While Empower is a fully functional learning management system, its core function, collecting evidence from students and calculating it for overall default values, is the “crown jewel” of the tool.
But what do you see first when you log in to Empower? There are three main tabs for the user interface. The Instructions tab allows you to view classes (either from your student information system or from custom groups) and to create and assign teaching materials such as activities and tests. On the Reporting tab, you can output progress reports and export other data. The “Rating” tab contains “Grade Books” and the place where evidence and standards are assessed. (Remember, as required in SBG, these scores are based on established championship scales – for Shelby, these range in whole numbers from 0 to 4.)
|Example of a test class / group (with a single student) and an example of a grade book with a standard.|
Empower has two types of music books. The first is the standard grade book of a class (also called “Master Course Playlist” by Empower), which is designed and managed at the district level and which sets the prioritized standards for the course. In this master’s grade book, many important reporting and analytical aspects of Empower are described, such as B. Progress reports and the calculation of the final grade. (In a knowing allusion to a traditional system that needs a final grade for secondary grades at the end of the year, Empower can take the end-of-year grades of all prioritized standards and average them together.) The second type are grade books custom created to help teachers learn Concentrate on a smaller level of standards (maybe just a few standards that are covered in your Unit One) or simplify cross-content project evaluation (think about the possibilities PBL offers!).
On the “Score” tab, you can switch between “Score Standards” and “Score Evidence”, which show the correlation between the two – they are really two sides of the same coin. Under “Score Evidences” you can display and evaluate tasks that meet different standards individual evidence corresponding. These may have been created in the teaching area, e.g. B. “Activities” and “Tests”. However, one of my favorite empower features is the ability to create “Quick Evidence”. With the push of a button and a few clicks, you can quickly create and evaluate evidence. (In many learning management systems, only digital activities that have been created within the system can be assessed. With Empower, however, you can evaluate and evaluate practically everything in a matter of seconds – analog activities, observation of class discussions, etc.). Under “Evaluation Standards”: a teacher can score total standard if you wish. However, one of Empower’s most powerful tools is that Marzano True Score Estimator (MTSE), which can be accessed via the “Standard” button of a music book. It allows you to take a look behind a specific standard and not only examine the evidence each student has provided, but also see how Empower calculates and projects an overall standard based on the evidence score numbers and the time the evidence was available, For this purpose, Empower carries out the evidence assessment using three different formulas: Average, linear and power law – then recommends one or more as the most reliable for the given sentence. This creates a completely different nuance than the grading (which is constantly updated as new evidence is entered) and a very necessary nuance when a student decides and defends mastery of a standard.
Let’s go through these formulas briefly. We are very used to averaging, but I will emphasize here that it is the only one of the formulas that is indifferent when Evidence has come in – in other words, two years ago, last September, or yesterday. Linear searches for a trend line. When we graph these values, do we tend up or down? Therefore, more recent knowledge is important to determine the direction of the trend. After all, the power law is based on an intuitively typical human learner. If most of us come up with a new concept, we will struggle to understand it, and if we were “rated” by our skills or knowledge, we would probably do poorly at 1 and 2. With time and experience we would get better, probably 2s and 3s, and with time we would master 4s. The potency law takes this development into account by counting the earliest points with a significantly lower “weight” and the most recent points with a significantly higher weight. In short: For Power Law, the performance you have just achieved is much more important than your potentially low scores at the beginning of your learning process.
Take a moment to compare these different, differentiated levels of learning assessment with the story of Timmy in Part 1 and his traditional assessment problem that, like many other students, struggled with a test result so low at the beginning of a session that it did didn’t matter whether he achieved the final exam; In a traditional system of averages and percentages, only a student who is perfect from the start would keep a high grade, and a student who starts poorly cannot avoid the demotivating academic gap from which he cannot statistically crawl. Empower changes the overall approach to examining what the grading communicates and, at least as importantly, gives students specific guidance on how they can improve their learning. Not only do they know the general strengths and challenges of the standard, they also know the evidence behind a standard of an accumulating history, and the importance of today’s performance is actually calculated to be more important than the difficulties the student may have had in the past , (This also has an additional positive side-effect: students who perform exceptionally well at the beginning of an academic year cannot rest on their good laurels and go into a temporary class when the “spring senioritis” begins and their current performance decreases significantly.)
I admit that I tried to understand and explain this to others when I started teaching others how Empower calculates scores. When the school year started, I created one Valuation calculations Doc to explain to our district officials how this works. For this blog entry, I just want to draw the Doc’s attention to a general concern that parents, students and even some teachers have: In a system of championship scales and standards-based grading, the final grades of the courses, GPAs, etc. will go Low for most students? In Doc I attack this head too a fictional set of four students and testing their evidence against a single hypothetical standard. Luke is the ideal Marzano student for human learning, starting with a score of 1, 2, 3 and finally 4. Han is the opposite: he started with all 4s and went back to 1s in several recent scores. Lando is down the line for a while, but he manages to score consistent 4s by the end of his time. Finally, Leia has a fairly constant result at a medium level, although she tends to score three (also lately).
Comparing the simple average of the scores with their projected linear / power law calculations, the table above shows how the idea of averaging summarizes the academic “stories” of these four students as equivalent when we see that this is at best restrictive and strong at worst Case inaccurate. Interestingly, three of these students in a mastery SBG system that goes beyond mere averaging Do it as well or better than in a traditional rating system, With SBG, not only is there a greater chance for a student to achieve a higher GPA, but such a GPA can actually reflect a real achievement of (championship) learning instead of just collecting points. Of our four fictional friends, this is the only student who does this worse in the SBG – Han – is the one student we can clearly see as “bottoming out” or a bad case of the above-mentioned senioritis, but instead of facing an academic penalty for this in the traditional grading, Han would unfairly giving in to the same grade as his peers.
Empower is a powerful digital tool and a potential enabler for evaluating student learning. Of course, a learning management system is just a holder of digital data entered by people – it cannot replace the professional judgment and relationship building that a teacher needs to learn and grow. Empower can calculate the ratings quantitatively, but cannot determine the qualitative nature of the ratings itself. This is where “the art of teaching” and a teacher’s judgment come into play. (This is one reason why Empower always allows a teacher to get a standard overall rating, even if it means that what Empower suggests based on evidence is overridden.) Empower does not magically make teachers effective in standards-based grading practices or automatically makes their ratings deeper, stricter, or more authentic. Excellence in the SBG requires commitment, professional learning and time. Empower does not shorten this and does not offer a silver Edtech ball. However, I have to say that in the six years that I have been part of educational technology in Shelby County, there have been few digital tools that have made and challenged our teachers to transformatively teach as much as Empower. It is impossible to use it fully and faithfully while still maintaining a traditional attitude to grading. In this sense, we continue to support and fulfill our current situation Strategic management planTools like Empower are the only way to personalize, enrich and expand our ability to learn our students with mastery of the standard philosophy, leaving the school’s idea as a game of compliance and dots behind.
Note: We are not the author of this content. For the Authentic and complete version,
Check its Original Source