Time to Revitalize Education through a "Just and Equitable" Grading System

by: Connie Germono, 2021 January 12

The article “Taking the Stress Out of Grading” written by Joe Feldman from Educational Leadership Magazine highlights the outdated practices in grading. It also discussed plan of action for a stress free grading system for teachers, specially during the time of Pandemic.

Reading the article reminded me of a post on the Harvard Business Review (HBR) magazine entitled, “You are what you measure”. For generations, grades have been used to measure students intellectual capability. I remember from my school days that those who had high grades were considered “cream of the crop” and “the best and the brightest.” High grades were like synonymous to excellence. The motivation to study came from a sense of fulfillment or/and a sense of achievement for being part of the “the best and the brightest,” or/and finally, being rewarded/recognized by the school, community, and most specially from parents or family of the student. Such mindset or practice has created a society where the “best and the brightest” were given the utmost attention, priority and most of all preference. These were manifested on various processes such as granting of scholarships, recruitment and selection, funding and, etc.

I value recognition and students who were performing well in school. I am not also undermining studying. I am just stressing and agreeing when Douglas Reeves mentioned in his conversation with Joe Feldman that

“Many grading systems are broken. When these systems rely on antiquated, inaccurate, and unfair practices, such as the average and using the 100-point scale, then we systematically put students at a disadvantage.”

Going back to the initial quote “You are what you measure,” when we use a grading system that is broken, then we can expect a broken outcome — a stressed teacher, mediocre results and to some extent a failure in education. Depending on the metric, people tend to modify their behavior (Ariely, D. 2010). The metric somehow becomes the goal. At some point, acing or passing the test was more important than learning. Because, good or high grades will result in a wide range of better work opportunities, and favorable incentives. Education then became a phase of life where learning was ministerial for both the students and teachers.

In view, the most important question in a student’s life is how to get a high grade. Here comes the challenge of a broken grading system. Antiquated practices such as the 0-100 scale, curving grades, including homework and class participation in the final grade make it stressful for teachers and the students. At the same time poses inequitable outcomes for the students (Feldman, J. 2020).

Of course, final grades were always linked with assessments. What goes to the final grade includes the performance of the students based on the results of the assessments (summative and sometimes formative). Hence, the evaluation of student’s learning depends on the criteria and grading strategy of the teacher. Some teachers, include formative assessments in the final grade, making it strenuous for them to read, check, and give grades for each seat work or homework of their students. Since such a task takes too much time and energy, some teachers tend to give assessments that can easily be checked or graded, i.e. Objective tests — which are mostly in the form of identification, matching type, or true or false. However, such tests, do not signify deep understanding but only feature the ability of the student to memorize a concept at a certain point in time.

I believe that the purpose of education is to transform an individual into a responsible citizen of society. The school should hone and upgrade the capabilities/competencies of an individual. In this case, the learning experience or journey should be at the center of any educational institution. Hence, the purpose of grading must be clearly defined. In the words of Douglas Reeves “The purpose is neither punishment nor reward; it is to provide accurate feedback to improve the performance of students and teachers.”

COVID-19 has triggered a lot of changes in how to do and look at things. It gave us the opportune time to review the existing grading system and make it more dynamic, and simple and target higher order of learning. This can be done through various means. Based on the article, one way to do this was through retakes. Allowing the student for a second chance (Feldman, J. & Reeves D., 2020). During this pandemic, various schools have also revised their grading system. “MIT …will issue either a passing grade, an incomplete, or no record adapted. Smith College switched to a satisfactory/unsatisfactory grading policy.” Vassar students, on the other hand, filed a petition for an unlimited Non-Recorded Options (NRO). This system allows students to “set a grade threshold for a class they choose to NRO.” (Lawler, S. 2020). Meantime, writing assessments can be implemented for higher-order cognition activity using the following strategies — Peer review; Limit what goes to the final grade; Collaborate with experts in using or setting up technologies that could assist faculty members checking the written assessments; Reduce incentives for cheating, i.e. less objective tests, and be flexible (Reynolds, J.A., et.al., 2020).

If we start to redefine the grading system, then maybe we can also reimagine education. After all, if the purpose of education was to transform the individual into responsible citizen, grades are the least priority but the mastery of the knowledge, skills, attitudes and habits learned from the lesson and co-creating initiatives for the society/community.

In the end, more than taking out the stress, we should be able to modify the structure that supports a broken grading system. The motivation of students, teachers and parents should be anchored to bringing the best version of the self and be able to contribute to nation development. The first thing to do is to overhaul how we view and implement a just and equitable grading system.

References:

Feldman, J. (2020) Taking the Stress Out of Grading. Educational Leadership

Ariely, D. (2010) You are What You Measure. Harvard Business Review Magazine. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2010/06/column-you-are-what-you-measure

Feldman, J. & Reeves, D. (2020) Grading During the Pandemic: A Conversation. Educational Leadership Magazine.

Lawler, S. (2020) Students, Faculty consider Alternative grading Amidst Pandemic. University Wire; Carlsbad. Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/wire-feeds/students-faculty-consider-alternative- grading/docview/2379250042/se-2?accountid=190474

Reynolds, J. A., Cai, V., Choi, J., Faller, S., Hu, M., Kozhumam, A., Vohra, A. (2020). Teaching during a pandemic: Using high‐impact writing assignments to balance rigor, engagement, flexibility, and workload. Ecology and Evolution, 10(22), 12573-12580. doi:http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1002/ece3.6776