Totally agree that students can "fail" in a system like this. I use a 3-2-1-0 scale, and a 0 is absent. 1 is weak. I agree that is a student attempts something that includes some of the components that would be like a 1 for me. a 0 is no attempt, or the attempt is doing something that doesn't align with the measured aspects of the rubric( Their "Reasoning" does not mention any key concepts or vocab, and just restates evidence in CER. ). I think this is also a misconception that these grading practices are supposed to give more opportunities for students to show growth (as you mention they must do this consistently), so they in theory should not be able to fail. But if you have no evidence that is important to distinguish for the next educator of the studnets. After all that's the whole point of grades.
I agree with your premise about students that you would place at "Incomplete." If they have not completed the work, they can't demonstrate understanding, and if this happens often enough, you would have insufficient evidence to justify a passing grade. Where I would proceed with caution is how you determine that a student's work is "Insufficient." At least in your specific example, the student sounds like they have some accurate knowledge of the content, but misunderstood what the question was asking them. I would allow an opportunity to redo the work if this kind of misunderstanding happened occasionally. If this was happening often, I would wonder if the student was ELL or had a learning disability where some additional supports and adaptations might be needed in order to support the student towards success. If a student does not engage with these opportunities for adaptations, redos, etc., then I could see it leading to failure in the long-term, but I would want to be sure I was confident that I had done my best to address any barriers that were impeding success before doing so.
Totally agree that students can "fail" in a system like this. I use a 3-2-1-0 scale, and a 0 is absent. 1 is weak. I agree that is a student attempts something that includes some of the components that would be like a 1 for me. a 0 is no attempt, or the attempt is doing something that doesn't align with the measured aspects of the rubric( Their "Reasoning" does not mention any key concepts or vocab, and just restates evidence in CER. ).
I think this is also a misconception that these grading practices are supposed to give more opportunities for students to show growth (as you mention they must do this consistently), so they in theory should not be able to fail. But if you have no evidence that is important to distinguish for the next educator of the studnets. After all that's the whole point of grades.
Thanks!
I agree with your premise about students that you would place at "Incomplete." If they have not completed the work, they can't demonstrate understanding, and if this happens often enough, you would have insufficient evidence to justify a passing grade.
Where I would proceed with caution is how you determine that a student's work is "Insufficient." At least in your specific example, the student sounds like they have some accurate knowledge of the content, but misunderstood what the question was asking them. I would allow an opportunity to redo the work if this kind of misunderstanding happened occasionally. If this was happening often, I would wonder if the student was ELL or had a learning disability where some additional supports and adaptations might be needed in order to support the student towards success. If a student does not engage with these opportunities for adaptations, redos, etc., then I could see it leading to failure in the long-term, but I would want to be sure I was confident that I had done my best to address any barriers that were impeding success before doing so.
is that a computer that uses floppy discs back there?
Oh yes it is! Old Mac from the 90s. Still works - and it's awesome.