slowly stop asking, and many will slowly start to see that their work is what's important. You can help them make this shift! 

Solution #3: Make every graded assignment worth the same number of points (including summative assessments).

In my class, that was 10 points. Everything was 10 points. Even tests. I simply programmed my grade book to figure out the weights of the categories (interpretive assessments, presentational assessments, "work"). 

"But they won't do it if I don't grade it". 

Grading everything and putting weight to everything is *not* the solution. If it was, why hasn't it worked yet?  

Additionally- is that true for every student? Probably not. 

Getting at the why- why won't they do it- takes more work, and more time- but grading more doesn't change the root problem. 

You can't control other people. But you can make change in your own classroom: your words, your policies, your practice. 

Want to read more about the intersections of assessment, equity, and actual solutions? I have written so much about assessment: here's everything on this blog.   I also write for The Comprehensible Classroom on Setting Standards, Performance vs. Proficiency, Finals and Midterms, and more! 

Things to avoid Part 1: Grading accuracy, participation, and engagement/effort

 

There was a discussion on a Facebook group page that asked for guidance regarding grades and grade books.  I was surprised to see the number of teachers who count things like accuracy, participation, and effort.   

Now, my thinking has changed a bit, especially on participation and effort, as I continue to decolonize my classroom, my teaching practice, and my curriculum in my journey to become a more equitable educator. 

 (Update on that: I am also a Teaching Assistant now for the MITx class, Becoming a More Equitable Educator, that was so impactful for me last year, and it is just as impactful going through it again and working with learners from ALL OVER THE GLOBE in their pursuit to become more equitable educators.  It is *free* and great.)  

I am really struggling with where classroom management, white supremacy and systems of oppression, and my classroom practice intersect, but I have no clarity, so I am going to keep struggling on that and asking questions and seeing what I can think of.

However, over the course of my work and collaborations with amazing educators, I have really come to understand more about the role that grading for effort, accuracy, and participation/engagement play in a comprehension based classroom. I don't think I have all the answers, but I have some strong thoughts! 

 In terms of grading for participation, effort, and accuracy, I would say that all of those concepts may allow teacher bias to strongly interfere with grades.  They create systems of  rewarding some students for being better at "playing school", and reinforce a "numbers=learning" mindset.  And of course, if some students get rewarded, other students are going to be penalized.  

As I continue to work with teachers on assessment and grading practices, this student (and caregiver) mindset about numbers (percentages, points) being the equivalent of learning is consistently the number one issue that teachers have, so it is worth considering how our classroom practices play into creating the situation in the first place.  Remember that effort and participation might look a lot like compliance, and grading for compliance is never a good idea. Read my previous posts about grading for accountability, which is another way to say compliance.

Grading for Accuracy 

Since students have no control over the rate at which they acquire, grading for accuracy on a daily basis is going to reward only faster processors and punish other students for not being faster processors.   

Research about Ordered Development tells us that language features (verbs, word order, what we think of as grammar, etc.) is acquired in an order that is independent of instruction. 

That is to say, it doesn't matter how many times or how creatively a Spanish teacher teaches the difference between ser and estar (to be and the other to be) or the difference between the preterite and imperfect past tenses, students will not produce them until their brain is ready, and when they have traversed the developmental stages of acquisition for that word (or language feature).  Furthermore, learners move through those stages in a non-linear fashion!   They may be able to use a feature accurately one day, then in another context revert back to an earlier phase of development.  This developmental order plays out in every language, for every language feature, no matter what the learner's first language is. We see it in first language development as well.  For more information about ordered development, there is a paywalled article in Hispania by Dr. Bill VanPatten, as well as his great books available from ACTFL: The Nature of Language and While We're On The Topic".   

Accuracy is probably the least important component of proficiency.  Consider: for those of you that have very young children, can they communicate with you?  Of course! It is usually imperfect and often adorable, but it is communication. For those of us who prefer four-legged furry friends, do you know when your dog or cat wants something? I sure do, and I speak terrible Dog and her English is just as poor. But we communicate! (Usually.)   

Why would we expect our students to communicate about something accurately after mere tens of hours of instruction? Even after hundreds of hours (600+) of instruction, the rather small percentage of students who reach a proficiency level of Intermediate Mid (ACTFL proficiency scale) can only do so much.  For example, they can handle concrete, familiar, and predictable situations but might have difficulty linking ideas and time frames, and they are not expected to be accurate speakers of the language.  Read about that study here, and my analysis of it when published:  What Standards Should I set for my students? 

In short, we should not grade students for accuracy, especially on a daily or weekly basis.  

Grading for Effort

Effort is another tricky concept. Many teachers say that if students are trying, then they are making the effort. But what does that look like? Does "trying" look the same across cultural contexts? Does my "trying" look the same as someone else's? And if the teacher sees someone trying, but doesn't see someone else, who gets the reward (the grade)?  

This goes right along with the familiar teacher practice of "well, little Johnny tried really hard so I will just bump up their grade because they deserve it."  Now, that is coming from a place of love and support, but wow- there are so many issues with that!  

First, if we bump up one kid's grade, why don't we bump up another? Who are we to judge how hard one kid tried and value that over another? Do we have the right to make those calls? 

Again, I guarantee that our implicit biases are going to come into play.  If we bump up the grade, do little Johnny and their caregivers have an inflated idea about what they can do in the language? Or does it mean that little Johnny gets credit despite not being able to meet a performance target?  

Grading for effort is a dangerous road, fraught with opportunities to let implicit biases reward students who understand the dominant cultural norms of the classroom and/or fit the teacher's definition of trying hard.  

Participation

Participation is also one of those concepts that needs to be carefully considered. The silent period (lasting 6 months to two years) is a documented stage of language acquisition. We also know that students do not need to be speaking in order to acquire language (they do need to be participating in communicative events, but that doesn't mean speaking!) 

Students who are not neuro-typical may demonstrate participation differently, as might students from other cultures. Again, teacher bias may strongly affect these grades, rewarding kids who are good at "playing school" and/or who understand the norms of the dominant culture.

But What About Engagement?

But wait! Don't you ask students to engage in class?  Don't you expect them to take risks and try to use the language?  

The answers to those concerns are COMPLICATED.

Engagement and participation are DIFFERENT in my book. Participation often looks like forcing kids to speak before the words come pouring out of them, or to speak in complete sentences. It also might be coupled with the belief that students must take risks in order to acquire language.  

I do not believe that students should feel like they are taking risks in speaking in my class.  My goal (and it *is* a high bar, I recognize) is that they feel like they have so much to say and they want to say it so badly that words just pour out.  

Engagement is something that I am really working through.  In order to meet the need for enough grades in a grade book, in my last school placement I asked students to self-assess on behaviors that support language acquisition, then I recorded that grade. (You can read more about what I used to do in this blog post: What goes in the Grade Book.)  After a while, I continued to ask students to self-assess, but recorded it less and less.  The practice was useful in some ways, but now I am really asking myself some hard questions about how I was rewarding those kids who played school (and penalizing others, including students from different cultural backgrounds and those who would be considered to be neurally diverse), and how I can try to reach the same goals (helping students self-regulate and attend to the input) while eliminating white supremacist culture in my classroom.  This is an ongoing exploration for me.  Whew!  

I truly believe that the way we grade can help us become more equitable educators, and that the way we grade should help all students believe that they are capable of successfully acquiring another language.