More On Grading

I’ve written about grading practice problems before. Even though so much is tied to grading – class rank, scholarships received, college admissions – the practice is filled with error.

I read with interest a recent article published in Edutopia, the online newsletter sponsored by the George Lucas Educational Foundation. The article begins with,

“Let us set the scene: A group of teachers sit at a broad conference table, reading student essays together. One scans an essay and gives it a C, noting its lack of coherence. Another pushes the same essay back and pronounces it a B minus, pointing out the author used quotes well and included insightful analysis.”

“Sound familiar? For English teacher Seth Czarnecki, this was a quadrennial ritual at his Massachusetts high school. ‘Though the process varies from time to time, the results are the same. Some of us obsess over pluses and minuses. Other plumb the sample for deficiencies. Ultimately, we leave the exercise in disagreement about the grade the essay deserves,’ Czarnecki wrote in English Journal earlier this year.”

“If grading were merely imprecise but still highly motivating for students, it might justify placing an even greater emphasis on traditional assessment practices. But that’s not the case, says Chris Hulleman, a professor and researcher at the University of Virginia, and an expert in student motivation. ‘Despite the conventional wisdom in education, grades don’t motivate students to do their best work, nor do they lead to better learning or performance,’ he wrote in an Edutopia article…”

“This isn’t about throwing grades out entirely. Some method for measuring student knowledge at regular intervals – using standards-based grading, portfolios, or student conferences, for example – is needed to provide stakeholders with a window into academic progress. And there are forms of grading, such as multiple-choice tests and single-answer mathematical exams, that are more precise than the example Czarnecki provides. In the end, solutions to the problem of grading do not need to be absolute. Teachers can still rely on periodic summative assessments and consider evidence-backed ways to reduce the demotivating impact of grading, create more precise measures, and prioritize the messy process of learning over the largely artificial cleanness of grading.”

“A through F letter grades and the 100-point scale feel like eternal verities – systems handed down from the heavens, fully formed. In reality, the 100-point grading scale made its U.S. debut nearly two centuries ago and was originally centered around the 50-point mark, with scores rarely reaching the upper and lower extremes, according to a 2013 study by James Carifio and Theodore Carey. For your grandparents’ grandparents, then, a score of 0 for missed work would be a setback, but not an insurmountable one. Today’s version of the 100-point grading scale, however – after shifting upward to align with the A through F grading scale – is a ’badly lopsided scale that is heavily gamed against the student,’ the researchers concluded. Factor a single zero into a relatively strong quarter of learning, and a previously A student may never recover.”

“Handing out stiff sentences for missing work, some educators argue, sensibly, teachers students important lessons about accountability and prepares them for real-world consequences. But a survey from 2022 [printed in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology] reveals that extensions are frequently granted in professional settings, and in a 2012 study [titled “The Minimum Grading Controversy: Results of a Quantitative Study of Seven Years or Grading Data From an Urban High School], researchers discovered that when the minimum mark in school was a 50 instead of a zero, students put more effort into their learning, earned higher test scores, and graduated at higher rates than their peers under traditional grading schemes. Severe grading practices, the researchers explained, can trigger ‘defensive and self-destructive responses in students’ that can hamper motivation and draw out disruptive behavior.”

“It might still make sense to give zeros under some circumstances. But the research suggests that it’s better to look for opportunities to give students a path forward. Simple mathematical adjustments, such as dropping the lowest grade (or both the lowest and highest grades) can remove anomalous scores, improve student motivation, and provide a more accurate picture of a student’s ability.”

The article ends by giving adult learning leaders some suggestions on improved evaluation strategies when dealing with their young learners. Provide feedback before communicating a “grade.” Make feedback frequent and favor low-stakes over high-stakes when it comes to the type of learning assessment. Teach your young learners how to provide feedback to each other. Eventually, include your young learners in a group conversation about how well they are learning or not. Rubrics are good, especially when young learners are involved in their construction.

A big reason why the traditional school system is failing these days is that their most important job – assessing how kids are learning – is based on a system that doesn’t work. Any other industry who faced this challenge, and failed, would be closed. But we still allow schools to remain open, while pedaling “fool’s gold” disguised as grades.

Friday News Roundup tomorrow. SVB