Comments on: Hacking the 100-point Scale – Part 4: Playing with Neural Networks

By: Evan Weinberg

Evan Weinberg — Thu, 14 Jul 2016 13:34:47 +0000

In reply to Xavier.

That’s the same thing I’m looking to do as I develop this idea. The only thing is that I need to make a tool that simplifies the process of differently sized rubrics and skill levels, as you described. You are describing the essence of standards based grading there, something I’ve used for the past three years and have grown to love.

The only thing I’d adjust is the sum. I’m not convinced yet of the benefit of combining all of those scores into one through addition – it’s a loss of information as far as I can tell. I might not be understanding what you mean though.

By: Clara Maxcy (Cleargrace)

Clara Maxcy (Cleargrace) — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:41:34 +0000

I like the idea that the grade process should be driven by the rubric. And then for into the 100 pt scale b/c of the grading systems used by our schools and put out to our parents.
If I look at your images generating the 1, 2, 3, 4: all 3s generates a 4, which appears to be equivalent to 100.
The variation in 3s would perhaps be able to be attached to points within the “A” range of most school systems (some range from 90-100; mine uses 93-100). The computation could place various combinations within the 93-99 values.
Same thing for 2, for 1.
I have kids that don’t do anything- except put their name on the paper, or attempt a few scribbles that are essentially zero (yes- I target them for intervention), so what grade do they get until I can get with them to determine level of mastery?
Sorry- going beyond the scope here. I like the process you are trying to build.

By: Xavier

Xavier — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 16:18:02 +0000

Thanks, Evan, for all these posts. These days I ponder about the assessment. My conclusion is that each activity could be assessed for different criteria/skills. For example: a word problem could have these skills: 1) understand the problem 2) plan an strategy to solve the problem 3) apply this strategy coherently 4) give correct answer and 5) interpret the results and give predictions. Each student when does an activity she gets some number: 6 for example. But what does it mean 6 in this? Which skills are missing? Which are the best abilities of her?

In my next course I will put 5 numbers in each activity and I sum the number obtained to the skills. So I will assess by skills not by “exams” or “additions of skills”. And, at the end of the course, each student will have an evolution of each skill and I will decide if she has it or not. If she would have the majority or the main skills, then she will pass. Otherwise not.

What do you think? I have thought a lot. But just because you have published all of these posts.

Thanks a lot,

By: Evan Weinberg

Evan Weinberg — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:34:32 +0000

In reply to Mr. P.

Hi Paul,

Thanks for identifying yourself – the extra detail here is useful background information. I’m curious about the grade percentages you picked for these standard levels. What did you use to generate these?

By: Mr. P

Mr. P — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:30:17 +0000

Evan, thanks for the deep thoughts in writing this up and trying to find a consistent way to have our students know where they stand. I was the “Paul” who submitted a grading scale. I attempted standards based grading and had to find a way to translate it to a 100 point scale. I only gave a student a Zero if they did not attempt the quiz/test in a meaningful way.
I originally went with a 1,2,3,4 whole number scale, trying to keep it as simple as possible, but I would find when I was grading that a student was almost there, but didn’t quite get it. So I ended up putting in half steps.
1 = 50% Made an attempt, but showing no understanding of the standard.
1.5 = 60% Little understanding, but on the way.
2 = 70% Some understanding, but missing some concepts
2.5 = 78% Almost there, but not quite.
3 = 85% Understand the concept, making little mistakes, or not giving full explanations of how you understand the concept.
3.5= 94% Full understanding, good explanations, maybe one or two small mistakes.
4 = 100% Full understanding, Full explanations, no mistakes.
Students (7th grade math) seemed to think it was clear. If I was still in a classroom I would definitely still be using this scale.

Paul