Below are comments from parents on the Standards Based Learning/Grading program surveys.
Is there anything else you would like us to know regarding the pilot?
1. I want to emphasize that the COMMUNICATION to the parents was not good at
all. I blame Dr. Fredisdorf for the lack of communicating this new standards
based program to parents. Nov 19, 2010 7:38 PM
2. I really do believe that the concept is one that has the potential to be successful.
However, I also feel that there was not nearly enough research, site based
visits/discussions with other schools currently using the system, or expectations
communicated to parents done to adequately implement the system. Furthermore
I am very afraid if the ecpectation to implement the system distrcit wide next year
still exists. Given the current status of the program, I feel that line of thinking
needs to be reviewed. Nov 19, 2010 7:48 PM
3. My child was very stressed during this time. She did not like the retakes. She
was unusually worried about these tests. Nov 19, 2010 8:46 PM
4. There are no "do overs" in life and I think this is a dangerous lesson we are
teaching our children. My child knew that they could retake the test so didn't put
as much effort into the first taking. This is not a lesson I want my child to learn.
Nov 19, 2010 10:18 PM
5. # 6 & 9 are tricky. I love giving my child access to opportunties. However in the
real world, there are multiple opportunities to re-do test/evaluations. I think we
need to prepare our children for the real world. Also, my child is equally motivated
to learn either in the standards based approach or traditional. I stongly agree that
Standard based does not prepare them for the real world. Nov 19, 2010 11:10 PM
6. na Nov 20, 2010 1:49 AM
7. I understand the concept, but the grading sheets that were sent home were very
confusing. Nov 20, 2010 2:09 AM
8. The standards based unit was not encouraging to my child. The belief that
students cannot know sophisticated ideas because the definition is not completely
reproduced on the assessment was frustrating to my child. Many times very
intelligent individuals "know" without knowing why - in an intuitive sense. This
intuitive part of learning or knowing is sabotaged by the standards based method.
There are adequate indicators already in place within the ITBS and other
assessments our children take for the teachers to know how well the standards
are being learned. My child did not feel the learning of definition for the sake of
definitions was important and therefore did not try as hard as in the past. Nov 20, 2010 3:17 AM
9. I have no idea if my child was more or less motivated by this program, he did not
express anything about it to us at all. Nov 20, 2010 7:11 AM
10. Once they "get it"...the subject becomes,unfortuately--boring. It was hard for me
to keep her interested with other features of simple machines. Any suggestions
on how do you address that? Nov 20, 2010 11:21 AM
11. tHE GRADING WAS EXPLAINED POORLY NOT ONLY TO THE PARENTS BUT
TO THE STUDENTS AS WELL. LESS EMPHASIS SHOULD BE PUT ON
GRADES AND MORE ON LEARNING.STUDENTS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO
RETAKE TESTS NOR SHOULD THIS BE OFFERRED TO THEM. Nov 20, 2010 2:24 PM
12. I really don't understand the grading system and am not sure the multiple retakes
are advantageous. Nov 20, 2010 2:35 PM
13. We were pleased to be a part of the standards-based approach. Our child
understood what was expected to learn for each test. We like the level type
questions being explained to our child. We realize this takes alot of teacher time
to prepare and grade but this was a good program for our child. Nov 20, 2010 4:07 PM
14. A primary concern I have is that by implementing this program, it would seem as if
we are missing time to be teaching new concepts. If we weren't using this system
to "retest" the kids, that time could be better spent on new material. How would
the time that is spent retaking the tests have been spent if we were teaching it in a
regular manner? This also begs the question of how do we justify letting kids who
have received a 4.0 on the initial test sit there "reading" while others are taking the
retest. While independent reading is wonderful, there are already PLENTY (too
many, in my opinion) of opportunities for quiet reading. It doesn't seem fair to
make some children wait for others to catch up. I have no problem inherently with
the idea of helping kids really understand concepts that they may not have initially
learned...however, this should take place outside of regular classroom time and
should not entirely replace an initial grade, but perhaps could serve as extra credit
or something similar.
Secondly, there seems to be a lack of uniformity in the program as it stands. I'd
like much more specific information about how this will play out in subjects like
Language Arts and Math. I'm having difficulty envisioning a rollout in these two.
Finally, I find the entire program so bureaucratically top-heavy. You need not look
further than the science folder to see this. The paperwork, jargon and process
alone is off-putting, and more irritatingly, the kids are subjected to it. Why should
our children be taking time incorporating "KWL," "first attempt," and other
administrative lingo into their collective vocabulary when they could be doing
something like furthering their knowledge of concepts or conducting experiments.
It's my preference that we stick with current grading practices, but if we are
already married to this program (which is extremely unfortunate), then at a
minimum, the project needs to be rolled out at a much, much slower pace. An
autumn start date seems foolhardy when there are so many glitches in the current
pilot. Nov 20, 2010 7:53 PM
15. Were not happy with the standard base approach at this time I don't know
enough. I'm worried this is putting many kids on hold on new material they should
be learning, due to the retakes. So at this time, I hope the school will discontinue
this pilot program. Nov 20, 2010 10:00 PM
16. I felt like much of the teaching was done by the parents. It was like we had turned
in to the teachers. Okay for a short bit, and okay for enhancing the students
learning. But these were complex concepts and as non-teachers, we as parents
aren't equipped to provide the 'basics' of these topics for our kids. Also,
enhancement opportunities such as certain websites weren't provided to kids until
much later. This would have made it easier for us to work with the kids at home.
All in all, I felt that although parents should share in the teaching of our kids, I feel
like we were doing all/most of the teaching. Nov 21, 2010 2:57 PM
17. the numerical system was confusing because often a number was given without a
reference to what the max possible score was. a 2 may be good if out of 2 , but
really bad if out of 4. i'm still not really sure how my son did. he was even offered
retakes when he got the max score. why? overall, the concept makes sense, but
the results reporting is confusing. Nov 21, 2010 10:39 PM
18. I have several issues with the SB approach. First off, the "goal" of the program
seems to be almost absent as it has not yet been clearly articulated in open
meetings. If the goal is to increase test scores, I would like to know who decided
test scores were not high enough. Second, the logistics of this project are
absolutely ridiculous. Not only does the teacher have to grade and regrade and
distribute and redistribute, but students who perform extremely well are required
to get 100% on assessments. If a student can write a paragraph that ultimately
describes a concept, why is one true/false question holding him or her back with
scores of a two. In addition, those who chose not to or do not have to retake, sit
and WASTE time while others are retesting. Third, the inconsistencies from test
to test and class to class are unbearable. My child missed one t/f on one test and
got a 2 because it was a “two” question. However, on the next test, with the same
performance, my child received a 3 because the teacher felt as though it did not
represent two-quality work. Fourth, perfection is not reality. Students are already
being pressured at the middle school to take SATs, Explore, etc. Adding the
issue that your “should” retake until a 4 is earned is not realistic. Why would we
as the responsible parents want to add more pressure to these students. Those
students who struggle with school and don’t like it, are only going to not like it
more because they are going to continually see a low/retakeable grade. Fifth,
research has not been done on the school district’s end. I cannot believe
research is not readily available for parents to become better educated on the
SBA. I also have not heard evidence that a site visit was done to further support
this move either. And finally, your initial letter claimed this to be a “pilot.” A pilot is
a study, or test. You did not use a test group in this case. Nor did you wait to see
if this worked prior to suggesting that grades 3-8 would move in this direction for
every subject. I’m concerned that the Board of Education let this slip by in a
flippant manner. I am also concerned that the administrators/curriculum experts
are not following through on research of educational trends and rather making a
quick move to make a statement. This move has definitely put the district under
a microscope; a well deserved position for your schools. Nov 22, 2010 4:08 AM
19. I was not able to attend the session about this and am not sure that my child
showed me the data folder every time it came home. I am not that familiar with
the process but I suppose it is partly my fault. Nov 22, 2010 4:19 AM
20. #2 was hard to answer, because we looked at the folder every time it came home.
We know what is in it. However, ultimately, interpretation was difficult for us. For
example, how are data points that are worth a maximum of 2 averaged into the
final grade? If a child receives a 1.5 on an item with a maximum score of 2, does
this still mean that the child does not understand the material? The grading
system seems too black-and-white below 3, and rife with subjectivity between 3
and 4. There has to be room for a child to make a mistake.
#9. My child was actually de-motivated by the process as my child knew that,
should he get one item on the level 2 section wrong, he would have to retake the
WHOLE instrument over again. If our goal is really to get the kids to learn the
material, it would make more sense for the child to re-work the items missed,
instead of retaking the whole test.
#10. The whole communication process was lacking. There were not enough
parents involved in the decision to implement this sweeping change. There is not
enough data to prove that this is the best and only way to lift the children's test
scores. More information about why SBG is needed, where it came from, etc. was
needed - and is still needed. It seems only to be a "repackaged" way to teach to
the test. When I did talk with my child's teacher, they were unable to provide
enough information. The pilot should have been set up with measurable
outcomes, and with a control group.
In general, the folder is FAR too complex for younger children to understand. A
simplified folder - functioning more like a syllabus - would be more effective for
younger children. The idea that the kids will be spending time on paperwork while
they "take responsibility for their own learning" is pointless bureaucracy when this
time could be spent with teachers teaching curriculum. MAJOR simplification for
grades K - 5 or 6 is needed.
The KWL is an interesting tool that could really be used to a positive end but
SHOULD NOT BE GRADED. The idea of penalizing a child with a grade for failing
to know anything PRIOR to being taught is outrageous.
As with the complex folder being simplified for younger children, level four
questions should also not be graded until grades 5 or 6. Each child should be able
to do their best on a level four question. The responses could be listed and
discussed in class. This training should be made a part of the curriculum until
grade 5 or 6. There are some children who will naturally be able to produce level
four answers; there are more that need to be taught how the expectations have
changed, and how to produce level four responses. Again, the grading between 3
and 4 is wildly subjective and WAY too vulnerable to being wielded as a tool
against children a teacher may not think much of. Again, as the
curriculum/syllabus folder might become more complex as a child ages, the level
four expectations should become higher as a child ages.
As mentioned above, it seems that this model of SBG is simply another way to
teach to the test. Simply teaching children how to answer level four questions is
not enough to help our kids compete on the global stage. It has been said that
SBG helps teachers identify what kids do or do not know. It has also been said
that this model will allow teachers to teach kids who are visual, kinesthetic,
auditory, etc learners. Shouldn't teachers have already been able to know where a
child was "missing the boat" with any given unit of study? Shouldn't teachers have
already been addressing the different ways children learn?
It has been said that parents have expressed concern that they weren't getting
enough information on what made up their child's grades. A syllabus process with
data points outlined AND WHAT EACH DATA POINT IS WORTH would address
these concerns.
Finally, when a child receives less than a 2, which is considered mastery of the Nov 22, 2010 4:51 AM
21. I was unable to attend the meeting, so I do not understand the program
completely. I read some general information about it that another parent passed
onto me. I think it is a good idea, but I am unclear exactly how we are
implementing it. I believe it should have been discussed at Curriculium Night
and/or there should have been multiple presentations of the program. I have seen
far less important issues at the school get more coverage. One example of good
communication from our district was about 8 years ago, the second or third grade
teachers invited the parents to come into the classroom one day to show how they
taught LA. We helpled our children complete their paragraph for the day. It was
extremely helpful to me as a parent and helpled me support the program at home.
Maybe some meetings like this could be used to teach us how the program is
being used. I have read about the use of the approach and think it is a good idea.
It is possible that my husband signed my son's forms, but I can honestly say I only
saw it once. This may be a function of our family dynamics more than the school
implementation. However, I have asked my son on several occassions about the
program and he finds it a bit difficult to explain what's going on in class. He
doesn't seem to mind it, but I can't get him to really talk about it either. Its seems
to be a bit elusive to him as well. However, I feel that the success of the program
will rely heavily on the communication aspect of it, especially because it is clearly
different from the way we all went to school so, our normal parental advise on
studying or working through the material might be completely wrong and counter
productive. It seems to me what parents' are most afraid of is the unknown and
the unknown is how to get an A. That is understandable in the highly competitive
world and school district we live in and parents' concerns should be answered.
People worry about A's when we should be concerned about how much our
children are learning, especially in 3rd and 4th grade, however there is also the
self image aspect to consider and the pygmalion effect that information can have
on a child. Telling a child, he is average influences that student's self image and
can eventually become his self image. One concern I have is if students are A
students now, are told they are just right and that is perceived as a C student,
some very negative feelings may arise for individual students. I know we
implemented a similiar rating system at work several years ago, and human
nature resists it. We are must tell employees they either exceed,consistently
meet expectation, Meets mostly or does not meet expectaions but, almost
everyone translates it back to an A,B,C,D rating system. Managers give almost
all CMs and are very reluctant to give honest feeback to employees. Employees
get very defensive about anything less that a CM and do not see it as very
encouraging, usually. Just a little food for thought on the implementation of new
rating systems. I also, feel that the name of the program is quite intimidating.
There is nothing warm and fuzzy about a Standards Approach. I think the district
should continue to investigate the use of it, but should definately communicate
more to the parents about how it is specifically being implemented in our schools.
In my mind there is nothing wrong with mastering the information or developing
the minds to go beyond the classroom, so we should definately keep our minds
open to it. Hope this helps. Nov 22, 2010 5:34 PM
22. Don't feel that study materials were given to the child so they can learn at home. It
seems like the child has to already know the information or struggle with poor
grades until they learn the material. No book or homework ever comes home and
it seems as if there is no way to prepare for the upcoming test. I would like to be
able to stay involved with my childs education and help at home and this program
does not seem to support this. Nov 22, 2010 5:58 PM
23. My child never showed us a folder along the way. We have a good student so we
were okay with this pilot. Nov 23, 2010 5:25 PM
24. The pilot suffered from poor communication and poor execution. Goals were not
clearly stated nor was success criteria. In addition, the district did not clearly state
the reason for changing to the grading system.
My child had to be reminded that they needed to study and excel on the test the
first time. Their belief was that they had multiple attempts to do well, consequently
they did not have to try hard the first time. In addition kids who do well have to
wait for the rest of the class to catch up. It seems like the program to geared to
the lowest common denominator ... making every kid average and not rewarding
strong performance. It seems to follow the trend of trophies and snacks for every
child mentality that has permeated all children's activities. Nov 24, 2010 1:08 AM
25. this is very de-motivating for the kids. They know they can re-take and therefore
don't have to try hard. Why are we changing? Nov 24, 2010 1:39 AM
26. I felt it just fell short of what the parent meeting said it would be. I'm not
completely against it, but I never knew what they were supposed to study. There
was not enough info. sent home to study. The teacher told me they were
supposed to get the info in the classroom. But isn't there supposed to be some
info. to study at home. It was all too confusing. I think it has a long, long way to go
before implementing it across the board. I hope my kids are in high school by
then!! And if the teacher has moved on to another area of study, and your child
has not mastered the other area, then they still don't know the info. to be a 3.0 or
a 4.0. I also think the teachers need a litle more training on it so they can answer
your questions. Nov 27, 2010 5:24 PM
27. Had conflicts with every parent meeting you offered, including the one on the
30th. We are interested but life is so crazy with a very busy family as much
advance warning you could give to parent presentations would be helpful so it can
make it on the calendar. Nov 29, 2010 2:28 PM
28. This is a terrible pilot, helping to push children through the system! Nov 29, 2010 4:10 PM
29. I do not like this program. I we do not try this out. Nov 29, 2010 4:11 PM
30. I like how the information that the kids learned was broken down. I think smaller
doses of information is easier to learn at this age. Nov 29, 2010 4:26 PM
31. I hope that this is not implemented in our school. Nov 30, 2010 3:37 PM
32. What was presented at the parent meeting and what actually took place were two
completely different things. I never once saw opportunities for singing songs,
doing puzzles or telling stories in order to show proficiency as stated at the
meeting would happen. Do you even have puzzles for every concept that is
taught?
This program needs a lot of work before it should be sent out school wide. First of
all, how can we as parents expect to know what it is all about if the administration
and teachers don't have a good grasp of it?
I have no problem with re-takes during class time but it should be optional not
mandatory. My child was given a re-take notice on a test that had not even been
graded! My child was also given a re-take notice on a test that earned a 3.5. That
is crazy. Also, for the kids that don't need a re-take, they should not be made to sit
in the classroom reading a science book. How are they expected to extend their
learning by just sitting there? Give them something fun to do to spark their
interest! Hands on activities work best!
Also, the grading was rather subjective. It is totally ridiculous that a student cannot
get a grade higher than a D if they missed a single level two question. The level
threes and fours were correct, but one level two error and a D was given. That is
terrible!
Also, if a child needs a re-take, why do they have to re-take the entire test? Why
not just the parts they missed? If you want the kids to have multiple chances to
show knowledge in a particular area, that is one thing, but re-taking the entire test
causes multiple stresses in these kids.
The communication in regard to this pilot was the worst I have seen in the district
lately. Parents were told one thing, and another was done. For instance, at the
middle school parents were told the Spanish pilot would last all year and then
suddenly it ended after the first trimester. This program should have been
communicated to every grade level in the school because sooner or later, it will
affect those families as well.
Why haven't parents been given any research studies or a list of schools that are
currently using the program so we can evaluate it ourselves? What does LT think
of this kind of learning?
Why does our school ask for parental input and then do nothing with it? It is like
talking to a wall. Everything is pre-determined and you make parents go through
the motions as if they might actually have some say and it never happens that
way. It is a done deal long before any meeting or discussion took place. You just
want the parents to think they have a say or a chance to give input.
The best meeting on this program was the private parent meeting. It was a
chance to learn without all the empty promises and misinformation. It was a
chance to discuss, understand and compare notes. It was an opportunity to freely
express our feelings without being noted.
Also, far too much time is being spent on writing assessments and outcomes. The
teachers could not be more stressed out over this program and that stress trickles
down to the kids.
Finally, the program has potential, but not until all the glitches are fixed, it is
communicated openly and honestly and everyone from teachers to parents to kids
have a thorough understanding of what it is all about. Nov 30, 2010 4:56 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment