[This blog is part of a series that begins with this recent post about our SBL journey.]

Picture a standard that is taught throughout the year.

In October, should a student earn a “3” for meeting expectations if they are progressing successfully towards that end of the year standard even if they have not yet attained it?  Should the student only receive a “1” or “2” (for not meeting expectations or approaching expectations) throughout the year until they show complete mastery of that standard in May?  

There is no perfectly correct answer here, but our district has chosen the former option and we report out on standards based upon where we believe students should be at different points in time.  Does this introduce the opportunity for more subjectivity?  Perhaps.  Does this do more to recognize and celebrate student growth and progress?  Yes.

This asks our teachers to constantly calibrate and recalibrate, but this was also happening in our traditional system, just with less visibility.  

One of our teachers suggested an intelligent way to approach this concept.  In our former traditional system and in our current standards-based systems we often use “I Can” statements, or some close equivalent, which identify objectives we expect students to learn during the class.  These statements are often benchmarks that progress students towards the ultimate standard we are trying to reach.  If they achieve the “I Can” expectation they are meeting growth expectations at that point in time.

As we continue to learn and grow together on our SBL journey please do not hesitate to reach out to myself or any staff member at Caruso Middle School to ask questions or provide feedback.