Embedded Files
Considerations for Promotion, Graduation, and Transcripts
Considerations for Promotion, Graduation, and Transcripts
One more consideration for a system when designing a Competency-Based assessment, grading and reporting structure is around promotion, graduation and transcript needs. Some systems do not need to consider this as part of their design. This is true for most elementary and even middle school systems, if they do not have any official transcript needs. However, it’s still beneficial to review the options within this section to determine if any of the approaches will support your model, especially when it comes to cohorting learners. Although this decision is listed here as the last in a series of design questions, it is something that can be visited throughout the design process and can have real implications for the design and structure of the system itself.
There are two questions to address at this point in the design process:
Do you want to translate proficiency level scores on the Progress Report to a letter grade for a traditional transcript?
How might your new assessment, grading and reporting structure support you in thinking differently about cohorting learners and promotion or graduation requirements?
For the first question regarding traditional letter grades, many systems will find that, due to limitations with policies and higher education requirements, they want to translate proficiency level scores (such as “developing” or “3”) on outcomes to traditional letter grades, perhaps at the course or subject level. Explore a variety of approaches to doing that here. Other systems may be ready to take the bold step of creating alternative crediting tools and transcripts that can be used by learners to enter their next phase in life, whether that be the workforce of higher education. Explore a variety of bold approaches to alternative transcripts here.
The second question, around cohorting and promotion, requires that a system rethink what a grade level or course credit means. It also brings up the question, why do all 8 year olds move onto 3rd grade when we know that they are all on individual paths to proficiency in a variety of different outcomes? You can read more about these questions and different approaches to answering them here.
Determine an Approach for Translating Proficiency Scores to Letter Grades
Determine an Approach for Translating Proficiency Scores to Letter Grades
Most secondary schools in the United States, beholden to either local or state policy, and often the higher education system, will find that they need to provide letter grades on a traditional transcript for learners. There are two ways to approach creating a letter grade or traditional grade in a Standards- or Competency-Based system:
1:1 Conversion - a proficiency level score is converted directly to a letter grade using a conversion chart
Logic Model - a proficiency level score is converted to a letter grade using a variety of logic rules
Batting Average Approach - a grade is determined based on the percentage of the expected standards or competencies that have been met
In a 1:1 conversion, each proficiency level score is equated to a letter grade or percentage range. At Waukesha East, which you can read more about here, a grade conversion chart is provided to translate a proficiency level score on the continua of competencies for each subject area back to a traditional letter grade.
At Edge, in Liberty Public Schools, learners receive scores on course-specific outcomes using a 6-level descriptive proficiency scale which is translated to a final grade in the course using the following conversion chart:
For those using a Standards-Based approach of a 1-4 scale, Marzano Academies (n.d.) provides this conversion chart as a recommended approach to translating scores to grades:
Other systems leveraging a Standards-Based approach have taken a more nuanced path to translation, called a Logic Model. Yukon Schools (n.d.) has this logic model:
This logic rule approach is advocated for by Ken O’Connor in his book A Repair Kit for Grading citing work from Guskey that Standards- or Competency-Based systems that use fewer proficiency levels (such as a 1-4 system) cannot accurately be converted in a 1:1 way to percentages (O’Conner, 2022).
One key factor to consider when reviewing these conversion tables and logic models is the equity of providing an A on anything that is “exceeding expectations.” As discussed in the section on defining levels of proficiency, researchers caution against unclear definitions of what that level means. As a society, expectations are that learners reach an A in their course work and this is especially important when applying for higher education. We want to keep expectations of learners high while also ensuring we are providing adequate opportunities and equitable access to reaching those high expectations. If a system holds an A as a level that only a few learners are possibly going to attain, a system is not truly Competency-Based. In a Competency-Based paradigm, the belief is that all learners are capable of achieving the highest levels and we need to support them in getting there, not hold them back and use an A or the highest level of proficiency to distinguish some learners above others.
The batting average approach, described by Mathew Riggan of the Workshop Schoo as, “your grade is simply the percentage of work in your portfolio that meets expectations” (2022). Synergy @Mineola High School also takes this batting average approach. They have aligned their proficiency scales to points, with the highest score being “applying,” or “meeting the standard.” They use what they call “rolling grades” in that learners accumulate points by working their way, at their own pace, through the proficiency scales with the goal of reaching the applying level on all required proficiency scales within a course for a 100%. You can read more about their approach here.
Alternative Transcripts and Credentials
Alternative Transcripts and Credentials
Many systems have started to look at different approaches altogether, toward transcripts and credentials that do not require any translation to a letter or percentage grade. These unique and trailblazing approaches are models that higher education is paying attention to and, for the most part, embracing as what’s possible in the future around transcripts, crediting and credentialing.
In their groundbreaking report on Next-Generation Badging, Danielle Allen, David Kidd and Ariana Zetlin from Harvard University wrote about the challenges of the traditional transcript:
“The transcripts that nearly all U.S. high school graduates send off to potential employers or admissions offices inform high stakes decisions. Transcripts therefore need to present students’ relevant achievements and competencies succinctly, accurately, and credibly, and this must be true for all types of learners. Currently, most transcripts do none of these things very well. They have four fundamental weaknesses: (1) they are grounded on a problematic theory of learning, which fails to spur pedagogic innovation and obscures inequities in educational opportunities; (2) they lack transparency; (3) they poorly capture out of school learning and interdisciplinary competencies; and (4) they fail to accommodate flexible learning pathways” (Allen, et. al., 2022, p. 7).
The models shared below are all attempts by systems to address these weaknesses and provide a more robust and learner-centered transcript option.
An Aurora Institute report, calls these next generation credentials and learner records. The report describes these as:
“Next gen credentials and learner records communicate the continuous nature of learning knowledge and skills and enable learners to gain recognition and validation of learning they do anywhere and anytime.
Next gen credentials are the competency-based diplomas and certifications of the future. They capture whether a student has demonstrated proficiency on a holistic set of competencies that are communicated and reported on a learner record. Leading to next gen credentials, learner records officially document the knowledge, skills, and competencies a student has demonstrated both inside and outside of the classroom. Learner records follow students as they learn, including through competency-based pathways of their choosing. Learner records are typically stored digitally so students can always access them” (Patrick et al., 2023).
The International Big Picture Learning Credential (IBPLC)
The IBPLC is a credential that can supplement or take the place of a traditional transcript, providing the reader with a learner photo, a learner video statement, a learner-curated digital portfolio, an advisor statement that serves as a powerful letter of recommendation, a flower graphic that shows the learner Progression Level on each Learning Goal at the time the Credential is issued and a brief list of student-identified achievements and real-world experiences.
This innovative approach to credentialing was designed in partnership with researchers at the University of Melbourne and the Big Picture Learning Australia and the US. The credential is accompanied by clearly defined Learning Progressions that holistically and in detail describe each of the 5 Progression Levels in what is called a “Frame.”
Educators who issue the credentials are provided a robust training program that supports the validity of the assessment process. Big Picture Australia expects to issue 507 credentials in the 2024 school year. 34.5% of graduates are expected to pursue positions in the workforce using their credential. 48.7% of graduates are expected to use their credentials to access post-secondary education. Currently, 17 Universities in Australia, representing 40% of academic post-secondary institutions in the country, accept the IBPLC for admissions consideration with no additional transcript or test scores. You can learn more about this credential here.
This image is from Big Picture Education Australia.
This image is an example Mastery Transcript provided by Liberty Academy.
Mastery Transcript and Learner Record
Mastery Transcript Consortium (n.d.) has created the Mastery Transcript and Learner Record to support their member schools with tools to report credits on competencies, instead of a transcript based on seat time. Hundreds of higher education institutions have accepted the Mastery Transcript, although many systems still use it as a supplement to their traditional transcript (Mastery Transcript Consortium, 2024). The Mastery Transcript includes a student statement, information about the school, a graphic demonstrating what competency credits have been earned, a list of courses taken and a portfolio of student uploaded evidence of learning associated with the competencies.
You can read about two different approaches to using the Mastery Transcript in the Liberty Academy and Clark Street Community School profiles.
One Stone's Growth Transcript
In another approach, One Stone has created the Growth Transcript, which shows learners’ proficiency levels on 28 Bold Learning Objectives (BLOB skills for short). In addition, they provide a credit transcript that offers a list of the credits learners have earned through a variety of learning experiences over their high school career. Each learning experience at One Stone has a defined list of requirements. Learners earn credits based on completing the requirements while also receiving feedback and proficiency levels on the 28 BLOB skills. It was important to One Stone as they designed the Growth Framework and Growth Transcript to acknowledge learners’ proficiency on essential knowledge and skills honestly using the Growth Transcript, while also crediting them for accomplishments in their learning experiences with the Credit Transcript, separating competency from crediting. Hundreds of higher education institutions have accepted the Growth Transcript in place of a traditional transcript (n.d. - b). You can read more about how Bostonia Global, a K-12 Charter School, leverages the One Stone Growth Transcript here.
All of these innovative and bold approaches to a new kind of transcript put learners at the center and make learning and assessment more focused on the learner as a growing human being with a variety of strengths and individuality. Higher education is paying attention, as evidenced by the growing number of institutions accepting these alternative transcripts, but also in their own projects to develop more holistic learner records for their own students (NASPA, 2019).
Alternative Ways to Cohort and “Promote” Learners
Alternative Ways to Cohort and “Promote” Learners
Traditional grading systems are organized around the concept of learners cohorted by age for 1 year called grade levels, promoted to the next grade level after completing a certain number of days in school. At the secondary level there is an additional requirement that learners complete each course, made up of a specific number of days according to the Carnegie Unit, at a certain grade (typically a D or above) in order to move onto the next grade level. Courses are therefore also defined by grade levels. In this world, subjects are taught in silos with teachers specializing in subject areas. In a competency-based paradigm, interdisciplinary and authentic learning are a key component where learners build content-area knowledge and skills alongside more interdisciplinary skills in a variety of learning experiences. In addition, it is recognized that each learner develops on their own developmental timeline, with some exhibiting strengths in some areas while still working on other areas. Systems have begun to rethink the cohorting of learners in 1 year grade levels and thinking about their promotion to the next grade level strictly by time. For example, Northern Cass School District is rethinking grade levels by grouping learners by proficiency levels (Berdick, 2018).
Promotion Based on Readiness and Self-Advocacy
Red Bridge, a K-8 micro-school takes a unique approach to cohorting learners not strictly by age but instead by developmental level, or what they call Autonomy Level. This is similar to many Montessori programs that cohort learners in 2-3 year grade bands. However, Red Bridge, has taken the approach further by designing a system for promoting learners based on individual readiness and self-advocacy. They have mapped out what they call Work Habits at each Autonomy level, and when a learner feels they are ready to demonstrate proficiency of each skill, they work with their educator over a series of weeks to document how they are consistently demonstrating these habits of being a self-driven learner. For example, in Autonomy Level 1, learners must demonstrate that they are able to “Follow a learning plan for the day and monitor progress.” This is broken down into action items that learners track, with their guide, on paper.
After a few weeks of documenting progress, learners in collaboration with their guide will be promoted to the next Autonomy Level if they have successfully demonstrated proficiency with the majority of the habits of their Autonomy Level. This generally happens each Winter and Spring of the school year. Many learners at Red Bridge are ready for promotion after a full 2 years at an Autonomy Level, but some are ready earlier while others need more time. It is important to note that Autonomy Level groupings are decoupled from academic groups. Learners have agency over their Autonomy Level groups as mentioned above, but educators place learners in the reading, writing, and math content groups based on assessment data, so that each learner is in the right group for each aspect of their learning - work habits, and content proficiency. This flexible structure supports learners in being in the best grouping for them based on their work habit skills. Thanks to their flexible schedule, learners are still able to access the academic skills and content they need regardless of their Autonomy Level grouping.
Rethinking Grade Levels in High School
At Waukesha East, who have adapted Building 21’s Portfolio model, they organize learning levels into “Backpacks.” Each Backpack needs to be “filled up” with a predetermined amount of competency-specific evidence before moving onto the next Backpack. Instead of learners filling up their grade year with time and completion, they are filling up a new unit of measurement, a Backpack, with evidence of learning at a certain level. When they complete a Backpack in a specific subject area, they move onto the next Backpack. This process is not based on time and a different timeline can be in play for each subject, supporting the personalization of developmental levels for different skills. This model is explained in more detail in their profile, found here.
Page updated
Report abuse