Here’s an example of how one school is thinking outside the box to evaluate students’ mastery of skills & concepts without using the traditional letter-grade approach. Rather than assigning an evaluative “stamp” to a student’s learning (ie., he got a “B” on this standard, she got a “D” on that standard), they simply assign the standard.
The student learned to identify two and three digit numbers that are odd & even, for example – didn’t get a “C”, “B”, or “A” in that skill, but simply learned it.
What does the letter grade tell us, anyway? If our job is to teach students to identify those numbers, what really is there for us to know other than that they learned it or didn’t?
If there’s nothing especially helpful in knowing a student’s work is “C” level, is there anything inspiring for a student to know that?
I’m not sure about this, but I think they might have tapped into something here.
What do you think?