Why Zero Isn't A Grade At All

Syllogism:

Grades represent evaluations of learning.

A zero, given for missing or late work, does not represent an evaluation of learning.

Therefore, that zero is not a grade.

Any questions?

(So, what are those zeros doing in grade books?)

(Next up: Zero and Statistical Integrity)

Don't Give a Zero! Try 50, 59, or 60. (Or not.)

Here's the first in a miniseries about the folly of awarding a grade of zero for late work or work not turned in.

Part 1: The Math of Zero in a Percentage Scale

I was talking to a colleague recently about how although there is no one "right" way to grade, there certainly are justifiable and unjustifiable grades.

Then I said, innocently as I could manage,"...and giving kids zeros as a penalty for late work or for work not turned in is a perfect example of unjustifiable grading."

He immediately went on the attack. "I've heard that the school board is about to require us to not give zeros! That's outrageous! No work, no grade! We have to teach kids to be responsible!"

I didn't know which of the four positions he took to reply to first, so I chose the easiest.

"Nope," I said, "the school board is not about to require the high school to quit giving zeros. We're in a conversational mode, and I hope people are willing to think about standards-based grading and talk it over."

"However," I followed up with, "have you given any thought to the math of zero?"

"What do you mean, the math? Zero is zero. Nothing is nothing. No work, zip. End of story."

Realizing that I had no graceful exit strategy from this conversation if my colleague proved resistant to my charm and logic, I set up a problem for him to analyze.

"Think about this," I suggested. "Everyone is familiar with a 4.0 GPA scale, right? What if the F (a zero, right?), in a 4.0 scale had the same weight as a zero in a scale of 0-100, the percent scale we use almost universally for grading?"

"What are you getting at?" he asked.

"Just this," I said. "In a 4.0 scale, A=4, B=3, C=2, D=1, and F=0. The difference between a D and an F is just one point. On the percentage scale, the difference between a D and a zero is 60 points. Does that seem proportionate to you?"

"No," he said, as the math began to register. "On a 4.0 scale, if it were equivalent to a percentage scale, the F would be, what, negative 6?!"

"That's in the ball park," I said. "Isn't it amazing that we teachers don't ask these kinds of questions more often when we talk about grading?"

"Yeah," he said thoughtfully.

"Look," I said, "here's a two-page article from the Phi Beta Kappan on the destructive effect of zeros . It's written by Doug Reeves, an international education consultant based in Colorado. He explains it far more eloquently than I can. Check it out."

The following week, I asked him if he liked the article. "Man," he said, "I am DONE with zeros!"

"Pass it on," I said, "because there's more..."

(Next up: Why Zero Isn't A Grade At All)

The Responsibility Paradox

Why do we love Wiley Coyote? Is it because he never learns from his mistakes? Doesn't look ahead to analyze the consequences of his actions? Reminds us of ourselves?

Whenever I speak about standards-based grading, grading linked to standards, or grading for learning, inevitably a teacher with some or many years of experience in the classroom will challenge me with the "responsibility" hack. The spirit of Wiley Coyote lives on.

I teach that formative assessment (practice) should not figure into a final grade. I teach that giving zeros is a fruitless effort to stimulate academic achievement, and is also bad statistical math. I teach that grades should report only academic achievement or lack thereof, and should not be used to punish or manipulate students (because there is absolutely no research to indicate that such manipulation is effective in raising individual achievement scores).

But regardless of how effectively I make my points -- never mind how many studies I cite -- a strong voice of experience can often be heard, apparently oblivious to the comedy of the challenge. The voice says, "But I have to teach them 'responsibility.' The real world holds them accountable, and I have to teach them responsibility!"

They don't usually foam at the mouth, but in my imagination, they always do.

And each of these teachers who think they know better than the researchers and teacher practitioners of grading for learning need to confront what I call "The Responsibility Paradox."

To put this post in perspective, let's consider the mission of a teacher. I've had a long time to think this over, and this is what I would argue is a teacher's mission…

"Facilitate learning as measured by assessments linked to state or provincial, and district standards."

The Responsibility Paradox states that "teachers who try to hold students accountable by teaching 'responsibility,' are themselves irresponsible because they neglect their mission as teachers. They introduce foreign elements into the final grade that distort the picture of achievement, and worse."

Let's see…

Teachers who add zeros and/or dock grades for a variety of behavior-related offenses (like being "late")…

…ignore the math of statistics.

…close the door on learning.

...ignore the potential damage to student/teacher classroom relationships.

…disregard the effects on student motivation.

…set poor example to students and peers by ignoring assessment, grading, and reporting research.

… refuse to learn about grading alternatives that may increase student success.

…and completely forget that "responsibility" is not in their state or provincial, and district academic standards.

That's a lot to think about, and I hope I haven't upset any of my friends out there, but this kind of discussion is what this blog is going to be about for a while.

Why? Because it's good for kids, that's why. ;)

What's "Fair"?

In a recent discussion with another teacher, I asserted that homework should be evaluated, but that evaluation, whether in the form of a letter or a percentage, should not be included in a report card grade if the purpose of the homework was to reinforce classroom learning (as in "formative assessment").

Then the teacher asked what they should do if the student decided that, because the homework mark didn't "count," he or she would not turn in their homework.

In the case above, most teachers would try to control the errant student with punitive grading: a zero, perhaps, for non-performance, and then averaging the zero along with the letter or percentage items that determine the report card grade. The teacher I was speaking with thought that zero was the only option.

I said, "No, it's not the only option. Stick with the principle of not adding homework evaluation to report card grades (summative evaluation)."

He said, "Then I should just let them skip homework."

"No," I said, "let's back up a second."

I asked if we could agree that homework should be thoughtfully assigned by the teacher, and the purpose of the homework should be to reinforce knowledge or skills taught in the classroom, and not assigned without consideration of the fact that students actually have a life in addition to school.

Yes, we could agree on quality homework.

Next, I asked if he would want to pursue every student who didn't do any homework assignment. He said he would, because otherwise it wasn't fair to the other students.

"Suppose," I asked, "that the student in question has an A in the class and doesn't need to do the homework?"

"Well," he said, "it just wouldn't be fair to the other students if I let that one go."

"Why not?" I asked.

"Well, it just wouldn't," he said.

"Can we talk about 'Fair'?" I asked. "There's two ways of looking at 'Fair.'"

"Okay," he said.

"First," I said, "'Fair' has nothing to do with anything. With regard to that particular student's achievement, it's all between the state standards, that student, and you. Other students don't figure into the equation. Remember, we're criterion-referenced, not norm-referenced, right?"

"Right."

"Second, and this is the way I prefer to think of it, 'Fairness is not treating all students the same. Fairness is meeting each student at their level of need.' So we consider each student, each case, one at a time, isolated from all the others."

"Besides," I said, "most well performing students are doing their homework anyway, and if they miss an assignment, there's usually a pretty good reason. You're a teacher, not a cop, so let it go."

"If you're concerned about the student who chooses to ignore homework because they may fail or perform poorly in the course without the practice, then you need to find a way to support them, and that takes some investigation into the reasons they are not doing the homework, as well as an enlightened administration that will provide before and after school, and lunch-time opportunities for students to have homework supervision and help."

"Okay," he said, "I get it. I'm a teacher not a cop. And I'm concerned with the value of what the homework produces for the student, not the process of making sure every kid does it or else. Homework is generally formative assessment, for practice, so it doesn't go into the report card grade. If a student who doesn't need the practice misses a homework assignment, I don't need to sweat it, but if a student who needs the practice misses, I find a way to help him or her get it done."

"Right," I said. "And besides, in all the years that I've observed those homework policies, I've never seen kids try to take advantage of me. The ones who will do it on their own, do it. If it's late, there's usually a good reason and it comes in later. If they're not going to do it, you have an opportunity to support them. And I've never seen that mythical stack of late papers on my desk at the end of a marking period."

Never. Honest.

Fired Up!

I'm home, and I'm a little tuckered. But I'm fired up, because I got to work with a group of administrators and teachers who are absolutely committed to student success.

You can't seem them here, but beyond the shoreline of this beautiful lake in British Columbia are five schools that are hot on the trail of standards based grading.

This year, after sending key administrators and teachers to the ATI/ETS Sound Grading Practices Conference in Portland, Oregon (last December) the high school principal is conducting a yearlong discussion with his staff (including an interactive presentation from yours truly) about phasing in the missing link in classroom assessment, "grading for learning." Keeping him company are four other middle schools in the same town. The goal is to institute these powerful ideas next year enabling students to increase achievement through sound grading practices.

What's really cool is that these folks are also going to be presenters at this year's grading conference on how to get an entire school moving on the road to beneficial change! I'll be recommending that our local folks who are attending (23 plus, including administrators and board members) pack that Canadian session!

Auspicious Beginnings…

The family's back home safely (if you consider home to be in two widely spaced geographic locations), charged up with coffee, and back to work. Wife's at school and my favorite guide is on a three-day trip on the River in the Canyon.

My first clue that this would be a good year was when the supe came in the door of the commons area of one of our high schools where he and the board were hosting the New Teachers' Luncheon and introduction to us last Wednesday. He said, as we shook hands, "you're going to like what I have to say."

The luncheon included all the new teachers, and their principals and vice principals (33 schools). I sat at my old middle school's newbie table, one of two for that school. The supe and the rest of the board got there after I did, and by that time the TOSAs (Teachers On Special Assignment, i.e., admin training) had created a "special" table for dignitaries, but I stayed with my home school newbies. They need to know what happens to teachers who retire and want to keep their oars in the water.

The supe was the featured speaker, and he is good. Short, to the point, but funny and comfortable. Based on what he said when he came in the door, I'm thinking, good, he's going to emphasize exemplary instruction and talk about our district goals for the classroom.

Well, I was right about that, but he went on to give the new teachers a heads up that we are moving toward cleaning up secondary grading and he quoted a bunch of Ken O'Connor's main points on good grading practices, while confessing that he himself had committed every grading atrocity known to teachers, but that if we were going to maximize our instructional effectiveness, we had to get grading and reporting under control.

This has been coming for a long time, and I was joyful. We are finally actively moving to fill in the missing piece from the research on student achievement

BTW, We're not looking to duplicate elementary level rubric/anecdotal report cards, but rather make our As, Bs, and Cs reflective of actual student achievement relative to standards. Until higher education has more sophisticated achievement data processing capability, high schools are pretty much stuck with the alphabet (but we can sure make it more meaningful!).

The supe also let the newbies know that they would encounter policies in their school handbooks that are contrary to his grading suggestions. Then he said, "So buck the system!"

He totally galvanized the audience -- literally. You could see new teachers startle in their seats, then laugh and applaud.

Monday, ETS/ATI grading conference info was distributed to the troops, so our district may break some ETS/ATI attendance records. We already have 20 spots reserved for secondary principals and VPs. Board members are making separate reservations so that they can get up to speed for the policy amendments they will need to make in the future so the newbies are no longer "bucking the system."

Species Identification

Unless you're a resident of the Wild West or the Great Lakes region, I wouldn't expect you to identify this fish as a wild River Canyon steelhead (a big, anadramous rainbow trout). Note the sleekness, the coloring, the spots, the fins that are sharp and haven't been worn ragged by the concrete walls of a fish hatchery.

My favorite guide took that picture. (One of his many fine photos that appear on this site.)

That fish was born in fresh river water and then spent two or three years in the ocean, feeding on bait fish before returning to the River Canyon to spawn. If he (it's a buck) is lucky, he'll go back and forth to the ocean once or twice more before he cashes in his chips.

What does a gorgeous wild steelhead have to do with grading? Well, when I'm talking about fishing and fish with other fishers, we assume that there's a base of common knowledge, a common vocabulary, and common points of reference, all allowing facile communication and discussion of different points of view. Failure to establish baselines can lead to very difficult discussions.

I want to correctly identify the direction in which I'm going with the grading discussion. And I thank The Science Goddess for reminding me with a remark she made on her blog about secondary standards-based grading, namely that it would be very difficult to move away from the ABCDF system in high schools because our system of higher education currently understands and is set up to process only the alphabetical shorthand.

I presently have very little interest in moving high schools away from the ABC grading system. Higher education currently requires it. But we can do a great deal to clean up what the letters represent. Someday, perhaps, higher ed will be able to process more information about individual achievement, but until then we have to make the best of what we have, and there is a whale of a lot we can do.

The grades that I want to link to standards are the As, Bs, and Cs. (It's hard for me to imagine Ds and Fs unless a student makes an effort not to achieve!)

PS: For you fishers out there, we are required by law to release wild steelhead. I would anyway.

What Are Grades For, and Why Should We Care?

I hope that back-to-school is going smoothly for all of you. I also hope that this post begins the fulfillment of a promise I made a while ago to have a running conversation on the importance of linking grades to standards for the improvement of student achievement.

Some of this dialog will be cross-posted on the Edublogger wiki discussion on standards-based grading.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any discussion of grading should begin with a common understanding of what grades are for, who needs to know what grades tell about a student, and what grades should and should not describe, and why.

In his book Transforming Classroom Grading, Robert Marzano (2000) cites the work of measurement expert Peter Airasian (1994) who tells us that grades can serve a number of purposes, including administrative (to decide on who moves through the system and who does not); guidance (based on grades, what a student should or should not pursue vocationally - a very suspect use, in my opinion); feedback about student achievement (no surprise here); instructional planning (try to steer clear of tracking -- a bad word these days); and motivation (beware, very difficult to substantiate).

Marzano concludes, not surprisingly, that the primary purpose of student grading is to provide feedback (accurate, undistorted, valid, and reliable) about student achievement. All other uses for grades flow from that, whether the consumers of grading information are parents, counselors, administration, admissions officers, or the students themselves.

It's also interesting to note that when Bob Marzano conducts professional development sessions on grading and asks his audiences of teachers if they have ever received grades that were not indicative of their academic achievement in a course of study, virtually all raise their hands. When he asks about their total school achievement report, 50% or so indicate that the grades they received did not reflect what they learned in school.

If teachers don't trust grades, why should anyone else?


Marzano, R. (2000). Transforming Classroom Grading. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Airasian, P. (1994). Classroom Assessment, 2nd ed.. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

2nd Annual Conference on Sound Grading Practices

Educational Testing Service/Assessment Training Institute is holding the premiere international conference on standards-based grading December 6-7, 2007.

The continuation of this conference is a sure indicator that grading for learning has hit critical mass, and I'm way happy to say that our district will be well represented.

I'll be doing a couple of breakout sessions (those will be listed later) and I'd very much enjoy meeting any of you who can persuade your district to send you. At the risk of sounding like an old-time sales dog, "Last year was a sellout, so talk to your administrator today."

Don't Worry, We'll Make It!

The best of plans can run into rough water, but the deep pool coming up next is calm and has good fishing.

The wiki kick off has been revised and will not require so much attention that principal's will be shaking their collective heads saying, "So that's where my star teacher lingered instead of getting ready for the first days of school!"

We anticipate many different conversations on different education topics. Not everyone of us burns with the same enthusiasm for each of them, so appearances at all gatherings are not expected.

If you're an edublogger with an interest in instructional improvement and you're curious about what grading has do with it, speak up here and maybe join the conversation.

From this point RepairKit may reference the Edubloggers wiki occasionally, but my blogs on "grading for learning" will be independent. I'll be looking for you on both sides! ;-)

New Wiki In Town! 2

Here's an update on our wiki...

First, participants discussed wiki goals, use, and format. Then Eric edited and finalized the Front Page that outlines where we are at this point.

We'll begin our exploration of standards-based grading with a warm up wherein we analyze a couple of grading situations that made major metro papers. In SBG Warm Up Draft 1, we'll look at the articles separately, comment on each of them, then compare the situations and draw some conclusions about what's being described in the articles. (Articles are on this page.)

Standards-Based Grading, or SBG from here on, is also known as "grading linked to standards," and "grading for learning." (Thanks to Exhausted Intern for the new term and three-letter acronym!)

The end goal is to produce a document or series of wiki pages that can 1) serve as a primer for educators new to SBG, 2) facilitate a quick review for educators who have been exposed to the concepts, 3) be a training tool for professional development sessions.

This topic is red hot and ready to roll.

New Wiki In Town!

Eric Turner of Second Hand Thoughts has been hard at work constructing a wiki for edubloggers to share and polish thoughts about the education topics near and dear to their hearts.

While poking around in Eric's new construction zone, I came upon the above image. It's from Eric and it pretty well sums up the aim of the new wiki.

Any more conversation/ideas about how it's going to work? Let's hear from you!

Eric's my choice for ad hoc wiki foreman at least till it's up and running. How does that sound?

A Grading Conversation

I'll be off the grid for a couple of days, but was hoping to contribute something constructive prior to taking off.

Labels/categories/topics in a blog sidebar, although they may be a way to keep track of topical conversations, don't go far enough. A search function also helps. (There's probably an efficient Web 2.0 way to do it, like a topical aggregator, but it hasn't touched my mind yet.) So this is an experiment, a "sticky" post. (I'll figure a way to make it sticky!)

Eric, in Second Hand Thoughts, reinforced my desire to broaden and deepen the conversations on what the Exhausted Intern calls SBG or "standards-based grading," aka, "grading for learning," or "grading linked to standards." (Eric has in mind an idea for focusing conversations that goes beyond what I'm hoping to do here.) Here goes...

So far, I've talked about SBG with the following folks who have "grading" listed on their topic sidebar...

The Science Goddess of What It's Like On the Inside
The Exhausted Intern of Not Enough Hours

...and folks who don't have "grading" listed as a topic, but have addressed the issue in posts or "comments" either on RepairKit or their own blog:

Miss Profe from Hardknock Teacher's Life (See today's knock-your-socks-off post.)
Miss A of Confessions from the Couch
The Midwest Teacher of Teach Me, I Dare You

This is also an open invitation to join the conversation.

If I left anyone out of this conversation, my sincere apology and please mention it in a comment to this post. I'll cut and paste your link above.

My goal is to list, in one place, all of you with whom I exchange ideas about SBG. (If this is a dumb idea, or there's a better way to do it, please tell me!)

A Hidden Third Factor That Influences Math Scores?

I'll be very interested to read what The Science Goddess has to say about intrinsic and extrinsic student motivation to succeed relative to grading linked to standards, and how it sorts out with regard for a student's orientation toward either comparative performance or sheer subject mastery.

I'm thinking it will be a complex set of complex questions, and I would love to see the study design!

Prior to SG posing the question of how grading student output relates to motivation, I pretty much thought of student motivation to achieve being either encumbered or unencumbered by a teacher's grading philosophy. In other words, poorly informed, idiosyncratic grading practices have the potential to crush student motivation to achieve, and enlightened grading practices simply unencumber the student, but eventually become transparent or invisible and are taken for granted like breathing fresh air.

I spent a lot of time trying to analyze what in the classroom stands in the way of student achievement. For example, for years we tried to improve math scores. It was like banging our heads against a brick wall. We used Northwest Regional Ed Lab's "Onward to Excellence" model, a no-foolin' piece of work, to guide us. Our principal was on fire and had the intellect to lead the charge. We barely budged those scores. My thinking lead me to this some years later...

Question: Can classroom assessment issues block motivation to achieve in math?

Possible Motivational Challenges:

1. Formative assessments are included in grades (no room for mistakes).

2. Homework is treated like a test – marked and included in the grade (students develop
“coping behaviors,” a euphemism for cheating).

3. Infrequent processing opportunities during instruction.

4. Sparse student-involved assessment.

5. Zeros or 50% given for late and missing work.

6. Teacher uses mean average (with outlying scores) to compute grades.

7. Make up policies are one-size-fits-all.

8. Missing or unclear exemplars for classwork/homework (should match instruction).

9. Recency of learning not considered in grade.


Solutions:

1. Analyze syllabi, grading policies, classroom rules. Check for research-based “best practices”.

2. Check understanding of computer grading program mechanics.

3. Check for mean averaging with extreme scores that skew the mean. Compare to median average of scores.

4. Check grade printouts.

5. Analyze homework policies.

6. Do classroom observations with focus on classroom assessment and processing as part of
instruction (including student-involved assessment).

7. Develop a processing activity/formative assessment “bank” that teachers can draw on.

8. Emphasize Assessment Literacy and grading for learning in professional development activities.

Note: Many of these challenges and solutions will apply to classes in other disciplines. Anyone care to add to the list?

Side Issue in Grading for Learning: The Student Who "Won't Work"

Grading policies need to be grounded in reality. That reality is this: most students will conform to the teacher's expectations, especially if those expectations are reasonable. Teachers who set up punitive grading systems create self-fulfilling prophecies by gearing their policies to the exceptions, the what-ifs. Those teachers go looking for trouble and they find it. There will always be exceptional students on both ends of the normal population curve who will confound, amaze, and frustrate us, but creating a classroom management and/or grading policy that speaks to them and drags the majority of students into an academic minefield is counter-productive.

So, what do we do with the student who "won't work."

Step One: Analyze the situation. What work is he or she refusing to do? Class work? Homework? Group work? Attending to the teacher? Taking notes on presentations? Is it "make or break" for succeeding in the course? Is the work necessary for learning or has the student already demonstrated understanding of the topic? Is the work a stated requirement of the class, grounded in district curriculum? Is the homework necessary, or does the student already have the subject under control?

We need to determine if the student is learning enough to satisfy the requirements of the course and not get hung up in procedural minutiae. "Fairness" is not treating all students alike. Fairness in education is meeting students at their own level of need. Our job is to evaluate learning, not "give credit" (the district gives "credits").

I will do what I can to help and persuade a student to engage in learning, even to arranging required after-school tutoring for the student with the permission of the parent. If it's simply a matter of homework not completed by a student who can score high in the test on that subject matter, what's the point of hassling the kid or reducing the grade? Power struggles backed up by punitive grading solve nothing and don't facilitate accurate reports of academic achievement.

Step Two: Get help. Recalcitrant students usually have multiple "issues" that accompany their refusal to engage in learning that have to be handled professionally by all school personnel involved. Involve the parent, counselor, and administration. Go over IEPs, 504s, and make sure that all the ducks are in a row: those that will help the student and those that satisfy state and federal bureaucracy. Keep the feedback going through that loop.

Step Three: Continue to grade for learning. If the student can't or won't meet the requirements of the course, summative assessments will tell the tale and that's that. No need to engage in punitive grading for "school work" that is not completed. Keep the parent, principal, and counselor informed and meet with them all as needed.

I kept a record of summative assessment grades and formative assessment grades (I used INC rather than zero), but used only summative assessment scores for report card grades. The formative set is very handy for backing up your final grades and your good judgment.

Summer Agenda/Discussion on Grading for Learning

My darling wife is the lead teacher in a small alternative school summer program for at risk high school students, and I don't have a board meeting until late July. The way I figure, it's recreation and reflection time sandwiched between some business obligations.

Last December, I had the opportunity to rub shoulders with international education hotshots at the ETS/ATI's Annual Conference on Grading. I was invited to do two 75 minute breakout sessions that would trace the evolution in assessment and grading philosophy of a career teacher who practiced grading linked to standards before the district got on board with the ideas. (At some point in the future I'll fill in some backstory about how I arrived in that particular train station, but let's get the show on the road.)

This fall, I travel to British Columbia to give a refined version of my interactive presentation on how to assess and grade for learning. That invitation came out of the ETS conference. I'll do some stuff (without pay -- conflict of interest) for my own district as well.

So, let's set a leisurely summer agenda for exploring a controversial topic -- "grading for learning" -- from a veteran teacher's point of view (not infallible, just veteran)...

In this post, to get the ball rolling, we're going to list the three worst things a teacher can do when grading student work. We'll talk about them at length in subsequent posts. (These are problems a gutsy district can tackle in a year or two.) I'm also going to include my own district approved/building approved grading guidelines for background at the end of this post. (The guidelines were published in 2003 by ASCD in a training manual.)

To place grading in context, in the next post we'll quickly review the uses of grades, and focus on the use to which teachers should be most sensitive. Then on to the good stuff.

If you want to join the conversation, hop on board. I'm open to disagreement for two reasons: 1) You might enlighten me, and 2) if I don't agree, I can sharpen my saw! :)


What are three biggest mistakes teachers make in grading?

1. Grading formative assessments (those assignments wherein the student should be free to err while getting corrective feedback) and adding these scores to the report card grade.

2. Bad Math -- inappropriate number crunching. (To wit, reckless use of the mean average and freely handing out zeros.)

3. Failing to differentiate between academics and behavior (knocking grades down for behavioral issues that have nothing to do with the student's showing what he or she has learned).


The Guidelines (here's what kids and parents get at the start of school):

8th Grade Social Studies
Guidelines for Grading, Homework and Discipline that Enhance Learning

Grading Guidelines:

1. All grading procedures relate to “intended learning outcomes” as written in State and School District content and performance standards.

2. Grades will be based on individual achievement of learning goals and will not be affected by issues such as effort, attitude, and participation. These factors will be reported separately. In addition, individual grades will be given for group work.

3. Assessments that are used to monitor student learning in progress and/or adjust teaching, such as in-class practice assignments, discussions, and other forms of descriptive feedback (“formative assessment”) to students about their learning, will not be factored into grades. Only assessments that take place after learning is supposed to have occurred (“summative assessment”) will be used for grading purposes. I will, however, keep a record of formative assessment scores to validate my judgment in grading. (For example, if a student performs poorly in summative assessments and there is a sparse record of participation in the formative assessment process, we can see that little learning took place.)

4. New information showing additional learning about any given standard will replace old information. Grades will reflect the most recent learning. Old scores relating to that standard will be discarded.

5. Where a combination of scores is used to determine a letter grade, I will make sure that they are descriptive of achievement only. For example, I will not include zeros (for late or missing assignments) in achievement statistics because they are both non-descriptive of learning, and extreme as values. I will use the median average (or middle score) as a general indicator of achievement unless there is an unusual circumstance, and then I will consider relative importance of the learning goals achieved and recency of scores. If there is insufficient evidence of achievement, I will assign an incomplete and expect the student to make arrangements to make-up or repeat the learning experiences missed.

6. Students will be graded relative to published standards and not in comparison to each other.

7. All assessments, both formative and summative, will match their learning goals. Grades will always be based on quality assessment.

8. Students will always know how their grades are formulated. They will often take part in the assessment process because recent research indicates that student-involved formative assessment is the most powerful innovation in learning that currently exists.


Grading Scales:

If prevailing median scores for learning goals are in the range of 90 to 100 percent, a grade of A will be given. The cutoffs for B, C, and D, respectively will be 80%, 70%, and 60%. Less than 60% will be considered F. Although I will never give a letter grade lower than the median score indicates, I may award a letter grade higher than the numbers indicate if there is sufficient additional non-numerical evidence of greater learning, such as performance rubrics or scoring guides which don’t easily convert to percentages.


Homework Guidelines:

Please see attached School Board Policy on homework for a comprehensive view.

We will not have homework every day. Most of our formative assessment activities will take place in the classroom with my coaching. I will expect students to work on “big” assignments with extended deadlines at home on occasion. My homework hotline message will inform you of what we have covered in class for the day and our plans for the week. It may vary from our actual schedule because I must submit the entire week’s plan on Monday and I must be flexible covering our course goals. I welcome your calls regarding makeup opportunities. My phone numbers and email addresses appear at the end of this document.


Makeup Work:

The District policy for makeup work is to give students the “number of days absent plus one” as time to make up work. I regard this as a guideline, not an inflexible rule. If a student is well enough to work at home, it is to their benefit to stay current from home. (I will never require less time than the District guideline, in any case.) If the student is too ill to stay current, even the stated amount of time may not be sufficient and may generate great stress for the student. We will agree, parents and students both, on mutually acceptable target dates for completion of work. If a student is indisposed up to and beyond a grading period, we shall make arrangements with the principal for a fair opportunity to make up work.


Late Work:

I expect a student to be timely because it benefits them in their achievement of learning goals, and it helps me. Chronic lateness of work will be dealt with as a behavioral problem -- not a grade reduction -- with a variety of remedies, including parental notification, a record of missed assignments in my formative assessment log, and staying after school (with parental permission and transportation support from the school) to complete assignments. I do not anticipate much of a problem with this since most of our assignments will be completed during class.


Behavioral Guidelines:

Please consult the student handbook for details on school rules. I promote the concept of mutual respect and students are able to relate this to their conduct. Additionally, I clarify my expectations by reference to the Golden Rule, which states that we should treat others as we would like to be treated. Students understand these references and apply them to their classroom behavior, my expectations and procedures. In rare cases where disciplinary action is required, I follow the Discipline Plan outlined in the student handbook.


Progress Reports:

In addition to scheduled school-wide progress reports, I will notify parents when a grade of D or F appears to be forthcoming, and/or when there is a marked or sudden change in a student’s performance or attitude.

Doing the Math of Student Grading

One of the questions that has bugged me over the years is why teachers continue to use the mean average when it's obvious that it can give misleading information about the measure of central tendency with regard to student grades.

I had an entire year of statistics as an undergrad sociology major, so I was aware enough, as a teacher, to disregard extreme scores in my grade calculations. (In those days, I hid this from my peers and principal, and to myself and my confidants called it "The Fudge Factor.")

Most of my fellow faculty members uncritically used the mean average, some rounding up, and some being sticklers for decimal point accuracy (thereby alienating students).

Yesterday it occurred to me, after reading a blog post on salary averages, of all things, that there is a pretty good reason that teachers do not (and apparently never did) use the median average to arrive at a grade even though that is the way to achieve statistical integrity when seeking an accurate measure of central tendency in a student's collection of scores.

The author of the salary average post said that prior to the advent of the computer, medians were more difficult to ascertain. I immediately identified with that statement! After I learned to apply the median to individual student's scores (Spring, 2000, at an Albuquerque, NM ASCD Institute with Ken O'Connor), I found it very cumbersome to calculate those medians! Where it wasn't obvious by looking at my grade book, I wrote out the numbers by hand.

Mean averages can easily be calculated with mechanical adding machines or electronic calculators by adding the scores, regardless of order, and dividing the sum by the number of the scores. Medians would require the teacher, in pre-computer days, to physically lay out the scores from high to low and count from each end toward the middle. No wonder it never became common practice. (According to my wife, had I kept my classroom stats on Excel, I could have rank ordered the scores for each student and spotted the median instantly! But I didn't know Excel.)

Over time, as grades became of vast witch's brew of too many scores with dubious relative value, the distinction between the basic aspects of the mean and median was either lost or never conceived of, and a pervasive and dangerous grading practice -- reliance on the mean average -- was born. But ignorance, and possibly laziness, may now be laid to rest. With computers and grading programs like MarkBook, we can calculate medians with the push of a key, so there's no excuse not to ditch the bad math and hit the trail to more valid grade calculation.

A side benefit of getting on the median track is that the battle against the illegitimate "zero" grade eases up because occasional zeros, for students that turn in work on a regular basis, become a non-issue, but an issue we must pursue nonetheless.