Formative Assessments and Assignments are defined as assessment for learning. Formative assessments and assignments provide the student, parent/guardian, and teacher diagnostic information in order to provide feedback and modify teaching and learning activities to improve student attainment of the standards of learning.
Summative Assessments and Assignments are defined as assessment of learning at the end of a predetermined learning cycle. A summative assessment's grade serves as the report of learning at that moment in time as a finality of that grading period. An assessment or assignment is summative when it is the finality of the reporting of learning. In turn, an assessment that was intended to be summative may turn into a formative assessment. For example, a student completed at a proficient level most of the formative assignments during a unit. A teacher then gives the student a final exam on that unit of learning. If the student performed poorly on the summative assessment and chooses to retake the assessment, the initial summative assessment has now turned formative (informed the student and teacher that the child has not learned the material well enough and hasn't reached proficiency yet). The student and teacher work together to identify why the student did not do well on the assessment and participate together in relearning activities. The student then retakes the assessment and improves. The retake is now the summative assessment grade because it is now the finality of learning.
Quality Assessments have the following:
Alignment: The assessment and attending tools match the standards
Rigor: Elicits the appropriate levels of reasoning
Relevance: The assessment matters to the students
Fairness and equity: Assessment is free from bias as possible and allow students full opportunities for success
Clarity: All prompts, questions, criteria, and directions are written in language that all learners will find clear, direct, understandable, and accessible.
Reliability: Questions and items are set up in a manner that will generate consistent measurement and accuracy of the results
Garnet Hillman Presentation September 25, 2020, Hutchinson High SchoolResource for review:
Classroom Assessment Principles to Support Teaching and Learning
Using Assessments to Drive Student Instruction--Garnet Hillman October 3, 2018, work with ISD 423
Assessment Development and Design--Garnet Hillman October 3, 2018, work with ISD 423
Scales and Rubrics both give information indicating progression of learning and quality. Scales use numbers (0-4) and Rubrics use descriptive words and phrases (partially meets, meets, exceeds). The primary advantage of scales and rubrics is a focus on the progression of learning rather than a checklist of tasks for a student to complete.
Learning Targets are generated in order to provide students direction and information about exactly what they should know upon completion of a lesson. Learning Targets also guide students in what they may do to show their learning and how well they have to show it.
MDE Resource on Learning Targets
An illustration for younger students to understand the concept of proficiency scales is located here.
Resources for review:
Using and Creating Rubrics for Assessment--UW Stout
Criteria for Effective Learning Targets (Bonnie Houck)
Literacy Design Collaborative (ldc.org)
Themespark (themespark.net)
Buck Institute of Education (my.pblworks.org)
National organizations
Learning Management Systems
Webb’s Depth of Knowledge
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Hess’ Cognitive Rigor Matricies
In regard to the term "homework," it may be best not to use this word in our academic vocabulary unless educators simply mean any student work "done at home/outside class," or "done independently." If students ask, "Is this homework?" a teacher may instead say, "Yes, if you do it at home or finish it in class today during independent work time." The assignment is a formative assignment for you and me to determine whether you have understood the learning target for today." Instead, begin to define all assignments or assessments as either formative or summative. If a formative assignment is completed during the scheduled class time or outside the scheduled class time, it is still a formative assignment. If a summative assignment is completed during the schedule class time or outside the schedule class time, it is still a summative assignment. The connotation "homework" may bring to students and parents is to complete the assignment for the sake of completion of an assignment. Using the terms formative and summative for any assignments professes the importance of completing the assignment for learning, not just work completion.
When determining a formative or summative "Product Grade" for any work a student completed outside the scheduled class period, the teacher is grading the academic learning the student has demonstrated by completing the assignment. When determining a formative or summative "Process Grade" for any work a student completed outside the scheduled class period, the teacher is grading the behavioral aspect of completing the work and submitting on time. The importance of students submitting work on time is so the teacher can provide feedback of learning. In addition, it is also important that students follow directions and submit work on time as asked for learning to proceed. Furthermore, it important for teachers to work collaboratively with students and parents to determine why a student may not submit work by the due date. See the section below titled "Student Accountability and Late Work" for further guidance.
Formative and Summative Assessment Retake Policy
Addendum to Policy 618
One Core Value of the Hutchinson Public School District is “All Students Learn.” Educators in the district realize that all students do not learn at the same speed nor understand all course learning expectations on the first attempt. We believe learning is a process, not something that must or should come easily. We also believe students should not have academic penalties for not learning or not meeting academic expectations of mastery on the first attempt. We value mistakes our students make as a natural and common aspect of learning. Mistakes are not something students should be afraid to make and our grading policies and procedures should not promote a mindset contrary to this belief. ISD 423 educators must provide opportunities for students to retake assessments and redo assignments to promote proficiency of learning.
Learning is not a competition or a game. If it is, then there are winners and losers in academic proficiency. We strive for academic proficiency in all course standards for all of our students. Our educational system will promote a growth mindset where students should reattempt learning and reattempt proof of learning through another assessment opportunity. If we promote this belief, we are promoting our core value of “All Students Learn.” If we do not, we then are promoting proficiency as a competition and are assuredly maintaining, if not widening, an achievement gap and an opportunity gap. As educators, we must provide feedback to students through formative assignments and provide opportunities for students to reattempt learning expectations where they have not yet reached proficiency. Students will show their proficiency on standards of learning primarily through formative and summative assessments and will be provided the opportunity to retake assessments. There are many reasons why a student may need to demonstrate proficiency again on another assessment. Best practice would be for the teacher and student to determine why the retake is necessary.
Policy Guidelines
All students may retake a summative assessment (except a final course cumulative assessment) regardless of the score outcome on any summative assessment (e.g. first summative assessment or subsequent retakes).
The better assessment of learning score will be used in determining a summative grade.
Retakes will be given all trimester except during the last five (5) days of the trimester. The course’s final cumulative assessment may not be retaken.
There must be teacher-guided remediation before a student may retake an assessment.
Procedure Guidelines
Teachers determine times and locations when students may retake assessments. Teachers may arrange for students to use times such as night school, after-school support sessions, study halls, WIN time, advisories, regular class time, Saturday School, etc., to retake an assessment.
Teachers determine the remedial work and activity a student must perform before retaking an assessment. This remedial work should not be so overwhelming as to deter a student from retaking an assessment but instead provide feedback to the student and teacher that the student is ready to show proficiency. The remedial work is to be teacher guided.
Retake procedures must be the same for teachers of the same course title.
Student behavioral expectations unrelated to performance preparation on the assessment (e.g. not tardy to class, not having a behavioral referral, ensuring a parent signs a form before a retake can be given, etc.) should not be part of the retake procedure.
Parents should be notified by some means that a student is retaking an assessment. This can be done through a campus message or a notation in the comments section in the Campus gradebook.
Resources for reading or view:
Redos and Retakes Done Right By Rick Wormeli
Redos, Retakes, and Do-Overs Part 1 By Rick Wormeli
Redos, Retakes, and Do-Overs Part 2 By Rick Wormeli
As educators, we realize that not all students learn at the same rate nor have the same skills at the same time. There are many differing reasons students may not learn at the same time and submit evidence of learning (work) at the same time. Understanding why a student did not submit evidence of learning when requested is a vital component when determining an intervention.
In addition, it is important to emphasize, directly and explicitly to students why it is important to submit work on time. The main reason is not so they learn time management. The acquisition and development of soft skills are important, and are developed over time. Perfecting time management is learned best when people have the skills and knowledge to already complete the work (like an employee who has the skills and knowledge already to complete the work on time and is to do so for the productivity of the business). We can't assume a student can do the work but is refusing in all instances. The analogy that students need to complete work on time because they are analogous to employees, leans towards a false analogy. False analogies happen when there are more differences than similarities in items of comparison.
Students are still in school to learn and reach the proficiency of skills and knowledge, employees typically already have that level of skill and knowledge. Students are not completing work for the benefit of an employer (in this analogy, the teacher) or productivity of the business (in this analogy, the school). Instead, students are learning for their own benefit and to be productive members of society. Students can not be terminated from school for not completing work, employees can from employment. Therefore, the analogy of students are like employees tends to have more differences than similarities, therefore, more of a false analogy.
Because of this, it is difficult to have as a primary focus that students need to complete work on time because it teaches time management. It may do that for some students, especially for those who have the skills and knowledge to complete the work. It is also important to turn work in on time so the teacher can manage the classroom and manage his/her own time in order for the class to move forward in learning. This could teach a skill of thought/care for others. In this case, students are aware of their work completion helps their teacher perform his/her duties most effectively. However, a primary reason we need to directly and explicitly tell students as to why they need to complete work on a date specified is so the teacher can provide feedback of learning to the student. If a student doesn't turn in work, there is no feedback that a teacher can provide.
In order to determine an intervention and reason why a student may or may not complete work is important for the learning process whether it is for the student to relearn material, retake an assessment, or to provide an intervention. Consider the chart below. A student who "can" do the work defines a student who has the skills and knowledge to begin and/or fully complete an assignment. A student who "can't" do the work means a student who does not have the skills and knowledge yet to begin and/or complete the work or may not have the conditions such as appropriate resources or conditions at home to complete the work. A student who "will" complete the work is a student who has intentions or desire to complete the work. A student who "won't" complete the work does not have intentions or desire to complete the work.
When asking a student "why" he/she did not submit work when requested in order for the teacher to provide feedback, it is important to consider which quadrant a student may reside with this assignment in order to determine what intervention may need to take place. A student who can do the work (or provide evidence of learning) but is choosing not to may need a behavioral intervention. A student who can't do the work but will may need an academic intervention. A student who can't do the work and won't do the work may need an academic and behavioral intervention. Furthermore, a student may need intervention for a number of these quadrants in the areas of social, emotional, or family support in order to be able to complete evidence of learning. We may make a false assumption that a student who does not submit evidence of learning on time is a student who can do the work but is choosing not to. Caution should be used before asking a student to "work harder" or "put in more effort." If a student doesn't produce evidence of learning (work), ask a student first how much time and effort was already put into the work. Do not assume the student hasn't been trying and that more effort or harder work is needed as a remedy. That may only apply to a student who CAN do the work, but is choosing he/she WON'T. However, if that is the case, a re-emphasis on the reason for work to be completed on time--to provide feedback of learning--may be warranted.
Will Won't
Can Can/Will Can/Won't
Can't Can't/Will Can't/Won't
On Late Work By Rick Wormeli
Teachers' use of standards-based grading by reporting a Product, Progress, and/or Process grade produces a more accurate reporting of student progress. It is important to note a product grade may indicate a student is not proficient yet on a standard, but a progress grade may reflect a student's great progress towards proficiency.
Jung (2009) further emphasized the benefit of standards-based grading for students with special needs by stating, “All families deserve an understanding of how their children are doing in school, but for families of children with disabilities, the accuracy and thoroughness of this information is exceedingly necessary” (p. 28). Moreover, Jung continued to explain the value of standards-based grades for students who have special needs as opposed to traditional grading. Letter grades can lead parents to believe either their child is doing well when receiving high grades or not making progress when receiving low grades. Letter grades do not give specific and necessary information for educational teams to make decisions for student services and interventions (p. 28-29).
In addition to providing meaningful grades specifically to students with special needs in order to make progress on IEP goals, standards-based grading also offers a means for teachers to provide meaningful and accurate grades to English Language Learners. Sampson (2009) contended, “Students who are ELL face many challenges in meeting grade-appropriate standards, including varying levels of English proficiency and poor academic preparation prior to their enrollment in U.S. schools” (p. 42). If teachers assign a traditional letter grade to an ELL student to show academic progress, that grade does not show clear information to parents and students about how well a student is achieving in school, especially a student who is still learning the English language. Sampson (2009) suggested “…the most important for ensuring fair and meaningful grades for ELL students is separate reporting of the three aspects of product, process, and progress” (p. 48). Sampson emphasized on standards-based grading to bring further clarity and recommended educators to separate student achievement of standards, effort, and progress towards standards (p. 52).
In the attached article below "Grading and Reporting in a Standards-Based Environment" Implications for Student with Special Needs," Guskey and Jung address how to report grades if modification or accommodations are made to learning expectations and/or assignments.
Grading and Reporting in a Standards-Based Environment: Implications for Students with Special Needs