Yesterday I was sent this article* and was not surprised to see yet another example of re-inventing the wheel in education, re-naming it, claiming credit and then monetizing it. This time it concerned evaluation and grading and the new name for the old hat is equity or equitable grading.
The article claims the term was coined in 2018, although to be fair it does not state that the coiner had invented the approach however at the same time, it does not provide any earlier instances.
I first came across this approach in the mid-1990s and subsequently introduced it in every school I had the pleasure of leading, ether as Academic Director or as School Principal. In essence, it has three pillars.
Firstly, student production of any kind is separated from the student and is evaluated purely and simply in terms of what is in front of you against objective and consistent (or "standard") criteria. Not every piece is evaluated, but what is evaluated is done so individually and grades at the end of the period are a total or an average of these.
Secondly, every evaluated piece is graded against Content standards, aka as Knowledge and Understanding, and Skills standards, or Application, Demonstration, Implementation. For example knowing how to do a layup versus doing a layup, or knowing what happens when one splits an atom versus ending the world as we know it. As students progress, Conotents can include Response and Analysis and Skills, quality of performance.
A smart student who bluffs in multichoice reveals whether s/he can actually write a sentence or form a paragraph with an A for Content and a C for Skills. Meanwhile, a student who is not mathematically blessed can receive a C for Content (wrong answer) but a B for Skills (right method).
Thirdly, the student is evaluated globally against Attitude indicators such as punctuality, or extra effort in a task or involving a shy classmate in a discussion. Attitude grades are global and reflect students rather than performance, and again, objective and consistent criteria are essential.
Thus a student who may not be the brightest tool in the sixpack can receive a C for Content, B for Skills and A for Attitude. Another who has little or no future in quantum physics can still improve his/her Skills performance to receive an overall pass.
When I was introduced to this approach to evaluation and Teaching & Learning, I cannot believe it was then new. While we all need to put food on the table, and I cannot fault this particular professor for his appetite, I do wish there was more sharing amongst educators and more knowledge of what works and what has worked in the past.
**Please leave comments and queries below.""
Further reading
No comments :
Post a Comment