"Researchers determined that grades given by teachers were neither valid nor reliable since what constitutes an "A" in one classroom or school does not constitute an "A" in another.This became one of the reasons that standardized testing became so popular" (http://www.middleweb.com/INCASEgrades.html). As I continue my search for grading and what my grades reflect, I continue to come accross articles that spur my thinking. Could the above statement be true that standardize testing is a direct effect of the unreliability of grades???? So we have put ourselves in this sea of CSAP, ITBS, MAP, etc. I now (sort of) see the thinking behind implementing these tests, if grades are not an accurate account of student learning/achievemnet, then doesn't something need to be? Is it not true that we tend to be more rigid with very intelligent students who we see as lazy; then, on the flip side, we tend to be overly leanient with students who struggle with the concepts but work incredibly hard? Is it also not true that an A in one class can be equal to a C in another?

I fully agree that assessments should be our focus and not grades. Assessments should tell us what students know and what concepts we need to continue to work on in class. How many times have teachers given a test to see where the learning/teaching fell short? In other words, instead of assessing who should receive an A, B, C, etc., what if teachers focused on assessing the content that the students learned and didn't so the teacher knows how to stear the next lessons?

Now, let me switch gears. I was sitting in a meeting about a student the other morning and really started thinking that this whole learning processes isn't rocket science. The student being disscussed is intelligent but doesn't put in the time to study. Studying, especially the rote learning (memorization of words/facts) either happens or doesn't. This type of learning of material doesn't have a great deal of "understanding" behind it. However, it is still an essential part of learning a content. How can you begin to study the human digestive system without knowing the names of the organs and the locations of them? How can you start speaking/constructing a new language without memorizing any new words of that language?

This then leads me to even more uncertanties. I have many types of assessments in my classroom. Assessments of understanding, and let's face it, assessments of memorization. And, aren't those assessments of memorization essentially grading on responsiblity? If a students studied and memorized those words they will perform well on the assessment, if a student failed to study, they probably did poorly.

So....... I have come to the conclusion that assessment of understanding and learning are the most important factors and grades should be able to fluxuate with a student's learning. Now I just have to make sure that my grading system directly correlates with this belief. I need to stop trying to separate responsiblity with acedemics and just focus on learning.

So as I continue my research (what's new?) I have been finding more and more thought provoking ideas for me to ponder (as if I don't have enough floating around in my head already!). The most recent article that has me thinking is another article on grading. It talks about the illogical thinking behind letter grades (as opposed to just a percentage number).
The article intrigued my thinking because it talked about how two students could have a 9% separation in their grade and receive the same grade. (e.i. student one = 99%, student 2 = 90%, both receiving an "A" mark. But is their understanding/mastery the same?
On the other hand two students that have a 1% differences could end up with a different letter grades. (e.i student 1 = 90%, student 2 = 89%, each receiving a different grade).
This leads me to many questions: Is it fair to suggest that the 90% student has mastered the content that much better than the 89% student? If this happened in all classes, one would be a 4.0 student, one would be a 3.0 student. Fair? Accurate? Reflecting that one understands the material that much more? All questions I am trying to answer.
I think the more I research, the more confused I become!!!!!

As I continue to think about my teaching, teaching in general, grading, assessing, etc. I am continuing to waver in my thinking, which always happenes. I am a true believer in grading on knowledge and that my job is here to help students learn new concepts and ways of thinking. In addition, I think that students should have the opportunity to make up work, re-take quizzes and have the opportunity to show understanding/proficiency of a topic to regain points.
With that said, I struggle because I also believe in a strong work ethic. I know that we can make a different category and put grades under it, and I like that, but I really hate the idea that this is a non-accedemic area (although many have renamed it). I think that this generation and mine seem to have less work ethic. Sometimes things are not glamorous, fun or exciting, but necessary to do. (And sometimes, believe it or not, these non glamorous skills help you succeed the most in your life.)
One of my biggest pet peeves is when you announce the need for taking notes of reading for understanding in class and you get the eye rolling from the students. 2 things about this frustrate me. 1. That students think it is okay to roll their eyes at adults, teachers especially. 2. that students don't see any need to practice these skills. These may be the skills that I use the most as an adult. After all, how do you think I research all of this information on constructivist teaching, good teaching practices, and what aspects of education are working in other cultures? I read for comprehension and take notes for myself!!!
I guess I am just still struggling with what a constructivist classroom truly is. Because I feel that reading for comprehension is a type of autonomous learning (constructivism) where students are constructing their own thoughts and knowledge from the text being read.

So recently in all of my research (I actually don't have a life) I found an arictle that discusses world-class schools. The article did a great job of listing the differences and similarities between the United States and other schools. It discussed common traits of high achieving schools. I believe they studied 10 countries: USA, Canada, Japan, Singapore, Korea, France, and others. This was something interesting it had to say about homework, my favoite part is the end (could you image!?).

World-class students turn off television and turn on to homework.
World-class schools use homework--which is free—
to increase learning time.
(a difference of how families value homework and students do homework is obviously different!)

Historically, mothers in Japan and Taiwan
have been intensely involved in their children's
learning environment. Many Japanese mothers,
for instance, attend their child's school and take
notes when the child is ill.

I agree that grades are in dire need of examining. I also agree that grades need to reflect understanding/knowledge and ability. For a great deal of time there has been an ongoing discussion of results vs effort. But the two should somehow converge to one in my opinion. I think that every teacher should ponder the following:
1. Effort vs results
2. Grading on a curve (big no, no)
3. Rigor isn't equal to work load (i.e. the number of workbook pages to be completed)
4. Grades should not be a consequence of inappropriate behavior (implying that is it then true to say they shouldn't be a consequence of appropriate behavior?)

The pendulum is definitely swinging. The most recent article I am reading (given to me by Karl of course) has a great deal of controversial ideas. It states that we need to throw out frases such as, "study this because it will be on the test". We need to steer students back to the value of learning and understanding new material to lead to a better understanding of the world. We need to tell them why the knowledge is important beyond the classroom. The articles suggests throwing out grades entirely to promote student learning. That everything that grades reflect (especially in the past) have nothing to do with learning (I do have questions about this).

I agree that the first step of this process (of grades reflecting true understanding), is eliminating the grading curve and ranking process. Shouldn't every student have the opportunity to learn from their failures to reach true understanding of a concept/topic? If we truly believe that learning is the center of education, we need to reflect that in our assesments (re-assessments). To me this means that a student should be able to re-write, re-read, or re-take to demonstrate aquired understanding/knowledge of the content and raise their grade/understanding of the material.
I do live in a real world with 30+ students, time restraints, and the truth that some students embody laziness; however, I would like to think my job is to teach students to problem solve, create, question and learn, not just give them a piece of the alphabet.

Right now I am in a full out battle on how to get students to STUDY! Not just sit down and look at the new words to be memorized and not just having them be able to look at the Spanish word and know the English word, but internalize the material: Know what the word means and how to use it, spell it, and manipulate it out of thin air! We work on all types of methods in class like word associations, connecting the word to prior words learned that are similar, and study techniques like flash cards and word webs to help them, but the students don't seem to be putting in the time. I am finding that whatever the approach (rote or constructivist) there is still a need for studying and looking at the new material many times to learn it. I would love to hear any suggestions for improving this. I realize the students have more on their minds than Spanish, but I think they can all spare 10 minutes a night for my course!