Competency 4: Communication Skills Related Task Specific Task committee. 2.1 2.1.3 Knowledge of group interaction techniques.

Jennifer Orkisz

Represent a given school or district on a district, county or statewide education

Narrative Description Davison Community Schools created a Standard Reference Grading Committee in the 2012-2013 school year as a way to discuss and create conversation about moving to a new district-wide way of assessing our students. The move to a different way of assessing students on report cards created the need for a committee to work through changing the report card process and evaluating students. I will be a representative of my building on this committee in order to learn more about the process in converting K-12 classrooms to this system and the process of converting to it. I will provide a journal of meeting notes and personal reflection of topics discussed at each meeting. Process, Purpose and Approach: To understand the history of this committee, I first needed to look at its beginning. The committee initially started in the school year 2010-2011, when the planning began to convert from the traditional grading system to a Standards Reference grading system. The steering committee was originally compiled of teachers from grades kindergarten through 12th grade, special education teachers, and math, science, social studies and language arts coordinators. It also included one elementary principal, an intermediate grade principal, one high school principal and the assistant superintendent. The steering committee compiled research and processes about Standards Reference grading, planning to open dialogue with staff and slowly implementing the process wth the younger grades first. The vision was to have all Davison Community Schools curriculum and courses to be standards referenced by the start of the 2015/2016 school year. This involved changing the approach on formative and summative assessments, how reports cards would look, and how each subject shaped its lessons. Mission Statement The mission of the Standards Referenced Grading Committee is to develop a District wide assessment system that accurately measures every students knowledge and understanding of content and provides students multiple opportunities and means to demonstrate proficiency. Primary Functions of the Committee Create a collaborative culture in order to effectively implement best practices in standards referenced grading Foster communication among administrators and faculty representing a variety of perspectives Provide direction and support district wide for implementation of effective assessment practices Identify needs and issues that arise in regard to standards referenced grading Recommend professional development opportunities to support staff in the implementation of SRG

Structure of the Committee At least one teacher representative from each building

At least one special education teacher from the elementary (K-6) level and at least one special education teacher from secondary At least one administrator from the elementary level and at least one administrator from the secondary level District Curriculum Coordinators District Assessment Coordinator Assistant Superintendent

Philosophy of the SRG Committee The SRG committee believes that: Grades should accurately reflect student learning.

The District should develop a comprehensive assessment system to accurately assess students depth of knowledge and understanding of content. Students should be given multiple opportunities and means to demonstrate proficiency.

The SRG Committee must support the Districts Advisory Curriculum Council (ACC) especially with regards to phase IV Assessment Evidence Beliefs and Practices Purposes for Grading There are many different purposes for grading. Grading communicates student achievement to students, parents, and others. It provides information for students, so they can self-evaluate and plan learning goals. Sometimes grades are used to select, identify, or group students for certain educational programs or activities. Grades have been used to provide incentives for students to learn. Grades are also a way to document student performance to evaluate the effectiveness of an instructional method or program. Purposes for Standards Referenced Grading Although grading remains a communication tool, standards referenced grading accurately measures the specific level of mastery that a student has demonstrated on specific skills or content area knowledge. In other words, it provides more meaningful feedback about what a student knows and at what level they can apply their knowledge.

Standards-Referenced Grading Practices Standards-referenced grading practices differ from traditional grading practices in the following ways:

Standards-Referenced Directly related to standards Achievement only From summative assessments only Recent information only Uses current learning trend Individual Derived from quality learning assessments All aspects discussed with, and understood by, students

Traditional Usually related to assessment methods Mix of achievement, attitude, effort, and behavior From formative and summative assessments Everything marked included Uses averages Often includes group marks Huge variation in assessment quality Teacher decided and announced

Uses of Formative and Summative Assessments in Grading Within a standards-referenced system, both formative and summative assessments are used but have different purposes.

Summative and Interim Assessments (Minimum of 90%) Used to make a decision about student learning at the end of a period of instruction for report card Are based on known criteria Used after students have been given opportunities to practice skills Focused on individual student performance Formal observations, tests, projects, reports

Formative Assessments (No more than 10%) Used to guide instruction for individual students or for a whole class Introduce criteria, allow for feedback, selfassessment, and guided practice

Focus on individual or group learning Informal observations, quizzes, homework, teacher questions, worksheets Information can be used for report card Comments

Assessment should be used to inform instruction. Teachers may or may not have the same formative and summative assessments.

*To ensure consistency across grade levels and subject areas ACC requires common summative unit assessments in phase IV Assessment Evidence. Some students may have more formative assessments than others.

 Formative assessments should be used to determine when students are ready for a summative assessment. Since not all students learn at the same rate, students should be given multiple opportunities to demonstrate proficiency. Teachers should use a variety of assessment types to meet the needs of all students.

Behavior, attendance, participation, attitude, and effort should not be included in either category, but instead be reflected in Cardinal Code marks. Late work should not be marked down.

Teachers should not allow extra credit but should allow students multiple opportunities to demonstrate proficiency. District Standards Referenced Grading Student Assessment Guidelines: The Davison Community Schools believe that all students can learn and grow. In order to ensure a consistent system for assessing students academic growth, achievement, performance, progress and learning, the District has implemented a Standards Referenced Grading (SRG) system. It is an expectation of the District that all teachers: Teach and assess a common curriculum.

Differentiate instruction and assessment to ensure all students have the opportunity to demonstrate proficiency and achieve academic success. Use formative assessment to continually monitor and assess student knowledge and understanding of content and determine when students are ready for a summative assessment. Re-teach and re-assess when necessary to ensure student learning.

Administer common unit assessments as required by the Districts Advisory Curriculum Council (ACC). Implement a grading scale in which at least ninety percent (90%) of a students grade is determined by summative assessment. Allow all students at least one opportunity to retake or redo summative assessments, portions of the assessment, or provide them an alternative assessment after re-teaching and/or providing students who are not successful on summative assessments additional learning opportunities. Develop grade level, departmental and/or course policies and procedures for administering retakes/redos so that all students have multiple (at least two) opportunities to demonstrate proficiency on summative assessments. Develop alternative assessments to meet the needs of special education students.

Information I acquired from the meetings: Changing from one way of grading to Standards Reference grading requires planning within a gradual process, from district wide curriculum alignment, blueprints that state what assessments will be given, specifics on what the student will learn, and the depth of knowledge each assessment creates. The transition then moves to report cards that reflect these changes. Report cards were drafted and changed first, in the lower elementary, and then to the intermediate building which houses 5th and 6th grade. The plan was to slowly add on over time. What I appreciate most about the meetings that I attend, is that the meeting is set up to be a roundtable discussion to address problems with the process, positives and questions about the steps needed to go to the next level. With any type of transition process, there are things you dont expect to happen that do. One elementary reported that parents were confused with the new report card descriptors. The end discussion determined that the whole concept is to assess students on standards which would automatically feed into clusters and then would feed into domains this would then automatically compute a numerical value this is where we are supposed to be and that is where we are headed. When this is a reality, the process will be more descriptive and more precise just hasnt happened yet. Another thing brought up was the necessity to add a narrative portion on the report cards for next year. The intermediate building was having issues with the district wide grading software that we use, and are trying to keep those concerns separate from SRG but it is difficult. Davison found out in September that we couldnt do a mixed report card grades and numerical values so Hahn moved forward to go to all numerical values. The middle school and high school levels are still working on blueprinting their assignments, which includes writing specific depths of knowledge. This has taken them a lot longer than expected, and the high school doesnt think it will be done by the end of the year. Another concern for the high school is how the depth of knowledge numbers (1 2 3 4) translate into a grade point, which is a concern when applying to colleges. Overall, this committee has taught me the value of communication within a school district. It shows that when a group is willing to represent their building and come together to discuss problems and progress as a district, the end result will benefit the whole. Any program change will take a large of group to be invested, and the committee members help foster positivity when returning to their buildings with a better understanding of the process.