Highlights of 10/19/06 Rick Wormeli Seminar:

“Differentiated Assessment and Grading”

            The presenter began with a lively introduction, granting permission to (even urging!) participants to use anything they see or hear in the seminar to help others improve their practice.  “I stand on many shoulders…” to credit the experts he, himself, had learned from.  He also declared that he had never improved as a teacher until he began talking with other teachers, and then stressed the necessity for find common language to collaborate on issues such as assessment and grading.

Following are some “silver bullets” that were worth preserving:  (parenthesis = my interpretations)

Multiple pathways to same level of excellence (a lynchpin of differentiation)

Formative dipsticking  (continuously checking for student comprehension)

Grades must be accurate: based on consistent evidence over time: not a snapshot.

The way you grade has much to do with who you are; it’s very personal and can be touchy.

Mastery is not so precise that you can measure it by decimal points on a grade, which is more like playing a game than truly representing student achievement.

Being human means “mess upon mess until something coherent emerges.”

Rock the boat (as teachers); calm waters are deadly for sailors!

Grades are usually inferences based on a sampling, thus are both subjective and relative.

When designing a unit of study, it takes at least a week to decide on your objectives.  (Must research what truly is important, how standards are addressed, what is authentic about the learning.)

You do kids from poor backgrounds/situations a disservice by lowering expectations (out of pity.)  (They can reach excellence but may need more scaffolding, alternative routes)

“Average” (plus below/above average) have no place in classroom grading, as that refers to a norm-referenced scale.  Teachers are using criterion-referenced measures.

The only reason kids do anything (from completing assignments to staying seated) is their hope for a positive outcome.  If you take away their hope, nothing will work!

Do everything possible to keep kids in the game.

(2)

As Ruby Payne says, those who feel competent, themselves, are likely to accept differences in others. 

The teacher “stare of death” (tool for discipline)

The single greatest tool a teacher can have is expertise on how humans learn: cognitive science.  You must know what kids at each age should be able to do (to keep expectations/curriculum developmentally appropriate.)

What is fair isn’t always equal; some kids need tools (glasses, extra chances) that other kids don’t need.

            Each participant was given a copy of Wormeli’s book FAIR ISN’T ALWAYS EQUAL plus a “resource book” containing charts, his power point slides, and places for notes.  Below are major notions covered throughout the resource book.

Designing a Unit of Study

            When designing an assessment-based differentiated unit of instruction, your first task is to determine the E.E.K. (“essential and enduring knowledge”) aka K.U.D. (what students will do, understand, be able to do) from that unit.  Each unit should provide 2-5 essential questions to guide the study.  An example is “How does a country rebuild itself after a civil war?”

            Determining these goals/objectives effectively requires at least a week spent researching the standards, the content, even asking colleagues for input.

            Then, allowing several days before designing the actual lesson plans, administer pre-assessments to see what student needs are.  These should “cut to the chase” meaning not be elaborate but simply ask for basic information about the topic.

            The most impact on learning comes from the formative (“forma”) assessments used throughout the unit.  Consider that football coaches don’t wait until game day to provide feedback and practice.  Students need frequent “checkpoints” (short quizzes, quickwrites, etc.) with feedback throughout the unit if learning is to stick.

            The summative assessment is the final task for students but among the first for yourself.  You should already have designed the final assessment when you first set up the unit so that you can, as Steven Covey advises business leaders, “Keep the end in mind!”  This “summa” must match your instruction  in objectives and format to be truly accurate.

 (3)

About DI (Differentiated Instruction)

            Consistently differentiating instruction results in students who are competent.  The “real world” is completely differentiated; think of the workplace.  DI is nothing new.  When our own teachers nudged us to work harder, encouraged us, provided extra help, etc. they were practicing DI on your behalf.  In fact, he noted that if they hadn’t, none of us would be sitting in this professional seminar.

            DI means students know their stuff, and will do fine on standardized tests.  DI is pragmatic, meaning you do whatever it takes for kids to learn.  It’s what is fair for kids, meaning not doing the same for all, but doing what is best for each kid.

            DI is about mastery, not creating parrots.  You must make kids use the knowledge: application level!  One slide from the Center for Media Literacy in New Mexico lists four skills that denote true literacy in any subject:  if literate, we can ACCESS (understand and find meaning in), ANALYZE, EVALUATE, CREATE.  Most teachers stop at “access” which is not going for enough for mastery.

            Automacity (reciting math tables or spelling words) is the first step but does not achieve mastery.  Following step-by-step directions correctly is not mastery, but a process towards mastery.  Mastery would be designing a process, themselves, providing the steps, themselves.

            Differentiation is a mindset, not a process.

Instructional Tips

            Experts think in chunks and see connections.  An effective lecture must be “chunked” every 8-10 minutes.  You might deliver one chunk of information and then allow 2-3 minutes for a “brain dunk” (students share 30 seconds of recall with a partner, then trade roles; students do a quickwrite to sum up important points and share w/ partner or the class, etc.)

            Avoid “time suckage” such as useless homework, word searches for instruction (fun for games, but of no value for vocabulary study), doing pre-tests and never using the results to design your lessons.

            Spiral and reweave learning over and over throughout the year.  Adolescent brains are going through the most extreme growth spurt since age 0-2 and lots of pruning is going on to make way for new ideas.  If information is not revisited frequently, it will get pruned!

(4)

            Give students a copy of your final assessment on the first day instruction begins.  If the test uses constructed response or essay, keep those the same.  This will greatly improve student focus throughout the unit.  If you’ll be using “forced responses” (true-

false, match, fill in blanks) keep the same items but change the order on the actual test to avoid memorization in place of mastery.

Those Grades

            He asked us to look at the grades A-F and define each according to our beliefs about them.  When debriefing, he noted that what we said about “A” “C” and “F” were the most revealing.  “A” should imply complete mastery of the stated objectives; there’s no room for “going beyond expectations” as that is gamesmanship.  Students should not be required to read the teacher’s mind to see what will really impress them.  If they successfully meet the objectives, they should get an “A.”  He offered a cute line from Doug Reeves: “A ‘D’ is a coward’s ‘F.’ “  In other words, failure should be honestly reported. For true “DI” (differentiated instruction) assessors, that means you still keep the door open for student hope by providing help so that all students can succeed.

            “Assessment” comes from the Latin word that means “to sit beside.”  Grades should be treated as “physicals” more than “autopsies” (more Doug Reeves.)  Kids need feedback more than grades; forma more than summa!  “Feedback” means holding up a mirror to a kid without making an evaluation.

            Homework, effort, class discussion, all are formative and should not be part of your grade.  Only assign grades on instruments based on your standards; practice (such as the three listed above) are part of the process used to reach the point where they are ready to be graded.  Never assign homework to kids who don’t understand the concept/process yet, as it will do more harm than good.  Those who “get” it can do the homework for practice and benefit that way.

            A grade should reflect what you know, not what you did to learn it!  Otherwise, it is simply not an accurate grade.  A grade is a demonstration of proficiency, not practice attempts.

            Always correlate your unit objectives to your formal (summa) assessments.  To “assess your assessment” you might 1) do the task yourself and then circle where you had to produce the E.E.K. of the unit; 2) read the E.E.K. again and check off on the assessment where it was required; or 3) ask a colleague to compare the E.E.K. to the assessment to be sure they’re aligned.   Otherwise, your assessment won’t be valid.

(5)

            Successful assessment is authentic when it is 1) close to how students will apply that learning in real-world applications (great, but not required) or 2) it is authentic to how students were instructed (required) Present no surprises in format, content, or objectives.

            Successful assessments assess the student’s knowledge, not his ability to deal with the assessment’s format.  For example, one student may be a weak writer but a fine actor.  Provide alternative ways to assess so that all kids have the best chance to show what they know.

            Rubrics are great, but can be improved with this tactic:  After using a rubric for the first time (and which gives descriptors for every level of performance, top to bottom) use a rubric that only gives criteria for the top score.  This keeps kids from settling for less.  It keeps them focused on what excellence looks like so they are more likely to reach it.  Make the top score a “5” to avoid the A,B,C,D mindset of 4-1.  The “5” only rubric can supply a listing of other scores below with the statement that areas to be improved are circled in the descriptors above.

Some Myth-Busting about Grades

            High grades rarely motivate kids consistently.  Low grades simply push them away from trying.

            We should grade to provide feedback, document progress, and guide instructional decisions.  Grades should never be used to motivate, punish, or sort students.

            Attendance, effort, and behavior should never be factored into grades, as they are subjective and not legally defensible.  They are also routes, not outcomes.

            Zeros on homework or assignments not done are not grades.  They indicate character, not mastery.

            Students should be allowed chances to redo work for full credit.  Do not penalize multiple attempts at mastery by deducting points on second attempts.  Record the highest grade attained.  Keep the door open, meaning allow redo’s to be submitted any time during the grading period.  HOWEVER:  you can apply conditions to your “redo” policy.  Examples:  insist on parent signatures on each attempt; submit previous attempt(s) with the latest; kids who show a pattern of work that implies abusing your mercy can be refused the opportunity; you can set the end time for submitting redos and not accept during the last days before report cards are due (for your own sanity.)

            Grading on a curve is norm-referenced, which is not possible in your classroom.  A curve is not grading again a standard, which is criterion-referenced, which is what you use as a classroom teacher.

(6)

            Never give the same grade to teams of students.  This is an abuse of cooperative learning theory and not an accurate measure of each student’s mastery.

            Do not assign zeros.  Use the upper level of failure to allow students to overcome that failure.  If you correlate the 100-point scale to the 4-point scale, the vast region below 60 is like giving a -5 on the 4-point scale!  Also, the 100-point scale is a poor system for grading human performance, due to this huge degree of failure it allows.

            A 4.0 grading scale is more reliable for use among many raters.  With 100-point scales, grades are more subjective.

            Accurate assessment reflects student performance over time, not a snapshot.  Averaging is less accurate than medians if you desire accuracy.

            With late work, never take whole letter grades off per day, as that removes hope.  Taking a few points off, however, is instructive and still offers hope.  Also, if late work is chronic, you can be more punitive.  An occasional late assignment deserves mercy.

            A teacher’s professional judgment based on clear descriptors on a rubric will yield more accurate assessment of student mastery than will a mathematical average of grades.  Teacher judgment based on rubrics also has a stronger correlation with outside standardized tests than point or average calculations do.

Test Design Tips

            On “True/False” tests always provide a “T” or an “F” for students to circle.  That avoids neatness issues and thus is more accurate.

            On matching activities, remember that we read from left to right.  Putting the longest part to read on the left is much less tiring and confusing, thus more accurate.

            Keep matching item portions limited to 8 or less at the time, to avoid making it an endurance test rather than a mastery opportunity.

            Keep the blanks in fill-in-the-blank items close to the end of the item to avoid reading comprehension issues.  Also highlight key words (“most”  “not”)  to give students the best chance to show what they know, not how closely they read the item.

            Make all writing assignments “one-pagers.”  This will avoid “filler” and provides a strong writing challenge.  It also makes grading less of a burden.  Remember what Pascal said:  “If I had more time, I would have written less.”

(7)

            Don’t leave the hardest items on your test for the very end, when students are more tired and most likely to give up.

            Never make comments that students will see as personal attacks (such as frowny faces or “Not again!!!”) on their work.  Such comments are you venting rather than assessing accurately.

            In summary, Rick Wormeli is as dynamic as Steve Martin and as inspiring as any presenter I’ve ever seen.  In this age of accountability and ever-diverse student populations, his admonitions make more sense than ever.

Rick Wormeli  rwormeli@cox.net

This page updated last on :  08/25/2007