Search

This paper describes a major initiative in the Commonwealth of Kentucky to develop a statewide, standards-based, student report card for reporting the learning progress of individual students at all grade levels (K-12). Led by a team of researchers with expertise in grading and reporting, 36 educators from three diverse school districts created two reporting forms: one for elementary and another for secondary level. These reporting forms were piloted by 41 teachers who distributed both the new form and the traditional report card to parents/guardians during the school year. Information gathered through surveys administered to teachers, parents/guardians, and students was used to determine satisfaction with the new forms and to guide revisions. Plans are currently in place to expand applications and professional development, enhance technical support, and establish a basis for statewide implementation. (Contains 2 tables and 5 figures.)

This study explored teachers' views on several decisive issues regarding grading and reporting student learning. Data were gathered through a survey administered to 556 K-12 teachers from a medium-size, Midwest school district with a student population that closely approximates national student demographics. MANOVA analyses revealed few differences among teachers of different subject areas, but striking differences in the perceptions of elementary and secondary teachers. Elementary teachers expressed more progressive perspectives on grading, saw grades primarily as a way to communicate with parents, and more often distinguished achievement from behavior indicators in assigning grades. Secondary teachers based their grading practices on what they perceived would best prepare students for college or the work world, believed that grades helped teachers influence students' effort and behavior, and were committed to the mathematical precision of grade calculations. Possible reasons for these differences are explored and implications for reforms in grading policies and practices are discussed. (Contains 6 tables.)

Teachers at all levels of education today struggle in their efforts to assign fair, accurate, and meaningful grades to students with disabilities, especially those placed in general education classrooms. Lacking specific policies or recommendations, most teachers apply informal, individual grading adaptations for such students. Although these idiosyncratic adaptations are made to ensure continued effort and protect these students' self-images, the result is grades that communicate little about the students' actual performance or level of achievement. This article describes a 5-step process that teachers can use to provide fair and meaningful grades to students with disabilities within a standards-based classroom environment. Two additional resources for classroom use are listed. (Contains 1 figure.)

Grades, report cards, and other progress reports are important vehicles for communicating with families about their children's strengths, areas to target, and interventions that can be used at home. For families of children with disabilities, accurate information on learning progress is essential for understanding intervention effectiveness and making placement decisions. Of all required components of the Individualized Education Program, however, educators struggle most with progress monitoring and reporting. The current emphasis on standards-based grading has intensified the challenge of determining fair and accurate grades for students with disabilities. In this article, the authors present a five-step process for linking IEP goals to general curriculum standards and reporting student learning in a format that is clear and meaningful for families. (Contains 1 figure.)

This paper describes the first year evaluation of a community-wide, parent/family involvement program initiated in a midsized, Southeast community and school district. The program consists of three major components: (1) Community-Wide Efforts, (2) School-Home Communication, and (3) Home Involvement. Formative and summative evaluation data were gathered through survey forms, telephone interviews, and focus groups involving parents, school administrators, teachers and students. Results show that Community-Wide Efforts were favorably regarded by participants but led to relatively few changes in parents' levels of involvement. School administrators and teachers viewed most aspects of School-Home Communication more positively and more effective than did parents. All stakeholders considered Home Involvement important, but discrepancies were evident among teachers, parents, and students' responses. Recommendations for improving parent involvement programs are discussed.

Few educators receive any formal training in assigning marks to students' work or in grading students' performance and achievement. As a result, when required to do so, most simply reflect back on what was done to them and then, based on those experiences, try to develop policies and practices that they believe are fair, equitable, defensible, and educationally sound. Their personal experiences as students, therefore, may have significant influence on the policies and practices they choose to employ. This study explored educators' recollections of their experiences as students with grading. Data were gathered through questionnaires administered to 320 elementary, middle, and secondary school educators. Questionnaire items asked respondents to describe their most positive and most negative experiences with grading when they were students, and to explain the reasons for their feelings. Content analyses of questionnaire responses revealed that nearly 70% of educators at all levels indicated their most negative experiences occurred in college or university level classes. In the vast majority of those cases, the recalled experience related to perceptions of unfair treatment or personal bias on the part of their professors or instructors. No differences were identified based on respondents' experience, gender, or current assignment. Positive experiences were more evenly dispersed across elementary, secondary, and college level classes, showing that the high proportion of negative experiences in college or university classes was not be explained simply because they occurred most recently. Respondents' descriptions of positive experiences typically related to extremely challenging learning tasks assigned by the teacher that required exceptional effort. The teacher or professor then offered personalized guidance and assistance that resulted in a high level of performance or outstanding achievement. Although the specific influence of these experiences on educators' current grading and reporting practices remains unknown, these results offer clear insights into the factors that contribute to educators' personal perspectives on grading and reporting. In addition, they provide specific implications for reform efforts in grading policies and practices.

This study compared different stakeholders' perceptions of the validity of various indicators of student learning used to judge the quality of schools and individual student's academic performance. Data are based on questionnaire responses of 314 educators from school districts in three states that have implemented comprehensive statewide assessment programs that include high-stakes consequences both for educators and for students. MANOVA results showed significant differences between school administrators and teachers, with administrators favoring the validity and trustworthiness of nationally-normed standardized assessments, state assessments, and district assessments, while teachers favored classroom observations, classroom assessments, homework completion and quality, class participation, and behavior. The implications of these differences for reform initiatives are discussed, particularly with regard to teachers' motivation to improve results.

Although much recent attention has focused on gaps in the achievement of different groups of students, the problem has been with us for decades. This paper presents the problem as one of reducing variation in students' achievement, and reviews the work of renowned educator Benjamin Bloom on this problem. Bloom argued that to reduce variation in students' achievement and to have all students learn well, we must increase variation in instructional approaches and learning time. The key element in this effort is well constructed, formative classroom assessments. Bloom outlined a specific strategy for using formative classroom assessments to guide teachers in differentiating their instruction and labeled it "mastery learning." This paper describes Bloom's work, presents the essential elements of mastery learning, explains common misinterpretations, and describes the results of research on its effects. (Contains 4 figures.)

This study investigated the stability of students' grades in high school courses during the academic year. Records of over 8000 high school students from five large Midwest high schools were analyzed to determine the relationship between the first achievement grade students were assigned during an academic term and their final course grades. Results showed that grades were remarkably stable, with correlations between first achievement grades and final course grades generally ranging between +.4 and +.7. Correlations were typically larger for 9th and 10th grade courses than 11th and 12th grade courses. Differences among departments (subject areas) were statistically significant, but differences among schools were not. Differences related to student gender, grade level, ethnicity, and poverty level also were statistically significant but modest in magnitude. The implications of such stability and its probable influence on student motivation are discussed.

In recent years, different researchers and research agencies, teacher associations, national education organizations, and the U.S. Department of Education have published lists of the characteristics of "effective professional development." This study analyzed 13 of the better known of these lists to determine if they were derived through similar procedures, based on similar frames of reference, and included the same elements or characteristics. Results showed that individual characteristics vary widely in their frequency of inclusion on the lists and that no characteristic is consistently named in all lists. In addition, research evidence supporting most of the identified characteristics is inconsistent and often contradictory. Implications for improving the quality and effectiveness of professional development are discussed. (Contains 56 references.) (Author/SM)

This study investigated possible differences in the perceptions of three stakeholder groups (teachers, students, and parents) regarding grading and grade reporting. Data were gathered through questionnaires completed by 215 teachers in 2 states, 4,265 elementary school, middle school, and high school students, and 944 parents. Different forms were developed for the different groups, but the items were nearly identical. Teachers at the elementary level tended to believe that an ideal distribution of grades would have most students receiving the highest grades possible. The ideal distribution patterns of teachers at other levels and most students were similar, but parents had more mixed ratings, with parents of elementary school students generally perceiving that students would attain high grades, and those of older students expecting a more even distribution of grades across grade categories. Overall, as grade level progressed, teachers, parents, and students all tended to rank communicating with parents as a less important purpose of grading and providing feedback to students as a more important purpose. All groups recommended the inclusion of multiple sources of information in determining grades, but parents seemed less well informed about the evidence to be considered in determining grades. (Contains 4 tables and 13 references.) (SLD)

This paper describes a theoretical model of the multidimensional relationship between professional development activities for educators and improvements in student learning. It also examines the validity and appropriateness of the model through five in-depth case studies of school-based professional development programs. The model presented extends the work of current researchers and is more comprehensive than other recent models. The premise of the model is that the quality of professional development is influenced by many factors, with the most important being grouped into three categories: content characteristics, process variables, and context characteristics. Quality of professional development, the central component of the model, is linked to teachers' knowledge and practices, administrators' knowledge and practices, and parents' knowledge and practices. Student learning outcomes result from these interactions. The case studies used to test the model came from the National Staff Development Councils Model School Program. Three implications are drawn from the model. First, the model shows that the relationship between professional development and improvements in student learning is complex but not chaotic or random. Second, the model offers guidance to those interested in determining what makes professional development effective. Third, the model illustrates the importance of a systemic approach to professional development and the need to view professional development reform from a systems perspective. (Contains 1 figure and 23 references.) (SLD)

Few individuals in the history of education have had greater impact on education policy and practice than Benjamin S. Bloom. During a career that spanned more than 5 decades, his research and writing guided the development of many educational programs and provided insights into the untapped potential of educators to have all students learn well. Bloom's contributions to education began during his years in the Office of the Board of Examiners at the University of Chicago, where he worked from 1940 to 1959. Much of his work at this time focused on the relationships among methods of instruction, educational outcomes, and measurement of those outcomes. This work led to his first book in 1950 and eventually to the work for which he is best known, the "Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain." In 1959 Bloom spent a year at the Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University. This year marked a shift in high research and writing, as Bloom began to concentrate on problems in learning, rather than problems in testing, measurement, and evaluation. Bloom's most notable contribution to teaching and learning was his work in developing the theory and practice of mastery learning. Mastery learning was developed as a way for teachers to provide higher quality and more appropriate instruction for their students. Mastery learning depends on feedback, correctives, and enrichments, combined with another essential element of mastery learning, congruence among instructional components. Mastery learning is not an educational panacea, but careful attention to the essential elements of mastery learning will allow educators at all levels to make great strides toward the goal of all children learning excellently. (Contains 44 references.) (SLD)

Basic questions about the evaluation of professional development efforts are explored, including the nature and purposes of evaluation, the critical levels of professional development evaluation, and the difference between evidence and proof in evaluation. Evaluation, which is defined as the systematic investigation of merit or worth, can be characterized as planning, formative, or summative evaluation. All three types of evaluation involve the collection and analysis of data. In evaluating professional development, there are five critical levels of information to consider. These are: (1) participants' reactions; (2) participants' learning; (3) organization support and change; (4) participants' use of new knowledge and skills; and (5) student learning outcomes. In the real-world setting of professional development evaluation, it is nearly impossible to obtain proof of the impact of the effort, but it is possible to obtain good evidence. A list of guidelines is included to help improve the quality of professional development evaluations. (Contains 1 figure and 25 references.) (SLD)

Research on the concept of teacher efficacy spans over 20 years, but much remains to be learned. Although precise definitions of the concept have always been problematic, in general, teacher efficacy is defined as teacher's belief or conviction that they can influence how well students learn (T. Guskey and P. Passaro, 1994). Efforts to clarify the definition of teacher efficacy are sometimes clouded by similar or related constructs. It is suggested that the only major difference between perceptions of efficacy and responsibility is in the tense of the items used in the measure, with efficacy representing projected potency and responsibility being an attribute directed toward the past. From the earliest research, teacher efficacy has been considered to have two dimensions, sometimes suggested to be outcome expectations and efficacy expectations. Others have interpreted the dimensions as personal efficacy and teaching efficacy. Guskey and Passaro (1994) have found the two dimensions to be: internal, the extent that teachers believe that they, and other teachers, have the influence and impact on student learning; and external, a dimension that measures teachers' perceptions of the influence and control of factors outside the classroom. This distinction is not the same as locus of control, because these two factors operate fairly independently. Researchers have identified other factors that may be equally powerful and important, and these remain to be studied in detail. (Contains 16 references.) (SLD)

Multiage/multiability grouping is when more than one grade level of students is grouped in a classroom. This report summarizes the research on multiage/multiability grouping in the primary grades. The paper, which is intended for use in Kentucky's educational system, focuses on quantitatively based comparative research syntheses. The text describes the Primary Program and looks at factors that may explain improved learning and test results. It asks numerous questions: "What are the problems in implementing the multi-age/multi-grade grouping attribute of the Primary Program?""Does the multi-age requirement limit implementation of other critical attributes of the Primary Program?""Are there inconsistencies between the Primary Program and other components of the Kentucky Education Reform Act?""What are the findings from research studies on multiage/multigrade grouping?" and "What effect has Kentucky's Primary Program had on the number of children labeled 'exceptional' in grade 4?" Each question is followed by a summary of research addressing that question. The findings indicate that learning is enhanced not by how schools group students for instruction, but by what they do within those groups. (RJM)

The relationship between selected contextual and socioeconomic variables and school-level results from a statewide performance-based student assessment system was studied using the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS). KIRIS uses portfolios of student work, scores from on-demand assessments, and student performance on performance events in the areas of mathematics, science, social studies, arts and humanities, practical living, and vocational skills. Multiple regression analyses were conducted using data gathered over a 3-year period (1993-1995) from 49 schools in one school district. Results show that a single socioeconomic variable, the percent of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch benefits, explains a large portion of the variance in scores at all school levels. Contextual or socioeconomic indicators were not, however, predictive of improvements in scores from year to year. Although socioeconomic indicators explain much of the variation in elementary, middle, and high schools' levels of achievement, they do not explain the variation in score improvements made by schools in this district. Possible explanations for these results and school level differences are discussed, along with implications for performance-based student assessment systems. (Contains 5 tables and 21 reference.) (Author/SLD)

This paper describes an interim evaluation of the Block Schedule Restructuring Program at Governor Thomas Johnson High School in Frederick, Maryland. The program began in the 1992-93 school year, when the school changed from seven 48-minute class periods per day to a block schedule format of four 90-minute class periods. Classes are conducted on a semester basis, with each semester lasting 18 weeks (90 instructional days). The evaluation is based on the first year and a half of program implementation. Student performance on various achievement tests and final course grades have not varied much, but the scores of African American students on the Maryland Functional Tests and scores on Advanced Placement Tests have markedly improved. Student daily attendance and dropout have not changed, but there has been a dramatic reduction in student behavior problems. Perceptions of both students and faculty members regarding the block schedule program are overwhelmingly positive, with nearly 70% of students and 95% of faculty indicating they prefer the new 4-period day. A few procedural problems need to be addressed and additional staff development is needed, but the program appears quite successful to date. Nine tables present study findings. (Author/SLD)

Questions frequently arise about the origins of outcome-based education and mastery learning, their similarities and differences, their theoretical and practical links, and evidence about their effects on student learning. Historical and theoretical perspectives show a clear distinction between outcome-based education and mastery learning. Outcome-based education is principally a curriculum reform model with definite implications for the assessment of student learning. Mastery learning, while known by various names and in various forms, is principally an instructional strategy labeled by B. S. Bloom, and designed to help teachers enhance the quality of their teaching procedures so that more of their students learn excellently. Outcome-based education and mastery learning address different educational concerns, but their potential if used in combination is clear. The combination of a thoughtful curriculum and effective instructional practices makes true improvement in learning possible. One figure illustrates the discussion. (Contains 27 references.) (SLD)