Recommendations for schools and districts


academic achievement only. Consider that the academic grade only represents the ac- tual learning outcomes the student has ac- quired through systematic and consistent implementation of grading policy shared by all faculty in the school and district. A sec- ond grade can be reflective of the character and dispositions of the student, to include responsibility, completion of assigned work, attitude, behavior and effort. We must recognize that our students can


1.


be, at the very same time, both academically competent and dispositionally challenged, and those qualities must be reported sepa- rately for two reasons: to record accurate data that is easily interpreted, and to be able to intervene effectively with students based on what the students’ true needs are – aca- demic or dispositional.


prohibiting teachers from issuing grades lower than a minimum threshold – often set at 50. Consider as well eliminating the practice of averaging all scores to determine a final grade. A few low scores along the way as student understanding is evolving causes a lower overall grade at the end, even though the final understanding of content has been achieved.


2.


practice of providing specific feedback to students and the opportunity to improve a work product based on feedback. Research widely supports the enhanced learning that takes place when their deficits are commu- nicated and students have an opportunity to improve their product (Stiggins, 2005).


3.


of consistency, clear criterion, feedback and extinguishing the gate-keeper mentality within our classroom grading systems (Reeves, 2008). This researcher found that there are a number of teachers whose grad- ing practice is standards based and learning centered. Provide a forum for these teachers


4. May/June 2012 33


Educators should share their un- derstanding of the powerful effect


Schools and districts should imple- ment policy around the teaching


The practice of assigning minimum grades should be implemented,


Every final course grade should be based on content standards and


to share their insights with colleagues and lead the effort to develop improved policies. Students who have more control over the


grade they receive experience greater success, enhanced morale and improved behavior


of grading systems and student motiva- tion.” Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 21-40.


Guskey, T.R. & Bailey, J. M. (2001). Devel- oping grading and reporting systems for student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.


Marzano, R.J. (2000). Transforming Class- room Grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.


Reeves, Douglas B. (2008). “Effective Grad- ing Practices.” Educational Leadership, 65.5, 85-87.


(Guskey & Bailey, 2001). The recommended changes in grading policy would reduce the resources needed for remedial courses, course repetitions and summer school and allow those resources to be invested in elec- tives and advanced courses, a much-needed benefit to entire school systems. n


References


Docan, T.N. (2006). “Positive and negative incentives in the classroom: An analysis


Conni Campbell is associate dean, School of Education, Point Loma Nazarene University.


Stiggins, Richard J. (2005). Student-involved Assessment for Learning. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Pren- tice Hall.


Ventura, Steve. (2011). Presentation at the Leadership and Learning Conference, Ef- fective Grading Practices: Creating a Com- pelling Case for Change. June 29, 2011, Boulder, Colo.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40