Yes, Competency-Based Education is an approach that currently emphasizes ongoing online/computer-based assessments and testing. It will be interesting to see what percentage of software-delivered lessons and testing will be done here at BCPS–and how much screen time will increase–especially in the next year or two as STAT (the laptop initiative) is set to spread to all grades.

For now, computer-embedded assessments are already being used in BCPS classrooms–for diagnostic, formative and summative (the graded kind) of assessments–a running tally of $12 million in recent contracts, and counting.

The following are mostly aligned with STAT. This information has been pulled together, and now seems a good time for parents to know what’s around–and to determine how well these offerings work so far.

One program is iReady/Curriculum Associates, which is used primarily in elementary grades. See some reviews here: https://curriculum-associates.pissedcons….

BCPS just tripled the contract to $1.2 million. Teachers I’ve talked to at BCPS are finding lots of problems, such as iReady not really differentiating learning for each student as advertised. Other feedback? Contract info here: https://www.bcps.org/apps/bcpscontracts/…

Another is Kahoot, a game-based model that ranks students against each other on screens at the front of the room, yet has no evidence of positive learning outcomes. (It also rewards speed above all.) From the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/techno…

Others are Padlet and Quizlet (formative, for feedback). And the testing–and grading–of students is already happening via screens. The computer-based testing company Escoreny, as well as Pearson software, are being used for end-of-unit tests and other graded assessments. Some info on Escoreny and its recently expanded $1.3 million contract to create constant “end-of-unit” assessments: http://escoreny.org

http://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/bcps/Board…

Overall, we can determine whether these programs seem effective, or not—and let teachers and administrators know. I’ve heard from parents and students that Pearson Realize math assessments have incorrectly graded or processed answers, lowering students’ grades. “Estimation” answers, for example, are unrealistic. The students beat the grading program to a right answer, but are marked wrong. (So teachers need to go back and regrade by hand.)

These are also costly programs, hitting multi millions in contracts and related software licensing fees and updates, records show. For example, Middlebury Interactive, the flawed Spanish language computer-based program, now has a $7 million, decade-long contract with BCPS. That’s for an in-development software program. How well is that going for elementary school students?

http://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/bcps/Board…

Even more familiar to elementary students and parents out there: DreamBox, with its required hour per week and push “reminders.” DreamBox collects “50,000 behavioral data points per hour per student.” What are behavioral data points? 50,000?? From their own website, and this Harvard Business School Open Forum:

https://openforum.hbs.org/challenge/unde…

How much is DreamBox costing us in the long run? And what about all that student data mined by a for-profit company? DreamBox Learning’s BCPS contract nearly doubled recently for just another 9 months, $636,000 to $1.2 million.

http://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/bcps/Board…

(In terms of math software, other parents probably know Ascend Math for middle schools. Has that been a help? Hope so, as it’s another million-dollar software program cost-wise—-so far.

Ascend Math, ~$480,000 expanded to $1.3 million for three more years, plus other agreements.)

http://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/bcps/Board…

In the end, there are likely benefits to some of these offerings. And the practice of skills is one. Another modality is fine, and tech can offer some new approaches for teachers to evaluate, and for students to self-assess. Yet is it worth the million of dollars? How much will this approach expand here? ( I’m not sure BCPS staff is being told what has been outlined in various district plans.)

A primary concern for me as a parent: Are our students just working out the bugs in for-profit software? Whetstones for flawed products, as happened in Detroit (a lot of similarities, including the ‘building the plane as we fly it’ weirdness) http://www.aclumich.org/article/guyette-…

One way or the other, it seems these computer-embedded tests and assessments portend more screen time for students, and less direct time with teachers.

Oh, and can we please stop flying a half-built plane with our children on board?

Some issues that led to the change, she said, dealt with the fact that grade books are now electronic, whereas before they were in hardcopy form. This led to an ability to see what others were doing which brought about a conversation regarding equitable grading practices across the district. It got the conversation started and, in Ms. Marchineck’s words, had colleagues asking questions of each other about “what’s in your grade book?” or “how do you do yours?”.

One issue that was discovered that led to a need for change dealt with some teachers giving out extra credit for students bringing in supplies (such as tissues) which creates an inequitable grading practice across the system and even between classes within the same school building.

One of the high school administrators in attendance admitted that the rollout of this grading policy change was “shaky at the beginning of the year”, and that there was “confusion about the body of evidence” as well as teachers misunderstanding the difference between a major assignment (which would not qualify for a redo) and a minor assignment (which would) and the qualifier that each student would be required to demonstrate that he or she made an effort, such as reaching out to the teacher or participating in “oral pairing”. Despite the shaky rollout, the high school administrator stated that after looking at a sampling of the grades (this first quarter compared to last year’s first quarter) that there was not a significant change, despite parents – school and systemwide – who felt the changes were significant and had been a change that created unneeded uncertainty, stress and anxiety.

A parent mentioned frustration with the rollout being implemented on a large scale, instead of as a pilot, and found it very disorienting for his family who stayed on top of each child’s grades – almost daily – throughout the entire quarter. The inaccurate and ever-changing lexicons – such as some assignments being labeled “non-graded” when they were in fact actually graded – had also added to parents’ confusion. Another question was regarding the motive of the grading policy and how it related to Competency-Based Education and STAT, whose curriculum contains (or will contain) embedded assessments and adaptive software, some of which will not allow students to ascend until the software game or questions are mastered. The school’s administrator assured parents that no such software would influence the high schools in any way.

[Some parents in BCPS elementary schools have complained that these programs are flawed and have held back GT students at lower grade levels, years lower than their actual level, due to problems with the software for STAT. Other issues have included unreasonable computer grading that does not take into account possible nuances of answers or unequal question sets.]

When asked about Competency-Based Education and how the grading policy and STAT fit in with it – and with such an emphasis on redos – Ms. Marchineck stated that she felt that Competency-Based Education was something that is far off in the future for BCPS. The school administrator, however, seemed unaware of the existence of the movement toward Competency-Based Education, altogether, and equally unaware of how it actually relates to technology and computer-centered learning and assessing.

There seem to be different definitions for both Competency-Based and Mastery-Based Education. One that is understood in the realm of education and another which deals with technology and digital curriculum. One that seems compatible with mastering comprehension holistically and another that deals with demonstrating that understanding on computers and adaptive software-guided lessons and assessments. Apples and oranges.

[The top brass at BCPS, meanwhile, have been part of discussions on the topic of Competency-Based Education across the country, and even in our own county, as what occurred at this past Fall’s Digital Promise / League of Innovative Schools event, which BCPS hosted!: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lSryCDH_fGo91qPCVFnk8mb2vY1dkgE1SmvWYP_FoSU/edit

Despite discussions around this topic of Competency-Based Education outside of our school system, it is still a concept not yet widely known here in Baltimore County among teachers, individual school administrators and parents. As with some other policy changes in BCPS, Competency-Based Education is also a movement occurring across the country, which is part of Personalized, Student-Centered Learning and the move toward increased digital curriculum, lessons, assessments and a 1:1 digital learning environment.]

With regard to the grading policy change in BCPS, the high school administrator said that part of the problem was that “unfortunately, the media got the message out that students could just keep redoing their work.” The administrator also stated that teachers lacked models that they needed, despite thorough professional development over the summer and that “once it (the grading policy) came out, we continued to build the plane as we flew it.” The administrator then went onto say that some were “not sure that it was going to fly’, but that kinks have been worked out, that professional development for the teachers will continue and that the school is confident it will work, moving forward.

Ms. Marchineck mentioned that conversations and feedback are continuing on the 60+ member committee of administrators, teachers, parents and students that was formed to help construct BCPS’s new grading policy. And at some point during the meeting, she stated that districts across the country seem to be implementing a similar grading policy. This point in particular had me leaving the meeting a little bit confused on how this particular grading policy came to be here in Baltimore County – as well as across the country – and all at around the same time.

Causey also noted that students often do better with paper and pencil quizzes and tests, which has been shown in the district and nationwide on standardized tests such as PARCC. And she added: “I have concerns about computer-embedded assessments being an increasing part of what we are doing.”

A few of the ongoing issues:

* Lines snaking around ‘learning cottages’ for high school students doing redoes, many panicked about grades as they apply to colleges.

* Students showing up at 6 a.m. to also redo assignments, depending on each teacher’s particular policy.

* Elementary school grading ‘rubrics’ — say 3 out of 4 points on an assignment — being translated by percentages into Cs, when apparently there’s another way to properly grade via rubrics. (That seems super important to clarify, as it can have a huge effect on grades).

So far, Policy 5210 is not quite hitting the goals of “equitable and accurate” in grading.

BCPS administrators and staff from the Division of Curriculum and Instruction were on hand to offer help and gather feedback. And a very thoughtful presentation and Q & A featured Christina Byers, BCPS Senior Executive Director Curriculum Operations, 443-809-3866. Here is her email: cbyers@bcps.org and Twitter feed @CbyersChristina.

Community Superintendent Dr. Penelope Martin-Knox shared her e-mail for parents with concerns at pmartin4@bcps.org

(Another presenter last night across the county was Linda A. Marchineck,
BCPS Coordinator, Accountability and School Improvement. Here is her email lmarchineck@bcps.org, and a link to other contacts in Research, Accountability, and Assessment here: https://www.bcps.org/offices/accountability_research_testing/contactus.html

Byers spoke about a primary goal of the policy: to enhance student learning, with greater opportunities for proficiency and demonstrating levels of performance. She talked about making the grading rubric ‘conversion charts’ public, so parents can see the parameters teachers are applying.

That would be helpful.

I did glean a few other tips and wanted to share, as this info should be more widely known. Each high school can fill out a “school profile” section that goes along with a student’s transcript to the colleges where they apply. That school profile could note that a new experimental grading policy was in effect at the time. Not sure of the wording, but would be good to make sure the high schools address that.

Other issues: Alas, no plans to revisit first quarter grades using parameters newly applied in the second quarter, especially for those juniors and seniors caught in the transition. The Addendum: http://towsonflyer.com/2016/11/03/clarity-bcps-new-grading-policy/

Though one parent asked, “Will the school district step forward and take responsibility for what has happened to the class of 2018?”

Beyers said that the “asterisk discussion is still going on.” She also noted that colleges should be seeing only the final grade — a culmination of all four quarters — on the transcripts. That’s somewhat reassuring, though I’m not sure how that would work for students who ended up getting Ds for the first quarter — and first time ever — because of too few grades counted or other implementation chaos.

The redo policy also needs some tinkering, Byers and other staff acknowledged. Clearer district-wide parameters that still give teachers leeway? Perhaps focusing more on the concepts of drafts, outlines, sketches and other formative, feedback-oriented approaches that don’t set up the do-redo struggle?

Lastly, the future form of assessments, within the digital initiative known as STAT, was not yet addressed, though BCPS Board of Education member Kathleen Causey inquired about online/software based assessments, especially in elementary schools: “What is most appropriate for the students? What is a developmentally appropriate way for children to show what they know?”