Looking for Evidence of Learning Versus Completion of Work

There are a lot of students who learn what they are supposed to learn and subsequently fail a course. On the other hand, there are a lot of students who don't learn what they are supposed to learn and pass a course. 

Why?

I don't think the answer comes as a surprise to anyone. We personally say the answer all the time. What do you say when a student asks, "How do I get my grade up?" Really, think about your answer, but more importantly, think about what it means to how our classrooms function. 

What do we say when asked that question? We say, "Turn in your missing assignments."

Bingo. There it is. The reason why students can fail a course despite learning everything or pass a course despite having major learning gaps. The learning isn't the most important factor in whether or not a student is deemed ready to move on–completion of work is.

Let's hear that one more time: Learning isn't the determining factor in whether or not the majority of students are deemed ready to move onto the next course of study. 

I don't want to move past this too quickly. Really chew on that for a second. This is how the majority of our system has functioned for as long as it goes back. If you do what I tell you to, you'll be fine. What type of student, what type of person does that create? Does it create someone who thinks creatively, who problem-solves independently, or who takes risks? Not at all. It creates compliant, rule-following drones who don't know how to think for themselves. 

We already have enough of those in our society. Just hop on social media for like three seconds. They'll be right there waiting. 

So, what's the alternative to basing grades on whether or not students have completed their work?

The alternative is basing them on whether or not the student has provided evidence of their learning. Now, that might sound like I'm playing with words there, but it's actually a huge shift, one that MUST be made, especially right now as our normal school system has been so disrupted. 

What does this mean? What does it look like to evaluate students based on the evidence they give us?

1. A student who shows proficiency while doing half the assignments should have a higher grade that the student who completes all their work and shows a lack of understanding.

I mean it. Getting things done is not at all the same as learning or knowing something. The fact that the student completed all their work definitely should be celebrated somehow, but it doesn't mean they automatically deserve to move on. 

The question I always ask is, "Do I have enough evidence to determine the student's level of understanding with this learning objective?" The key is "enough" evidence–not all, not even most in some cases. If you have a reasonable amount of evidence, then you have enough to determine the student's score. And no, this is not an adjusted score because they didn't turn in all the work. Their grade is a representation of their learning. If they learned it, they learned it. Period. 

So again, the question is, "Do I have enough evidence to determine the student's level of understanding with this learning objective?"

If the answer is yes, then record the score. If the answer is no, well, let's move onto the next item. 

2. There are so many ways students can provide evidence of learning.

You know what I've been doing this week? I've been emailing students to say, "Hey! I noticed you don't have very much evidence for me regarding X standard. What do you have for me? How can you show me you know it?" Yes, I want my students to complete the assignments I made, but no, they aren't the only ways they can show me they know something. If we truly are looking for evidence of learning, we realize how many different doors we can open for students. 

And when we open that many doors...

3. A collection of a few smaller pieces of evidence are more reliable than one large piece of evidence. 

It's really dry, but one of the most valuable books on assessment that I've read is called A Handbook of Classroom Assessment by Ashton D. Trice. It goes deep into the research on reliability, accuracy, validity, etc. of assessment, and one of my big takeaways is how important it is to assess frequently and in bite-sized chunks. This gives you an opportunity to see trends, patterns, etc. Those are what you really are looking for, not just a one-time performance. The room for error in a single data point is huge. Gets lots of pieces of evidence, and you can hone in more. 

Why else does it matter that we are doing a bunch of smaller acts of evidence-gathering instead of having students do one big project, especially right now? Because, going back to the opening, we have so many students that only know how to follow along, and now, when we are expecting them to manage their time and accomplish large tasks independently, we haven't set them up for success with that. We are literally setting them up for failure with large, teacher-directed projects right now. 

What's the big takeaway?

For me, the big takeaway has always been this: Can I prove to the best of my ability that the student has learned what they need to be successful if they move on? 

From there, it doesn't matter what they've done. If the answer is yes, the answer is yes. If the answer is no, the answer is no (but NEVER should simply stop there). 

Ask yourself these questions as you wrap up a term and start the next one:

1. Have I provided students multiple opportunities through multiple methods to show me what they know?
2. Am I sure that my students have learned to a reasonable degree the learning outcomes they needed to get from the course?
3. What matters more, that they did what I told them to or that they learned what they needed to?

That last question. 

Never stop asking that last question.