KARCHER STAFF BLOG
Karcher 2016-2017 School Calendar
Student's of the week for
April 18 - April 21
- Alex Rodriguez: (Hive)
- Alex has a positive attitude towards life in general. His responsibility to his school work and compassion and respect he shows to peers and staff make him beyond awesome.
- Dylan Baumeister: (Silver)
- Dylan comes into classroom everyday with a positive attitude and a willingness to put forth his best effort.
- Kendra Baumeister: (Onyx)
- Kendra is a phenomenal young lady who consistently has an extremely positive attitude, is caring and kind to all around her, and takes pride in all she does. Thanks Kendra and keep up the great work.
- Elizabeth Lind: (Applied Academics)
- Elizabeth has impeccable work ethic during class, setting an example for those around her. She take the concepts for projects and thinks outside of the box and holds herself to extremely high expectations in craftsmanship and application of art materials to create truly amazing and unique artwork.
- Cathlyn Tayag: (Karcher Character Bucks)
- Cathlyn is a kind person who is thoughtful to others. She gives her best effort in class no matter how challenging the task may be. Her willingness to follow the Karcher Way is a great example for other students to follow!
- Shaquell Daniel: (Diamond - not pictured)
- Shaquell has been participating well in class and he works well with his group in science. Shaquell is also participating in track and is doing a great job! He has shown growth in maturity this year.
______________________________________________________________________________
Kudos
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
- Jayme Pruszka was chosen as the KCB STAFF OF THE WEEK! Congrats Jayme and thank you all for continuing to reinforce our 8 character traits.
- Kudos to Jenny Geyso, Kurt Rummler, and Alyssa Riggs for your continued work this week with the Forward Exam for Writing with our students! Kudos as well to Steve Berezowitz, and Becky Hoesly for figuring out and lining up our makeup exams for the Forward Exam as well. Everyone has taken the exam very seriously and we appreciate everyones hard work and flexibility!
- Thank you to Marilee Hoffman, Hans Block, Alyssa Riggs, Mike Jones, Brad Ferstenou, Andrea Hancock, Barb Berezowitz, and Jack Schmidt for assisting with our PE interviews last week! Some of you were on the committee while others were assisting with covering classes, lunch duties, etc. Thank you for all of your help!!! We had some strong candidates and will be working to finalize the process this week.
- Thank you to Amanda Thate, Stacy Stoughton, and Mike Jones for your willingness to assist and provide staff with support on our work with essential skills and the development of sub-skills. Light bulbs are going off one at a time!
- Big shout out to all that assisted with FNL: Mike Jones, Donna Sturdevant, Matt Behringer, Erika Fons, Stephanie Rummler, Kurt Rummler, Daniel Rummler, Andrea Cummings, and Kelly Fulton.
- And lastly... the true leaders in our building need to be thanked as we move into the week with Administrative Assistants Day on Wednesday, April 26. Kim Moss, Jane Peterson, Marian Hancock, and Amanda Wilks are the ones keeping the rest of us on target! They do so many things behind the scenes that most probably do not always notice. They are beyond flexible and truly support each other as things come up and support the rest of staff as well throughout the school year. Thank you all for your dedication to Karcher, for your dedication to our staff, and for your dedication to our students! At times students come very fired up to the office (and sometimes parents do as well) and they consistently maintain an even keel and give start everyday as a new day. Thank you all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
______________________________________________________________________________
Reminders
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
- Monday, August 24 - Staff Meeting in the library
- Briefly going over needs for MLP.
- Wednesday, April 26 - Administrative Assistants luncheon!!!
- Barb Berezowitz will be sending out further information for everyone to participate with a luncheon on Wednesday in order to thank, appreciate, and spend some time with Kim, Jane, Marian, and Amanda!
- Wednesday, April 26 - Literacy Strategy Presentations PLC in the library!!!
- Talk around the building is that staff are excited to see and hear what others have to share! Should be a great PLC.
- Note... adjustments to the PLCs in the month of May have been adjusted. Please look at the calendar to see those changes. Due to the timing the removal of an additional round of literacy strategies (like we just worked through) has been removed with 2 PLCs added for content area/grade level needs as you wrap up this school year and look into next school year. These PLCs as take place in your classrooms or if you want to align with 7-12 for a PLC and reach out to another group that can occur as well. Let me know if that is the case and I can assist with any needs you have!
- Friday, April 28 - Karchers first Rube Goldberg club students along with advisors Kaylyn Waki and Jayme Pruszka will be going to the Middle School Rube Goldberg competition this Friday!
- They will be leaving around 8:00am and returning at the very end of the school day.
- The challenge was to create a machine with a minimum of 8 simple machines that will end with the popping of a balloon!!!
- Throughout the week we will still be pulling students to complete their makeups for the Forward Exam and thank everyone for your understanding and flexibility!
- Looking ahead...
- Partners 2 will be coming to present to some of our students during the next three Mondays and information regarding this is within the advisory materials.
- Thursday, May 4 - some 8th grade students will be pulled from their 4th hour class for the Summer Survivor presentation. These students will have a pass already and should present it to you to go.
- Thursday, May 4 - Strings Concert!
- MAP testing starts the week of May 8!
- Board and Brush:
- Those interested in attending Board and Brush on May 10 at 6:00pm in Lake Geneva please go to the below link! With teacher appreciation coming up I just thought this would be a great way for ANY staff to get together for a little Karcher bonding time. There are 18 slots available but we may be able to squeeze a few more in! Sign-up by May 7th in order for Board and Brush to gather everyones materials!
- Here is the LINK to register. Our "party" is called: Staff acting like a goose!
______________________________________________________________________________
Pictures from the week
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Students in Ms. Stoughton's class doing some collaboration about their math.
Article of the week: Here is the continuation from last week's article!
Grading to Communicate
Grades can only be a shiny distraction—unless we make them a strong message.
Nonacademic Factors
Nonacademic Factors
Although grades should definitely reflect the quality of students' academic performance, many teachers believe that students' work habits, responsibility, and attitudes—what researcher Robert Marzano (2000) calls nonacademic factors—are also important.
I believe it is essential to report academic and nonacademic factors separately. We can assess a student's ability to turn things in on time and report it as part of a nonacademic grade component. This assessment, however, should not distort feedback regarding that student's ability to understand a concept or write an essay. In the previously cited language arts example, nonacademic factors are recorded under the effort/citizenship grade component. In the grading scheme for my sociology class, I included a nonacademic component called work habits, which was worth 10 percent of the overall class grade. With a disaggregated grading system, I can simultaneously give accurate feedback on students' learning of essential concepts or skills and their performance on nonacademic factors.
In keeping track of students' work in my sociology course, I grouped each course assignment under one of the five components of essential learning, depending on what kind of learning the assignment tapped. For example, because students' journal entries and reflection worksheets prompted them to connect course concepts and life, scores for those assignments counted toward the application component. I counted some assignments under more than one component; a major paper, for instance, might receive an academic grade for ideas and content grouped under analysis and evaluation and a nonacademic grade for work habits, reflecting whether the student writer completed all steps of the process on time.
I based the letter grade for each component on the average score of all assignments grouped under that component. Each component was worth a specified percentage of the overall letter grade, and I computed the overall course grade by combining the grades for the five components according to the predetermined weight of each. I updated each student's scores continually on a student summary form that I maintained online. Each student and parent could see this individual form anytime, and I also printed this report in preparation for parent-teacher conferences.
Sticky Issues
Handling Homework
When assessing homework assignments, it's especially important to distinguish between academic achievement and nonacademic factors. When we base a significant portion of a student's grade on homework, then the aggregate grade may be a more accurate measure of a student's effort than of his or her learning. In the past, students in my classes who completed homework often received good overall grades even when their actual understanding, as measured by tests, was unsatisfactory. Conversely, students who failed to turn in homework often received low or failing grades even when they had excellent understanding of the content. I do assess the quality of homework: A student who does poor work or shows a lack of understanding will get only partial credit. But my experience suggests that even the quality of the work on an assignment that goes home is more an indicator of nonacademic work habits than of academic understanding. And it is obvious that when an assignment is not turned in at all, we can draw no conclusions about the offending student's knowledge or skills.
To resolve this issue, I consider a student's diligence in doing daily homework as a nonacademic grade component and his or her in-class assessments as a measure of learning. When I combine these components into an overall grade, I weigh the work habits portion at 10–20 percent, which acknowledges the importance of nonacademic factors while placing a greater emphasis on academic learning.
Late Work
With regard to work turned in late, I make a distinction between late daily homework assignments and late major projects or papers. If daily homework is recorded only in the nonacademic portion of the grade, it seems acceptable to me that a teacher might not accept or credit late homework. A student who does not turn in all daily assignments but who has mastered the material can still receive a high grade in the academic component if he or she demonstrates strong learning through in-class assessments. Conversely, a student who turns in all of his or her homework but is not learning will receive high marks for the nonacademic portion, but not on academic components.
Major assignments like projects or papers, however, should be handled differently. Because they are important learning opportunities, they should be accepted even when they are late. The difficulty arises in determining how to assign a grade to late work. A common practice for teachers is to simply reduce the grade, but this practice confuses the issue. A lower grade for an essay turned in late does not accurately communicate how well the student has learned and performed. The grade may indicate that the student is a poorer writer than he or she actually is. With a disaggregated grade, however, the teacher can record a low work habits grade to reflect that the student missed the deadline while giving the paper a grade on the academic component that accurately reflects what the student has learned.
In my sociology class, I assigned students three formal papers. Students were required to successfully complete these assignments to pass the class. I assessed three separate components for each paper: an analysis and evaluation grade for content, a work habits grade for fulfilling the steps and turning the paper in on time, and a formal writing grade that reflected writing skills.
The first semester I tried this approach, it paid high dividends. As I collected our first formal writing assignment, in which students were to observe and document a social pattern, one student sheepishly admitted to not having completed the paper. I reminded him that although he would lose work habits points, he could still get full credit for the academic portions if he turned in a quality paper. He went back to work monitoring social patterns and turned the paper in the next week. In assessing it, I discovered that although his writing was mediocre, his ideas were inspired. This student received three grades for this assignment: an F for work habits, an A for analysis and evaluation, and a C for formal writing. I was able to report the lateness of the student's work without dampening his enthusiasm or distorting the feedback the grade provided. Most important, the student took full advantage of this important learning opportunity: In fact, he went on to pursue sociology at the postsecondary level. Much would have been lost if I had simply told him to forget the assignment because I do not accept late work.
Extra Credit
If students are allowed to raise their grade through extra-credit work that is independent of essential learning, then that raised grade reinforces the view of grades as a commodity to be earned. When a student asks for an extra-credit assignment to raise his or her grade, I remind the student that the purpose of grades is to assess and promote learning. A low grade simply communicates a learning gap; the way to raise the grade is to learn more. I explain that although I do not believe in extra credit, I do believe in opportunities for further learning. A student who scored low on a formal paper, for example, may seek extra writing help, rewrite the paper, and try for a higher grade. If a student received a low quiz grade, he or she may take the quiz again to demonstrate mastery of the material. This approach helps reinforce the view that grades are a communication tool, not the goal.
Finding a Better Way to Motivate
If we want to keep the focus on learning, we must not depend on grades to motivate our students. In 1945, junior high school teacher Dorothy De Zouche stated, “If I can't give a child a better reason for studying than a grade on a report card, I ought to lock my desk and go home and stay there” (p. 341). Sixty years later, assessment expert Richard Stiggins (2005) declares that “we can succeed as teachers only if we help our students want to learn” (p. 199).
As they begin their schooling, young learners are quite inquisitive, eager to read their first chapter book and excited to discover their place in the world. But many students' innate curiosity is stifled by an education system that too often values compliance over creativity, taking tests over testing theories, memorizing over understanding, and high grades over learning.
If educators wish to convince students that we value their understanding, their reasoning, their ideas, and their creativity, we must practice what we preach. By creating meaningful grade components rooted in essential learning, separating out nonacademic factors to ensure that we assess true learning, and sharing our passion for what we teach, we can use grades as a communication tool rather than as the goal.
References
De Zouche, D. (1945). “The wound is mortal”: Marks, honors, unsound activities. Clearing House, 19, 339–344.
Marzano, R. J. (2000). Transforming classroom grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Stiggins, R. (2005). Student-involved assessment for learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
