Out of fairness of giving additional exposure to
yesterday's less articulate comment, I thought this comment to
my post about the new grading policy at one of the school districts downstate was particularly insightful, in large part because it is written by someone who is actually experiencing said grading policy change:
"Note: This is a fairly long comment, but it clears up some misconceptions that have been floating around various places (not to accuse anything of having incomplete information though)
I am a student in the Capital School District. The grading scale (i.e., A=94-100, B=85-93....) has been that way for at least 5 years, with the exception of 50% as the lowest possible score. On the other hand, the 50-below-is-a-50 policy only applies to each quarter's score. In addition, a formative/summative grading system has been adopted for grades 5-12. Formative assignments, such as homework (which has a newly updated policy and is not supposed to be "busy work") and classwork, are intended to be for when students are still learning the concepts, and make up 20% of the grade. Summative assessments, such as tests and projects, are designed to assess a student's knowledge, and are worth 80% of the grade. These percentages are approximate, and may vary by 5% if my understanding of the policy is correct.
The purpose of making marking period grades under 50% a 50% is so that a student does not dig him/herself so deep into a hole that it would be impossible for them to pass that course, while "still reflecting that a student has failed". Under the grading system, 280 points (out of 400, 100 for each of the four quarters), are required to pass a full-year course. If a student gets, say, a 10% in the first quarter, that student would have to get at least a 90% every subsequent quarter in order to pass. With the 50% system in place, that student would need a 77% per quarter, which may be much more realistic for that student.
The formative and summative policy, at least in my school, is rather unpopular. Some (including teachers) despise the policy, while others take a more moderate view, preferring a change to the scale (A=90, B=80....) or a rebalancing to 70-30%,, and one of my teachers actually commented that she previously did a 90-10% system. Under this policy, class participation is not graded, and no assignment is allowed to be worth more than 20%. This means that teachers are required to give four summative and one formative assignment per quarter. For students, this results in their grades hinging heavily on their performance on tests. Previously, each teacher would set the weighting of each category of assignment. That tended to work well due to individual differences in course content, and it left some room for the teacher to adjust grades to ensure an accurate measure of student's performance.
This new grading system does cause stress for some students. In Capital, progress reports are released roughly halfway through each quarter, and reflect the student's current grade. Students scoring poorly on a test early on the quarter do not always have a chance to boost that grade before the progress report, and since the test makes up most of the grade when there are few other summative assignments, the student's grade will be much lower than what it should be. While some teachers do offer "make-up tests", essentially a re-test, not all will. An extreme example, but still showing the point, is one of a classmate whose average dropped about 15 percentage points in the beginning of the quarter due to a failed test.
The system places an emphasis on test grades, and so those that perform well on tests (showing that they do understand the concepts) but don't always do their homework will benefit, at the cost of those that do not always do well on tests, but always do their homework. It has been said that this promotes laziness, since it is not necessary to do any formative assignments at all if the average summative grade is at least 88% (resulting in a 70.4% average). Those that do work hard, but that are not good test-takers, are penalized.
A semi-recent Dover Post news article stated that the Board was open to suggestions for the policy. Several parents were present at their meeting and did voice their concerns about the new system. Topics mentioned included changing the percentage of each, class rankings differing large amounts dependent on the use of a 80-20 or a 70-30 split, and the first marking period grade of seniors hoping for early admission that are still adjusting to changing standards.
Some people do support the new system though. One of my teachers has said that summative assessments actually should be making up the majority of the grade, since the point of a course is to gain knowledge in a subject and be able to use it. Another important argument is that colleges do not have formative grades, and most students are college-bound. I have heard that another school is piloting a summative-only program (failing to do homework results in a detention). As to whether or not we are better prepared for college because of it, we will not know for several years, and by then the policy may have changed again.
A Dover Post article from several weeks ago stated that the board had been monitoring the situation, and that several concerned parents had brought up some issues. A look at grades revealed that the number of grades that were lower compared to last year was only about 3% higher than the number that were higher. If I remember correctly, the board was also open to changes to the policy.
As for my opinion on the changes itself, I am largely undecided. My grades this year have largely been unchanged, although the summative category has caused some large drops in my average. While I do agree that the policy is better for college preparation, it is important that it is not college, which may have been the reason for the formative category. I personally would prefer either a change to the grading scale, or a change in the percentages to a 70-30%. As to whether this system will be modified or removed, we will just have to wait and see."
