FIAE+Chapter+12+Block+2

Kalib Moore Abstract and Synthesis
Chapter 12 of //Fair Isn't Always Equal// discusses the two different types of grading scales commonly found in high schools and universities found around the United States. The first one is the 4.0 grading scale, which is much smaller than the 100-point scale. The 100-point scale is a 0-100 scale in which students are given a percentage that coexists with a letter grade. Both the 4.0 and 100-point scale are [|calculated] evenly to line up with the same and correct letter grade. "It's dangerous to emphasize something in our schools that has no positive purpose for learning or living." (Wormeli, 155) Wormeli points out that we need to pre-assess students and look at past work as a test to see whether students should be allowed to move up to advanced classes. A lot of schools rely on a GPA score to decide whether or not students should be accepted into advanced courses explains Wormeli on page 155, and I completely disagree. I think many factors should be taken into consideration to decide whether or not a student is prepared to take advanced courses. It seemed to me that everyone who read this chapter seemed to think that grading scales were not a good measure of a student's intelligence. Some of you felt that students felt pressured or embarrassed by grades. Womeli says that "embracing such an appropriate grading policy for differentiated instruction can be a scary process if a school's grading culture is purely about documenting deficiencies and sorting students." (159) I agreed with the point made that teachers need to make sure that they include [|feedback] into the grading and assessment process. toc

Leanne Fasulo
The twelfth chapter of Fair Isn’t Always Equal is all about grading scales. Grades should be used to show the patterns of progress and be used with the beliefs of differentiated instruction. Grading should hurt a child because they are being compared to other students. Grades should also not be affected by the past mistakes made by a student, because everyone makes mistakes and students deserve a chance to learn from them. Teachers who follow the differentiated practice use grading as a way to help their students and do not punish them because of how a teacher’s past teacher graded them in school. Teachers who differentiate know not to bring that kind of baggage into their own classroom, but learn from it to make a difference. Grades are not meant to be equal but to be fair according to the student. People think that fair means equal when in fact it means giving each student what they need to grow. It is important to note that smaller grading scales can be more efficient in the fact that they can give a student better feedback than a larger one. Students who get good feedback are proven to do better, which is the whole point of grading. When I am a teacher I plan on giving my students the best feedback that I can give to them. Just putting a letter or number grade on top of an important assignment will not do anything for the student. The symbols are basically meaningless. Students need true specific feedback to become successful.

Christina L Quach
In Chapter 12 of FIAE, the author discusses different grading scales and how teachers use them. Wormeli gives many reasons why either alone do not provide good feedback for a student’s learning achievements. I thought that it was interesting when he mentioned changing the grading system to something that people are not used to. For instance people are most familiar with the grade scaling systems of 100 and the four-point system. Even adding or taking away a few points from the second example would make it look different. What I did not agree with here is that the system would have to be constantly changing to make people think differently about this. Once people get used to a 6.0 system they will be in the same boat as the 4.0 system. I think even a 6.0 is closer to the 100 point system. I did agree though that giving constant feedback throughout a student’s education is critical for assessing, but I also think it is important to find a way to have a summative assessment that is effective. Wormeli said, “We’re about student learning, and most often that comes from specific and timely feedback during the process of learning, not a tabulation of correct answers. If we are truly focused on mastery, then we’ll want to do everything we can to provide that feedback, emphasizing formative over summative feedback as much as possible (157).” I also did not agree with Wormeli when he brought up grades with a minus or negative at the end. If I had an A- I would work towards an A or an A+. I would not settle for these grades like he mentioned students would do.

Richie Johnson
While this chapter proved to be interesting to read, and while much of it is noteworthy, there are a few bits that irk me. Mainly, I am still not fond of the whole grading thing. Wormeli makes many good points about how to use grading “effectively” but never really addresses why we must use grading in the first place (unless I have managed to overlook the parts where he did, which may be plausible given my tendency to strongly disagree with grading, generally). He emphasizes how important it is to give feedback with a grade, rather than presenting students with a number that has no meaning behind it, but this causes me to question what the number has to do with the feedback. Why can’t we, teachers, simply give great feedback constantly, and neglect to include a number with it? What purpose is the number serving? Are there students out there that are more encouraged by a number than by constructive feedback? Perhaps I am the one whose got it all wrong, but I am really frustrated with the whole grading deal. Ah!
 * //Fair Isn’t Always Equal//: Chapter 12**

Brittany Blackman
Chapter 12 is about the difference between grading on a 100-point scale and a 4.0 scale. They recognize that sometimes giving a short quiz and grading it on a 100 point scale is necessary, but they clearly lean towards a 4.0 scale. They claim it is easier to fudge grades on a 100 point scale, and there is less room for conceptual grading (which most teachers like but it isn’t right). With a 4.0 scale you are forced to write detailed rubrics and follow them closely. At first I was skeptical of this idea, because, being a math major, I want to do everything mathematically by the numbers, but I’m glad they included a mathematics example. The example was looking at the final answer and giving them a 100 or a 0 opposed to looking for specific steps and understandings and giving a 3.0 or 3.5 even though they have the wrong answer. I see where they are coming from with this, but I don’t agree that you have to have a 4.0 scale in order to do this. Most teachers give partial credit on tests because there are multiple steps and concepts you need to know. If you calculate a part wrong, they may take off one or two points, but mark the rest right, even if you don’t have the right answer. They are still doing the “right” things when grading, but using a 100-point scale.

Kalib Moore
Chapter 12 of //Fair Isn't Always Equal// discusses the two different types of grading scales commonly found in high schools and universities found around the United States. The first one is the 4.0 grading scale, which is much smaller than the 100-point scale. The 100-point scale is a 0-100 scale in which students are given a percentage that coexists with a letter grade. Both the 4.0 and 100-point scale are calculated evenly to line up with the same and correct letter grade. "It's dangerous to emphasize something in our schools that has no positive purpose for learning or living." (Wormeli, 155) Wormeli points out that we need to pre-assess students and look at past work as a test to see whether students should be allowed to move up to advanced classes. A lot of schools rely on a GPA score to decide whether or not students should be accepted into advanced courses explains Wormeli on page 155, and I completely disagree. I think many factors should be taken into consideration to decide whether or not a student is prepared to take advanced courses.

Kelsea Trefethen
This chapter was very helpful and really got me thinking. I had never realized how much thought went into deciding which scale to use. I always consider there just being one way of grading, which is weird because I have been graded in a variety of ways throughout my education career. I think the book definitely leans more towards the four-point scale. I can see why the book favors the four-point scale, however I think I would be more likely to use the percentage scales. In Mathematics there are so many minor details that are scored. I think it would be really difficult to compose a grade from a four-point scale. I think it would be much more simple and logical to grade with a percentage scale. The book stated that teachers get anxiety when they have to really reflect on the student’s mastery of the content and decide on a grade from that. I think the four-point scale would only make that anxiety worse. I feel like with the percentage scale you can break the grade down piece by piece and really calculate the true grade. I honestly don’t think grading should be sugar coated. However, I do think I will need to work with my students to make sure they are getting all that they need from me to succeed. I liked the part where the chapter talked about grading as far as “what is fair for each child?” As an educator, it is important for me to always be considering what each individual student needs.

Tyler Oren
Chapter 12 of //Fair isn’t Always Equal// details grading scales and their use in the differentiated classroom. The very first note Wormeli makes is to advise teachers to be consistent when scaling grades make sure the meaning behind the grades translates correctly into the rest of the school. Wormeli also asks that teachers remain human as they scale grades, don’t be a slave to numbers. If a student’s grade is just shy of an A, but they have made a push to improve their grade and put in the effort then they have probably earned the grade. Always consider the circumstances and never ascribe to a rigid one size fits all model. When scaling grades the most key principle to scale by is understanding and mastery. If a grade needs to be adjusted it should be adjusted to reflect the student’s level of understanding. After all, that is why students to go to school, to learn and understand. If a student can display high level understanding but their grade does not reflect it then the grade book most likely failed to display the student’s potential and a change is in order. Unfortunately the opposite is also true but probably a less common occurrence.

Evgeni Bouzakine In Chapter twelve, Wormeli talks about the positives and negatives of a 100 point grading scale, as well as the 4.0 scale. Wormeli favors the 4.0 scale much more than the 100 point scale. The 4.0 scales are subject to less distortion according to Wormeli. This scale also focuses more on the criteria then just the wrong and right answers from the 100 point scale. Students need to focus on the content and learning it. Rubrics are the perfect way to digest information and put it in a way that meets the criteria. Grades are the biggest focus in our schools now. This will hopefully change in my lifetime. In my classroom I want to focus as much as I can on only the content and not so much the grades. But because I have to comply with grades, I will throw in the grades until our grading system changes. I have already seen changes in the grading system in some elementary school.

Johnny Buys
Chapter 12: Grading Scales With the controversy surrounding the relevance of grades in the classroom different grading scales become important for teachers to consider. Wormelli suggests that, “most experts and teaching veterans agree that our decisions based on the consistency of evidence (the grade pattern) and our professional opinions via rubrics will generate an accurate appraisal and mark” (154). Evidence of masterful understanding as the goal for learning requires feedback. However, there are numerous pointers to making grades more appropriate. One of Wormelli’s tips for more productive grading would be to eliminate minus-versions of grades (156). This practice is easily applicable and establishes the level of mastery without the derogatory connotations that Wormelli points out saying, “You’re a C student, but a loser of a C student, closer to being a D student” (156). It is important to remember student’s sense of self-worth when creating a grading system (154). Therefore, arbitrary ranks and titles become less important stressing the importance of mastery and understanding rather than raw averages that are often misrepresentative of students’ true level of mastery due to the lack of resistance of averages. Grades are also arbitrary due to the variety of systems. When an A can start anywhere from a 90 to a 97, the scores become less reflective of process and product. Because of these inconsistencies, Wormeli suggests that when smaller grading scales are used, “parents focus more on learning, not on grades” ( 158). Another possibility that could easily incorporate into the grading process would be more explicative feedback such as words and phrases or even extended comments to establish understanding levels. One examples that is particular effective for understanding based education using phrases would be as suggested by Wormeli from McTighe and Wiggins: “Sophisticated, mature, good, adequate, naïve understanding” (158).

Cyril Lunt
In a stroke of originality and genius, chapter twelve is about grading.

...//fine, I'll talk about it.// More specifically, chapter twelve of FIAE talks about the grading system itself, both the 100 point system and the 4 point system. Wormeli seems to like the 4 point system more than the 100 point system, going as far as to say that the 100 point system is too bulky for its own good. I'll disagree with him, mainly because 100 is such an impressive number. I'd feel better about getting a 100/100 than getting a 4/4. Also, do remember, a 3/4 is a 75/100 on the 100 point scale. That's a huge decline. Five more points on the 100 scale, and that student wouldn't be passing. We wouldn't want that, would we? Now, I know that the 4 point system uses decimals. A 3.6 grade average is still stellar, but it just doesn't //feel// as rewarding as a 93ish. And a 4 just pales in comparison to seeing that glorious 100 on the top of your paper.

I know, I know. My only defense for the 100 point system is totally feelings-based, and I'm sure that the 4 point system is vastly superior. But if I do recall, grades are meant to gauge how well the student is doing, and seeing the larger numbers, I feel, illustrate that point we're trying to make. If you get a 42 out of 100, that makes a better case at giving that student help, rather than if you got a 1.2 out of 4. It just seems less impressive. ===

===

Kyle Kuvaja
Chapter twelve of //Fair Isn’t Always Equal// is about grading scales. According to Wormeli, most grading scales are either on a 4 point scale or a 100 point scale. 100 point scales are any grading systems that use percentages. Marzano says that there is considerable evidence that rubrics help improve student mastery of subject areas. The chapters moves into discussing how there is little difference in terms of mastery between a “low” B and a “high” B. Some school systems are doing away with the minus “-“ from grades. They are the ones who feel that there is little difference in mastery. The minus has the connotation that the students who get the “A” over an “A-“ are better at the material or smarter, when some would reiterate that there is little to no difference in master. The end of the chapter talks about how using the 4.0 point scale will result in parents who equate a 4 to an A and so forth. To avoid this we need to use a 3, 5, or 6 point system.

I believe that this had some good points, but went on a little longer than it needed to. I personally feel that grades are still important and that a student earning a 100 should not be seen as a bad thing. I still agree with earlier chapter that students should be able to strive towards mastery the topics.