Header image: From https://harrypotter.fandom.com/
(writing in progress)
This post was prompted by sharing with another teacher that, as in BC, they use a proficiency scale for grading at Hogwarts. My initial thoughts are below. Read about the BC/Hogwarts proficiency scales below that.
I get the reasoning behind proficiency scales. In my own teaching, I am thinking about trying to use only two terms: “Adequate” and “I’m gonna need a little more from you”.
For some, having their work described as ‘adequate’ is taken as an insult. In a world where words that once held weight have been devalued to the point of meaninglessness, affirmation in anything other than superlatives or “extreme adjectives” can be considered insufficient. [I am aware that this is one of those arguments that has been made by every generation for millennia; this does not make it less relevant]
“Extreme adjectives” like fantastic, amazing, or excellent used to have a currency that “linguistic inflation” has decimated. Advertising is largely to blame: Products seek to out-superlative each other to distinguish themselves, but the result is a stalemate and the devaluing of language in general. When competing burger chains describe their products as ‘incredible‘ or ‘extraordinary‘; when coffee chains boast of ‘fantastic flavors’ or ‘awesome aromas’, these words are emptied of value.
Consider that you had a good burger one day and chose to describe it as ‘fantastic‘. The next day, you try a burger from a different place that is orders of magnitude better; how can you describe this second burger? There’s no way to describe the second burger without resorting to (and this is what we see today) belabored “Oh. My. God” statements, repetition (‘super super amazing‘), neologisms (‘amazeballs‘) and compound forms (‘super-awesome‘).
We’ve now moved into a new realm of linguistic geography where we now describe things as “beyond + adj”. When I hear someone gush that a smoothie is ‘beyond fantastic‘, or a dress is ‘beyond stunning‘, I imagine them located out on ye apocryphal olde maps close to the uncharted areas marked “here be dragons“.
With apologies to Stephen King, ‘Adequate‘ is a very useful word.
It means “just the right amount”.
Not ‘too much‘: too much is bad.
Not ‘too little’: too little is bad.
It passes the Goldilocks test; ‘adequate‘ is ‘just right‘
- How do you feel when you eat/drink/work too much?
- How do you feel when you exercise/socialize/sleep too little?
When you have an adequate amount of food, drink, sleep, rest, work, exercise, etc. things are pretty great. You have as much as you need; the right amount
Even having too much / too little money is bad. Having an adequate amount of money is good.
‘Adequate‘ is what we should be aiming for, yet the compulsion to be MORE has been nurtured within us. The cult of self-improvement tells us that we are never enough, never adequate, as we are. There is always someone trying to sell us a product or a message, convincing us that we could be “more” – stronger, bigger, faster, healthier, smarter, richer etc. Like superlatives, these comparatives are unhelpful. Who are you being compared to? Z
Sure, you could be adj-er, but adj-er than who? Who exactly am I in competition with? The implication is that I am in competition with myself and that I have some sort of obligation to grind and struggle and push myself.
Well, sure; we all need to continue to grow, and at our own pace, but when we are set in competition with ourselves it is impossible to win; it is an impossible struggle to become…..’adequate’.
I say that adequate is the goal. You need not always do “your best” – life is challenging and sometimes you may not have the resources to give to a particular task. The urgency of contemporary life – where our attention and very subjectivity are the raw material that propels the knowledge economy forward – has set us up to fail if we try to be all things to all people; something has to give.
Rather than tell my students to “do your best”, I avoid the superlative and invite them to “do your part, and move on”.
To “do your part” is to give it a fair shot; that’s all I ask. Usually, the result will be adequate. Sometimes, I may say “I’m gonna need a little more from you”. Sometimes students are stretched thin with competing commitments; I understand that. Maybe the “little more” can come a little later. Maybe it doesn’t come at all, but I’d like to have a discussion about the effort they are making and try to figure out how they can feel supported and feel like they are making progress. They are not ranked against others in the class; there is no “better”. They are not asked to “try harder” and be put in competition with themselves.
This is a developing line of thought. I understand that this reasoning may not be considered applicable to the requirements for metrics/grades/ranking/quantifying/packaging/branding/finishing/homogenizing that schools often demand.
Still, ask yourself, are you adequate?
Right now, are you enough?
I’d bet you probably are.
And if you feel you’re not, that’s ok too.
You are becoming more like the person you are.
It’s not a race and there’s no prize at the end.
Do your part.
That’s enough.
You’re enough.
(Sep 09, 2023) Forget letter grades, it’s all about proficiency in B.C. public schools now
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/letter-grades-proficiency-scale-1.6961686
- “Since 2016, the Ministry of Education has been testing a no-letter-grade model for about half of the province’s Kindergarten to Grade 9 students. That model — based on a proficiency scale — has been expanded to include all school districts this year [2023].”
- “Letter grades and percentages remain for all students in Grades 10 through 12 — public or private — so those students can meet post-secondary entry requirements.”
For a simple overview, see Unpacking the Proficiency Scale https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/administration/kindergarten-to-grade-12/unpacking-the-proficency-scale-support-for-educators.pdf
Read (Dec 11, 2023) How parents and teachers are reacting to B.C.’s new grading system
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/bc-schools-letter-grades-proficiency-scale
- “[Education Minister Rachna] Singh, a mother of two whose daughter is in the Surrey school district, said the goal is to get students “better prepared for the outside world … like when they’re getting a job. You don’t get feedback in letters, right?”
- KF: Eh, no. You get hired, or not: Pass/Fail. Not a great choice of analogy there.
- “Despite survey results that showed 77 per cent of teachers were unhappy with the proposed grading overhaul, the B.C. Teachers Federation has endorsed the new system.”
➡ Be sure to check the comments from the experts on r/Vancouver
Consider, however, the use of a proficiency scale at Hogwarts. When I hear people griping about the BC proficiency scale, I like to point out that if such a system is good enough for one of the finest magical institutions in the wizarding world then it is certainly good enough for you us bungling muggles.
See: Grades at Hogwarts
https://www.hp-lexicon.org/thing/grades-at-hogwarts/
Read more about grading in the Ordinary Wizarding Level (O.W.L) exam.
- “Once a student passed the O.W.L.s, they would be allowed to take the N.E.W.T. -level classes in their sixth and seventh years. In their seventh year, students took the Nastily Exhausting Wizarding Test, or N.E.W.T., the scores of which were what potential employers looked at when the student was looking for a career after they completed their education. Some careers required certain subjects to be taken at N.E.W.T. -level and with a passing grade or in some cases top grades. The O.W.L. examinations basically determined what type of career options students would be able to pursue once their education had been completed”
Archive: https://archive.is/RiOtN