Problem Identification
Grading methods that rely on assigning a numeric value for correcting formative assessment tasks, such as homework, risks conveying a feedback to the student in a manner that is problematic. Primarily, such action risks, albeit inadvertently, stratifying of students in the classroom into “attainment” based status groups. In particular, those students who are devalued are put at further risk of devaluation, and may be made vulnerable to potentially image-impairing experiences as a result of their perceived lowly status, as it pertains to their perceived level of competency.
The risk and vulnerability, as identified above, can potentially increase the likelihood that the devalued party may find themselves in a negatively reinforcing feedback loop. In which case, their perceived image of incompetency leads to negative role expectancy of “deviancy”, or low performance in this case. Goal Statement
From September 2010, beginning with the first regular homework for each class, I will introduce into each formative assessment feedback given to students one of (+), (-) or (=) symbols. (+) will denote improvement from previous level of performance, (-) denotes decline from previous level of performance and (=) denotes the same level of performance as previous work. Rational The main premise for this paper is that of the need to prevent additional wounds and reduce existing devaluations that may be suffered by devalued groups and/or individuals. This Social Role Valorization (SRV) inspired implementation plan seeks to demonstrate a reflective approach when feedback is given on student progress.
In a school learning experience, homework tasks and short tests play an important role of formative assessment process. The approach taken, therefore, in conveying feedback to the student during such a process is critical to the student's awareness of her or his learning progress. In a recent study conducted to investigate student's reaction to their teacher's feedback Lee (2008) found that student's reaction to such a feedback not only depended on their individual characteristics or proficiency level, but also with teacher factors, such as belief, practices and their interactions with students.
Classroom setting and instructional context in which feedback is situated plays a direct role on student reaction. Although, it will be applied within the whole class setting, the SRV based change plan proposed in this paper particularly focuses on those students who are devalued or at risk of devaluation. Perceived levels of performance at school work has value implication within any classroom setting. Those who are perceived to be low performers are devalued, and the negative role expectancy that it triggers becomes potentially image-impairing scenario to the devalued party. Once the process of negative role expectancy begins to take hold, a negatively reinforcing feedback loop is sets in. This involves the devalued student missing out on remedial intervention, and therefore continue to under perform thus continue to remain devalued.
This SRV change plan is designed to do what a formative assessment feedback essentially be all about. Formative assessment feedback should enable the student to recognize how well they are managing through the learning task at hand. It should not be about, albeit inadvertently, stratifying the students into status groups, one that is is based on perceptions of competency. Students make progress at various levels of performance. By indicating to students how they have performed as it compares to their previous work does not only make them aware of their progress but also identifies their achievement regardless of the level of performance at which it occurs. For example, a student who attains 3/10 in one homework task and goes on to get 5/10 in the following one, may still be perceived as a low achiever. However, assigning a (+) to this student suggests to him/her that he/she has actually made a progress.
The Conservatism Corollary in SRV recommends that when there is a range of available measures to enhance a party's image and/or competency, to choose the more valued option. This change plan, as stated in the goal statement above is a feasible valued option that reduces existing devaluations or prevents additional ones that are based on negatively valued perceptions about low performance. Implementation Plan
In the very first class on September, students will conduct a 15 minute teacher lead discussion on how to interpret homework feedback symbols.
The first regular homework's feedback will include the symbol (=) for all students, and will be treated as a base mark for comparison for the following homework.
Each homework will be compared with the one immediately preceding it.
After each homework task, teacher logbook will be updated with both numeric value and specific assigned symbol for progress.
Every time after five consecutive homework sets have been completed, a teacher lead diagnostic review of progress will be carried out to determine intervention needs.
The whole cycle will repeat in the same manner for the following set of five homeworks.
Support Plan This change plan does not involve a great deal of additional work, but rather a shift in the method by which formative assessment feedback is conveyed to students. As this method of feedback provides an instant snapshot of student progress, it would open for greater opportunities to work with students, parents and other stake holders collaboratively to meet learning objectives. Personal organization and accessing available resources within classroom and else where will need to be planned for ahead of time. Sharing Plan Once this method of providing feedback is implemented and outcomes reviewed, it is intended to be shared with colleagues in the department. Typically this involves an informal discussions and exchange of ideas on issues of implementation and development of the system
References Hendriks, J.A., Kuyper, H., Lubbers, M.J., & Van Der Werf, M., (2010). Does homework behavior mediate the relation between personality and academic performance? Learning and Individual Differences,20, 203–208. URL: http:www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif.
Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 144–164.URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com
Parr, M.J. & Timperley, H.S. (2010). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing Writing, 15, 68–85. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com
Shirvani, H. (2009).Examining an assessment strategy on high school mathematics achievement: Daily quizzes vs. weekly tests. American Secondary Education, 38(1), 34-45.URL: http://www.ashland.edu/academics/education/ase/.
Strambler, M.J., & Weinstein, R.S. (2010). Psychological disengagement in elementary school among ethnic minority students. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,// 31, 155–165. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01933973.
Grading methods that rely on assigning a numeric value for correcting formative assessment tasks, such as homework, risks conveying a feedback to the student in a manner that is problematic. Primarily, such action risks, albeit inadvertently, stratifying of students in the classroom into “attainment” based status groups. In particular, those students who are devalued are put at further risk of devaluation, and may be made vulnerable to potentially image-impairing experiences as a result of their perceived lowly status, as it pertains to their perceived level of competency.
The risk and vulnerability, as identified above, can potentially increase the likelihood that the devalued party may find themselves in a negatively reinforcing feedback loop. In which case, their perceived image of incompetency leads to negative role expectancy of “deviancy”, or low performance in this case.
Goal Statement
From September 2010, beginning with the first regular homework for each class, I will introduce into each formative assessment feedback given to students one of (+), (-) or (=) symbols. (+) will denote improvement from previous level of performance, (-) denotes decline from previous level of performance and (=) denotes the same level of performance as previous work.
Rational
The main premise for this paper is that of the need to prevent additional wounds and reduce existing devaluations that may be suffered by devalued groups and/or individuals. This Social Role Valorization (SRV) inspired implementation plan seeks to demonstrate a reflective approach when feedback is given on student progress.
In a school learning experience, homework tasks and short tests play an important role of formative assessment process. The approach taken, therefore, in conveying feedback to the student during such a process is critical to the student's awareness of her or his learning progress. In a recent study conducted to investigate student's reaction to their teacher's feedback Lee (2008) found that student's reaction to such a feedback not only depended on their individual characteristics or proficiency level, but also with teacher factors, such as belief, practices and their interactions with students.
Classroom setting and instructional context in which feedback is situated plays a direct role on student reaction. Although, it will be applied within the whole class setting, the SRV based change plan proposed in this paper particularly focuses on those students who are devalued or at risk of devaluation. Perceived levels of performance at school work has value implication within any classroom setting. Those who are perceived to be low performers are devalued, and the negative role expectancy that it triggers becomes potentially image-impairing scenario to the devalued party. Once the process of negative role expectancy begins to take hold, a negatively reinforcing feedback loop is sets in. This involves the devalued student missing out on remedial intervention, and therefore continue to under perform thus continue to remain devalued.
This SRV change plan is designed to do what a formative assessment feedback essentially be all about. Formative assessment feedback should enable the student to recognize how well they are managing through the learning task at hand. It should not be about, albeit inadvertently, stratifying the students into status groups, one that is is based on perceptions of competency. Students make progress at various levels of performance. By indicating to students how they have performed as it compares to their previous work does not only make them aware of their progress but also identifies their achievement regardless of the level of performance at which it occurs. For example, a student who attains 3/10 in one homework task and goes on to get 5/10 in the following one, may still be perceived as a low achiever. However, assigning a (+) to this student suggests to him/her that he/she has actually made a progress.
The Conservatism Corollary in SRV recommends that when there is a range of available measures to enhance a party's image and/or competency, to choose the more valued option. This change plan, as stated in the goal statement above is a feasible valued option that reduces existing devaluations or prevents additional ones that are based on negatively valued perceptions about low performance.
Implementation Plan
- In the very first class on September, students will conduct a 15 minute teacher lead discussion on how to interpret homework feedback symbols.
- The first regular homework's feedback will include the symbol (=) for all students, and will be treated as a base mark for comparison for the following homework.
- Each homework will be compared with the one immediately preceding it.
- After each homework task, teacher logbook will be updated with both numeric value and specific assigned symbol for progress.
- Every time after five consecutive homework sets have been completed, a teacher lead diagnostic review of progress will be carried out to determine intervention needs.
- The whole cycle will repeat in the same manner for the following set of five homeworks.
Support PlanThis change plan does not involve a great deal of additional work, but rather a shift in the method by which formative assessment feedback is conveyed to students. As this method of feedback provides an instant snapshot of student progress, it would open for greater opportunities to work with students, parents and other stake holders collaboratively to meet learning objectives. Personal organization and accessing available resources within classroom and else where will need to be planned for ahead of time.
Sharing Plan
Once this method of providing feedback is implemented and outcomes reviewed, it is intended to be shared with colleagues in the department. Typically this involves an informal discussions and exchange of ideas on issues of implementation and development of the system
References
Hendriks, J.A., Kuyper, H., Lubbers, M.J., & Van Der Werf, M., (2010). Does homework behavior mediate the relation between personality and academic performance? Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 203–208. URL: http:www.elsevier.com/locate/lindif.
Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 144–164.URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com
Parr, M.J. & Timperley, H.S. (2010). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing Writing, 15, 68–85. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com
Shirvani, H. (2009).Examining an assessment strategy on high school mathematics achievement: Daily quizzes vs. weekly tests. American Secondary Education, 38(1), 34-45.URL: http://www.ashland.edu/academics/education/ase/.
Strambler, M.J., & Weinstein, R.S. (2010). Psychological disengagement in elementary school among ethnic minority students. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,// 31, 155–165. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01933973.