This blog is part of the TxLx Reimagining our Assessment Practices series. Teachers and administrators throughout Texas participated in our Design Sessions to identify challenges and highlight promising practices. The goal of the Texas Learning Exchange (TxLx) project is to generate iterative resources focused on equity, access and continuity of instruction.
A couple of years ago, all of the leaders in my organization were asked to complete an online personality quiz. Upon completion, we received a detailed report of our individual strengths. From there, our Human Resources team gathered all of us into a large hotel banquet room, and we attended a mandatory session called “Strengths-Based Leadership.” This theory of organizational leadership posits that leaders that focus their energy on leveraging and amplifying their team members’ respective strengths will yield faster results, higher levels of productivity, and more positive outcomes than leaders that focus heavily on remediating and improving weaknesses.
The concept of strengths-based coaching is not in and of itself remarkable – many companies across many industries ascribe to it. What is worth noting, however, is that this hotel conference room happened to be full of PK-12 school leaders and district administrators. And while I furiously jotted down notes in my conference-branded notebook, the irony was not lost on me that the philosophy of measuring and evaluating adult performance seemed so at odds with the practices we were using to evaluate children within our own schools.
While debates around assessment and grading often seem fraught, in my personal experience, there exist surprisingly high levels of consensus among practitioners regarding what is NOT working. Here are a few examples:
With these challenges in mind, I find that many educators have an aligned vision for their ideal state. Educators and practitioners know there are many better, fairer, and more equitable ways to assess and grade our students. Where these dialogues hit a wall and inevitably break down is when the discussion veers towards the context of a larger “system.” When it comes to assessment and grading, public schools are beholden to external interests including state Boards of Education and other state education agencies, the federal government, college admissions officers, the local school board, and frustrated parents on teacher conference night. Students are frustrated, too, as teachers report seeing test anxiety emerging as early as kindergarten. We have still not conquered the myth that without “good grades”, students face imminent doom in their chances of ever achieving post-secondary success or thriving in our capitalistic society. Not forgetting what we learned throughout the pandemic, we can change this.
If we were to glean a silver lining out of the COVID 19 pandemic, it would be the realization that even some of our most seemingly entrenched systems are perhaps more flexible than we have been led to believe. For example, in the case of higher education, we have observed a recent trend of college admissions offices forgoing traditional application requirements in favor of “test-optional” and “holistic review” selection policies. While these admissions policies are not yet widespread (mostly occurring in pockets of selective liberal arts colleges), they are signs of positive, if only incremental progress.
While we should celebrate any progress, we also know that systemic education reform and transformation often occurs at an infuriatingly glacial pace. While we wait for the rest of the various “systems” to catch up, there are several bold, attainable moves that teachers and administrators have within their locus of control to make meaningful improvements for students NOW:
The cumulative effects of poor assessment and grading practices can have long-term, irreversible impacts on a student’s outcomes and abilities to succeed. As we all collectively scramble to respond to the lingering effects of COVID-19, we should also capitalize on the opportunity to re-think and rebuild some of our outdated and ineffective practices. Rather than aiming for a nostalgic sense of “normalcy,” we can aspire for policies and systems that are better, fairer, and more equitable.
Stay in-the-know with innovations in learning by signing up for the weekly Smart Update. This post includes mentions of a Getting Smart partner. For a full list of partners, affiliate organizations and all other disclosures, please see our Partner page.