Assessment at Glasgow

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a rubric? How do teachers use it to assess student work? How does that assessment translate into a grade?

Rubrics are grids that define in advance “what good looks like.” They describe various levels of achievement for specific assessment tasks against individual performance criteria or learning objectives.  Rubrics help to make assessment precise. Teachers use rubrics to help students understand what’s expected, how they can do well, and how they can develop the skill of assessing their own work. In the Middle Years Program, each subject has its own criteria, each of which has its own possible levels of achievement. Teachers examine students’ achievement over time to arrive at an overall level that describes performance against each criterion.

There are so many strange numbers- why is that? What do they mean? Why don’t tests, projects, and other assessment tasks get letter grades? What is an “achievement level” anyway?

Each MYP subject has been developed by skilled and experienced educators who carefully consider the unique categories of knowledge, understanding, skills, and attitudes students need to be successful in the their study of specific disciplines. These subject area requirements are divided into between 3 and 6 learning objectives/ assessment criteria, each of which has been “weighted” in terms of its overall importance by the assigned maximum levels of achievement. A “level of achievement” is another way of describing what students understand and are able to do which is assigned a numerical symbol (mark) based on how well students demonstrate mastery of the various components of an assessment task.
Rather than looking for and grading students’ combined achievement on each task, we look at a variety of tasks to establish over time patterns and growth in performance against each MYP objective.

How are teachers determining quarterly grades? Can you explain the idea of a “criterion level total” and “grade boundary?” When can I expect reports?

Each quarter, teachers review students’ achievement toward the subject area’s key objectives by examining all the relevant tasks that provide information about student performance.  For each objective, teachers determine a single achievement level that best fits each student’s cumulative progress. These achievement levels are combined to calculate a “criterion level total” that represents each student’s overall progress. We use pre-determined grade level boundaries to establish an appropriate letter grade that describes students’ general accomplishment in each subject for the quarter.

Whenever teachers make summative judgments about student work, they send home a report that describes the assessment task and the student’s level of achievement. At the end of each quarter, teachers will send home a report that summarizes how these levels of achievement are used to determine students’ overall progress (grade). Twice each year teachers will report on students’ development with respect to MYP approaches to learning (second and third quarter interims).

Is it fair to determine grades with so few assignments?

In general, teachers make assessments of learning at points in which they reasonably expect that students have mastered targeted standards/objectives, benchmarks, and indicators. These assessments usually fall at the end of identified units of instruction. Teachers choose as many tasks as necessary for students to demonstrate their accomplishments. Throughout the unit, students have many opportunities to practice new skills and consolidate new understandings through formative assessments like class work and homework, quizzes, and informal checks. However, in general, we aim for fewer, weightier tasks that offer students opportunities to apply knowledge in complex, real-world situations. Not only is this approach more realistic and more challenging, it helps to focus instruction and build students’ self-confidence and skill as learners.

Fairfax County policy has always held that formative assessments should not carry undue weight in determinations of students’ academic achievement.

It all seems so subjective. Wouldn’t a number between 1 and 100 be more precise and reliable?

All educational assessment is subject and depends on reliable, informed judgments made by subjective human beings. Traditional systems often hide that subjectivity behind numbers that imply objective precision. However, behind even the most standardized selected-response assessments (widely tested assessments containing only questions that have a single right answer which students select from a range of choices, such as, for instance, most Virginia Standards of Learning tests), teachers or testing companies have made hundreds of subjective decisions about content, language, and scoring. MYP assessment aims to acknowledge the subjectivity of assessment and deal with it in a public forum with principles and practices that are subject to discussion and review by parents, students, administrators, and collaborative teams of teachers.

Are other schools taking this approach? What about the continuation of the MYP at Glasgow’s partner schools (Stuart HS and Annandale HS)?

Every authorized IB World School is responsible for developing school wide assessment policies that align with the assessment philosophy of the IB and respect local practices. Many public schools struggle to make the necessary changes in teaching practices that challenge many long-held assumptions in the United States about how teachers determine grades. Glasgow is widely recognized as a leader in this work, and each school’s timetable for implementation is unique.

Over time, these policies will be implemented in appropriate ways at our partner schools. This year, for example, all 10th grade students at Stuart are being assessed at least twice on the basis of tasks aligned with MYP requirements and reported using MYP criteria. We will be using these marks to determine eligibility for FCPS recognition of students’ work in the MYP.

Is it true that IB people in Switzerland are forcing these changes?

IB World Schools comprise a voluntary alliance that agrees to pursue excellence in education through a rigorous, international approach designed to meet individual students’ developmental needs. We are accountable to standards and practices for philosophy, organization and administration, curriculum and assessment, and students. We have broad discretion in our implementation of the program and are committed to a cycle of improvement that continually improves our standard of practice. Any change we pursue is carefully considered in the context of our mission as a Fairfax County School and never violates that public trust.

Why doesn’t homework count for a grade? Why would any kid do homework if that’s the case?

We teach students that everything counts. Teachers record information about the completion and accuracy of many assignments. We are helping students understand that the natural consequence for failing to complete assigned work is lower achievement on assessments of learning (summative assessments). We are holding students personally and administratively responsible for completing their work. We are committed to assigning homework that provides students essential opportunities to practice, take risks, and make mistakes while they learn.

What sense is there in letting students re-take tests or re-submit substandard assignments? Won’t this lead to grade inflation? Aren’t we lowering standards? What will happen when they get to high school and college?

At Glasgow, one of our core beliefs is that there should be no penalty for learning. We are committed to each student’s mastery of essential academic goals, and we are not concerned with ranking any student’s achievement in comparison with others. This understanding is in line with the School Board’s directive to develop Personal Learning Plans for each student. Everyone deserves a second chance. Especially in middle school, students must build confidence and a sense of self-efficacy (the idea that hard work leads to academic progress--that smart is something that you work to get, not something that you are) that’s necessary for success in high school, college, and beyond.

We believe that fair is not necessarily the same as equal, and we believe all students can succeed. We hold all students to appropriately high standards, and provide the support they need to achieve them.

What! Students at Glasgow can’t fail? How can that be?

No one is served when students fail. The personal, institutional, and societal consequences of failure are so serious that we institute many levels of intervention—including disciplinary action—to prevent students from failing. We promise to do everything possible to ensure that students succeed in accomplishing AT LEAST the minimum required assessment tasks and learning objectives necessary for advancing successfully to the next level of study.

Doesn’t all this go against FCPS policy? What about the new grading scale?

Glasgow’s assessment changes comply fully with FCPS grading and reporting guidelines of middle and high school students. Teachers are not required to use numerical grades. Our thinking is very much in line with the School Board’s strategic governance goals for academic achievement and accountability. We have adopted school wide understanding about assessment and uniform assessment practices so that we can work together, support student learning, and communicate consistently with parents.

Why is it that even my child’s teacher seems confused?

These changes challenge many traditional, ineffective, and unhealthy assessment practices. They are unfamiliar, they require learning new systems, and they force us to re-think the many highly idiosyncratic practices (some better and some worse) that individual teachers have devised over the years. Sometimes they challenge cherished individual practices, and sometimes they confront core beliefs we hold about teaching and learning. Change is always difficult, and teachers arrive at the task with varying degrees of experience and understanding. This year we are learning together and helping each other refine our understanding.

What’s wrong with the way we’ve always done it before? Everyone already understands points and percentages.

Educators widely agree that our assessment system is broken, no longer serving its purpose in a highly diverse, fast-moving, post-industrial global society. Our research found an emerging consensus on what works and what’s best for students.  Just because a system is widely understood does not make it good; just because it’s easier to leave that system in place doesn’t mean it’s right to do so. Glasgow’s faculty and staff work every day to build a better and more peaceful world through education, and we believe that together we can use more effective assessment, grading, and reporting practices to meet the needs of our community, our parents, our teachers, and the students who will inherit that world.

How can I make sure the school has accurate contact information so that I receive student progress reports electronically?

Teachers send subject area reports using IGPro, a school-based software solution for grading and reporting. This system draws from each student's official record in the school's student information system. To make sure that your electronic (and traditional) contact information is correct, you can contact Clara Campos (clara.campos@fcps.edu) or our Student Services office (703.813.8740). Parents with access to Wecare@school through FCPS 24/7 (Blackboard) can confirm or change contact information there.