![]() ![]() ![]() After 10 assignments, both systems equal the same grade, but in the short term my system is less disastrous for a student. In my system, the same 100% and a 0% is a 2.0 (C). For example, in a typical system a 100% and a 0% (a missing assignment) equals s 50% (F). Plus, an initial poor score does not doom a student. Right now, I use GPA scoring where a 4.0 is a perfect score, a 3.0 is a B, a 2.0 is a C, and so on.Īll scores in a category are equal and all of the assignments lend equal weight. Yes, I am not on the cusp of educational research, but no one has shown me our chosen Power Standards are all-encompassing and fully implemented. For one, I am not convinced we have decided on our final grade-level standards, and, for two, I am not convinced it’s the best way to go. While a few of my colleagues have moved to standards-based grading, I have refrained from fully moving in that direction. I can then move around the room helping students, and from time to time I allow students to partner up or talk with someone who edited his/her writing. Frequently, I follow the peer editing with some silent editing time where the students may use the sticky notes to mark their own papers. I monitor the process (and look for ways to improve it the next time), answer questions, keep students from chatting, and ensure everyone honors the process. This eliminates students getting overwhelmed, and, if we rotate enough times, two students may assess a piece of writing looking for the same corrections. I usually rotate 10-15 times depending on how things are going and how long the writings are.Īfter 15 minutes or so, every student has a series of positive and critical comments, and each student only had one skill or correction on which to focus. If this is a longer piece of writing, I then have the students write their names in the margin of the paper where they stopped reading, which allows a future reader to see where the editor left off.Īfter the 60 seconds everyone rotates, and we begin again. Critiques are stuck on the desk to the left and kudos are stuck to the right. Each student gets about 45 seconds to read the piece and then has 15 seconds to write one critical comment on a sticky note and one kudos (which can be about anything read) during this time. Then, I ask each student to rotate clockwise one desk, and we begin. These may include a nuanced thesis, quotation usage, citation inclusion, capitalization, comma usage, pronoun/antecedent agreements, etc. Before we begin I hand each student a card, and each card has the specific skill or correction on which to comment. I am on the inside of the circle while the students are on the outside. The students place their own writing on the desk behind which they are standing. I have the students arrange desks in a large circle, and I give each student a bunch of sticky notes. I know it’s not new, but it’s how I do this. Sometimes I observe thoughtful commentary being written on student work while at other times I watch students virtually ignore what is read with no more than a “good job” written on the paper. Peer editing is a god-send and a nightmare, and it all depends on which peers are doing the editing. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |