"A number or a grade provides absolutely no information to a student beyond a vague sense that he or she has pleased or displeased the teacher, or the assumption that some other students have done better or worse"

(Brown, 2004)

 

​

Effectively, you'll be converting your language program to competency-based learning with the primary goal of unifying instructors' grading and assessments to reflect the notions of competency. If you haven't already, learn the steps instructors take to convert to competency-based learning in their classroom by clicking Instructor-Level.

​

In this step, you or your instructors will:

​

• Abandon traditional grading systems of points and weighted categories

• Convert to competency-based grading

• Consider centralizing the assessments process

• Review and update course assessments

• Create a reassessment plan (multiple opportunities)

• Consider "proficiency stages"

• Prescribe meaningful correct feedback

• Update your grading and assessment policies

​

 

 

​

​

​

​

 

The Details

​

Abandon Traditional Grading

​

• Instructors will no longer use traditional grading structures of (a) points earned over total points possible, (b) percentages, or (c) weighted categories to determine grades on any course assessments

• Traditional grading will only be used to calculate final course percentage at the end of the course

​

Convert to Competency-Based Grading

​

• Grading, which we refer to now as scoring, now involves assigning a rubric score to student performance on each student learning outcome, or SLO

• Students are required to demonstrate minimal competency on each SLO, in addition to the homework/participation expectations for a course

• The SLOs for a course consist of proficiency benchmarks and course content

• Therefore, proficiency, course content, and homework/participation are able to be isolated, assessed, and monitored separately during the course (or, proficiency can be embedded within course content)

• Homework is viewed as practice and is, therefore, considered a vehicle through which to improve on the (A) proficiency and (B) course content SLOs; homework/participation scores do not influence interpretation of proficiency and course content scores

• Students take their assessments and receive one rubric score for each assessed SLO. Depending on how many SLOs one assessment measures, students may receive multiple rubric scores on one assessment

• Scores are recorded and monitored in a competency-based gradebook (i.e. Competency Tracker Form, a learning management system, or both)

• Students can view their gradebook online at any point to see scores, read feedback, and monitor progress

• Based on their performance and assigned score, students are deemed competent, or not, on the assessed SLO(s)

• Extra credit is not recommended

• Students are required to demonstrate competency in all three areas: (A) proficiency, (B) course content, and (C) participation before the end of the course

• If a student is competent in (A) proficiency and (B) course content at the end of the course, then the (C) participation category *may* be waived, depending on program policy

• The final course grade calculation varies depending on whether a courses assigns final grades as pass/fail or letter grades 

• In a pass/fail structure, a student passes when competency in (A) proficiency and (B) course content is demonstrated by the end of the course

• In a letter grade structure, a letter grade is calculated and assigned only after students demonstrate competency in (A) proficiency and (B) course content by the end of the course; final letter grades are calculated by converting multiple rubric scores to logical percentage equivalents, considering weighted categories; this calculation is automatically using the Competency Tracker Form: Letter Grade option

​

Consider Centralizing Proficiency Assessment Process

​

• Create a committee or team of instructors to design pre-assessment activities, assessments, and re-assessments (for when students fail or are absent) for each course; hire or fund department chairs or assessment specialists

• Create rubrics to define competency

• Instructors instruct, do the pre-assessment, proctor the assessment, scores completed work using a rubric, and assigns a score to determine if the student is "competent" or not, and to what degree

• Scores on assessments are also submitted or recorded centrally so that students who drop or fail - for whatever reason - are able to bring any completed competencies with them. Since they can “keep” the progress they made, if they return, their prior competencies will transfer into the class they need to retake, reducing the number of competencies they need to demonstrate (see Organization: Co-Requisite, for more information)

• Establish an assessment review process and consider how instructors will be able to provide feedback to improve the process

​

Review and Update Assessments

​

• Distinguish between "proficiency assessments" and "performance assessments" (ACTFL, 2012, p. 5)

• Create or update assessments to be practical, valid, reliable, and authentic in a way that creates positive washback (Brown, 2004)

• Additionally, assessments may reflect application over knowledge (application subsumes knowledge), de-emphasizing the notion of traditional tests and, instead, require students to perform, create, or produce something related to real-world contexts or simulations in multi-culturally sensitive ways (Brown, 2004)

• No true-false, multiple-choice, or other discrete point question types (unless justifiable) allowing students to guess or copy-and-paste 

• Assessments are criteria-referenced and designed so that instructors can assign one rubric score for each SLO assessed

• Each assessment measures between 1-4 SLOs (recommended), depending on the reassessment plan

• Assessments measuring course content (i.e. skills or knowledge) can be formative or summative

• Instructors can create assessments that measure abilities in multiple contexts or way, allowing pathway for measurements that are engaging, positive, and motivating for students

• Formative assessments are mostly likely opportunities for corrective feedback

​

Implement a Re-assessment Plan

​

• Implement multiple opportunities via a reassessment plan

• Either instructors or program (if assessments are centralized) plan well to provide students multiple opportunities to demonstrate competencies on SLOs during the course

• An established reassessment plan and infrastructure built-in to the course or program is needed; for example, students could re-take an assessment in the Test Center, outside the instructor's office, or during class time

• Students regularly have opportunities to not only demonstrate minimum competency, but to improve their previous earned scores; learners may advance from 1 to 2, 2 to 3, 3 to 4, and 4-5

• Instructors are able to collect multiple points of data for each SLO during a course

• Depending on the SLO, instructors can consider the most recent score or the collective average of all scores to determine competency on a SLO

• Learners work on some SLOs more quickly and others with more time to ensure competency

​​

Consider Proficiency Stages

​

• Proficiency development is unlike learning conceptual knowledge in that language acquisition takes time and a student should not be penalized for the normal language acquisition process; however, progress should be made over time

• Therefore, you might consider a "Developmental Stage" (i.e. first 75% of course) and "Competency Stage" (i.e. last 25% of course) when it comes to proficiency assessment

• Before the first half, rubric scores of 1-2 might be expected; at midterm, scores of 2-3; entering into the Competency Stage, scores of 3-4; by end of course, scores of 3, 4, or 5

• Proficiency assessments are formative during the Developmental Stage and summative during the Competency Stage; there may be a midterm summative proficiency assessment

• Assessments measuring course content are not subject to the two proficiency stages

 

Provide Corrective Feedback

​

• Corrective feedback is "among the techniques which are believed to facilitate L2 development by providing learners with both positive and negative evidence" (Long, 1996)

• Corrective feedback useful for second language learners are: explicit correction, recasts, clarification requests, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, or repetition (Lighbown, Spada, 1999)

• Individualized corrective feedback accompanies each score and is entered in the gradebook for students 

• Feedback is immediate and clearly identifies specific information that will help student to improve on that SLO during the next assessment opportunity; feedback type is also considered

• Feedback may be communicated in writing or orally; both are recommended

• Instructor and student work to develop a personalized plan of action for any undeveloped SLOs

• For students who are deficient in an SLO, support is available in which students receive preparation time, suggestions, explanations, access to resources, additional instruction

• Instructor communicates plan of action with necessary support team (see Organization: Co-Requisite)

​

Update Policies

​

• Update relevant policies to reflect these standards and procedures

• Assessment and grading policies should be mandatory for all instructors to abide by

 

​

​​

​

​