[Catalist] Rubric Grading and Decline in Student Science Understanding

[Leon Harris]

The first child on your 4th URL reminds me of many I have met over the 
years, and is destined to decline and fail in later years.
Variable understanding is much more significant than c-level 
"explanation". The first indicates a knowledge of scientific method. 
This indicates that the student's learning is transferable. The "c"s in 
the other areas indicate satisfactory fluency in English and acceptable 
work ethic.

You see a lot of them at Y8/Y9 parent teacher interviews: "Well Johnny 
did fine last year, why is he failing now. You must be a dreadful 
teacher!". Johnny was a nice kid, if a bit talkative, who bonded well 
with the social structure of his year 6 class, and, with a relatively 
charismatic teacher, made his peace to fit into the social order. Later 
at high school, with 5 other teachers (4h each per week) and mix-n-match 
classrooms, when Johnny doesn't depend on a single teacher so much for 
his social status, he loses out on the attributes he got "c"s for, and 
his underlying "D" understanding shines through. Those Johnnies are damn 
hard to re-engage. Things that have worked in the past for me are 
engaging Johnnies best friend or girlfriend, and if caught early enough 
(ie before term 2 Y8), getting his parents onside by 1) explaining the 
dynamics and 2) giving a detailed enough work pathway with some 
demonstrable product that allows them to see when Johnny starts 
deviating. (However if the folks are against homework, you have no chance).

The other concern with rubrics occurs at the top end. They become "lists 
of ways to fail". So the kid who does well on variables, hypothesis and 
explanation, but doesn't hit reflection or follow the convention on 
methods gets pulled down. I often find myself frustrated with a rubric 
because it prevents me from giving as high a mark to a kid, due to a 
rubric foot fault.

Then you have the problem where you have a clear spectrum of ability in 
your class: Ms 95%, Mr 90% (who often is a foot-faulted 98%),  86,85,85 
and 83%, and then 80%. There is a clear difference in the quality of the 
performance piece between 83% and 86% - you want to hang the 86% in the 
schools library, whereas 83% fits in to the lower parts of each rubric 
box. My experience in that case is that rubrics get subjected to 
boundary shifting then, especially if two or more of you are marking it 
trying to moderate a couple of classes, and that is enormously 
subjective. This is less necessary if you don't give out the rubric 
prior to marking, but then the whole thing just becomes an exercise in 
seeing who has the best school culture capital/ can read the teacher the 
best.

However, rubrics are one of the few push-backs that we have against the 
incessant pressure to hand back all lower school assessments. The work 
load to writing/recycling a rubric is much lower that the average 10-16h 
a completely fresh test takes me! I suspect that more rubrics and fewer 
tests will be a way that schools will go if the return of all tests (out 
to the tutorsphere) becomes mandatory.

Cheers Mike, as always, you raise interesting topics. Normally I am too 
busy to engage fully, but today I am off sick.
Leon.

(ps: electrons don't transmit flu!
pps: stay away from sick people, they are bad for your health!)



On 20/06/2018 7:15 AM, Michael McGarry wrote:
>
> *Rubric Grading and Decline in Student Science Understanding*
>
> Greetings CATALIST and ASTARIX 2.0 Subscribers,
>
> I contend that *Grading with Rubrics*has contributed to the evidenced, 
> about 10 to 20-year decline in Australian Student Understanding and 
> Participation in Science and Mathematics [*S*TE*M*] measured by 
> International Tests like TIMSS and PISA.
>
> URL 1: 
> https://www.teachermagazine.com.au/columnists/geoff-masters/20-year-slide-in-maths-and-science-learning
>
> URL 2: 
> https://rd.acer.org/article/PISA-2015-Australian-students-achievement
>
> URL 3: 
> http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2016/07/science-and-maths-in-australian-secondary-schools-datasheet/
>
> I also contend that grading with Rubrics is *unreliable*as different 
> teachers assign different grades to the same sample of student work 
> within a school, and between schools.
>
> URL 4:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p21wvti1HY8
>
> I am not professionally criticising teachers shown in the YouTube video.
>
> I also contend that teacher-time expended on grading with Rubrics 
> increases the occupational workloads of teachers. Such ‘wasted’ time 
> would be better spent on the planning and preparation of top-quality 
> lessons in science conceptual understandings, and in science process 
> skills.
>
> Uploaded to ASTARIX 2.0 e-forum is a ‘Hands-On’ activity in *STEM*.
>
> More ‘exemplar’ STEM modules at URL 5: http://moodle.asta.edu.au.
>
> With Best Wishes,
>
> Michael John McGarry
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalist mailing list
> Catalist at lists.stawa.net
> http://lists.stawa.net/mailman/listinfo/catalist_lists.stawa.net


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.stawa.net/pipermail/catalist_lists.stawa.net/attachments/20180620/de51c02a/attachment.html>