EARCOS – Grading in the Differentiated Classroom
William and Ochan Powell’s presentation wasn’t the first time that I’ve studied differentiation, validity, understanding by design, or assessment for learning. Nevertheless, their delivery was by far the best I’ve encountered.
Order of Events:
The Powells began with paired discussion about assumptions we make about teaching, which was effective because few concepts are as poorly understood as differentiation. Moreover, many teachers seem even afraid to discuss it (other teachers are eager to brag about it, which actually isn’t productive in these sessions), so the one:one approach was effective (and in line with think, pair, share).
We made a list of assumptions with brief bursts of discussion. We concluded that there’s a difference of purpose between assessment and grades (Assessment is required for learning. Grading is not necessary for learning).
That grading is so often given priority over assessment / feedback indicates a significant problem in our educational system, it reveals that all stakeholders too often focus on rating rather than learning.
From here, they went on to give six recommendations via power point. You can download their recommendations here.
In Review:
- What stands out about this style of presenting is its non-confrontational approach. All too often, presentations begin by outlining what should NOT be done. The audience is invited to engage in two minutes hate. No one felt threatened during the Powell presentation and everyone left with an inspired determination to integrate their “recommendations” (rather than orders, which I thought was a very clever use of word choice).
- That the Powells have delivered this presentation more than once was apparent. However, rather than being impatient or tired, they consistently came across as professionals. I loved the way they looked after each other when teacher comments became a little stressed.
- Their advocacy of “professional judgment” was something I haven’t considered.
- The idea of reporting on “effort, timely completion of work, class participation, attendance, attitude, homework, behavior” without having these things affect the student’s grade was excellent. I also liked how they suggested that these things are more important for succeeding in life than grades but that they still had no business being on an academic rubric (they could be an a study skills rubric that would be listed on a report card without affecting student GPA).
Again, I have studied these concepts before but it’s very useful for all of us to re-attend sessions on these concepts. This style of teaching represents a sea change in our reporting systems and even purpose. It’s very easy to veer away from teaching that is in line with differentiation, validity, understanding by design, or assessment for learning.
I left feeling a sense of pedagogical oneness — a Jedi-like focus.
