Credit: Ruslan Dashinsky (Ruslan Dashinsky (Photographer) - [None]
A few months ago, I talked with Rebecca Mieliwocki, a district professional development coordinator and former National Teacher of the Year, about how the changing instructional climate brought on by the COVID-19 crisis was affecting educators. She highlighted the many challenges involved in the switch to remote learning during a period of great uncertainty and suffering in school communities, but she also noted that the situation presented an opening for educators to evolve their practices and perspectives. "This is really an opportunity to let go of clinging to old systems," she said.
That's a sentiment worth reflecting on as we head into this new school year. The pandemic, along with recent incidents of racial injustice, has exposed deep-rooted inequalities in our society and school systems and created tremendous hardships for many students and families. It has also forced us to adapt to new and ever-changing formats and structures for teaching and learning. It's important for all of us to ask ourselves whether we might need to break free of some inherited practices and preconceptions to make a difference in these new conditions.
Fittingly, this issue of Educational Leadership focuses on grading, typically one of the most convention-bound and impactful areas in K–12 education. And indeed, the need for intentional change is a central thread. While the articles differ in their contexts and recommendations, nearly all of them suggest that, to better reflect and support student learning, conventional grading systems and practices need an overhaul. Especially at a time like the present, this is an area where school leaders and educators can make schools more responsive and meaningful to students.
In the lead article, for example, Joe Feldman urges educators to "critically examine" some common, traditional grading practices—such as using a 0–100 percentage scale, grading participation or behaviors, and factoring in homework—that have a tendency to misrepresent what's important in learning, reinforce biases, and create undue stress on students. Addressing such misalignments is particularly important this year, when many students may be behind academically and have "a shallower reservoir of resilience."
Outlining a more far-reaching approach, Thomas R. Guskey makes the provocative case that schools should consider giving multiple grades in each subject to better delineate students' standing in different areas—including academic achievement (vis-à-vis learning goals), progress or growth, and noncognitive "process" skills. As opposed to a composite or "hodgepodge" grade, broken-out grades can provide "more meaningful information" and more "direction in ways to improve students' performance." Again, these are especially pertinent goals this year.
Indeed, transforming grading systems to provide better communication and feedback—as opposed to static, reward-or-punishment markers—is an idea that runs throughout this issue. To reduce gaming-for-grades cultures, for example, Lee Ann Jung floats a plan for putting far more emphasis within grading periods on formative evaluation. ("Assessment and grading should be something we do with, not to, students," she writes.) Similarly, Myron Dueck outlines strategies to give students more of a vested role in and understanding of grading practices, including how they can change negative self-concepts around grades.
Changes in grading can also affect educators' own self-concepts. In her article, teacher Michelle Vanhala writes about how, after years of frustration with her grading method, she adopted her own version of a standards-based grading system—relying heavily on specified learning objectives, detailed feedback, and opportunities for student practice and retakes. The transition took a lot of work, but Vanhala soon saw that learning in her science class "became less about the grade and more about the learning goals." More than that, she found satisfaction in having "a grading policy that finally aligned with my educational philosophy."
In a year of student need, that's a lesson in professional growth we can all learn from.
Educational Leadership September 2020 Reflect & Discuss Questions
➛ What evidence do teachers in your school usually combine to yield a letter grade at the end of the marking period? Does evidence unrelated to academic proficiency (like attitude, attendance, etc.) factor in? Should it?
➛ Guskey claims true grading reform can't happen unless report cards show several grades for every student in every course. Do you agree? Do you think report cards in your school or district should be changed? In what ways?
