I'll definitely be checking this out.

Love this!!

Happy to have left many of the Direct Instruction Bros behind when I shut down my Twitter account.

Exactly.

I mean, I agree with you. But there aren't many of us out there.

Link to the newsletter, which is well reported. No shade on the writer intended. Lots of shade on Harvard intended. www.chronicle.com/newsletter/t...

--Still tracing ungrading/collaborative grading. When I was researching *Failing Our Future* I found a similar practice that dates to the 1960s, but I'm still following the bread crumbs there.

Having fun with this! 7/end

--Standards-based grading comes directly from the K-12 world. The innovation brought to the model by higher ed is that instructors in college create standards directly related to their own course and content, whereas K-12 standards derive from state standards and larger curricular goals. 6/x

Nilson removed the statement about contract grading from the recently published 2nd edition of the book. I'm not sure why, as it helps to clarify what can be a pretty challenging model for folks to wrap their heads around. 5/x

It's often assumed to be closely aligned with standards-based grading, but if we instead acknowledge its lineage in the contract-grading family, we can more clearly see specs grading as a system of mini-contracts. 4/x

Here are a couple of things I'm finding very interesting so far:

--According to Linda Nilson, specs grading "started under the name of contract grading" (1st ed. of *Specifications Grading*, p. 74). This might help us to to see specs grading in a different light. 3/x

(Yes, we know that putting together a genealogy is something you might expect two people trained in the Humanities to do. We make no apologies. 😂) 2/x