I haven’t been happy with my grading practices for a long time (like 15 years).  Grading is usually arbitrary and leads to an artificial “points mongering” attitude in students.  Can’t we all just get along and learn? I’ve tried different point schemes, I’ve tried contract grading (complete with oral interviews), but it really didn’t feel right. So, I spent some time reading blogs (yes, you can learn from them) and finally decided to jump on board the SBG Express (Coined by Sean Cornally)

Special thanks to these folks (and many more): Ms Gajda, Shawn Cornally, Frank Noschese, Ms Bethea, and Jason Buell.

So, here is the grading section from one of my syllabi this fall.  It isn’t perfect, but classes start on Wednesday, so it will do!  I would appreciate feedback.

Assessing and Grading Science Methods

The “Standards Based Grading” approach is an alternative to the scramble to collecting “points.” It is very common in elementary schools and emerging in middle and high schools. Standards Based Grading provides a more accurate picture of what a student understands. In addition, it helps students monitor their learning as they can see where they are and where they need to improve. My variation on Standards Based Grading (SBG) is informed by many resources and classroom teachers. It is also rooted in the research-based practices described in Marzano’s Classroom Assessment and Grading that Works. However, I think the term “standards” presents some problems since it is used in many contexts. So, instead of confusing you with another set of standards, I will assess you based on 4 learning goals for this course. Each learning goal has a set of criteria that I will be looking for in your work. I’m not interested in your grade – I’m interested in your learning. So, your scores are not fixed. You can resubmit or we can identify other ways to demonstrate your understanding.

The four learning goals include:

1. Designing effective instruction

2. Assessing student learning

3. Demonstrating an understanding of science inquiry

4. Being a lifelong learner

Usually, SBG eliminates the need to give a formal grade because you have a report card that shows individual standards. However, that isn’t always possible (like in higher education). At the end of the semester, I will need to assign you a letter grade. Averaging scores often masks student learning by allowing a high score to hid a low score. Therefore, I will use Marzano’s conjunctive scoring approach. Criteria will be averaged to give you a score for each goal. Your grade is determined by looking across all four learning goals and matching to the table below.

In addition, absences and habitual tardiness, and late assignments may negatively impact your grade.

Late assignments – The unit plan (and lessons) MUST be completed on time. Deadlines are described in specific assignment overviews. Please contact me prior to the due date if you need an extension. Late assignments may result in the lowering of one grade step (A to A-, B- to C+)

Habitual tardiness is simply inexcusable. If you are going to be late, let me know. If you are late often, expect to have your grade lowered at least one grade step.

We only meet a limited number of times for this course. Therefore, attendance and participation is mandatory. If you have an emergency and need to miss class, please contact me. Unexcused absenses and any more than 1 excused absence will result in lowering your grade by at least on grade step.

TITLE: CAT #24 “Application Cards”

Teacher:

M. Toran

Context:

The topic I based it on was surface area to volume ratio (SA:V), an important concept in Biology which they will see again and again in different units

Background:

The lessons are mainly lecture-based and sometimes feel like a guessing game where students have to complete the teacher’s sentences. . I was observing the lesson when the teacher went over surface are to volume ratio and they had talked about it in several lessons previously, they had also done a practical around the concept, so I knew they had covered it.

Task:

I modified CAT 24 for this class because the teacher warned me that I would probably only get a yes or no answer from them if any, so I tried to make the assessment more approachable for the lower ability student.  Instead of making it completely free-response, I asked them 3 questions, two of which were multiple choice and one open-response item. I wanted to have at least one question they could all answer and gradually increase the level of difficulty so that the higher ability students could also show what they knew (Figure 1 shows the exact CAT questions).

1.     Out of these three, solid, 3D shapes, which has the biggest surface area?   ____

Which has the biggest volume? ____

Which has the biggest surface area to volume ratio? ____

2.     Which of these animals has the biggest surface area to volume ratio?

1Giraffe                  1Elephant                 1Horse                   1Hamster                 1Don’t know

3.     How is the job of the mitochondria improved by having an inner membrane with many folds?

Results:

Most of them did not understand the concept of surface area to volume ratio or they did not know how to apply it. I did a quick tally of the answers and found that only about a third of the class (4/15 students) identified the shape with the greatest surface area correctly (A), about two thirds (9/15 students)  identified the greatest volume (B) and only one third (5/15) the largest SA:V (A). The students seemed the most confident with the idea of volume (probably because they have seen it more often in Math and it’s a more common unit of measurement in general, everyday use), although it was still only 60% of the class that got that question right.

Only 3/15 students (20% of the class) answered the second question correctly (the giraffe being the animal with the greatest SA:V). Around half of the class (7/15 students) thought the elephant had the greatest surface area to volume ratio. I can see why they would think this, because the ears and the trunk do add a lot of surface area to the animal. However, when probed further, they gave the fact that the elephant is bigger than the giraffe as the reason why they picked this answer, which also supports the fact that most of them don’t understand how to apply the concept of SA:V

Only one student in the class answered all the questions correctly

Closing the Loop:

I simply told them that their responses indicated that there was a general lack of understanding of surface area and SA:V and because it is an important concept in Biology we would spend some time going over it. I went over surface area, volume and SA:V using the ball and worm as visual aids.

Reflection:

Overall I felt the assessment went as I had planned. The assessment was somewhat limiting because I had to adapt it given the responses I was told to expect from this group of students. One way I would modify this particular CAT about SA:V I used in the future is by having the students write their definition of surface area, volume and surface area to volume ratio after their multiple choice answers for Question 1. One thing I was reminded of through this CAT, as I mentioned in the Analysis section is the importance of using a wide variety of methods to teach a difficult concept

Source:

Angelo, T.A. & Cross, P.K. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

Example Presentation:

Cat II A Background Knowledge Probe

Teacher:Cheryl Hudson

Context:

Used for a 10^th grade biology class studying genetics.

Background:

The intent of the questions was to elicit students’ current knowledge related to genetics before beginning a three week unit. The specific teaching goal addressed is TGI Goal 19: Learn concepts and theories in this subject (genetics). The purpose of the probe was to identify the possible underlying genetics misconceptions students harbor in order to be able to address the misconceptions early in the learning cycle. In addition, the student responses served to inform instruction in terms of the level of knowledge related to genetics students have acquired and the necessary sequence of instruction.

Task:

The probe consisted of four open-ended or short response questions that focused on Georgia Performance Standards for Secondary Biology content in genetics.

Question 1: How are biological traits passed on to offspring? (SB2. Students will analyze how biological traits are passed on to successive generations.)

Question 2: What is the structure of a gene and how does a gene function? (SB2 b. Explain the role of DNA in storing and transmitting cellular information.)

Question 3: What are genetic mutations and how are they caused? (SB2 d. Describe the relationship between changes in DNA and potential appearance of new traits.)

Question 4: What role can genetic engineering play in the future? (SB2 f. Examine the use of DNA technology in forensics, medicine, and agriculture.)

Results:

Closing the Loop:

An introduction to the genetics unit at the next class meeting, I will address the Background Knowledge Probe by putting an overhead of the chart that represents the results of the analysis. By modeling and encouraging metacognition, hopefully students will carefully construct learning related to genetics concepts that is founded on sound scientific principles. At the end of each lesson, students in groups will be given a handout with the actual list of responses of the Background Knowledge Probe questions and will discuss and evaluate the statements in terms of whole or part accuracy, no information, and erroneous information.

Reflection:

The results of this Background Knowledge Probe have been profoundly constructive in terms of identifying misconceptions and indicating appropriate adjustments to planned instruction.

Source:

Angelo, A. & K. Cross. 1993. Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. 2^nd Ed.  Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

Shaw, K., Van Horne, K., Zhang, H., & Boughman,J. 2008. Essay contest reveals misconceptions of high school students in genetics. Genetics. 178: 1157-1169. Downloaded on October 4, 2009 from http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/abstract/178/3/1157

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

Life Science Assessment Probe: Baby Mice Probe 17

Teacher:

Katherine Theobald

Context:

For the first Performance Assessment Task, I decided to again use both of my Biology classes. Classes were beginning a genetics unit.

Background:

Because they have language based disabilities, they often have trouble with vocabulary and overall understanding of concepts. This [assessment] fit in well into my instruction and teaching goals because it allowed me to assess their foundational knowledge of the complex topic of genetics. This probe was done at the start of a unit on genetics.

Task:

Appendix 1 - Probe 17: Baby Mice (Keeley, Volume 2)

Students were provided the “Baby Mice” probe (Keeley, Volume 2).  In this scenario, a child’s pet mouse had babies.  Five of the babies were back and two were white.  They father mouse was black.  The mother mouse was white.  The children gave different explanations for the differences in colors.  Students were asked to explain which child they thought was the ost correct.

Jerome: Baby mice inherit more traits from their fathers than their mothers.

Alexa: The baby mice got half their traits from their father and half from their mother.

June: Male traits are stronger than female traits.

Seif: Black mice have more traits than white mice.

Fiona: The black baby mice are probably male and the white baby mice are probably female.

Lydia: Parent’s traits like fur color don’t matter - nature decides what something will look like.

Billy: Blood type determines what traits babies will have.

Results:

While many of the students held misconceptions and mistaken ideas about genetics and the mechanisms for inheritance, they were able to use the terminology presented in the previous unit on DNA.

Closing the Loop:

Unlike my previous CATs, I have not actually done the closing the loop portion yet.  For the misconceptions based on previous units, I will address those right away to ensure that their foundational knowledge from past material is strong heading into the genetics unit.  As for the other ideas, I plan to address those misconceptions throughout the unit. I will have the seven possible explanations on the board worded as a general statement and not specific to this scenario.  I will also include a few other correct statements and misconceptions that are prominent in a genetics unit.  Then we will address them as they come up in the unit.

Reflection:

The assessment went smoothly and the students all provided thorough explanations for their choices.  This probe will impact my teaching for this unit because I know have information on the misconceptions and preconceptions that my students have going into the unit.  One thing I would change would be to not allow students to choose more than one answer. I will be sure to tailor my instruction to address all of the ideas that they highlighted.

Source:

Keeley, P., F. Eberle, and L. Farrin. Uncovering Student Ideas in Science Volume 2: 25 More Formative Assessment Probes.  Arlington, Virginia NSTA Press. 2007.

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

Directed Paraphrasing Assessment for Osmosis.

Teacher:

Michelle Hammond

Context:

After spending several days reviewing cell structures and functions we began our discussion of diffusion. This is an extended investigation that takes several days of observations

Background:

I chose my second period advanced class for this PA because these concepts tend to be difficult for middle school students and I felt these students would be able to articulate their ideas better during the interview section of the PA. Data were recorded on a data table designed by the students. At this time I discussed the student’s observations with them. What happened to the egg? Did the mass increase or decrease? What about circumference. Where did the foam come from?

Task:

Data were recorded on a data table designed by the students. At this time I discussed the student’s observations with them. What happened to the egg? Did the mass increase or decrease? What about circumference. Where did the foam come from?

I chose to interview 3 students from this class. I asked them the following questions:

1.    What was the purpose of soaking the eggs in the vinegar?

2.    What was holding the egg together after the shell dissolved?

3.    What did you predict was going to happen to the egg soaked in water? In corn syrup?

4.    What did happen?

5.    What did you learn from doing this experiment?

Results:

Students were surprised that the vinegar removed the egg shell leaving the cell membrane intact. The notion that an egg is a large cell was very confusing to them. I had to dispel many misconceptions such as “it’s melting”!  Students learned that materials do move in and out through a cell membrane. They were able to see it and measure it.

Closing the Loop:

I closed the loop in the short term by having the students write a conclusion addressing their observations and data. All of this information was recorded in their lab reports. They also had to address their hypothesis and whether it was correct or incorrect. Later on we compared data between lab groups to see if the measurements were similar and if the same patterns of mass and circumference were observed by the students.

Reflection:

I learned from this PA how important it is to take the time to make sure ALL students understand the concept being taught. When teaching things with paper and pencil only many students get left behind. I am learning how to incorporate these types of assessments into my lesson so I can individualize instruction but keep everyone busy. I am trying to teach my students how to eliminate down time.

Source:

Angelo, T.A. & Cross, P.K. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

CAT #2  Background Knowledge Probe

Teacher:

Brandon Fritz

Context:

I used this strategy for three sections of an Earth Science class I am teaching for the second time. This class is new as a result of Iowa’s new Model Core Curriculum implementation that requires all schools to teach a year of Earth Science.

Background:

I discovered during my first year of teaching this course that students lacked a good prior knowledge of how fossils form and the various types of fossils. Last year, I made the mistake of diving into a unit where students were examining index fossils representative of different rock layers and students were asked to determine the Geological era and period of the rock layer. However, students had some difficulty using fossil guides and working with fossils. I also discovered this was partly due to the lack of understanding of fossils, how they form and how scientists use them to arrive at geological dates. This year, I started the unit with a couple of simple journal questions that would serve to provide me with an understanding of how much students understood fossil basics. The two questions were:

Task:

a) How do fossils form?

b) How might scientists use fossils?

Each student was asked to write answers to these questions in his or her lab book. I then had students share ideas with a neighbor before discussing these answers as a whole. I then followed this up with having students examining a cross section of sedimentary rock strata with some patterns of fossils strewn throughout the layers. I asked students what they observed and if any conclusions could be developed.

Results:

Almost all students thought the fossils were still real bone materials in the sedimentary rocks. This was insightful for me because I understood that students did not realize that if this were true, we would not have fossils due to decomposition of organic matter.

My overall conclusion to my data was that students a basic understanding of fossils but lacked a depth of understanding of the processes involved like permineralization.

Closing the Loop:

The next day, I had prepared a power point presentation that explained a dozen different types of fossils with examples. I also included explanations of how scientists use fossils to discover relationships between organisms, evolutionary trends as well as how scientists date rock layers using index fossils. I gave a practice quiz. The results of this practice quiz (and real quiz the next day) indicated the level of understanding students had developed was much better and more in depth than when we started.

Furthermore, I posted six pictures of icons that represented a different decade of time in America (Martin Luther King, Jr., Michael Jordan, Elvis Presley, etc). I asked the students to post these in chronological order. I had groups explain how this could be used to illustrate index fossils. We then discussed the criteria needed for a fossil to be used as an index fossil.

Reflection:

This assessment of probing prior knowledge did go as planned. While I initially was expecting to just give one additional day to develop student understanding of fossils, I ended up spending a total of two and a half days in block scheduling providing students with experiences to develop a good understanding of all the different ways fossils form and how scientists use fossils to understand the past.

Furthermore, I also discovered that this knowledge made the inquiry experience over the three days much more rewarding and successful. Next time, I might start with the diagram first before the two questions.-as homework the night before and give students an open ended question like, “Using the pictures of fossils in the rock layers, how might you explain something you see?” Creating an open ended question may be more revealing about what students already know about fossils. Plus, I have found open ended questions certainly generate more fruitful discussions among students.

Secondly, I would also add the formative assessment of the “exit slip” to see how students’ knowledge or understanding changes at the end of each of the first two days.

Source:

Angelo, T.A. & Cross, P.K. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

TITLE: The Rusty Nails,

Teacher: Aimee Modic

Context:

Currently I am teaching a unit on chemical reactions including: balancing reactions, identifying the types of reactions and predicting products of selected types of reactions. Given the opportunity to do a formative assessment probe from one of the Keeley, et al volumes in lieu of a performance assessment, I perused them and found a probe that meshed very well with my topic.

Background:

We had been working on predicting products all week and had just finished some notes on predicting the products of double replacement reactions using the solubility rules; having studied decomposition and single replacement reactions earlier in the week. I asked if they would complete the probe for me (again, anonymously) and place it face down in the pile I created. I separated them into three stacks: those that chose A, the mass will increase; those that chose B, the mass will decrease; and those that chose C, the mass will remain the same. After reading through the students’ written responses and listening to the student interview responses there was one decision I was sure about: we need to do this activity

Task:

The students had been given the class period to work on any of three assignments that had upcoming due dates. I asked if they would complete the probe for me (again, anonymously) and place it face down in the pile I created.  This was the only day in a 7 class day period of time that I had enough time in the schedule to allow the students to complete the probe and with three items coming due most of the students seemed to take it seriously, but it would not surprise me if a few of them rushed through it to get to their work that would be graded. I chose three students to interview about the probe during our next available time

Results:

Of the students indicating the mass of the nails would increase due to the rusting process (5 out of 18, 27.7%) most indicated that the oxygen would somehow become bonded or added to the nails somehow … Two of the students (11.1%) said that the mass of the nails would decrease and the remainder of the class (61.1%) said that the mass would stay the same

The remainder, and largest portion of the class, had many variations on the theme of Law of Conservation of Mass

Closing the Loop:

I spoke to my class briefly about the results and indicated that pretty much everyone had something correct in their response, but that there were also a few misconceptions that needed to be cleared up. . I suggested that we set up the Rusty Nails activity when we return from vacation and actually make the measurements and the students indicated that it sounded like a good idea.

Reflection:

I have a very difficult time planning a way to fit them into my schedule. I tend to be a creature of habit and have certain activities that I feel are valuable for the students and like to include into my curriculum;  This probe in particular was an eye-opening experience for me on the misconceptions and seeming lack of preparation that several of the students are bringing to my classroom. I feel as though actually doing the lab will be of great benefit to my students. One of my colleagues and I have previously discussed the idea of using some pre-unit knowledge probes as a way of determining what our students know before we start so we can plan more effectively, and I saw several probes in Keeley’s book that piqued my interest;

Source:

Keeley, P,  Eberle, F. &Tugel, J. (2005). Uncovering Student Ideas in Science, Volume 1: 25 More Formative Assessment Probes. NSTA Press

Acknowledgement:

The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

CAT 23-Directed Paraphrasing

Teacher:

Nancy Bryant

Context:

This week we have been studying the history of the atom. We have discussed Aristotle, Democritus, Thomson, Rutherford, Dalton, and Bohr.

Background:

The direct paraphrase CAT gave the students an opportunity to explain in their own words what they had learned that day.  It was also kind of a game, since they were supposed to be telling a younger student about an experiment.  I thought this class would most benefit from some reform, and I know that asking them to paraphrase a concept also helps their analysis and critical thinking skills, which are both long term goals for the class. My goal in this discussion is to convince students that we can study atoms even though we can’t see them, and to help them understand how we know there are positive and negative charges in an atom.

Task:

After discussing Thomson and Rutherford’s experiments I told the class that I wanted them to give feedback on an index card.  They would not receive a grade and they did not need to put their names on them. The assignment was, “In four or five sentences, paraphrase Thomson’s experiment.  You are writing to a 7^th grade student who refuses to believe that electrons are real because he can’t see them.”  I gave them about 5 minutes to write their responses. Each of the responses was logged in the chart based on how the student stated each concept.  The five concepts are listed below.

Concept #1 -Thomson did not know what composed atoms

Concept #2- The cathode ray tube was filled with atoms

Concept #3 - Like charges repel- unlike charges attract,

Concept #4- The beam of gas moved toward the positive plate and away from the negative plate

Concept #5-Because the beam of gas was attracted to the positive plate, the beam must have negative charges in it.

Results:

I see three types of responses in this activity.  One type of response is the student who begins well with some background information, but then seems to lose sight of the conclusion he is trying to reach.

The second category, in which the explanation had no background, but started with the …fact that like charges repel and unlike charges attract.

background information and also arrived at the conclusion stated in some way

Closing the Loop:

I read through the student responses before the next class, made notes on each card, and returned the cards to the students.  I told them that I had learned that we needed to focus more on the conclusion of each experiment so that they could understand its importance.  We discussed Thomson’s experiment again, with the students supplying the steps of the experiment verbally.  I also led an activity that day which led the students to draw conclusions based on their observations, hoping to give them practice in critical thinking.

Reflection:

This activity definitely has helped me understand how I need to constantly reform teaching methods to help students learn more completely.  In the past I would have assumed that most of the students understood the concepts revealed in Thomson’s experiment and then I would have continued on to other topics.  One issue I have discovered is that most students take longer to master the material than I ever believe possible. If I use this assessment technique again- which I plan to do- I will narrow the question more or add more prompts.  Another option would be to change the question to be more basic and just use question #3 in a different form.

Examples:

Source:

Angelo, T.A. & Cross, P.K. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

Approximate Analogies

Ionic and Covalent Bonds

Teacher:

Mark McGaugh

Context:

I decided to do this activity while going over mixtures and compounds.

Background:

Many students had trouble with knowing when two substances had actually bonded. The class performed activities such as dissolving salt into water, boiling the water away, and seeing the salt left behind. I explained the salt had never bonded to the water, but formed a homogeneous mixture. This is when I decided to use the approximate analogies technique.

Task:

I wrote on the board the simple prompt “Ionic bonds are to covalent bonds as __________ are to __________”.I listened to the discussions carefully and even facilitated them at a few points.

Results:

After discussing several examples I realized the concept that was never being mentioned was charge. None of the students grasped that ionic bonds were being held together by two charged particles.

Closing the Loop:

Luckily I had some magnets in the classroom. I explained to the class that each magnet had two ends, one with a positive charge and one with a negative charge. To avoid any unnecessary confusion I mentioned nothing about north and south poles. I passed out the magnets and explained that when like charges were facing one another they magnets repulsed one another and when opposite charges faced one another the magnets came together. To make a connection with ionic bonds I told them that the cations and anions, made by electron transfer, are of opposite charge and are attracted just like magnets. Next I took out some rope and pointed out it was not charged. I explained that covalent bonds electrons were shared, which was like tying two atoms together with a rope, and that covalent bonds have no charge.

Reflection:

The activity cleared up one problem but left another one unsolved, why were they confusing compounds and mixtures?I do know that in the future I will cover electrical charge and get the magnets out at the start of the year.

Source:

Keeley, P,  Eberle, F. &Tugel, J. (2007). Uncovering Student Ideas in Science, Volume 2: 25 More Formative Assessment Probes. NSTA Press

Acknowledgement: The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University

CAT 1 Directed Paraphrasing Activity

Teacher:

Cheryl Hudson

Context:

The class chosen for the CAT 1 exercise is a 10^th grade biology class that has been working on osmosis.

Background:

The students had spent one week conducting an osmosis lab where they soaked an egg in different solutions each day in order to observe the direction of diffusion of water through a cell membrane. At the end of the lab, students answered analysis questions that facilitated their ability to classify each solution as hypertonic, hypotonic, or isotonic based upon the data.

Task:

The following Directed Paraphrasing Activity was conducted immediately prior to a unit test on cellular transport to determine if students could connect learning from a four-day osmosis lab to a realistic scenario they might face:

You overhear some middle school aged athletes talking about hydrating before exercise.  One athlete tells another, “You should drink two gallons of water before the game so you don’t become dehydrated”. How would you explain the problem with this advice to the young athletes?

Write your response to the athletes using at least four sentences.

Results:

Closing the Loop:

When the papers were returned to the students and the purpose of the classroom assessment was again related, the students were able to recognize the connection of the lab concepts and the situation of drinking too much water. Most students agreed that the biology curriculum would be more meaningful when presented with applications.

Reflection:

I probably did not emphasize clearly that the students should specifically connect what they learned in the osmosis lab to the issue of drinking too much water at the time of the Directed Paraphrasing task. If I only change one practice this semester, it will be to incorporate this type of classroom assessment for learning to help scaffold the ability of most of my students to apply lab concepts to different situations for every lab.  In addition, students will transcribe each application question and their answer in their science journal.

Source:

“This assessment was created based on guidelines from the following book: Doran, R., Chan, F. & Tami, P.  (2002). Science Educator’s Guide to Laboratory Assessment. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.

Acknowledgement:  The author completed this assessment while a student at Montana State University