From: Debbie Berlin (debbie_berlin@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Jan 30 2004 - 15:12:31 PST
Message-ID: <20040130231231.49060.qmail@web11402.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:12:31 -0800 (PST) From: Debbie Berlin <debbie_berlin@yahoo.com> Subject: a question for physics teachers, re: alternative grading systems and learning outcomes
I'm thinking about trying some very reform-minded grading practices based on the work of Robert Marzano and others. Right now, I have a very traditional points-based system. I'm planning to move to a system that will undoubtedly generate a lot more work for me but will hopefully be a better system. I'm going to test it second semester. I want to avoid re-inventing the wheel. It's always easier to modify someone else's work than start from scratch. So, here's a description of my plan. If you have anything that would help, I'm very interested. Please send it along!
For each unit, I'm going to have 2 main outcomes: mathematical and conceptual. I'll also have laboratory skills outcomes and student behavior outcomes. For each outcome, I'd like 5 levels of skills/understanding. I've given an example below. The plan is to use these to assess every assignment. Rather than giving one single grade on a test or other assessment, you'd rank the student on various skills. I.e., each assignment may have multiple ratings ("grades") associated with it depending on how many skills it tests. Then, at the end of the grading period, you could graph the student's progress, add a trend line, and then grade them based on where they end up rather than where they start. As a science teacher, I like it because it avoids unnecessary averaging that destroys data. It's also the way I would want to be assessed as a student.
For example, under Newton's laws and problem solving, the outcomes might look something like this:
Level: Skills:
1) Student can calculate net force, mass or acceleration when given the other two variables.
2) Student can calculate net force when given two parallel forces and use that in the Fnet = m*a equation. Student has some ability to do the same calculation with more than two parallel forces.
3) Student can combine multiple parallel or perpendicular forces to determine the net force. Student can work backward from the net force to determine individual parallel or perpendicular forces. Student can use this information in Newton's second law. Student has some ability to integrate prior learning to Newton's 2nd law, such as by calculating acceleration from initial and final velocities and time prior to solving a Newton's second law problem. Student can calculate frictional force using the mu equation.
4) Student can combine multiple forces at various angles to determine the net force. Student can use Newton's 2nd law and the friction equation. Student can work backward from the net force to determine individual forces. Student has some ability to solve problems that integrate Newton's laws with the equations of motion. Student has some ability to solve problems involving coupled motion and inclined planes.
5) Student can extend the above skills to new problems. Student can which require seamless integration of Newton's laws to the equations of motion.
Anyway, I'll take anything that might help! I'm really excited about trying this out but not looking forward to the additional work. It will be an interesting experiment. Since there will undoubtedly be some kinks to work out, I plan to run my traditional grading system at the same time and then give kids a choice of which grade to use at the end of the year.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Aug 02 2004 - 12:05:35 PDT