Standards Based Grading and

Growth Mindset: Growing

Student Accountability
Andi Steaban
Waterford
Teacher, Instructional Coach

Opinionnaire

Driving Question: How does standards based

grading help to develop a growth mindset and
increase student accountability?
Results of Opinionnaire
How did this all start?
Growth Mindset
Inquiry Project
Trying It For Real
Construction Zones and Open Roads
Data Folders
Feedback
One Year Later

Growth Mindset

o
o
o
o
o

First WEEK
Start with why
Involve families
How the brain works
Revisit often

Worries + Frustrations + Insights + Struggles =

Wonderings about how I can improve my teaching

How might I modify my grading system to more accurately reflect student learning?
Will standards based grading allow for a more accurate representation of student
learning?
How can I change the way assessments are graded to get more information about what
students know?
How can observational checklists be used to keep track of student mastery of skills?

How can I encourage students to take more responsibility for their learning?

Design of Inquiry: Procedure

5th Hour Math 8 Class:
Co-taught
Eight students with learning disabilities in
math
Five ELL students

Third Marking Period Ten Weeks

Two Units
Bivariate Data
Shapes of Numbers

Design of Inquiry: Data Collection

Parallel Gradebooks
Standards
1: Beginning

Self Assessments

4: Mastery

Conferences

Common Assessments Modified

Open Ended First
Multiple Choice

Conversion
to Letter
Grade

Letter
Grade

Percent Range Description

Standards
Progress

89.1-100

Mastery

78.1-89

Proficient

68.1-78

Approaching 2
Proficient

58.1-68

Beginning

Note: In order to have a more precise comparison, I used the correlations shown on the
above scale between an 93% and an average rating of 4 along with the correlation
between 63% and an average rating of 1 as data points to create the equation y = 0.1x
5.3, where y is the average standards rating that correlates to a percent, x. Please note that
the district scale includes plus and minus versions of each grade within each range as well.

Marking Period 3 Unit Standards

Bivariate Data

Shapes of Numbers

8.SP.1

8.NS.1

8.SP.2

8.SP.3

8.SP.4

Construct and interpret scatter plots for bivariate

measurement data to investigate patterns of association
between two quantities. Describe patterns such as
clustering, outliers, positive or negative association, linear
association, and nonlinear association.
Know that straight lines are widely used to model
relationships between two quantitative variables. For
scatter plots that suggest a linear association, informally fit
a straight line, and informally assess the model fit by
judging the closeness of the data points to the line.
Use the equation of a linear model to solve problems in
the context of bivariate measurement data, interpreting
the slope and intercept.
Understand that patterns of association can also be seen
in bivariate categorical data by displaying frequencies
and relative frequencies in a two-way table. Construct
and interpret a two-way table summarizing data on two
categorical variables collected from the same subjects.
Use relative frequencies calculated for rows or columns to
describe possible association between the two variables.

8.NS.2
8.EE.2

8.G.6
8.G.7

8.G.8
8.G.9

Understand informally that every number has a decimal

expansion; the rational numbers are those with decimal
expansions that terminate in 0s or eventually repeat. Know
that other numbers are called irrational.
Use rational approximations of irrational numbers to
compare the size of irrational numbers.
Use square root and cube root symbols to represent
solutions to equations of the form x2 = p and x3 = p, where p
is a positive rational number. Evaluate square roots of small
perfect squares and cube roots of small perfect cubes.
Know that is irrational.
Explain a proof of the Pythagorean Theorem and its
converse.
Apply the Pythagorean Theorem to determine unknown
side lengths in right triangles in real-world and mathematical
problems in two and three dimensions.
Apply the Pythagorean Theorem to find the distance
between two points in a coordinate system.
Know the formulas for the volumes of cones, cylinders, and
spheres and use them to solve real-world and
mathematical problems.

Parallel
Gradebook

Analysis and Learning

Students put forth more effort (took more

time, showed more work) when test items
are open ended. Contrary to common
belief, students like open ended questions
better than multiple choice questions
because they can explain their thinking.

Students are more invested in their

learning when learning goals are clearly
stated and they are involved in tracking
their growth through self-assessments and
mastery checklists. They are more curious
about their progress and more motivated
to show evidence of their learning.

Standards based grades are a closer

match to students true abilities than the
normal gradebook. For most students
their standards based grade is higher
than their traditional gradebook grade
because it is based on a variety of ways
that students demonstrate or provide
evidence of their understanding. On the
other hand, for some students, the
standards based grade it lower because
these students normal gradebook grade
is padded by the practice category
even though it is only a 25% weight.

Analysis of Students with Greatest

Variance

Student

Standards
Progress
Average

2.8

Gradebook
Average

65%

Gradebook Average
Converted to 4-Point
Scale

1.2

Difference

Possible Reasons for Difference

1.6

-Does not complete homework or other

practice assignments, struggles to complete
anything fully
-Takes an extremely long time on quizzes
and tests
-Hard time focusing
-Extremely poor handwriting
-Able to explain reasoning verbally
-Excels during task based learning
-Frequently contributes to class and small
group discussions
-Quality participation in class

Analysis of Students with Greatest

Variance

Student

Standards
Progress
Average

2.8

Gradebook
Average

63%

Gradebook Average
Converted to 4-Point
Scale

1.0

Difference

Possible Reasons for Difference

1.8

-Has IEP
-Does not complete homework or other
practice in class
-Gives up easily, low frustration level, shuts
down some days
-Once learning is scaffolded he begins to
self-talk and begins to grow more confident
-Actively participates in small group
activities

Analysis of Students with Greatest

Variance

Student

Standards
Progress
Average
3.8

Gradebook
Average

101%

Gradebook Average
Converted to 4-Point
Scale
4.8

Difference

Possible Reasons for Difference

-1.0

-Completes all homework, vocab and other

practice assignments
-Takes all opportunities for bonus points
-Actively participates in all activities

Analysis of Students with Greatest

Variance

Student

Standards
Progress
Average

2.9

Gradebook
Average

62%

Gradebook Average
Converted to 4-Point
Scale

0.9

Difference

2.0

Possible Reasons for Difference

-Has IEP
-Frequently out of classroom due to
behavior plan
-Emotionally unstable, will only work with
select students
-Shuts down some days
-Participation and class work is hit or miss as
is her effort on tests

Analysis of Students with Greatest

Variance

Student

Standards
Progress
Average

3.4

Gradebook
Average

70%

Gradebook Average
Converted to 4-Point
Scale

1.7

Difference

Possible Reasons for Difference

1.7

-Average math student

-Completes most homework and practice
assignments
-Likes to volunteer in class
-Confidence level has grown
-Does poorly on written quizzes and tests but
is able to demonstrate learning in various
other ways

Analysis of Students with Greatest

Variance

Student

BB

Standards
Progress
Average

3.7

Gradebook
Average

96%

Gradebook Average
Converted to 4-Point
Scale

4.3

Difference

Possible Reasons for Difference

-0.6

-Completes all homework, vocab and other

practice assignments
-Takes all opportunities for bonus points
-Describes herself as terrible at math and
has little confidence in her abilities

Implications for
Practice and
Concluding Thoughts
Standards based grading more accurately
reflects student learning

Need to rethink common assessments

Change in learning environment

o How could the Common Core

Standards for Mathematical
Practice be incorporated into
grades in this system?
o Would it be possible to pilot this
system in my own classroom
next fall?
o How could MiStar be set up to
be used with a standards
based grading system?
o How does standards based
grading lead to an
environment suited to foster
growth mindsets?

Compass Points

Trying It For Real

Above Standard
(Expert)
4

At Standard
(Proficient)
3

Approaching
Standard
(Developing)
2
Below Standard
(Beginning)

1
No Evidence
0

My response shows I understand the content/skills completely and can explain them in detail.
I can teach someone else.
I have gone above and beyond the standard.
I can use new learning in unfamiliar situations.
I can check the reasonableness at various points and change my methods or apply shortcuts.

My response shows I understand the important things about the content/skills.

I can help someone find mistakes in their work.
I have met the standard.
I can successfully "Make one up and do it.
I can make a strong connection to prior experience.
I can use skill outside the classroom (in another class/life).
I can complete basic and intermediate problems.

My response shows I have a general understanding of the content/skills, but Im also confused
about some important parts.
I have more work to do to meet this standard.
I make attempts to identify pattern or structure.
I attempt to select efficient methods or shortcuts.
I can complete basic problems.

My response shows I do not understand the concept/skills.

I need to work with teacher to meet this standard.
I have shown little to no evidence of making connections to prior experiences.
I struggle to complete basic problems.
I dont know where to start.
I have not provided evidence to show my level of understanding.

Construction Zones and Open Roads

Student
Data
Folders

Two types of feedback

Student Self Assessments

Teacher feedback
4/12
What could
this paper look
like when
returned to a
student?

Elements of
feedback to
consider

Type

Amount

Purpose

Audience

Timing

Focus

Mode

Function

Comparison

Valence

SE2R:
creates an ongoing,
objective conversation
about learning that leads to
mastery learning.

Students love narrative

feedback, without punitive
number and letter grades.
When students engage in
conversation about learning
and are not penalized for
making mistakes, they
become enthusiastic,
independent learners.

1-Summarize
Tell students what youve observed.
2-Explain
Engage students in a conversation about what theyve
learned, based on specific lessons, instructions or
guidelines that have been presented in class.
3-Redirect
When you believe a skill or concept has not been
mastered, invite students to return to prior learning and
review lessons and models.
4-Resubmit
Encourage students to rework activities, based on prior
learning; then, ask them to resubmit their work, so the
conversation about learning can continue.

Evidence

One Year Later: I wish every teacher graded like

you!
Increased student accountability
A classroom culture that was already pretty awesome became even bettergrowth
mindset, resiliency, mastery learning
PBL + SBG = Amazing Learning Happening Here

SBG + Learning Targets = A Match Made in Heaven!

Yes, there have been struggles. I would love to share how Ive worked through them!
Are you even the slightest bit curious? Are you using SBG, too? Lets connect.
TomczA01@wsdmi.org

@AndiSteaban

AndreaSteaban.weebly.com