Unlock with PatreonThe Problem with CI
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Quick Quizzes
Share:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn
Ben Slavic
Get The Latest Updates
Subscribe to Our Mailing List
No spam, notifications only about new products, updates.
Related Posts
CI and the Research (cont.)
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
Research Question
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
We Have the Research
To view this content, you must be a member of Ben’s Patreon at $10 or more Unlock with PatreonAlready a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to
55 thoughts on “Quick Quizzes”
I don’t have research, but my experience mirrors yours. I actually know how the class is going to do on a Quick Quiz before I give it. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t give it. That’s probably not a good answer to give those who are skeptical, though, because many of them are looking for ways to trick students anyways.
I guess we could always give “who/what/where/when/why” questions on our quick quizzes. I wouldn’t quit if I had to, but I’ll stick with yes/no for as long as I can.
After the first couple weeks of class, I start mixing up the T/F with WWWWH questions on quick quizzes. Sometimes a “What does this mean” or a “How do you say” for some more precise feedback. Too much of this though, and the focus starts getting placed on form and memorization, versus what we want them to focus on… negotiation of meaning and comprehension.
OT kinda…
“As the spirit wanes, the form appears” -bukowski
(I’m stealing this for our purposes, though his I think is more directed at external forces telling us how to articulate what we want to say. For TCIers, to encourage spirited conversation/narrative that is compelling, versus focus on form due to an inverse lack of the former)
I love the Bukowki quote Jim. Thank you. It could be our motto. Does not language dance and float? Is its nature to be weighed down and carry the burden of form? Why is everyone interested in stories? Because they allow us to dance with language. It is precisely because we don’t know what the exact form of the class will be that we can experience more dancing and a lighthearted spirit in this work. That lightheartedness is worth its weight in gold when one considers that we have chosen to spend our careers doing this!
It’s like this, as only the French could explain it:
https://benslavic.com/blog/lart-de-la-conversation-and-tprs/
…many of them are looking for ways to trick students anyways….
This is at the crux of the argument, James. What is assessment? Is it a way to trick a kid and find them wanting, or is it a way to help them along in their attempts to learn the language?
However, even finding out what they really have acquired is not going to work in languages, nor in music classes or sports events or in arts classes. Those areas, because they involve incredibly complex neurology much of which takes place in the unconscious mind (music, art, PE and language) cannot be assessed in the conscious analytical way.
Those people think that a good test is one you memorize for anyway. Bless their misguided hearts. We don’t acquire languages through memorization. Remember? They tried that already. It didn’t work.
So that turns the question back on the interlocutor – what do you who bring this up with John actually know about how languages are acquired? Do you want more summative exams? Do you want to test what students can memorized? Do you really want to try to measure the growth of seeds below the ground, before they appear as sprouts? Do you really want to measure a process that requires at least 15,000 hours of input first? Then you are foolish and misguided, for trying to apply a system of testing where it does not apply.
The question is specious and comes from a place of pride in those who ask it. It reveals academic pride on their part. It reveals a deep misunderstanding of how languages are acquired. It is a wrong question to ask, and superficial. It reveals a desire to judge. Do we judge one year olds in their language development? Bless those academically prideful hearts. They don’t know how languages are acquired.
What is the purpose of any assessment instrument? In my own view, it is to build confidence in kids that they can do it. It is not to judge them. Haven’t we done that enough in schools and look where it has gotten us. That is why we use the quick quizzes. That is what the quizzes do – they build confidence formatively, day by day. The are not summative firebombs that destroy confidence in all but a few.
Kids can only learn a little bit of a language in a four year program anyway. Those questions, John, should be listened to and then batted away. You have more important things to do than listen to fools.
I’m just starting to use quick quizzes, and loving them, but to me (based on what I’ve read here, not on my experience because I have almost none) the purpose of the quick quiz is to motivate students to pay attention to oral CI.
Also based on what I’ve read here, there is no agreed-upon way to “properly” assess acquisition.
Thank you, Leah. You are the future of this work. Young ones who can say the above are our hope in this work, that it really will come to fruition one day even though the status quo right now is still about focusing on form and finding fault.
Does anyone see a deeper pattern here that reflects what is going on in the world?
Could describing the quick quiz as an “exit ticket” help? I don’t have to do those, but as I understand them, it’s a fairly short thing calling for a little student reflection. Then you’re not calling it assessment exactly – you’re fulfilling another kind of expectation on many teachers. If you have to give a daily objective, perhaps tying that to the quick quiz would give it more legitimacy?
I agree with John about how they do work as a confirmation of student comprehension. I do a mix of T/F and one word answers, or sometimes a phrase translation. But if there’s research, I don’t know of it.
Great idea Diane. Use it as an exit ticket. But then the pressure will be there to test summatively, and I resist that mightily because of the way languages are acquired. I defend my right to assess with the interpersonal skills rubric at 65%.
Evaluation of language acquisition using summative methods is a contradiction in terms because there are too many factors at play (affective filter, inability of the child to dredge what has been planted in her deeper mind up into the conscious arena, the tendency of summative instruments to focus on form, etc.). This I have learned from developing summative assessment instruments in Denver Public Schools for five years.
I don’t think there is any research. With this question, we again run into the same chasm that exists between standard traditional language instruction, which is so bogged down in form and itself has no research to back it up, and what we do.
Since I just finished midterms – talk about trying to make a summative assessment look rigorous to the unschooled and CI friendly for the kids… We always talk about the work that Denver has done. Too bad we can’t share it. Anyone else out there need to give midterms and finals that fit other’s ideas of “rigor”? BTW, love that Laurie Clarcq!
Traditional kids don’t have any fluency in the 4 skills – no real comprehension and scarce output on a non-rehearsed task when there is any time pressure. If that is tested (which is MORE rigorous) rather than vocabulary and grammar, then the average TCI kid wipes the floor with other average kids.
A T/F quiz may not relate highly to acquisition. But here’s how I would argue against the “guessing argument.” First off, there’s guessing on any limited choices assessment. If you flip a coin ten times then you could get 8 heads and 2 tails. Flip that coin 100 times and the numbers start moving closer to 50-50. So if you consistently gave quick quizzes (easy to do if given after every 10 minute deal) then you’d have tons of quizzes and if kids are guessing then they’ll have very poor grades (50%).
Is the grade of a student supposed to be solely a measure of acquisition? That decision is up to every teacher and everyone weighs categories differently. Personally, I hate that teachers would kill a student’s grade for not doing homework. If they’re not doing it and it truly is valuable, then that low grade would show up on tests. Otherwise, it’s busy work for that particular student.
Personally, I like the idea of grading based on quick quizzes and the communication rubric. But I also like to give a more summative assessment (mid-term and final) in which I try to better measure pure acquisition. I don’t count that summative assessment towards the students’ grade, but I comment on the result and progress on the report card. I could see a teacher also offering the final summative grade as a substitute for the students’ current grade.
As others have said, I use the quick quiz more to build confidence (easy grade for a student awake in class) and to add some light accountability in order to get some kids listening, those kids that need external pressures in order to listen. We probably get our best clue into a student’s “acquisition” by the day-to-day constant interaction with the students.
Also it’s more reps. Repeat a question a few times for even more. Suckers!
Any time I’m grading something (a quick quiz, an announced quiz, semester exams), it’s mainly to give more reps in a way that students tend to treat more seriously. It’s also to fulfill school expectations. I’ve gotten to the point where I wouldn’t grade anything if it weren’t for the fact that not all students want to be there (so need accountability to operate within classroom expectations) and I work at a school (where grades are required).
Ex: I’ve had the opportunity to tutor two former students one-on-one. We never did anything quiz or grade-like and could follow their interests (=non-targeted CI) much more easily because they are so into it. I’m continuing to tutor one of them this school year over Skype. It’s been really fun. He’s become known at school for being the boy who speaks Chinese, and it’s deserved. He had 2 years of class with me, then 1 year of tutoring so far.
Of course, by “effort” I don’t mean study and memorization, but instead the things on the Interpersonal Communication Skills rubric.
I still like Quick Quizzes for oral CI days, but for readings, sometimes I mix it up with higher order questions in English, requiring students to cite the text to back up their statements. Things like “Is the monster more brave or shy?” or “Does the boy have good parents?” shows both comprehension and reasoning skills. Not as fast to grade, but a nice change of pace.
I’m not into t/f. My exit quizzes– on the rare occasions when I can be bothered to do them– are, listen, write and trans, or listen and trans (for early-days beginners). As per Hosler, main point is reps.
So far, in summary:
Possible purposes for quick T/F quizzes:
1. Attention/Classroom management
2. Accountability (also tied to #1)
3. Scaffolding for Success (aka differentiation….allows teacher to identify smaller chunks of info)
4. Data collection (formative assessment)
5. Provide additional reps
6. Build student confidence
Let them try to argue that list.
As for the guessing factor…it is a 50/50 shot if they guess. I’m not a math brain, but to consistently score an 80 or higher, a student has to do more than guess.
If they truly object to the nomenclature, by all means adopt them as an exit ticket and feel free to ask them a “reflection question ” at the end.
There is also no harm at all to asking one WWWWH question on each quiz for example,…In your opinion, why did George want a green tomato sandwich? Just don’t grade that question and let your colleagues assume that you are. It will also give some of the output hungry kids a little love.
I don’t know what type of summative assessments are required, or how often, but it sounds as if you should use a few during the year, if for no other reason than to feed the machine. It eats up some of the kids’ time and some of yours BUT it is a fair trade for the peace, quiet and freedom you may earn to teach the way you would like the rest of the time.
Thank those meddlesome folks for their professional concern and opinion. Then go teach your kids. It’s the kids that matter.
Hugs,
Laurie
PS Continue to use the quizzes if they work for you!! But don’t feel that they are a requirement for a CI classroom. Some folks use them, others don’t. Use what works for you!!!
Laurie can I put the above into the chapter in Stepping Stones on quick quizzes? It fairly rocks.
Benny
Of course Ben! (although you might want to temper my attitude lol)
with love,
Laurie
Thanks, everyone, for the feedback. I work in a machine, and have stepped into the most traditional grammar m achine that ‘s existed in this century. Luckily, the criticism of t/f has mostly come from “concerned” parents of 4%ers. But I probably use them more than all my fl colleagues combined, and that stands out, so I at least want to be able to summarize the benefits–which Laurie did beautifully above.
Ben you are so right about this being a clash of cultures, between the idea of assessment as “gotcha” vs. assessment as building students up. Some students and colleagues and parents will inevitably lash out at us for making care the center of our curriculum. Let us not be bullied!
That is an interesting situation, John. So are the parents opposed to t/f assessments in general or only for Latin/ FL? Are they also opposed to multiple choice? MC is a 1 in 4 chance. A strategy for MC, though, is to eliminate the one or two more obviously wrong choices and then you are back to a 50-50 chance like t/f. And as Eric pointed out, 50-50 means that random guessing lends to an F for a grade.
At some point there might be the opportunity to point out the difference between assessment “in the past” and assessment in the 21st century.
In the past: Testing to find out what students don’t know
Today: Assessing to find out what students can do
– (Courtesy of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, from the World Languages Skills Map)
Playing “gotcha” is so last century (not to mention so immature).
John is going through his first year in that machine. When the people around you don’t get what you do, and apply old ideas to new things, the pressure can be enormous. John sticks to what he believes is best for the kids. We are indeed in the presence of a warrior, a Latin King here as we have called that whole unbelievable group of Latin teachers. It may be very hard on him this year, but it will get better. And when he returns from this first year odyssey, maybe some of those judging him will understand that the world is indeed not flat. Good work John. Keep at it. You have our respect and admiration.
Related: https://benslavic.com/blog/the-round-world-group/
James: “Also itās more reps. Repeat a question a few times for even more. Suckers!”
In my mind, this is the key. I don’t see much use for assessment in language acquisition. Some may disagree, since assessment should inform future instruction. In our classrooms, though, the results of an assessment won’t tell us much that we don’t know: if a student is struggling, there is only one remedy…more CI. Students cannot do much else to compensate (e.g., memorize, practice, etc.). If this is the case, we need to blur the line between instruction and assessment as much as possible, so that assessment is actually just an extension of instruction (i.e. more CI). I’m sure James would agree that, not only do we provide more reps through assessment, but sometimes those reps are the most focused of all (since it “counts”). Also, Quick Quizzes convey to our students that content takes precedence over form, since we ask about the story itself (True or False: John sleeps under the bed in Ikea) rather than the code used to send that message (Tell me the prepositions of location).
I also have been enjoying James’ attitude about the additional reps a quick quiz gives them. And yet, the students think they’re being tested…
Assessment: seeing how kids are doing (for us, how much they understand) so we can adjust instruction. Eval: putting a number on it.
Assess: cook tastes soup. Eval: customers taste soup.
TPRS class does constant assessment:
— speed of responses
— strength of choral response
— actor fluency
All of these are designed to check how kids are doing on the spot. If Adminz want to see Assessmentz we can tell them “I assess constantly” and exit quizzez can be Numberz for their Spreadheetz.
Scott this is big time right here:
…if a student is struggling, there is only one remedyā¦more CI. Students cannot do much else to compensate (e.g., memorize, practice, etc.)….
If this is true, and it is, then it proves the underlying ground breaking and super radical premise that forms the basis for all we do: a student cannot learn a language by thinking about it, but by hearing it, really, for years. That’s the only way it can be learned.
A student learns a language because she wants to; it has nothing to do with thinking. So what’s this testing thing? Yes, we can test, but do we test one year olds on how much language they know? Don’t we just wait? And our students have heard a lot less than a one year old even after four years.
I was told by a department chair a few weeks ago that my grades were too high across the board (all 90s/100s) that I needed more of a range for each assessment. Two weeks later I had not fixed this “problem” and this same department chair pulled me out of class and proceeded to tell me, referencing gradebook prinouts for all my classes, that these high grades “tell me there is not enough rigor in your class, or that you’re not really grading these assessments.” After this accusation, this chair told me I was “brought on board [for a maternity leave replacement] in the hopes of being able to keep me, but that based on what I’ve seen the past few weeks, I’m honestly not tenure track material” (This person has only seen me teach for a total of maybe 20 minutes. Also, there have been zero parent complaints (that I know of).
After hearing those statements from my supervisor, all I could force myself to say before returning to teach my class was “I understand. Thank you.” (Which is true – I understand the thinking that leads to someone having an issue with an entire class having high grades). But this just reiterates that same issues John and many others are facing.
All of this to say thank you to John for raising the question, and also to Laurie for summarizing the benefits of Quick Quizzes for any of us who, like me, know the reasons for what we do in class but can’t always think of them when we want to explain ourselves. I’m going to study that list for a conversation I’m scheduled to have with my supervisor next week. If she doesn’t agree with my reasoning, I will not press for further dialogue, but I will request that she come visit my classroom for an entire class period and give me any feedback she might have.
Lastly: I too have been questioning my quick quizzes recently. Another option to the ones already suggested as change from Quick Quizes once in a while is a “Fix the mistake” quiz. The quiz writer writes X number of sentences that have one error each (I.e., every setence is false). I used this last week and just had my kids write the correct word (not the whole sentence). This way the 50/50 guess of a true/false quiz gets eliminated. And, I’m just realizing as I type this, to make this completely comprehension-friendly for lower levels I could even leave key words of the story on the board if I don’t think my kids are ready for cold recall of the words they need to correct the sentences….but they’re still having to listen interpretively and thus get the golden reps.
Ugh! This is wrong on so many levels. She pulled you out of class to hammer on you???? ARe you freaking kidding me??? So inappropriate.
So sorry to hear this Greg. Kudos to you for remaining calm under attack though.
I would also look at Robert’s primer for the statement on rigor, that classes interacting in language are in fact rigorous and lower grades do not necessarily (or usually) equate to greater rigor.
Right, being rigorous does not mean ensuring that at least X (number expected by dept. head) number of students do poorly in your class regardless of their effort.
This happens to some degree to all of us, doesn’t it? If kids are able to succeed, the assumption is that the teacher is too easy, not that the teacher is asking reasonable, brain-based things of the students that they can and do achieve.
There IS such thing as grade inflation. BUT, in order to determine whether grades have been inflated, you need to look at two factors: the work (i.e. their proficiency) and the grade. This Department Chair has ONLY looked at the grade. In other words, she is saying the grades are too high because…that is how it has always been done. Ridiculous. Like Eric said, what I love about CI/TPRS is that it is not just about language acquisition. It’s about creating the conditions necessary for ALL students to learn at a high level. It’s about teachers taking responsibility for teaching AND learning (rather than just “Here’s the material…”). DeMado explains it much better than I ever could…
http://vimeo.com/36379469
On a more useful note, I would start by explaining to her (although, sorry to say, it’s probably a lost cause) why the assessment is INTERPRETIVE. That is, interpretive assessments at this level account for individual variation in the time needed to listen to the various structures and acquire them. If the assessment were output-oriented and a student did not do well (AND he/she was attentive, for the most part, to the CI delivered in class), what is he/she to do? If memorizing and conjugating don’t work, isn’t he then just being punished for being a slow acquirer? That’s where I’d start because it pulls in the research. Then, let her suggest some ways that the interpretive Quick Quizzes can be more “rigorous” (e.g., open-ended questions or Textivate cloze). Take her suggestions or leave them, but I wouldn’t touch those grades if they give those kids confidence.
Dude Scott you are just hitting doubles and triples all over the park today:
…if memorizing and conjugating donāt work, isnāt he then just being punished for being a slow acquirer?….
…I wouldnāt touch those grades if they give those kids confidence….
“in order to determine whether grades have been inflated, you need to look at two factors: the work (i.e. their proficiency) and the grade. This Department Chair has ONLY looked at the grade.”
Exactly Scott. So Greg, if your department chair comes into your classroom and hears kids responding to your questions and perhaps offering some unrehearsed and therefore likely grammatical inaccurate grammar, will he/she find fault in the accuracy/amount of output or celebrate the comprehension/engagement? I agree with whoever said to get that person to come in and observe and hand them a copy of that admin checklist that is floating around. I just utilized it today when my principal came in to observe me. It gets the focused on what really matters,
I also really like what Diane said…
“If kids are able to succeed, the assumption is that the teacher is too easy, not that the teacher is asking reasonable, brain-based things of the students that they can and do achieve.”
…will he/she find fault in the accuracy/amount of output or celebrate the comprehension/engagement?…
The more I read on this thread the more I realize that we have a completely different way of looking at our jobs. We want our kids to succeed, where so many others want them to fail. What’s up with that? These are children, and they need to have a reason to hope in things, in their ability to do well in their language class, for example, because the classroom process seems so easy and natural to them if they just pay attention. I sense that the time we are in now is about the disappearance of some really negative things in language education. That makes me happy. We’re being proactive. We can defend our pedagogical stances in favor of children. People who need to see kids fail can’t do that. They can’t defend anything. They are on their way out. Enough is enough.
And really, there won’t be a greater proportion of inaccurate grammar. It will just appear that way, because there will be so much more output š
“grammatical inaccurate grammar”
Nice Jim, nice.
And to prove your point Jim, about communication and engagement instead of error finding: I hadn’t noticed the typo at all!
True Diane but how are the teachers supposed to like themselves if the adverb form there is incorrect? They want to be the smartest kids in the room and unless they find and expose the perfidy in Jim’s adverb mistake above, how are they supposed to let him know that they and not Jim are the smartest and the best? That’s what they want. John Piazza and I discussed this very thing on the phone last night. It’s everywhere. And look at what Greg Stout went through with being called into the hallway to be told that he is not tenure material. Who are these people and what is their real agenda? Is it really to teach grammar? I think it’s to be right at every turn. Which makes the kids wrong. Which makes them happy. Then they and the four percenters can rule.
Ben: “They want to be the smartest kids in the room and unless they find and expose the perfidy in Jimās adverb mistake above, how are they supposed to let him know that they and not Jim are the smartest and the best?”
Well said. It should be noted, too, that you need to have thick skin if you’re going to do it our way (celebrate the kids rather than prove your “superiority”). I have a few students this year who, because I have made them feel so successful, believe they are prepared for the next level. This is frustrating since, of course, they are not ready for the next level (although they are doing very well), but I essentially brought it on myself. I so badly want to say, “You are doing well because I have created the conditions for you to do so. It’s not because you are beyond this!” Of course, I do not, because I am an adult and the last thing I should be thinking about in the classroom is protecting my ego. Instead, I continue to celebrate how well they are doing and ask them the most difficult pop-ups (“How would I say…?”). I let them struggle for 2-3 seconds while they attempt mental gymnastics, and then I help them through it. The rest of the class does not notice, but this (sharp) student realizes he can’t handle production all on his own. Like we always say, it’s putting him in his place with a smile. In theory, differentiation happens naturally in CI classrooms – Krashen tells us that learners take from the input what they are ready to acquire. BUT, I also think we need to make the students mentioned above feel like we are differentiating in other ways as well (i.e. jobs, advanced pop-ups, etc.). In other words, CI is naturally challenging them as per Krashen, but sometimes the challenge needs to be more concrete when we are dealing with adolescents.
What a great way to deal with these little academic egos: it challenges them AND puts them in their place, both of which things they need from us in order to deal with their anxiety. Then they know that you are still the expert, and they are still special, but it doesn’t infect the entire classroom.
Sounds like a need for counseling to work through the trap of basing one’s value on achievement to me, Ben! (Rather than on lasting, not-performance-based factors about being a human being.)
Greg– your idiot defartment head inspired me to write a post about this topic. Ammo for when this idiot next brings spreadheets to a brainfight.
https://tprsquestionsandanswers.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/what-grades-should-kids-get-notes-on-evaluation-for-the-mathematically-challenged/
That’s a fun blog post, Chris! Effectively and thoroughly addressed.
Maybe now I’ll also remember what norm referencing means. I mix it up.
Criterion-referenced e.g. mid-term, unit test – you expect students to know little before the course/unit and hope for mastery by everyone at the end – hence, you want a ceiling effect – ideally, everyone gets an A. You then have no way to distinguish any range between students that may exist.
Norm-referenced e.g. placement tests, proficiency tests – you want to compare students or be able to measure a range of abilities.
Note: if the course teaches with a method, content, and/or a pace such that only the brightest, hardest working kids can show mastery of the content objectives, then this would result in a range of scores on the mid-term (criterion-referenced)
Note also: if all students are Novice-Mid then the proficiency test (norm-referenced) wouldn’t show a range. This also happens if categories are used and the range of each category is too wide, e.g. you can’t distinguish a higher Novice-Mid from a lower Novice-Mid. Of course, give the proficiency test to enough people (e.g. all levels in high school) and you’d expect to see a wider spread.
Ya Greg’s Defartment Head hasn’t thought about the fact that (by 3rd or whatever year Greg has) there will be less variation in scores also because the super-weak kids often drop out.
Nice overview, Chris.
Thanks kids. Bad teaching is one thing…bad leadership is worse
P.S. Also, for a grammar-raised French 4 class I required the whole sentence to be written out, with the incorrect word corrected, just to let them feel like they were doing some “real work” for a few minutes. So, it was more like a dictation-quiz combo (And then I added this to my arsenal of time-user-uppers for those periods when you run out of juice and want to coast till the bell rings).
Dude, Greg, your department chair can go . . . This “movement” is about way more than how languages are acquired. It’s an entire educational philosophy change. I’d definitely get that department head back in your classes to observe. Have some form of the administrator checklist to give the observer. And if they aren’t drooling when they are observing, then they can go . . . But really, I wonder if we are just too progressive for most of the departments in this nation. I bet many of us have students with high grades. Does that mean we all aren’t tenure material? ha.
I like them a lot still for James’ stated reasons, but I figure we could add some math to it, in case we need it. http://www.algebra.com/algebra/homework/NumericFractions/Numeric_Fractions.faq.question.209316.html
This website has many of the many things I am using to figure this. An individual student does have about a 5.5% to guess their way to 8 or better if all 10 questions are T/F. If it is a 9 or better they really only have 1.1% chance. We should realize however that a 7 will be achieved by 17% of pure guessers and 37.7% can guess their way to a 6. I think that does mean, that if we are getting many or even a few kids in this range, we could ask ourselves how much they are getting and see whether we might need to slow down.
However, that is only on one assessment, and if they are consistently guessing their way, they should do poorer as well and it should return to the mean. (5 correct) If you give them two quick quizzes and they score an 8 or better each time, the chance of them only guessing to do that is .3% or 3/1000. As you would expect the more quick quizzes you get, the smaller and smaller the chance for them to achieve such a high result from pure guessing.
I tend to do a little less T/F and a little more open ended, but that is just because I expect them to hear more open ended questions than yes or no questions.
Hopefully these numbers can help you if you need to use them to justify your position.
If your Defartment Ass (he is not a head, as heads have brains) thinks you need more Bs and Cs, ask him how he got to that idea. He will have nothing to say other than “other classes have that too” which may be true but which is also irelevant.
To paraphrase Goebbels, “when I hear the words bell curve, I reach for my gun.”
The distribution of scores in a classroom does NOT necessarily follow a normal (i.e. bell shaped) curve. First, the bottom end of kids – low IQ, severe challenges, etc. – are probably not in your class. (Remember, normal distributions occur across BIG and UNSORTED data sets).
Second, student scores are to a large extent a function of how they are taught. Different methods make demonstrable differences in outcomes. With shitty teaching, you’d expect a lot of low scores and a few higher ones – the really egg-headed students would Khan-academy their way through. You would also expect lower mean and median. If you have better, or excellent teaching, you would expect higher mean and median, and you would expect more scores at the higher end.
Third, class composition between classes often varies wildly. The only real way to tell if you scores are too high/low/whatever is to teach those kids your way, then teach them traditionally, and assess both sets of teaching against the same rubrics/assessment standards.
Fourth, why should what kids get in other classes matter? If your school is doing the same criterion-referenced assessment for all language classes (and it’s authentic, not grammar bullshit), the point is *not* what your score distribution is, it’s how well the kids do with reference to the criteria.
John and Greg are warriors! The good will we generate in our classrooms is fed by the flames of passion that burn within us. We commit to feeding the flames of passion to teach our children who suffer the injustices and wrongdoings of the system. John and Greg, you guys are my leaders as I care to keep my flames of passion lit.
I work in a completely different culture than yours. When my admin comes in and sees all students engaged and following along, without disrupting the class, they are left dumbfounded. I am in a neighborhood school in Chicago, not a selective enrollment school, but one where students who haven’t otherwise done well get placed. Feeling good about learning & not punishing students with grades is a heavy focus where I am. I do, however, have to put on my warrior armor to keep the good will flowing in my classes while students carry with them overpowering burdens of stress and anger. Though, I think I prefer my struggle than that of being belittled and threatened (are you kidding me!) by admin.
Please, please, please, keep us updated on how things develop John and Greg!
Just came up with an idea. For True False Quizzes you can offer THREE OPTIONS
1) True
2) False
3) We donĀ“t know