One of the advantages of holistic grading systems like the one we use at Lincoln School is greater score reliability. In other words, it’s much more likely that a student would earn the same score, regardless of the teacher marking their assessment, than they would in a percentage-based system. As an example, what exactly differentiates an 86 from an 87? How many decimal places does one include in determining the final mark, and should one round up or down? Research has clearly shown that the answers to these questions vary from teacher to teacher. At the system level, this is complicated even further by varying grade boundaries and weighted averages that may result in that 87 being scored as either a “B” or “B+”, each with very different implications for a student’s ultimate academic standing. In a holistic system, research tells us that a 6 is generally a 6 regardless of who is doing the scoring. At a system level, by eliminating weighting and conversions we further increase reliability and create a more consistent vocabulary to communicate student progress.
But there’s still work to be done. This year, our high school teachers will be meeting regularly to standardize our assessment practices and moderate our grades. We start this week, with a session in which teachers will bring one of their summative assessments to be analyzed by a peer. We will start the session with a review of our non-negotiables for assessments at Lincoln, including a clear marking scheme, alignment to unit objectives, and even a proper layout. Teachers will be provided with a rubric (because we are also modeling proper assessment techniques) and they will work in pairs and triads to review, mark, and provide feedback on one another’s assessments. From there, teachers will be given back their assessments with their partner’s feedback and will be asked to revise the assessment accordingly. After doing so, teachers will turn in their original assessment, rubric, feedback, and revisions for further comments from the academic team.
This is honestly a lot of time and effort that many teachers would rather be using to plan lessons or grade student work. It is vital, though, that we take this time to standardize our practice and learn from one another. It is how we ensure that we are “walking our talk” around assessment, and it’s only the beginning. We’ll continue to meet in teams throughout the year to share and standardize our assessment. We’re starting with teachers working in pairs and triads with peers who are teaching the same subjects and/or grade levels, but we will be mixing that up as the year progresses. By doing so we’ll be able to tighten our alignment between programs (MYP and DP) and eventually, across divisions (Elementary School, Middle School, and High School).
We will also be moderating our assessments in future sessions, which is a completely different yet equally vital practice. In those sessions, teachers will share not just their assessment but also actual student answers for their partners to mark. They will then compare their marks with those of their partner(s) to see if they came up with the same score. In other words, is a six a six regardless of which teacher is doing the marking? Our IBDP teachers will also follow this process with samples from previously, externally marked IAs to make sure their marking is not only aligned with one another but also with examiners from the IBO to ensure that a grade at Lincoln reliably aligns with a grade on the IB diploma.
Again, this is not easy or quick work, but it is an important exercise in quality control that will result in more valid, reliable assessments and grades for our current and future Lincoln students.
Please Come to the Principal’s Office 