Given the research I have done thus far about standards-based grading, also known as proficiency-based grading or competency-based grading, I have decided that I want to use this method in my classroom for judging student artwork when I become an art educator because of its wide range of benefits for student success. Although many educators think this two education models are the same, standards-based education is different than standards-referenced education. Standards-referenced grading refers to student’s educational goals being derived from learning standards, whereas standards-based grading concentrates on teachers see to it that their students truly learn the material that is expected from them over the course of their education. The Glossary of Education Reform states that “…standards-referenced refers to inputs (what is taught) and standards-based is focused on outputs (what is learned)”. Standards-based grading still uses learning standards to guide learning; however, they may be created at the district, or school level, as opposed to the state or national level. These two methods of educational instruction vary in assessment, curriculum, and grading which influence a student’s self-perception of academic success and mastery knowledge.
Assessment for standards-referenced education is when the expectations of students are aligned with the standards; yet do not rely on achieving standards to move forward in achieving their educational goals. For example, a student may score a 70% on a test, which means that they do not know 30% of the information. The teacher does not have a record of what specific goals were and were not met, and the student still passes the exam, although they have not achieved a reasonable degree of a skill. In standards-based education, students are aware of the specific standards in which they are expected to achieve mastery knowledge. Teachers who use standards-based grading are expected to teach students about what is expected from them. If the teacher does not make the goal clear, the student will not receive a grade for the assignment because the objective was not made clear to them. Eliminating the use of averaging grades through standard-referenced assessment and placing emphasis on student progress truly allows students to be encouraged by their own development.
This expectation of student success is communicated within the curriculum as well. For example, in standards-referenced education, students may receive a “D” in a course and be able to pass a class, although they have not achieved mastery for many of the expected academic goals. In standards-based grading, students are unable to pass a course until they are proficient in each standard. This method of curriculum is flexible which encourages reassessment where students can focus on specific areas that need improvement to achieve mastery knowledge (Stephanie Pinkin). Standards-based assessment gives students the opportunity to rework ideas and resubmit assignments which encourages metacognition and natural behavior models. Students will become intrinsically motivated by the individual progress they can make, which means they will work harder and spend time outside of class to further develop their ideas. In the art, an effective method to evaluate curriculum is through portfolio. This allows students to add and subtract pieces from their final portfolio as they continue to see their final body of work advance. Although students may add or subtract work from their final portfolio, they need to keep all of their work in a working portfolio over the course of the year to see their progress.
The largest visual difference in these two forms of education lies in grading. In standards referenced grading, students receive and average score of their knowledge, typically on a scale of 0-100. Letters often represent the value number ranges on this scale of student achievement. In standard referenced grading grades are vague, but in standards-based grading they are clear (Patricia L. Scriffiny). Grades in standards-based education are attached to written descriptive standards. This method of judging student artwork eliminates benchmarks in order to focus on student’s individual growth. Students have a clear understanding of their expectations because “The criteria used to determine what ‘meeting a standard’ means will defined in advance, often in a rubric, and teachers will evaluate learning progress and academic achievement in relation to the criteria” (The Glossary of Education Reform). A number scale ranging from 0-4 indicates the academic proficiency of each specific standard, where 3 and 4 indicate proficient levels of knowledge attained to meet the standard. Since grades are connected to specific learning descriptions, students tend to use the vocabulary within the descriptions to describe their level of success and areas that need improvement. This increases student involvement in the assessment process and increases self-efficacy. Standards-based grading also uses a second grading system which accounts for student behavior to assess correlations between student’s academic success and behavior as a means to assist students academically while considering their behaviors as a separate indicator of academic success (Susan Riley). In the art classroom, teachers must also analyze student progression at each level of artistic development such as planning, production and reflection to assess specific areas that may be enhancing or restricting a student’s ability achieve mastery.
Differentiating between standards-referenced education and standards-based education set the stage for appropriately judging student artwork in the classroom. Assessment, curriculum, and grading enforce subliminal messages to our student’s academic and behavioral success that can become toxic to their education when not implemented properly. Standards-based education expresses the complexity that should be considered to reach final conclusions and acts as the highest education model for student success. The ultimate goal of any teacher should be to help students discover how to learn best when they are not in the presence of a teacher for guidance and standards-based education promotes metacognition for success.
References:
Partnership, Great Schools. “Standards-Based Definition.” The Glossary of Education Reform, 9 Nov. 2017, www.edglossary.org/standards-based/.
Pinkin, Stephanie. “Putting Standards-Based Grading Into Action.” Teacher Teacher, 27 June 2018, www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2016/02/22/putting-standards-based-grading-into-action.html.
Riley, Susan, director. Standards Based Grading in the Arts. YouTube, EducationCloset, 22 Jan. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=4arQXl7igxA.
Scriffiny, Patricia L. “Seven Reasons for Standards-Based Grading.” Seven Reasons for Standards-Based Grading - Educational Leadership, Oct. 2008, www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/oct08/vol66/num02/Seven_Reasons_for_Standards-Based_Grading.aspx.
Additional References for Research:
Britton, K., & Johannes, J. (2003). Portfolios and a Backward Approach to Assessment. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 9(2), 70-76. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41181854
Guskey, T., & Jung, L. (2009). Grading and Reporting in a Standards-Based Environment: Implications for Students with Special Needs. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 53-62. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40071576
Muñoz, M., & Guskey, T. (2015). Standards-based grading and reporting will improve education. The Phi Delta Kappan, 96(7), 64-68. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/24375853