Over the last several years, ICSD has phased in a “standards-based grading” system at the middle schools. The system’s self-proclaimed goal is to create a more equitable grading system at the middle school level, while realigning education to assess tangible and objective skills. To accomplish this, the more typical 100-point grading system was replaced with a broader 4-point grading scale (4 representing mastery), hoping to shift student focus away from specific numbers and towards furthering their learning. However, this new grading system is a severe problem for high school-bearing credit courses taught at the middle schools.
Algebra, Earth Science, and Foreign Languages courses are taught at the middle schools for high-school credit. Accelerating to take these classes while still in eighth grade is an important opportunity for students who hope to take advantage of IHS’s wide array of AP classes and electives. If students choose not to accelerate, they will eventually take these classes at the high school. At the middle schools, Algebra, Earth Science, and Foreign Languages are graded on a 4-point scale. By contrast, the exact same courses are graded out of 100 if taken at IHS.
“Standards-based grading” is not designed to be implemented only on a 4 point scale. For example, physics teacher Matthew Fellman grades all class assessments out of 10 points, giving students multiple opportunities per quarter to achieve the highest score possible. Instead of averaging a student’s scores on every assignment, only the highest grade is counted, emphasizing improvement over initial skill level. Fellman explained to The Tattler that “this [grading system] allows me to emphasize a growth mindset when learning AP physics, while differentiating between different levels of good/great/perfect. Where a student who knows they can improve on a performance assessment routinely has the opportunity to do so, it’s worth the time. Many of my student look at their great performance (8 of 10) and may decide they can really produce an exemplary/perfect (10 of 10) if given the chance.”
Unfortunately, most 4-point grading systems used in ICSD classrooms are not truly “standards based” as described above. ICSD has provided teachers with little direction on how to implement this new approach to grading, resulting in policies varying widely at the middle schools. One Earth Science teacher at DeWitt only awards a 4 for a perfect test score. By contrast, an Algebra teacher at the same school awards any A-level performance a score of 4. This inconsistency underscores a fundamental error in the district’s decision. Since there are only 4 categories of achievement, any discrepancies in grading between classes bear much more severe consequences. There is no gradation between 3 and 4, so a student in the aforementioned Earth Science class could answer all but one question correctly and receive the same grade as a much lower performer.
Current ninth graders have 4-point scale grades for Earth Science, Algebra, and Foreign Languages on their high school transcripts, and it is unclear whether or not colleges will understand such integer grades. District officials have assured us that they send an explanatory statement to colleges, but considering the very small amount of time which admissions officers spend reviewing each application, it is possible that the statement would not be read carefully. Most colleges are used to seeing 100-point or letter grades. A new system, especially one with only four achievement levels, could hurt students’ chances of admission, as highlighted by Board of Education member Dr. Adam Krantweiss at a recent curriculum meeting.
Another proposed plan suggests that eighth graders’ scores in Earth Science, Algebra, and Foreign Languages are converted to the 100-point scale on their high school transcripts. Students who earned a four would get a 95 and students who earned a three would get an 85. This conversion cannot accurately represent the effort that students put into the course, especially since, as previously mentioned, standards-based grading is supposed to be entirely separate from a percentage score. Additionally, a student with a perfect record would only be able to achieve a 95 at most. As Krantweiss mentioned at a recent Board meeting, “I don’t like that there’s a ceiling of 95. I’d like it to be that you could earn 100 points if you wanted to.” Capping scores at 95 disincentivizes students from working as hard as they can, because they may not be rewarded for doing so.
ICSD prides itself on helping students from all levels of academic achievement to succeed. Although Algebra and Earth Science are optional for eighth graders, they are required to take a foreign language regardless of academic performance. Acclimating all students to the 100-point scale in at least one eighth grade class would go a long way towards preparing middle schoolers for their high school education. Under the current system many students will not experience the 100-point grading scale until ninth grade, hampering their ability to hit the ground running in high school and further advantaging students with a strong academic support network at home.
The Tattler Editorial Board proposes the maintenance of the 4-point scale for sixth and seventh grade and a transition to the 100-point scale for eighth grade credit-bearing courses. Sixth and seventh graders would be able to experience the ideal values of the standards-based system, meeting the desires of the district. At the same time, grading methods would be consistent between Algebra, Earth Science, and Foreign Language classes at the middle schools and high school. Changing to a 100-point scale for credit-bearing courses would fairly represent eighth graders on their curricula vitae. Lastly, this change would acclimatize eighth graders to a new system of grading and prepare them for their first year of high school. We urge the Board of Education’s Curriculum Committee to vote to bring this issue before the entire board for reevaluation.
Be First to Comment