ToolKit98

Activity 4.7

The Case of the Killer Question

Purposes:

To understand the critical link between clearly defined essential learning targets, assessment, grading, and reporting
To reflect on and discuss the role of grading in the portrayal of complex learning

Uses:

This is an advanced level activity used in Chapter 4 to provide an opportunity to participants to apply their understanding of grading and reporting issues. Prerequisites might include: (a) knowledge of how student assessment fits into standards-based education (Chapter 1 Text and/or Activities 1.1—Changing Assessment Practices, or 1.12—Assessment Principles); and (b) understanding of how assessment can be integrated with instructions (Chapter 2 Text and/or Activities 2.1—Sorting Student Work and 2.3—Ms. Toliver's Mathematics Class); (c) how assessment fits into standards-based education (Chapter 1 text and Activities 1.1—Changing Assessment Practices and 1.12—Assessment Principles; (d) how to match student learning targets to assessment methods (Chapter 1 text and Activities 1.2—Clear Targets and 1.7—Target-Method Match; and (e) stage setting activities on grading (Activity 4.2—Putting Grading and Reporting Issues in Perspective or 4.3—Grading Jigsaw and Activity 4.5—Report Card Formats).

Reference Box
The actual site of this case is West Hawaii Explorations Academy. For further information, please contact: Bill Woermer, West Hawaii Explorations Academy, P.O. Box 1749, Kailua-Kona, HI 96745.

Rationale:

This case arises out of an alternative secondary program's dilemma. In the program, self-selected students pursue long-term projects that deepen their knowledge and skills in a very specific area. There are few common content experiences among the program's students. Inquiry, problem solving, persistence, flexibility and other mega-skills are the common strands across student work. Project topics vary significantly from one student or small group to another. Some projects are individual, some are group, all are intended to be viable beyond school boundaries. Student autonomy and self-directed learning are key aims of the program.

As part of a larger high school, however, the program must demonstrate how its students are achieving in specific content areas including language arts, social studies, science, and mathematics for which students receive high school credits. In addition, a significant chunk of the resources that currently support the program come from an external source that emphasizes mathematics, science, and technology. The funding source is another audience expecting information about student learning and the impact of the program on mathematical and scientific literacy.

At the heart of the dilemma is the staff and students' passionate commitment to the independent, integrated, and deep learning embodied in the required projects. They have several key questions to answer: (1) What is the essential learning that the program delivers? (2) How can those outcomes be assessed without losing the complexity of the learning? (3) Do grades make sense in this context? If not, how can learning be reported to the satisfaction of the within-program and external audiences?

The use of case studies such as this to stimulate discussion is a useful learning technique for teachers.

Materials Required:

Overhead A4.7,O1—The Case of the Killer Question Purposes
Handouts A4.7,H1—The Case of the Killer Question, and A4.7,H2—Science and Mathematics Learning Targets for Students
Time Required:
1 ½ to 2 ½ hours
Facilitator Notes:
1. (2 minutes) Use Overhead A4.7,O1—The Case of the Killer Question Purposes to describe the goals of the activity.
2. (15-30 minutes) Pass out Handout A4.7,H1—The Case of the Killer Question. The "killer question" is: How do we capture and report the learning of our students in ways that others will value without compromising the integration, authenticity, student autonomy, and self-directed learning that is at the heart of our program?
  Participants should read the case and individually reflect on the assessment, grading, and reporting issues embedded in the case, responding to the reflection questions in Handout A4.7,H1, p. 5—Initial Reflections.
3. (10-20 minutes) Ask participants to establish what's known about the case and invite group members to identify issues and personal connections from their initial reflection. It might be important to determine if there is common understanding of terms like integrated curriculum. Check to see if there are questions that emerged from individual reading and reflection.
  
  Reference Box
  Kathleen U. Busick and Richard J. Stiggins, Making Connections: Case Studies for Student-Centered Classroom Assessment, Second Edition, 1997, Portland, OR: Assessment Training Institute, Inc., (503) 228-3060.
  ASCD Year Book: Communicating Student Learning, 1996. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), (800) 933-2723.
  Alfie Kohn, From Degrading to De-Grading in Punished by Rewards, 1996, Houghton-Mifflin, (617) 351-5000.
  Mike Schmoker, Results: The Key to Continuous School Improvement, 1996. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), (800) 933-2723.
  Richard J. Stiggins, Student Centered Classroom Assessment, Second Edition, 1997, Merrill.
  Ruth Sutton, Assessment for Learning, 1995. Author, 29 Nevile Ct., Nevile Rd., Salford, M7 OPS, England UK.
4. (30-45 minutes) Use the Discussion Starter questions (Handout A4.7,H1, p. 6) to guide and promote discussion of the variety of issues that face this program and its staff. Depending on the relationship of the issues in the case to participants' own local situation, the discussion might move quickly from the program in the case to concerns and practices within a school or district. This is fine. Try to keep the group focused on moving toward actions or solutions that are grounded in quality assessment. One of the expectations of this case is that it will generate and make tangible many often unspoken beliefs about curriculum, assessment, instruction, grading, and reporting.
  Handout A4.7,H2—Science and Mathematics Learning Targets for Students can be used to help answer some of the Discussion Starter questions.
5. (10-30 minutes) To bring closure to the discussion (at least for now), have the recorder for each group review key ideas made in the discussion and summarize the group's recommendations for action using Handout A4.7,H1, p. 7—Concluding Thoughts
6. (5 minutes) Decide as a group if further study is warranted and set the date for round 2. See the reference box and other activities in Toolkit98, Chapter 4, for additional ideas and resources.