Grading Policies: Everybody gets 50% for free!

[Ded As Ned]

I came across this local article today that has a lot of food for thougt.  

Quote

At Bryan Station, a student won’t be able to get a score lower than 50.

McMillin said that when a student gets below a 50 on a 100-point scale, it has a devastating effect on a student's grades. Getting a zero distorts the final grade, so it does not show a student's level of mastery, he said.

Quote

The committee decided on new grading rules, which are currently in play for teachers: Do not include student behaviors such as effort, participation, following class rules, when entering grades. Do not give extra credit and bonus points. Do not punish cheating/plagiarizing with a zero; students must redo work. Never deduct points for student work submitted past the due date. Do not assign zeroes as a punishment for missing work. Learning takes time, so always emphasize more recent student achievements. Do not give group scores; grade individual achievement only. A student’s attendance, or lack thereof, should not determine a grade. 

 

Quote

Going forward, an academic grade at Bryan Station will represent what a student knows, understands or is able to do. The grade will essentially consist of the scores they earn on tests in the course.

 

[Ded As Ned]

Unable to clean up the quotes... sorry

Anyway, some of it comes across as really bizarre to me

The thing the article doesn't seem to address is what is the goal of all of this?  I suspect it's school test scores, which directly affects funding they receive from Uncle Sam.  I have a hard time seeing how it better prepares kids for college or life in general... but I'm no education expert.  

 

[Leofric]

I can get behind the last quote, grade just based upon how much of the class subject material they know, not on their attendance or class participation or whether they followed rules of behavior, no penalizing their grades as punishment for nonacademic reasons.    Just add a whole other category of grading for discipline, behavior, ethics, and etiquette, separate from their academic grades.

But if you have a hundred questions and they get everyone one wrong then, they should not be given a 50% grade, give them what they earned, zero, as that shows they have no mastery level.   Giving them 50% for putting they're name on a test is not helping them learn.

[Weeping Sore]

I don't really have a problem with the base of 50%, it's pretty much the same as just dividing the grades into quintiles: 0-20% = F, 20.1 - 40% = D, 40.1 - 60% C, 60.1 - 80% = B, and 80.1 - 100% = A. It all depends on the difficulty of the material, doesn't it?

[Ded As Ned]

I agree with that in general terms.  My sons are in Kindergarten and 2nd grade, so I'll probably gain more experience with this system as they age, and the system becomes more widespread in the state.  Their elementary school already uses standards-based grading at this point in a similar type of system (but more simplified), but I believe it stops after 4th grade presently.

I want to know my children's mastery of a subject unrelated to their conduct in class, enthusiasm, participation, etc.  But I also want to know about those things as well, just separately.  Seems like that is what they are doing.

On the testing I haven't really formed a hard opinion.  Depends on the type of test.  If it were a test that truly allows a student to demonstrate knowledge/mastery of a subject then I'm more inclilned to support that.  If it's just a run of the mill, multiple choice test, not so much.  Plus many students just have test-anxiety.

It seems like they'll allow students to re-take tests if they complete homework and assignments, etc. until they are able to score satisfactory on the test.  

Unless colleges/universities also adopt this grading philosophy, it seems to me like this is setting up a lot of students to fail once they get to college and the traditional grading system.  

@Weeping Sore, from the article it seems like they're starting at a 50% base, but keeping the standard 90-100% =A, 80-90=B, and so on.  

 

 

[Leofric]

I seem to remember my elementary school had a different grading system for awhile when I was growing up, you basically had three grades, S, I, or N, Satisfactory, Incomplete, or Not Satisfactory that showed up on your report card.    But the teachers had their own internal grading systems beyond that that they used to place your next year's classes. 

I don't think it lasted long, it certainly didn't carry over to Middle School or High School.

[Weeping Sore]

@Ded As Ned

Yeah, what I meant is the ramifications would be the same with five equal quintiles as with the minimum of 50%. If you're working with a total range of 50 (50-100) then from 90-100 is just the top quintile of that 50.

[The Drunkard]

Going forward, an academic grade at Bryan Station will represent what a student knows, understands or is able to do. The grade will essentially consist of the scores they earn on tests in the course.

That's essentially how my high school ran. There was a final mark and grade based on your scores and a separate grade for your general attitude.

But giving everyone who scores below 50 a 50 doesn't accurately convey how much the student knows, allowing them to miss deadlines with no penalty essentially gives them more time to complete the same amount of work, and having no score-based punishment for plagiarism just isn't realistic and doesn't prepare them for how they'll be treated later on. This stuff is just as bad as some of the things they're removing.

[Altherion]

Setting a minimum at 50% and widening the range for an A from 92-100% to 90-100% and so on is simply a means to inflate grades. It's straightforward renormalization -- the same effort should now result in a higher grade.

Their other ideas are more interesting. Bonuses or penalties for participation, attendance, etc. never made much sense to begin with -- the student either knows the material or they do not. However, I'm not sure how their policy on lateness will work. If the work is not turned in on time, the student is now on the hook for both the past-due work and newly-assigned work. What happens if some student falls further and further behind? You know there will be some procrastinators who will tell themselves that they will do it all next week for a few weeks straight.

[Jo498]

This obviously depends on the level we are talking about, doesn't it? Primary school, middle school or (pre-)college. In Germany there used to be several grades for "behavior" up to 10th grade ("Führungsnoten"). So in principle a student who was untidy, unruly etc. but still good at tests or homework assignments would receive good grades in the individual subjects but poor grades in those behavior ratings. In praxi it was of course rather likely that a very unruly student would be rather mediocre academically and the behavior would also influence the "academic grades". Likewise, a good student could usually afford some untidiness and would still receive decent "behavior grades". Overall therefore, hardly anony cared about those behavior ratings because they were not very informative, unless one was really bad there which would probably lead to letters to parents etc. long before the report card. They are not completely abolished, I think, but only two instead of four.

As for the actual scaling and grade inflation, this is an entirely different kettle of fish. The main problem here is not grade inflation per se but different measures in respective schools or subjects. In my school time in 1980s Germany some teachers would grade so that "A"s were quite rare. (The system from 2nd/3rd (before that students only get a written repor) to 10th grade has 6 grade levels, from 1 (best) to 6 (failed) but 5 usually also means failed which does not make a lot of sense, the main difference is that in Germany you can fail and have to repeat a whole school year if your overall grades are too bad. And in that overall evaluation a 6 is considered worse than 5. 4 is the passing grade and considered mediocre; often 50%, sometimes 40% is the cutoff for passing) E.g. in a class of 25-30 people there would be sometimes be semesters when only 1-2 or sometimes no student would receive an A in a certain subject. If there were 20% or more "A"s in  a test, the next test would become harder. But this was usually only about As, to get a B would often be considerably easier even in hard subjects, so not unfrequently most of the students would receive B or C. Other teachers were more relaxed and if enough students would meet their standards there could be a bunch of A's.

[all swedes are racist]

9 hours ago, Altherion said:

Setting a minimum at 50% and widening the range for an A from 92-100% to 90-100% and so on is simply a means to inflate grades. It's straightforward renormalization -- the same effort should now result in a higher grade.

Their other ideas are more interesting. Bonuses or penalties for participation, attendance, etc. never made much sense to begin with -- the student either knows the material or they do not. However, I'm not sure how their policy on lateness will work. If the work is not turned in on time, the student is now on the hook for both the past-due work and newly-assigned work. What happens if some student falls further and further behind? You know there will be some procrastinators who will tell themselves that they will do it all next week for a few weeks straight.

I think the point is that there are separate penalties for such -- say student is now stuck in detention, working on past due assignments until completed. 

[sologdin]

maybe develop an aggregate citizenship grade that takes comments from all instructors and school personnel, and reflects attendance, timeliness, demeanor, conduct, and so on.  grades awarded as follows, descending from best to worst:

Quote

 

1 - Compliant with Categorical Imperative

2 - Mostly Harmless

3 - Some Pollution Begs not the Cloth but the Knife

4 - Leading Asshole in the State

5 - Lumpenized Antisocial Nihilist 

 

 

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

I see one major advantage, especially with young kids, or the first year transitioning to a new level (middle school from elementary, high school from middle), and first quarters in general. Many children have a really hard time at the start of a school year, especially if they have just transitioned to a higher level school, and their first quarter grades and end up being really low, maybe even below 50%. But the second quarter they have adjusted, and are now in the C grade range (say 75%). If you limit the 1st quarter grade to 50%, a 75% the second quarter would mean the child would pass the semester. It is generally the semester grades that determine if a child passes the class. It would suck to be getting a C for the quarter, and yet still fail the semester (and even with limiting to 50% that is still possible)

(My older son was very much like this when he was young. By 10th grade he had pretty much gotten over it)

 

Participation:  this is hard, as some kids are excessively shy, it would all have to depend on the class, I think, but for most, it really shouldn't be something that is graded.

I also like the "redoing" of work that had been copied, but wouldn't give full marks for it (max grade of C, or something like that...no matter how high you score, the max score you will receive is 75%, but if their grade is 73%, that is what they get)

As for turning in work late, there should be a penalty, but again, maybe making it a max grade, instead of deducting points (like above)

[zelticgar]

Most schools in my area do not give letter grades for elementary school. They still use Excellent (E), Satisfactory (S), Needs Improvement (N) models.

My kids are in middle and high school now and they use the standard letter grade models. One thing that does bother me a lot about my two youngest in public school is the variance among teachers regarding the total number of assignments used for grade calculations. The public schools have a blanket policy that only 10% of the grade is based on homework, 90% is on content (projects, assignments, quizzes, tests). We've had some quarters where a teacher might only give 5 or 6 total content papers so the weight of those are significant. Other classes would give 15 or 20 in a quarter. I notice there is a significant drop in content around the time standardize tests are taking place and into 4th quarter. The kids do well but it puts a lot of pressure on them when the weight of a test or quiz makes up 10 or 15% of their overall grade. 

My oldest started at a private school this year and she already has 16 assignments for the quarter and will likely average 30 grades per quarter per class. It is very different than the public schools and we are looking forward to moving the other two over when they enter high school. 

 

[Isis]

17 hours ago, Lany Freelove Cassandra said:

Participation:  this is hard, as some kids are excessively shy, it would all have to depend on the class, I think, but for most, it really shouldn't be something that is graded.

As for turning in work late, there should be a penalty, but again, maybe making it a max grade, instead of deducting points (like above)

I had a big problem getting my head around this when I first encountered US students here - you get marks for just opening your mouth and spouting some stuff, which is totally unrelated to the coursework or exams you do? SUPER WEIRD. In the UK students are given marks for their ability not for the personality. For people who are shy or socially awkward who are very clever - why the hell should they be getting lower grades than some loudmouth who knows less than them? If we want to assess your ability to work as a part of a team we'll set group work; if we want to assess your ability to stand up and talk in front of an audience  we'll make you give a presentation.

At school (i.e. under the age of 16) we were given grades for effort as well as attainment (is that what it was called? I can't remember, maybe it was ability? something with a letter A maybe). So you could be top of the class and get an A for attainment because you score well in all the assessments but clearly not be putting in that much effort or have a poor attitude or behaviour and so get a lower grade for effort. It would generally be the opposite way around though - people often tried hard (A for effort!) but maybe didn't do great in assessments and so got a lower grade for attainment.

For late submissions at my undergrad uni they were strict. If you submitted 24 hours late you lost a certain % of the marks, maybe 10% or something. Any more than 24 hours and your grade was capped at 40% (a bare passing grade - under 40% is a fail for any assignment or exam) no matter how good it was. This was broadcast loud and clear from day one and everyone knew where they stood.

 

 

[zelticgar]

37 minutes ago, Isis said:

I had a big problem getting my head around this when I first encountered US students here - you get marks for just opening your mouth and spouting some stuff, which is totally unrelated to the coursework or exams you do? SUPER WEIRD. In the UK students are given marks for their ability not for the personality. For people who are shy or socially awkward who are very clever - why the hell should they be getting lower grades than some loudmouth who knows less than them? If we want to assess your ability to work as a part of a team we'll set group work; if we want to assess your ability to stand up and talk in front of an audience  we'll make you give a presentation.

 

It sounds like you just have a fundamental misunderstanding of how grading works in the US. At the elementary and secondary education levels there are two categories of grading: 

• Performance - homework assignment and content (reports, projects, tests and quizzes). Typically these are used to calculate the traditional letter grades. 
• Effort and Conduct - this is either a letter grade E,S,N (Excellent, Satisfactory, Needs Improvement) or a number scale (1 to 4). 

So basically most students will get a letter grade (A) and an effort/conduct grade for each class (1 for Excellent). Same as what you described. At the university level it is strictly a letter grade. There is no over arching culture of giving marks for just speaking up in class. At the end of the day performance on coursework trumps all other factors. 

 

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

4 hours ago, Isis said:

I had a big problem getting my head around this when I first encountered US students here - you get marks for just opening your mouth and spouting some stuff, which is totally unrelated to the coursework or exams you do? SUPER WEIRD. In the UK students are given marks for their ability not for the personality. For people who are shy or socially awkward who are very clever - why the hell should they be getting lower grades than some loudmouth who knows less than them? If we want to assess your ability to work as a part of a team we'll set group work; if we want to assess your ability to stand up and talk in front of an audience  we'll make you give a presentation.

At school (i.e. under the age of 16) we were given grades for effort as well as attainment (is that what it was called? I can't remember, maybe it was ability? something with a letter A maybe). So you could be top of the class and get an A for attainment because you score well in all the assessments but clearly not be putting in that much effort or have a poor attitude or behaviour and so get a lower grade for effort. It would generally be the opposite way around though - people often tried hard (A for effort!) but maybe didn't do great in assessments and so got a lower grade for attainment.

For late submissions at my undergrad uni they were strict. If you submitted 24 hours late you lost a certain % of the marks, maybe 10% or something. Any more than 24 hours and your grade was capped at 40% (a bare passing grade - under 40% is a fail for any assignment or exam) no matter how good it was. This was broadcast loud and clear from day one and everyone knew where they stood.

 

 

I don't think participation works that way. I seriously doubt that a child who just spouts off random stuff would be getting marks for it.  One of the purposes of participation is to help children learn to express their thoughts with a group, to learn what is appropriate, to stay on subject, to help get over their fears in a safe environment. (by time you get to undergrad, Public Speaking classes are often mandatory-- you have to start somewhere).  Trying to get everyone to participate is important to the growth/development of the child, it is the grading of it that I have issues with.

@ late submissions: I fully agree in the penalty at uni, and minor ones in middle/high school, but not necessarily in elementary school

[Isis]

Do you think then that students who've been educated in the US are more likely to feel that they need to make a verbal contribution in a class? Because certainly we see that they are MUCH more likely to speak up in class than British students (note, it is not always the case that the student with the most to say on subject is always the most academically capable). 

[A True Kaniggit]

21 hours ago, Isis said:

I had a big problem getting my head around this when I first encountered US students here - you get marks for just opening your mouth and spouting some stuff, which is totally unrelated to the coursework or exams you do? SUPER WEIRD.

 

 

Funny you should mention this. When I was in the 12th grade my British Literature teacher did this exact thing. Every semester she gave us a grade on how much we spoke during class discussions, which she kept track of by putting tallys next to our names on a list she had. As mentioned, those of us who were more shy had greater trouble hitting the number she set every semester than did the more verbal students. What did that have to do with British Literature? Got me. 

[Jo498]

In my schooltime in Germany in the 1980s there were also "oral performance" grades. This was notoriously vague and sometimes intransparent but of course it was not supposed to be that simply saying something in class would count in your favor. OTOH, especially in (foreign) languages it seems obvious that oral performance should count towards the grade and there were no (or very few) oral exams, so this had to be evaluated by continuous performance in class. (There might also be prepared talks students had to give but this was quite rare in my time and the main component of the oral grade would be continuous performance in class.) And some teachers do make a difference between students who speak only when asked and those who "volunteer" contributions which is not entirely unfair, I think, although it can tend to penalize shy students and lead to loudmouths dominating the classroom but a decent teacher should see to that.

It's usually not a problem unless there is a large discrepancy between the performance in tests/quizzes and the oral performance. But in such cases most teachers would let the written stuff dominate. So the super-shy person with As in written tests who never said anything in class would usually not receive a C or so as average between A and "failed" oral performance but a B. And very few students would be able to lift themselves up considerably from really bad written tests. Of course, it could make the difference between passing and failing. I guess there are some guidelines how teachers are supposed to evaluate the ongoing oral performance but the results are bound to be less precise than written exams (where in doubt one can always give the test/essay/etc. to another teacher for a second opinion).