Transformative Principal

The Authority Tom Guskey
===

Jethro D. Jones: [00:00:00] Welcome to Transformative Principal. I'm your host, Jethro Jones. Transformative Principle is a proud member of the BE Podcast Network, and I'm gonna do something a little bit different over the next few weeks. I'm gonna share some of the other great shows that you can hear on the Be Podcast Network so that you can check 'em out.

And what I'm also gonna do is when you click the link to go to the show, it's gonna take you right to that show's page so that you can subscribe to that show specifically. I hope that you enjoyed learning about these other shows that we have on the network. We have, uh, 46, if you can believe it. Isn't that crazy?

It's awesome. We've got so many good shows on the B Podcast Network, so you can check those out as you hear them on this program. You'll be able to click the link or the cover art and it'll take you to that show's website, uh, which will be pretty [00:01:00] awesome and I'm excited to help you learn about these other great shows.

This week I'm gonna share an interview from the Authority Podcast. The Authority podcast, which I've had on this feed before, is all about interviewing amazing authors about the books that they're writing. They're the authorities that we are conversing with. Most of the time, Ross Romano, who's my partner at the B Podcast Network records these episodes and he does a fantastic job.

The one we're gonna share today is about, uh, professor Thomas Guskey's book about grading reforms and evolving. Parents and families in those grading reforms. And I think this is a really fascinating topic. I love talking and learning about grading reform because as I've said many times, grades are all just made up, which they are.

And if you don't believe me, then let's chat about it because they totally are. [00:02:00] And. Once we recognize that, then we can do something about it. Once you know that it's all just made up, then you can know or you can try to figure out at least how to play the game that you need to play to get the kind of grade that you're looking for.

And that's important because if it's a game and it is, then there are rules to the game. And knowing the rules to the game is really helpful. If you think that grades are really about what people learn and all of that, then uh, you're in for a rude awakening. 'cause that is not how we currently do it. So, uh, Tom and Ross don't necessarily share my crazy viewpoints on this, but I love this conversation.

I'd love to chat more with you about it. We will get to that interview with Tom and Ross here in just a moment. This is the Authority Podcast on the B Podcast Network. Thanks so much for listening to Transformative Principle where we have the opportunity to share this kind of [00:03:00] awesome stuff with you.

TAP 87 Tom Guskey
===

Ross Romano: [00:00:00] Welcome in everyone to the authority podcast and the be podcast network. Thanks as always for being here with us. And we hope to bring you a really. Wonderful conversation today around a topic that is of a lot of interest to me, and I'm sure it'll be of quite a bit of interest to all of you out there.

My guest today is Dr. Thomas Guske, who is Professor Emeritus in the College of Education at the University of Kentucky. Tom is a graduate at the University of Chicago's renowned Measurement Evaluation and Statistical Analysis program, began his career in education as a middle school teacher, served as an administrator in the Chicago Public Schools, and was the first director of the Center of Education.

the Improvement of Teaching and Learning National Education Research Center. He also served on the policy research team of the [00:01:00] National Commission on Teaching in America's Future and on the task force to develop the National Standards for Professional Development. He was named a fellow in the American Educational Research Association and was awarded the association's prestigious Relating Research to Practice Award.

He is the author and editor of 30 books and One of those is what we're talking about today is called Engaging Parents and Families in Grading Reforms, published by Corwin. Tom, welcome to the show.

Tom Guskey: Thanks, Ross. It's really my pleasure to be with you today.

Ross Romano: Yeah, I was, I was actually reading the Lorax to my son's preschool class this morning, so my reading voice was warmed up as I went through that intro, so I was even crisper than usual, did you notice?

Tom Guskey: I did. It's wonderful.

Ross Romano: This is a lot easier to read in some ways.

Tom Guskey: Yes.

Ross Romano: Excellent. Well, yeah, wonderful to have you here in this book [00:02:00] is you know, there presents a lot of great ideas and just wanted to start with what, what made you choose to tackle this topic in the book form and, and, you know, what work had you been doing related to it and how did you kind of decide to write this book basically?

Tom Guskey: Right. Well, it really came from two different major events. The first was the analysis that we did looking at school districts sort of throughout our country and Canada as well that had been attempting grading reforms and struggling mightily in their efforts. Oftentimes, they were really well intentioned in what they were trying to accomplish but we're meeting.

Unusual and unexpected resistance, especially from groups of parents. So we tried to understand the reasons behind that and and what issues were most important to parents. And I guess even a third step would be how to engage them in the process [00:03:00] so that they could become allies and supporters of the V.

I. P. efforts rather than opponents. The second source we drew from was another group of investigations that involved studies of survey data with different school districts where oftentimes they administered the same survey to teachers, to school leaders, to to parents and sometimes to students, and we found that there was a real disconnect between the perceptions of, of educators and perceptions of parents about the entire grading process, and even what schools were trying to do to facilitate and enhance communication.

between schools and home. And so it was those two bodies of evidence that really prompted us to enter this and really think about this in different ways, trying to understand parents perspective toward it, use the book as a way to inform school leaders about those perceptions, and provide some guidance to them as to how they might be able to [00:04:00] really engage parents in this process rather than having to you know, deal with them as opponents as they were trying to make these changes, (ad here)

Ross Romano: Excellent. And in my. Experience of it. I would probably classify grading as a whole and, you know, as a, as a concept as small C controversial. It's, it's the kind of thing, you know, there's a, I think a lot of pockets of. of groups within the education profession and within other stakeholder groups that are discontented with the, the way it's traditionally maybe applied and used, but it hasn't necessarily ever quite gotten to the, to the top of the priority sheet in the, the, the overall debates that are happening around the most critical reforms.

But of course you're, you're, Addressing that here what did the kind of start with your [00:05:00] From your perspective, what is the purpose of grading? And if you believe that the system or most, you know, leaders within the system have not typically been aligned with, with that purpose, kind of, you know, what's your perspective on, on the quote unquote traditional approach such as it's been, if, if you feel like it's in conflict with what you would propose.

Tom Guskey: right? Well, actually, the very first writing that I did on the topic of grading was a book we did with ASCD back in, oh gosh, 1996 and at that time, we I titled that book, Communicating Student Learning, trying to stress the idea that the whole purpose of grading was really a challenge in effective communication between schools and especially parents and in some [00:06:00] cases students as well.

Oftentimes I will begin presentations with any group of educators by suggesting that when you enter education there's one basic question that you need to address. And how you answer this question pretty much determines the entire scope of your career, how you go about your work, what you consider to be valuable, how you judge your effectiveness.

And the question is, is my purpose as a teacher to, to select talent or to develop talent? It's one or the other, and there's really no place in between. If your purpose is to select talent, then what you have to do is accentuate the differences between students. You have to spread them out, because if they're all clustered together on any measure of learning, it's very difficult to distinguish between them.

And often times, I think traditionally, grading has been used for that purpose, to accentuate those differences and spread them out in order to select talent. A classic example of this is the, [00:07:00] is the use of that traditional class rank that we calculate and use at the end of the senior year for many, in many of our high schools.

The problem, from a student's perspective, is this. The very best device that we have available to us as educators to spread out students, accentuates the difference between them. is poor teaching. Nothing does it better. I mean, if you want to, if you want to accentuate the differences between students, teach as poorly as you know how, because that will do it.

Some students learn regardless what we do. The vast majority of students need our help and assistance. If they don't get it, we'll spread them out. However, If your purpose is to develop talent, then you operate on a very different set of rules. Then, what you have to do is clarify very specifically what it is you want students to learn and be able to do.

I mean, the idea is that learning in any subject area is infinite. There's no, no limit to what we could learn in any academic discipline or subject area. But a curriculum, a curriculum is finite. [00:08:00] And as soon as you specify the curriculum, you, you identify within that entire domain the things we believe.

are important for all students to learn. Once we identify that curriculum, then our job becomes helping all students learn it well. We don't want to accentuate the differences between them, we want them all to learn excellently. And that poses a very different kind of challenge to grading. The grading is no longer designed to represent how students compare to each other, but rather to to compare students to that curriculum.

How well they've learned that curriculum. We move from a norm based to a criterion based system. And that's, I mean, philosophically, that's a huge transition. Traditionally, it's a huge transition. Historically, it's a huge transition. But that's what brings forth this remarkable challenge of effective communication as being the basic premise of what really good grading is about.

Ross Romano: Yeah, I think that's, I mean, obviously it's a kind of a wonderful [00:09:00] summation of it and probably leads into some of the, the reasons why it's challenging to get consensus on, on reform. What do you, what do you think? What do you think are some of the connotations around that phrase grading reform when people talk about it?

Are there certain thoughts and feelings that that brings up in folks when that conversation is initiated?

Tom Guskey: Oh yes, very definitely. In fact, we find that in all areas of education, the one where we are most bound by tradition is the area of grading. We continue to do things not because we've thought about it, not because we've investigated what works, we do it because we've always done it that way. And I don't fault anybody for this.

I mean, teachers really don't get a lot of instruction in their undergraduate preparation with regard to [00:10:00] grading. We don't talk about it very much in terms of even professional learning experiences in graduate classes. And aside from the occasional meetings, We'll have when a school district adopts a new online grading program.

We don't even talk about it much in professional learning. So what happens to most of us as teachers is we become teachers. We finally have to do it and most of us reflect back on what was done to us and then we Try in reflecting on those experiences to come up with things we think are, are fair and equitable and, and reasonable to use for our students.

We'd rather get those same practices. So we oftentimes perpetuate these long held traditions, never asking really if that's the best way we should go about it. I can recall my, my first introduction to how, how that can be almost terrifying was my very first year teaching. I, as you mentioned, I began as a middle school teacher in the middle school where I [00:11:00] taught.

It was our policy to administer final examinations to our eighth graders. We thought this was a good idea. We thought it would better prepare them for what they're going to face in high school. And I remember so distinctly the first year I'm doing this. I had prepared an exam for one of my eighth grade classes and I was standing outside my door greeting kids as they were coming to take their final exam.

Down the hall comes my superstar, Jessica. She had done really, really well over the entire year. I was so pleased at how well she had done. And as she came into the room, I said, Hi, Jess. How are you today? She said, fine, Mr. Guskey. I said, great. I said, Jess, did you study for your exam? She said, no, not really.

I was shocked. I was stunned. And I said, Jess, this is such an important part of your grade. How could you not study for your exam? And she turned to me and said, well, Mr. Guskey, I worked it out. I only need a 50. 2 for my A. I don't have to study to get a 50. 2. [00:12:00] This, this 8th grader, this 14 year old, had worked it out to the 10th decimal place, what she needed to do to get the A in my class.

And she was surprised that I didn't get it. And I thought, wow, what have I done? I mean, here, to this brilliant young woman, school was not about learning, it was about getting the grade. She had done her job and she was surprised that I didn't understand. And from that time on, I've always been sort of troubled and perplexed by these issues and concerned about how we can do it better.

Ross Romano: yeah, yeah, that's, I think that story perfectly kind of illustrates a concept that I've speculated a lot about on the show, just about the incompleteness. of what any grading system really can be, right? That it can, you know, certainly can serve an important role as far as being able to, to demonstrate students current proficiency [00:13:00] level in, in a variety of domains or subject areas.

But one when it's looked at purely quantitatively or just on paper, missing what the you know, what the actual narrative and trajectory of that student might be. A student who in math class over the four quarters goes DCBA, would have the same GPA as one who goes ABCD, and they're on completely separate tracks.

Or a student who in their four course subjects has two A's and two C's, has the same GPA as one who has four B's, and, but those are very different. But also, you know, one of the biggest things to me, relevant to that student is In the real world, right, there is no, there is no 100%. There, there's no limit to how much you [00:14:00] can know about a certain subject.

So a lot of times, right, if the students come to believe, well, you know, I'm basically guaranteed to get this correct. point. So I don't need to continue applying myself. And, and because the grade is the thing that's paramount over everything else. If that's a student, maybe that really is passionate about that subject or has great aptitude and could do great things, right?

The motivation isn't there to keep doing their best because it doesn't, you know, it doesn't matter what, if I get a 100 or a 51 on this last assessment, an A's an A. And. I guess that's part of at the high end, right, where of course I think a lot of the, a lot of the issues with the grading system on the other end of the scale are probably more commonly discussed about the fact that they are, you know, when they're ranking and sorting students and some students [00:15:00] who are being categorized as less capable, the damage that does to them, but there's, there's damage at the other end too.

So it's like, okay, it's great. It's great to know where you are right now, A, B, C, D, but that's. There's a lot of other factors to, to kind of really get a better understanding of what that, you know, what that student is currently as a learner, where they might be headed, what would best support them, and so on.

Tom Guskey: Yeah, that's absolutely true. I mean, my, my advisor in graduate school, the chair of my doctoral dissertation was Benjamin Bloom.

Ross Romano: Mm hmm.

Tom Guskey: And Bloom was perhaps best known for his work in the 1950s on developing Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives as a Cognitive Domain. But it was in the latter part of his career that I think he did the most important work.

which was where he really turned to, to learning dimensions and what it is that contributes to [00:16:00] learning of students. And he advocated, wow, in the 1960s, early 1970s, this notion that all students can learn excellently. And, and I know that that was really stunning at the time, you know, and really challenging, but, but it was his, his notion was just as I suggested before, learning in any subject area is infinite.

But a curriculum is finite. And as soon as we specify the curriculum, it becomes our job to make sure that all students learn that excellently. I mean, no one would put something in a curriculum we would expect some students not to be able to learn. It just doesn't make sense. And so, if it's a part of our curriculum, it's fine.

What we did in developing a curriculum was to indicate these are the things we believe all students should learn excellently. And our job becomes having everything possible happen in the classrooms to ensure that that takes place. Now it does, again, go against the tradition of this, this selection aspect [00:17:00] where we think that grades should follow this sort of normal curve distribution.

And that we don't want all students to learn excellently. And that's the case if you're using it for a selection process. And selection was a part of our education system for a long time. We never expected everybody to do excellently in school, but we've changed. We are no longer an industrial society.

We're an information society, and there's a critical knowledge base that is really essential for all people to have, and that's what we try to identify in our curriculum, and our job becomes what can we do instructionally to ensure that all students learn that really, really well. If all students get all A's.

Then we've done our job, but we can defend that too because the A means something. And one of the reasons for writing this book is that when we ask parents about their concerns, parents never question a school's curriculum. They never question the rigor of it. Now there are some contentious [00:18:00] elements out there today where people are questioning what elements should be a part of the curriculum, especially having to do with issues of equity and gender and racial equity and, and But the idea is that once we identify that curriculum, we want all students to learn it well.

Not just some, but all. And so, if we insist that grading represents how well they've learned it, Our goal should be to have all students get the highest grade possible.

Ross Romano: Yeah. So when it, when it comes to grading, grading practices or, you know, the reality of grades and what they are and what schools. need to be able to do to communicate that to parents and families. What are the things families want to know?

Tom Guskey: Well, it's again, families are, are steeped in these traditions. And a lot of parents understand grading based upon what they experienced in school. So, one of the questions that parents often ask of [00:19:00] teachers is, How is my kid doing compared to everybody else in the class? And it's really important that we help parents understand that we're just not thinking about it that way anymore, that we want to describe your child's progress in terms of our curriculum.

Now, we can have good and thoughtful discussions about the rigor of that curriculum. Are we expecting enough? Are we expecting the right things for your child? But, the question is That we're addressing in grading is, is really how well your child does in terms of those learning expectations for this course or this particular grade level.

How anybody else in the class does is irrelevant. You know, it doesn't have anything to do with it. And we find that when you base those grades on, on criteria, And all kind of advantages come to us. First of all, it makes the grade more meaningful because it really does give you a demonstration of what the child has learned and what they're able to do.

Second, it, it actually [00:20:00] encourages collaboration on the part of students. Because now how your classmates do has no bearing at all on what your grade is going to be. Helping out a classmate doesn't hurt your chances. In fact, it could enhance your chances for success. If I'm graded according to my state of my classmates, if I help somebody else, it hurts my chances. Plus, it also puts students and teachers on the same side, out to master or learn these things really well. So there are all these positive benefits that come from that transition, and that's what we're trying to work toward.

Ross Romano: Yeah. Are there, when it comes to the opposition to Rating Rock and particularly among parents and families and the things that they oppose, are they, are there kind of consistent reasons across the board or, or does some of it divide along certain lines? I could certainly see it, for example, [00:21:00] being like many reform opportunities in many other areas of Along kind of haves and have nots, at least as far as the incentive and the motivation for tackling it.

Okay. I could be a parent who, yeah, I believe that grading it, you know, the way it's set up isn't the greatest, but my kid has all A's. So, you know, versus if my child is struggling, I might be more motivated to say, yes, we should address this. Or I don't know, what have you found in that, in that regard.

Tom Guskey: Well, it seems that one of the major issues for conflict and opposition is that so much of what is being done with regard to grading reform today is, is being guided by a very well intentioned and extremely committed consultants who are really wanting to do a good job and are pressing for really [00:22:00] positive developments within the grading area.

But, but there Not necessarily well informed with regard to the history of this effort nor do they really understand the change process very well and as a result, they're going about the change process in ways that almost guarantee opposition will arise. For example, we find, and the advantage I have in this is that going back to my, my doctoral dissertation, I've always been interested in the aspect of change, how it occurs, what prompts it to occur, what facilitates, and what really impedes change.

And if we look at change from the perspective of teachers, and how we would change teachers through professional learning opportunities, everybody agrees that there are three major areas of change we're trying to impact. The first would be to get some change in their attitudes and beliefs. We'd like teachers to be committed to using these new strategies, or accept that all kids can learn, or believe that these kinds of strategies will be more successful.

We [00:23:00] want some change in their practices. We want to do things a little differently. We want some change in, in student learning. We want to get some results. Everybody agrees on those three areas. The question I posed some years ago was, in what order do those changes occur? I was able to find a long And distinguished history in education with regard to teacher change, that was based on the idea that the order of change was attitudes and beliefs first, leading to change in practice, resulting in change in student learning.

And I was able to trace this back to the work of early change theorists. Kurt Lewin, for example, who wrote about change in the 1940s, based a lot of his ideas on psychotherapeutic models. The problem is, almost all of our research on teacher change shows that's not the way it works. That the more typical order of change is practices first, results, student learning second, attitudes and beliefs last.

And so what [00:24:00] this means is, if you're setting out to change those attitudes and beliefs directly, you're doomed. You're going to fail because people have a whole collection of experiences behind them that is counter, that has formed their attitudes, and it's counter to what you're suggesting. It's very difficult to change attitudes and beliefs directly.

What you have to do is you have to change the experience. We find that same order of change holds with regard to students, that all these programs designed to enhance a growth mindset, to enhance persistence, perseverance, agency, efficacy, have met with modest results at best. What you need to do is you need to change the experience.

If you show kids how they can control the conditions for success in their learning, then they will believe that that control rests within them. But it's gaining that experience. The same order of change holds for parents. So, instead of trying to argue with parents about these philosophical issues with regard to grading, [00:25:00] instead of changing their attitudes and beliefs, what we have done, is the focus on changing experience. So, for example, we had a program operating here in our state where a group of school districts were struggling with grading issues, and they came to us here at the university, wanted to know if you would help. And we said, of course, so we brought everybody together in a summer institute. And in that summer institute, the teachers from these districts worked to develop a purpose statement for their grading.

They worked to develop a new framework for the report card. They went back and they acquainted the other teachers, their other colleagues, with what they had done. We didn't spend a lot of time orienting parents to this. We told them we were going to do some changes and, and sort of outline briefly for them what the changes would be.

But here's what we did. For the first two marking periods of the coming year, we sent home two report cards. We sent them the traditional one the parents were accustomed to getting which was a single grade for each subject area, and then we sent home a new report card. Our new [00:26:00] report card pulled out non achievement factors and reported them separately.

So things like homework, informative assessments, and punctuality and turning assignments were reported, they were reported separately. The achievement grades just reflect achievement. We put the teacher photographs on the report card. That wasn't our idea. We stole that from what we saw taking place in many Canadian schools.

We broke subject areas down so that instead of getting a single grade for language arts, students would get a grade for reading, writing, listening, speaking language skills. So we also had a section of, of comments where the teachers would have class comments where they'd record what the class worked on during the time and then usually a sentence about how the student had done.

So for two marking periods, Here in our state, report cards go home on a quarterly basis every nine weeks. So for half the year, parents got both report cards. At the end of the second marking period, we surveyed all the parents and we said, look, we don't have the resources to keep sending you two any longer.

We're going to send you only one [00:27:00] that you get to pick. Whichever one you want is the one we will send you. Do you know, nearly all of our parents chose a new one. They became our greatest supporters in this effort because it was better. So we focused on changing the experience, and when they saw what we were doing was actually better in terms of a communication device, they became our strongest supporters.

Ross Romano: Yeah. Yeah. And as you're talking through all that, particularly, you know, the idea, right? Yeah. Changing, changing people's minds via changing the experience versus. Telling them to change their mind, right? It of course has parallels to like political polarization, right? And, and it's making me kind of think through this idea in real time of those who are the best the, the most effective at doing that, and creating an experience versus just, you know, You know, a [00:28:00] one dimensional or a one way communication are making that experience three dimensional versus two dimensional, right?

If you and I, if You know, if, if I meet you and I know that we have some beliefs that are in opposition and I just tell you, well, here's why my way is right. You're going to say, I don't know, why should I listen to that? But if we become friends and we spend time each other and you see me as a real person and I see you as a, you know, a well rounded person and we say, well, you know, okay, I can, I'm more willing to consider that.

Seems like a reasonable person who has time. Thought through things, and I might not adopt everything they believe, but I'm much more likely to think that it comes from a well considered place. Versus just saying, well, this is a two dimensional character that obviously doesn't know anything , but with, you know, the same thing here with.

Things in education, right. Certainly with this grading reform, with a lot of [00:29:00] the I think antagonism we've seen in a lot of school districts and school board meetings and, and you know, and, and parent groups that have these antagonistic views toward educators. And the fact being, sometimes there are people that are operating, you know, in, in something other than good faith.

But sometimes what it illustrates is. Yeah, the school systems have to do a better job of that outreach and that engagement and of not just telling them, teachers are the experts or teachers really care about kids, but we need to get to know one another so you can see that in me and see me as a person who cares, not just as a title or a name on a report card, right?

Even what you said about just the pictures, something as simple as saying, I can see this person's face, I could see them as a person I might run into at the grocery store, a person in my community, now I'm seeing them as somebody [00:30:00] other than whatever their name would be and whatever that grade and that, you know, those preselected comments about what the student needs to improve or, or their intent in class or, you know, whatever it may be.

Tom Guskey: Yeah, no, that's, you make such an important point, Ross. In fact, when we've surveyed parents in follow ups to this, we asked them of all these different aspects of the report card, what do they like the most? Inevitably, they identify the photographs. I mean, it really reinforces this idea that the grading is personal.

No student ever said, the computer gave me this grade. They say, you gave me this grade. And, and the parents said exactly what you're reflecting, that they, it personalizes the report card, that they feel like they know the teachers now. And so when issues come up, they, they feel much more comfortable actually sharing issues with, with teachers about what's going on in home and what might affect students performance in [00:31:00] school to let the teachers know that there's a relationship here that is really valuable.

Thank you. Always. I would recommend to folks, if you want a classic example of this, watch the film Remember the Titans. It's a classic film from like the 1980s, 1990s, but it shows directly that you change the experience. When you change the experience, then the attitudes and beliefs will follow.

Ross Romano: Right, totally. So I want to talk through this, this purposeful, meaningful, you know, engagement piece a little bit. So the first part of that is who's, who's involved and what are their roles? So on the school side or the school districts, who are the individuals that would be involved in engaging parents and families and reforms?

And then for the parents and families, what is their relative role that, that, you know, that makes it kind of true engagement.

Tom Guskey: Mm hmm. Well, I think that It is true that in the grading process, there are a variety of different stakeholders. [00:32:00] I mean, the ones that typically come to mind are, first of all, teachers, because they are the ones that have to determine the grades. Second are parents, who are typically the recipients of those grades.

We find that students become an important stakeholder in the grading process. As grade levels go up, students become increasingly important. So that we begin at the elementary level, where the primary audience of any reported device is parents, because teachers are pretty much communicating with students on a one to one basis what they need to do in school, but as we go up in grade levels toward middle school and then especially into high school, the students become an important audience for the report card.

And so we're using this to give students feedback about how well they're doing and where their strengths lie and where they need to spend a bit more time or work a little in different ways. Until you get to my level at the university level, where we're the only audience of students. [00:33:00] always confront the problem of parents contacting us here at the university and they're saying, but you have to understand I'm paying thousands of thousands of dollars for my child's education.

Why can't you tell me their grade? You say, well, because they're 18. And, and when they turn 18, this report card is going to them. And so you need to talk to them about their grades. Even when we send notices of students that might be having difficulties, we have a system at my university to set up. Now they're within the first few weeks.

If we as a faculty find students struggling, we want to let them know that they need to be taking some steps to change what they're doing, or come to see us, talk to us, but we send those messages directly to the students not to the parents, and so they become an important part, and even when you're talking about reform, this is why I really focus in the book about how to engage them in this process.

But engage them in meaningful and thoughtful ways, so that not just as reactors to what it is we're doing, like [00:34:00] here's a policy, what do you think of it? But actually engage them as active participants in developing the policy to understand the rationale behind what those policies are and why we're going about the process.

Then you have to worry about other audiences for it, for example Potential employers who have access to the high school transcript, how this is going to affect the transcript for the college admissions process, and what admissions officers will be doing with this. And so all those need to be a part of the consideration that you pull together whenever you design the report card, recognizing who's going to be involved and what needs it has to meet. (ad here)

Ross Romano: Yeah. Yeah. All of that is is incredible. Cool. You know, including that. Understanding the kind of the how, what, and why of grading, right? Why are we doing this? How do we go about it? What is it meant to communicate? What is it not meant to communicate? But also within the context of this high pressure, high stakes you know, world [00:35:00] that we've created where you know, I've seen examples where a second grader gets a Progress report, not even a report card or a grade that says, Oh, you started, all the child is here and it's meant to be a positive.

And what the parents are fixated on is, does this go on my child's permanent record? And, and it's, you know, seems extreme. And, and yet With the competition between, you know, private schools, positioning yourself to get to the university, you know, it's not, it's not ridiculous, right? But so, you know, and that's one of the things to tackle, but what are, what do some of those conversations look like when they work to kind of change the, the perspective on going even all the way back to the beginning, right?

Of is this about selecting talent or developing [00:36:00] it and changing the perspectives of either this is something that's traditionally always been misunderstood about grading or this is something that's traditionally been done wrong and we're going to do it differently now. You know, how do we kind of communicate that and have productive conversations there?

Tom Guskey: Yeah, that's such a critical issue. In fact, we find that when we talk about grades, we Spoke before about how we need to ensure that the grades reflect learning criteria. But the challenge doesn't stop there, because there are three different types of criteria that teachers employ. And we've divided those into what we call product, process, and progress.

So product criteria are combinations of learning. You don't worry about how they got there, you worry about what they've learned and what they're able to do. Process criteria are behaviors that actually [00:37:00] enable learning rather than represent learning themselves. So for example, if you count homework, you're grading in terms of process.

If you count formative assessments, if you count class participation, all those are really process criteria. And finally, we have progress. With progress, you worry not where they are, but how far they've come. Sometimes they refer to it as improvement grading or value added grading. Now, all three are important, but all three are distinct.

What gets us into trouble is when we combine those into a single grade, because then it becomes impossible to interpret. It's just, as you said earlier, you know, if we combine those, then the highly responsible low achiever gets a grade of C, the irresponsible high achiever gets a grade of C. But they miscommunicate about both. So, the thing we're really pressing for is to really move away from a single grade to multiple grades, and report those process elements separately. Pull them out. Now, this has also become very [00:38:00] contentious in grading reform efforts across the country, because many people that are working on what they call grading for equity, are really advocating pull those things out of the achievement grade.

And then you have an achievement grade that really reflects more of what students will learn they're able to do. And they recommend pulling those out because many times these process elements are influenced by factors over which the students don't have control. And so it does become an equity issue.

Perhaps they come from a home where there's no quiet place from them for them to do the homework, or as soon as they get home, they're required to check on childcare responsibilities for younger siblings. Now, so, that's a right direction to move into. The problem is, as soon as you say to a student, Homework is not a part of your grade anymore, They're not going to do homework,

Ross Romano: Right,

Tom Guskey: and a lot of the, the equity advocates stress what we need to help students understand, this is for practice, you need to practice them to perform well.

I say, I go along with you on that, [00:39:00] but have you talked to a 14 year old? Do you know what they're like? Do you know what a 16 year old is like and what their life is like? As soon as you tell them it doesn't count, they won't do it. And so what we've been advocating now for decades is you pull out an achievement grade but report it separately on the report card and also on the transcript. It's got to be carried over both. Now I know that sounds relatively novel and it would be unusual for most schools here in the United States. What's, what's amazing though is if you, if you go to Canada, They've been doing this for decades. Canadian schools are much more progressive in terms of grading.

So, in the province of Ontario, for example, they have a whole section on the report card that deals with these non academic factors. And they report them on the report card and then on the transcript. Now, in terms of those sort of non academic things, we find that there are three major areas. [00:40:00] The first is what we call learning enablers, and they are, as I described, behaviors that enable learning but don't represent learning per se.

So, homework, formative assessments, class participation, class attendance, all that comes in to be a learning enabler. A second category are this, this broad category of social emotional learning skills. So here's where collaboration cooperation with classmates, getting along with others you know, persistence, growth mindset, all those come into play there.

And then there's a third category that we just call compliance. And compliance is, did you do what I told you you had to do? Did you behave in class? Did you turn it in on time? Now, We don't have evidence currently to indicate among those what's most important. We do know it can't do it all, and so what's necessary is for schools to sit down in a very organized way and look at these possibilities and make decisions about what they consider to be most important.

Develop rubrics for [00:41:00] those things, communicate those rubrics clearly to parents and the students, and then report those on the report card and on the transcript.

Ross Romano: Yeah. And it's strikes me as you're talking through that, that a lot of it seems to be just a more, you know, a more transparent reporting of, Data that already exists. It's not requiring teachers to, to figure out how to separate it out. That's already there. And then it's getting combined until and then, you know, there's a variety of combinations that are happening, right?

If you just think about a student's high school years of 4 years, if, you know, All the different factors that, you know, factor into their grade in one class are getting combined into one grade, and then the one grade in each class is getting combined with all the grades in every other class, and then the [00:42:00] GPA from this year is getting combined with the next year, until at the end, we just have one number that doesn't add up.

You know, doesn't tell a lot and, you know, I mean, certainly makes it harder to, yes, there's things like class rank within a school, but, but very hard to, I think, get much of a, a really meaningful representation of students preparedness for new opportunities. And when, within the context of. what school they're in versus another school.

We certainly see some instances of parents and students being motivated by things other than just the number rate. Oh, if I can go to the local public school that's totally fine, but it's not [00:43:00] highly rated and I can end up with a 3. 9 or something, or I can get into the more exclusive, you know, prestigious private school and there I'll probably end up with a 3.

3 or something like that. My grades won't be as good, it's harder to, but. But I know I'll have more opportunities coming out of there. But, but how do you know, how do we even compare? Right? And, and certainly, and as certainly as far as knowing, you know, what what are the competencies and, and skills and dispositions that we're prioritizing and, and demonstrating how some of these students are very serious about their learning and committed and they're dealing with a variety of challenges, right, within their lives. We could get a much clearer picture of that versus just the one who doesn't have all of those things going on, and it's just relatively easier to show up and do the work and end [00:44:00] up with a fine grade, and that could be a good student too, but it doesn't have, you know, it coming when everything is either or it, it really does.

You know, hamstring efforts at doing it better, right?

Tom Guskey: and you make such an important point. I know when I first saw these models in Canadian schools my question to them was, this looks great, but it looks like so much extra work. And they turned back to me and said exactly what you suggested. They said, it's easier than what you silly people do in the States.

We collect the same information as you, we just don't worry about combining it to the end. So all those arguments and all those fights you have about how you weight stuff, we don't deal with it. We keep it separate. The teachers there love it, because they find kids take these non achievement factors more seriously when they're reported separately. They also like it because if a parent questions them on an achievement grade, [00:45:00] all they do is say, well, look over here. Maybe if a child started participating more in class, or maybe if they started doing the homework more regularly, the achievement grade would go up. Parents like it because it can profile the performance of their kids in meaningful ways.

The college universities love it because, again, all those are required. And the transcripts themselves, so if you're an admissions officer, You can see a difference between the straight A student who got there through due diligence and hard work, and the straight A student who got there without even trying.

You know they they are really distinct, and then Actually, on my website, I include reports of admissions officers that have been asked specifically about this. There's a, a center at the University of Southern California that studies the college admissions process and enrollment, and their executive director, Jerome Lucida, was asked about this, and his response was, If you think about the college admissions [00:46:00] process, the only place in the admissions portfolio that admissions people have those kinds of evidence are in letters of recommendation. That if you can give this to us in a reasonable, thoughtful, easy to read format, It's really going to be welcomed. So they were very positive about this whole process overall,

Ross Romano: Yeah. Yeah. It's, it, it certainly seems like having those things separate, separated out would provide a lot more clarity and specificity to the students. student himself and their parents around, okay, what exactly needs to be done to increase some of these scores? Because I can see it right there. And decreases the perception of the subjectivity of it, right?

If I feel like I did really well in a class and I get a B and I say, why did I get a B? And they say, well, you don't really [00:47:00] participate enough in class. That just sounds totally subjective. And that, that feeds into that language and that mindset of, The teacher gave me this grade versus this is the grade I earned through the work that I did or you know that there when you can see it broken into the different domains to say there's clear and they're each important on in their own right and if you're totally not participating in this area it doesn't mean that your grade over here is invalidated, but it just means that.

We're, we're, it's all important that we're not just going to sweep some one thing under the rug because the other thing is fine and vice versa. But, but, yeah, that's certainly is kind of resonated with me. And I think you even used that phrase earlier, right? This is the grade they gave me. And it's, it does sound like, [00:48:00] okay, well.

We have these three kids and their test scores are all equal or whatever, you know, but this one raises their hand. This one doesn't, this one sleeps in class. So, or well, you know, well, they, they both sort of engage, but this one engages better, right? And and if that's not really the way it is, then we shouldn't let people believe that.

Tom Guskey: right? Well, it gets back to your point, which is also so critical, the idea of clarity and transparency. Reporting these things separately aids that process, but there need to be very clear rubrics established to what they mean, so that if a parent comes to a teacher and says you gave my kid a 2 in collaboration, how can you get a 4?

The teacher can say, this is what level four collaboration looks like. Here's an example of level four. This is what we're looking for to give level four. So it's that, that transparency and that clarity that really brings a parent into the process. Because now [00:49:00] it's not guesswork. The kids don't have to play this game of trying to figure out what the teacher thinks is important.

It's clear, it's transparent, it's obvious, it's meaningful. And to bring that to the grading process really does enhance what we're trying to use it for, which is primarily a communication tool.

Ross Romano: right. It's like if you were trying to understand your your, your net worth by just looking at the one number and saying, well, I make a good income and I feel like I've saved money. Like, why is, why is this not? Well, it's because you have this huge debt over here. So if you, you know, pay that off, then that's going to contribute those kinds of things.

And it makes it just much more practical. Thomas, we're coming to the end here. There's one final kind of questions I want to tie this together with, which is, When a, you know, when a district engages in this process, what are, what are the goals? What are they hoping the outcomes will be once it's done successfully?

Tom Guskey: Well, I always stress that effective [00:50:00] grading is much more challenging than effective communication.

Ross Romano: Mm

Tom Guskey: Documenting and quantifying achievement. I mean, computerized grading programs can do the quantifying part, but it's the communication aspect of it. And if parents and families and students don't understand the information we're communicating and how that information was derived, then we lose, you know, it doesn't serve that purpose any longer.

So, that's why one of the first steps that we always engage educators in is developing a purpose statement for grading. Be really clear about what that is, because once you get the purpose statement, then you can turn to all your policies and practices and see if they align with it. I mean, so, for example, many schools, when they develop their purpose statement, say that they want the grade to represent what students have learned and were able to do at this time.

Or they want it to represent what students have learned and were able to do as far as mastering these particular standards. Well, as [00:51:00] soon as you do that, as soon as you say you want the grade to represent their current level of achievement or what they know at this time, you got to throw out averaging.

Ross Romano: Mm hmm.

Tom Guskey: Because what it says is, we don't care where you were at the start of the marking period, we care a lot about where you are right now.

Ross Romano: Right.

Tom Guskey: And that is, that is often shocking. You know, I do that in my classes, and my students are shocked when I say to them, look, here's the deal. And Do better on the final than it did in the midterm?

I throw out the midterm. Why not? I mean, why, if you can come back and show me at the end you've got it, what does it matter that you didn't have it halfway through? But it's, it, it all begins with having that purpose statement. And so that seems to be the first necessary step. When districts contact me with their problems, the first question I always ask is, What's your purpose statement?

And if they can tell me that purpose statement, then we can reflect on these policies and practices and [00:52:00] see if they align with it. And if they don't, how can we adjust them accordingly? And here's where, where parents can become your strongest supporters, because the purpose is clear, and they understand the rationale behind policies and practices, because it's in line with their purpose.

And so that's where you gain their support and you gain their understanding, along with them being allies in the process of moving ahead to develop a more effective communication tool.

Ross Romano: Excellent. Yeah. For the communication piece, it feels like, if a parent receives a report card or any kind of communication from the school, if, if it kind of hits. three points. I'm happy to receive this. I know what it says and I know what to do with it. I know what to do with this information, right?

That's a good place to be in. And you know, the, the, the work to get there is, is a little more comprehensive, but ultimately, you know, most. Most [00:53:00] students and parents would agree that when they understand what it is, and they have clarity on it, and they're getting more transparent, more consistent information, I mean, I have a much or pleased about receiving that because I don't just have in my mind that I'm only getting bad news, or I'm only getting a bunch of stuff that It doesn't make any sense to me.

And, you know, to the point of effective grades, if the grades aren't where we want them to be, I know what I need to do to get them where I do versus just saying, well, these just aren't good. And what does that mean? So this is a, this is a, of course, there's a lot of great stuff here. The book goes into much more detail than we could discuss here.

So listeners. If you're interested, check that out. You can find the book, Engaging Parents and Families and Grading Reforms from Corwin, wherever you get your books. You can learn more at Tom's website, which is [00:54:00] tgusky. com. Tom, anything else listeners should check out? Any, any other resources or anything else you're working on?

Tom Guskey: Though I think we've covered all the bases Ross, I really appreciate it. There are On the website, if they go to resources, they can click on articles, a lot of articles, shorter articles on these topics. Also the opportunity to write a regular blog for Education Week where we cover many grading issues.

They can get access to that there as well.

Ross Romano: Excellent. Check all that out, folks. We'll put the links below to the different websites where you can find more information about the book and about other resources. If you're not already, please do also subscribe to the authority for more author interviews like this one coming your way every week.

And with that in mind, we'll see you next week. Thanks again, Tom.

Tom Guskey: Thanks Ross. My pleasure.