Evan, Teachers are absolutely allowed to grade the tests of the subject they teach as long as the test they grade is not their own student. Our whole department graded most of the tests with teachers of particular students passing the test on to another teacher if it was their student. For calculus, I absolutely was allowed to write a more detailed key for the non-calculus teachers who graded the exams - I was told clearly I was allowed to "train" them in grading my exam and they were allowed to ask me general questions about how to do problems if issues arose. All of those keys had to be stored with the SLO and no notes from grading or anything from student papers could be taken from the room, but we were allowed to do it. The different interpretations about how to go about grading without grading your own students' papers is very frustrating. This can only be 'bad' for kids. Liz
Elizabeth Waite AMTNYS Coordinator of Reps
-----Original Message----- From: Evan Romer <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: nyshsmath <email@example.com> Sent: Wed, Jun 19, 2013 1:29 am Subject: Re: Grading Regents Proofs
Our interpretation of "teachers may not grade their own tests" is hat Geometry teachers (for example) can't have any input on how to rade the Geometry test. If the teachers scoring a question go ask a eo teacher for input, or if the Geo teacher writes an answer key to uide their grading, then the Geo teacher is participating in the rading, which I think is a no-no. A pretty serious no-no. Our nterpretation. That's frustrating to all of us, because it does make it harder to rade students' papers fairly. We don't want the student doing omething a certain way all year and have it accepted, and then lose a oint or more on the Regents for doing it the same way. Our solution to this is that on Tuesday we decided that if there is a roof we'll assign it to me and a retired Geo teacher to score. (We core in pairs.) Then at lunch today I sat down with the two Geo eachers for half an hour and went through some sample proofs, how do ou teach adding segments, how do you do getting right angles ongruent, what are your expectations for what reasons should look ike, how do you do CPCTC, is there anything else your students may do hat we need to be aware of ...? And while we're at it, is there nything else aside from proofs that is unusual or that we need to now about? Very helpful (and interesting conversation). Including, I ould expect x on my classroom tests, but on the Regents we would ccept y. By having that conversation ahead of time, they're not elping to grade a specific question: they're helping the graders nderstand how it was taught. Once the test has been opened and the eo teachers have seen the questions, then they're out of the picture. We'll see how this works out in practice tomorrow. BTW, one teacher doesn't use "CPCTC" at all in that form. Her students rite, "If 2 triangles are congruent then their corresponding parts re congruent." Nice! Evan Romer usquehanna Valley HS onklin NY On Jun 18, 2013, at 9:23PM, StGOLD2112@aol.com wrote: > The standard for grading a proof is to grade it based on the way it was taught, which is why teachers of the course should make themselves available just in case there is a question about how to grade. When I taught proofs during the year I emphasized good mathematical reasoning and allowed very few shortcuts, but none of my proofs were ever worth as little as 6 points, which means we have to adjust our thinking when grading a proof on a Regents, but even if you aren't actually grading the exam, you should write the answer key so your colleagues know what you accept and what you don't.
Steve Goldman Half Hollow Hills HS East Dix Hills, NY ******************************************************************* To unsubscribe from this mailing list, email the message "unsubscribe nyshsmath" to firstname.lastname@example.org