At one time or another, we teachers are confronted with the need to assess our children’s learning. Many of us have thought long and hard about the use of a single, standard test to find out what our children have learned. There are, of course, things to be said in favor of standardized testing: one gets a view of how children perform compared to other children their age. That can be very valuable information, providing a basis for differentiated instruction.
However, children who are the weaker learners in the class also need a moment of success, of being “good enough” without always being last in line. When will these children be allowed to feel like they have learned enough, that they are making progress? Earlier, I wrote a blog entry about writing group plans for long-term planning. Based on these semi-annual plans, the language goals for a given theme can be determined. After that, though, how does one determine when each child has actually made progress at his or her own level? This is when differentiated outcome rubrics come in handy.
Part of what I do when designing a new theme, is determine which words must be learned by everyone, which words most children should learn, and what words are challenge words.
- Basic vocabulary: Words everyone should learn. These generally transfer easily from the mother tongue, are shorter, and used relatively often.
- Extended vocabulary: Words most children should learn. These may transfer easily, but may also be longer and used less often than the basic vocabulary.
- Challenge words: Words some children should learn. These words may be difficult for a number of reasons, they may be spelled unusually, be seldom used, or longer in length.
Next, I determine some form of end product that the children should work toward in the course of the theme. In the example below, I want them to do some kind of oral presentation about something we’ve learned. The weakest children are the the group “Cat”, the strongest are in the group “Chipmunk”, and everyone else are in the group “Bird” (no particular reason for those names, incidentally, I’ve used “skateboarders”, “snowboarders”, and “kite-surfers” in the past as well).
Finally, I determine what concrete language they should be able to produce for this product, based on the semi-annual plan. In this differentiated outcome rubric, I show what the minimum expectations are for a presentation that is “good enough.” Each child knows what group he or she belongs to, and therefore what kind of output is considered “good enough” in order to be considered successful.
In this example, the “Cats” work towards a short presentation in which they use short sentences correctly applying the basic vocabulary. There is space for some hesitation during the presentation. “Birds” need to use the extended vocabulary correctly, in longer sentences,with better pronunciation, and so on.
|Cat (intensive)||Bird (basic)||
|Vocabulary||Uses basic vocabulary correctly||Uses extended vocabulary correctly||Uses challenge vocabulary correctly|
|Sentence length||3 to 4 words||4 – 7 words||5 – 10 words|
|Speaking||Some errors in pronunciation
|Few errors in pronunciation
Of course, it is perfectly fine if children decide to try out a more difficult level of work. Some children get a real “kick” out of performing at a higher level than expected. Some, however, might wish to try out a lower level, and that’s fine too. There are plenty of children suffering from performance anxiety who might feel more comfortable operating at a lower, more easily-achieved level. Others might try out a lower level for fun, find it too easy (and therefore boring), and return to a more challenging level of work. The important thing is, however, that each child be allowed to succeed at a level appropriate to his or her own level, and a differentiated outcome rubric is good for just that.