Since November, a group of staff at the secondary level has been participating in a professional development book study using Joe Feldman’s text, Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms (2018.) The group has discussed how to create meaningful grades, reflected on current grading practices, and seeking to determine what fair grading entails.
The rationale for the book study stemmed from teacher and administrator discussions, educator SMARTIE goals, and the secondary level work focused on common rubrics, analyzing student data, and mastery of skills. Furthermore, the book study sought to develop more equitable grading practices that will align with the new Pentucket Middle/High School that will open in the fall. During the book study meetings, staff members have reflected on: their current grading practices and made minor changes; the purpose of homework and its weight in a student’s overall grade; reviewed Pentucket Middle and High School’s current grading practices to determine where it aligns with equitable grading; discussed the importance of rubrics and teacher feedback to monitor student learning; teacher created grading categories in Infinite Campus; and created a working definition of equity.
To provide some historical context on prior work, in October, utilizing the MA State Standards rubrics, teachers began to create student-friendly common department wide rubrics to assess student learning. The rubrics identified different levels of student performance the student has met, measurable progression of student performance, communicated the criteria for success for the teacher and the student, and connected to relevant content and performance objectives. Additionally, in October, educators created or revised common assessments that addressed specific content skills related to the MA Frameworks, per grade level content teams, to assess student learning through the use of rubrics. Since the work in October, teachers have administered common assessments, analyzed student work, and reflected on and revised instructional practices based on the learning needs of the students.
Specifically, at the book study meetings, staff have been engaged in reviewing the current grading descriptors in the PRHS and PRMS Handbooks. For example, some of the current grading descriptors read as “A– High honor grade; outstanding work-; B– Honor grade; good work-; C– Average grade; satisfactory work.” However, what exactly does “outstanding work” or “good work” mean? Educators are in the process of rewriting these descriptors that are clearer for staff, students, and families so that the descriptors reflect different levels of learning mastery and connect back to the school’s common rubrics. By rewriting the descriptors to be more specific, the grades students receive will more explicitly reflect their learning and provide students, teachers, and families a more accurate representation of a student’s learning progression. The new grading practices will be published in the program of studies.
While grading practices extend well beyond the issue of homework, how we grade homework has been a good initial touch point for the group as they continue to study the book and examine their own grading practices. Research on the effectiveness of homework is far from a settled debate, despite many attempts to research the topic. The 2019 article from The Atlantic, The Homework Cult by Joe Pinsker, revealed the variances in research on the effectiveness of homework but also addressed some of the issues around equity. Considering homework is completed outside of the school environment, students have different levels of support at home. While most educators, parents, and even students, can understand how practice at home would lead to better results in school, it is the grading of homework that becomes problematic. If a student is completing homework, are the grades based on the study habits of completion and practice, or are the grades a reflection of the skill proficiency or understanding of the concept? Those are challenging questions to untangle but if grades are treated the same, we may not always be grading what we think we are grading. If a student does not regularly complete homework from outside of school, yet demonstrates on assessments and in class work that they know and understand the key concepts, what does the lack of completion of homework mean? And should the grade in “History” be lower because they didn't complete homework, yet demonstrated they knew and understood everything the standards outlined for the course?
It was these questions and some around retakes, redos and competency or mastery based learning that prompted Mr. Shawn MacDonald, Pentucket Middle School STEM teacher and Ms. Linda Hackett, Pentucket Middle School and High School Global Language teacher to make some alterations to the way they grade. MacDonald, whose project-based elective STEM class is mostly subjective, explained why he has joined the book study, “I have witnessed the growth and success of students after providing the opportunity for them to test, reflect and revise a solution to a problem. Their engagement was lifted, their self-reflection boosted motivation, and a higher level of understanding and productivity has been the result.” Likewise, Hackett has allowed her students to revise/redo assignments as she questions, "Why burden students with a poor grade before they mastered the skill?” Both MacDonald’s and Hackett’s grading practices have allowed more equitable grading practices for students.
Vinny Hurd, a seventh grader in Mr. MacDonald’s natural science class, expressed that he appreciates that his teacher allows him to revise assignments. Because MacDonald’s has created a learning environment that fosters student growth, the seventh grader took the initiative to ask his teacher to revise his grade. Hurd communicated that he likes that MacDonald allows students to “redo” assignments because “he [MacDonald] wants us to learn.”
We are also reminded of the parachute packing class example. If two students are learning to pack a parachute and are evaluated at the end of each week for 4 straight weeks, they both end up with an average score. Student # 1 scored a 100%, 70%, 100% then a 70% in successive weeks averaging an 85%, which would indicate a proficient score. However student # 2 averaged an 83% - lower than student #1 but the scores were 60%, followed by 80%, then 90%, and finally 100%. While student #2 has a lower average - that is who I want packing my parachute. Student #2 has demonstrated mastery of the skills and concepts at the end of the time period, as opposed to student #1 who averages competency, but we aren’t so sure that they really have mastered it.
Of course jumping out of a plane is different from teaching 9th grade English (some may argue the difference is not that large). But conceptually these are some of the issues we are seeking to examine so we can build out consistent grading practices that take into account the variables our own students contend with. Equitable grading practices have a great deal to unpack, because much of our grading and grading habits have largely been based on the traditions we learned from others before us. Examining these practices with the goal of improved student engagement, learning and outcomes can be very powerful. Having an entire school staff have agreement on some key tenets, beliefs and practices can be transformative.
Beginning at the end of March, a continuation of the book study and an additional professional development opportunity has been created for staff members who participated in the book study and for new staff. The group has found great motivation in addressing this topic and want to advance the work for others in the district. The group will create new grading procedures, routines, practices, and structures for the 2022-2023 school year that defines equitable grading practices. The four components of the PD will consist of: letter grade clarification, late work policy, factoring the final grade, and homework policy.
At the May School Committee meeting, staff will present the new grading practices, routines, and procedures. To learn more about Feldman’s book, visit The Harvard Cast: Grading for Equity to listen to the podcast where Feldman explains the purpose behind his book.
Dr. Robin Doherty
7-12 Curriculum and Instruction Coordinator
Brent Conway
Assistant Superintendent
Comments