Grading with points: The determination of report card grades by high school science teachers

School Science and Mathematics, Mar 1998 by Feldman, Allan, Alibrandi, Marsha, Kropf, Aaron

This study examined the grading practices of 91 high school science teachers. Surveys were used to collect data about types of assessments used, the weight given each assessment, and the mechanism used to determine students ' report card grades. It was found that few of these teachers used alternative forms of assessment such as performance assessments, journals, or portfolios. While there was little difference among teachers based on experience, gender, or school setting, preference and weights for different assessments varied among science subject taught. These teachers used two types of mechanisms to calculate report card grades: averages and points. Teachers who used point systems for grading purposes were interviewed. The results of this study indicate that reform efforts have had little effect on the grading practices of these teachers. In addition, a large percentage of these teachers use point systems, which act against reform efforts by reinforcing task completion rather than conceptual understanding as the goal for science education.

How do science teachers assign report card grades to their students? While this question might at first seem trivial, its answer is salient for those who are engaged in the reform of precollege education. These reforms are focused on changing curriculum, pedagogy, and the assessment of student learning (Helgeson, 1992). Nationally, reform efforts can be seen in the attempts to define what it means to know science and to invent new ways to assess that knowledge (National Research Council [NRC], 1996), as well as in the new standards and assessments developed by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1995). At the state level, new curriculum frameworks in science and mathematics and associated high-stakes assessments are under development.

A significant aspect of the reform effort is a strong move to change the ways student learning is assessed (e.g., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1993; NRC, 1996). Even given this, the saliency of the question of how teachers assign grades is not at first apparent, because for policy making purposes, effects on practice are a secondary effect of assessment. That is, while national standards and state frameworks may look toward the use of portfolios and performance assessments (e.g., California Assessment Program, 1990), the purpose of these new evaluation tools is to obtain a more valid indication of student learning rather than to have a direct effect on classroom teaching. When the focus of the reform is on changing teachers' practices of student assessment and evaluation, however, the ways in which teachers assign grades can be of utmost importance.

Given the interest among policy makers and teacher educators in changing the ways teachers assess their students, little attention has been paid by researchers to the ways teachers assign grades to students (Mead, 1992; Stiggens, Griswold & Frisbie, 1986). Most of what is known is based on several research projects examining how teachers grade particular assignments (Mead, 1992), what weight they place on various criteria (Agnew, 1985; Mead, 1992; Nava & Loyd, 1992; Terwilliger, 1987), and how their grading practices compare with the recommendations of measurement experts (Brookhart,1991; Cross and Frary,1996; Frary, Cross, & Weber, 1993). This limited body of research indicates that, for the most part, individual teachers determine how their students are graded. Yet, according to Agnew (1985), "There is a remarkable consistency...across all schools and all subject areas....[I]t seems at least a little amazing that there is so much agreement among teachers of all types" (p. 34). Second, teachers' subject areas appear to be a large factor in determining what criteria and what weights for those criteria go into the grading decision (Agnew, 1985). Also, while secondary teachers use a wide variety of data in assigning grades (Terwilliger,1992), for the most part they rely on a traditional assortment of assessment devices (Agnew, 1985). And finally, teachers use both achievement and nonachievement criteria (for example, classroom behavior) to determine grades (Nava & Loyd, 1992).

Measurement experts call this mix of achievement and nonachievement criteria "hodgepodge" grading (Brookhart, 1991), and they have demonstrated its existence in a large number of teachers' practices (Cross & Frary, 1996; Frary, Cross & Weber, 1993). Missing from this research is an in-depth look at the ways in which teachers use the information that they have about their students from various sources (tests and quizzes, projects, book and lab reports, essays scores, and class discussion) to arrive at a summative evaluation of student achievement in the class. How do teachers decide what grade to put on students' report cards?

One purpose of this study was to answer this question. In doing so, parts of previous studies were duplicated. Teachers were asked about the importance of various assessment techniques and the basis on which they assign grades. The findings from that part of this study support the findings of previous studies. In addition, teachers were asked about the ways they calculate or otherwise determine report card grades and why. This latter part of the study generated previously unreported findings about the mechanisms teachers use to arrive at the grades they put on report cards. In particular, the findings indicated that a substantial fraction of teachers used point systems for calculating report card grades.