Questions and Answers regarding Standards-Based Grading

What is Standards-Based grading?

Standards-Based grading is a term commonly used to describe grading in a system where instruction is aligned to clearly articulated Content Standards, and where student performance is reported based on a set of agreed upon Performance Standards.

Must Standards-Based Grades be reported with narrative descriptors?

Standards-based grades may be reported with narrative descriptors, letter grades, percentages or in any other format that effectively communicates student performance on the standards. In general, the choice of reporting depends on the complexity of the standards. Below I will discuss reporting using a simple Kindergarten Math standard and High school Algebra Standard.  Reporting strategies that are useful at Kindergarten do not, in general, have the same utility at High School.

Simple Standard

The first Kindergarten Math Common Core State Standard under Counting and Cardinality has the Content Standard: Know number names and the count sequence.

The associated Performance Standard is: Count to 100 by ones and tens. These standards can be found at: CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.K.CC.A.1

In this context most parents want to know “Can my child count from 1 to 100 by ones and tens?” While a simple yes or no may suffice adding some additional nuance can have utility.

In Kindergarten most students are focusing on Math, English Language Arts, Creative Arts, Science, Civics, Physical Health and well-being, possibly a World Language.  All the Performance Standards at this level are sufficiently succinct that they could appear on a report card accompanied by narrative descriptors which may effectively communicate student growth and achievement to parents.

Narrative descriptors like:

1.       Mastery, or Secure tell parents: Yes, your child can count from 1 to 100 by ones and tens.

2.      Developing tells parents: your child can begin but gets lost somewhere about the middle values before 100

3.      Beginning tells parents: your child knows how to start off counting

4.      Not Introduced tells parents: we have not started this yet in class.

Student performances for this standard could also be reported in percentages based on how much of the task the student could complete. If the student got tied up in the 70s, not necessarily at the same spot each time, we could report on the performance using a percentage (75%) or a letter grade C. However, this may not be as meaningful to most parents as a narrative descriptor. I can hear parents looking at a percentage or a letter grade and asking: “But can my child count from 1 to 100 by ones and tens?”  

Complex Standard

For comparison let us look at a High School Algebra standard.

A reasonable Content Standard is: Understand that polynomials form a system analogous to the integers, namely, they are closed under the operations of addition, subtraction, and multiplication.

The associated Performance Standard is: Add, subtract, and multiply polynomials.

This standards can be found at:  CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.HSA.APR.A.1

In contrast to the question most kindergarten parents might ask, most High school parents want to know: “How is my child doing in Algebra?” there is much less interest, in general, in a particular standard.

In High School many students take seven or eight classes. Neither students nor their parents have time to examine and benefit from the granularity of skills-based reporting. Note, I am not denying that it could be beneficial, but as a parent of two high school students myself let me assure you that the time and effort to truly benefit from that type of reporting is not available to most parents of high school aged students.

An overall Letter-Grade or percentage is much more pragmatic and utilitarian at this level.

When should reporting change?

If we accept that narrative descriptors have greater utility in the early grades ad percentages or letter grades are more beneficial in the high school grades than an appropriate question is: When should reporting change from narrative descriptors to percentages or letter grades?

The real answer to this question is: when it is most meaningful to do so. This answer is clearly not the same for all students and parents. So, some degree of pragmatism and practicality is required here.

Report cards should be tested on parent groups to see what is most meaningful and utilitarian, after all parents are the end users for this information.

Appropriate break points would best be aligned to school structure so that parents within specific grade bands are only required to struggle with one type of report card.

Narrative descriptors are clearly most appropriate for Early Childhood Education. Standards begin to get more complexed around third grade and by sixth grade most educators would agree that Secondary style letter Grade or percentage reporting is most appropriate. The change would probably be most appropriate somewhere between third and Fifth Grade. Again, let me say that appropriately conducted focus groups would be the best way to determine what might work best in a particular jurisdiction with specific standards.

Rolling Up Standards-Based Grades

In working with educators, I have often come across those who say that once a student has demonstrated mastery then, the Mastery score should be that student’s score for that standard. As an educator I know that just because Michaela can count from one to 100 by ones and tens today does not mean that she will be able to do it tomorrow. I also know that this fundamental skill is necessary for her to truly master skills that will be required in later courses so as a parent it is important to me that she truly has permanent mastery of this skill and that she can demonstrate it at any time, not just one time. So, I believe it is necessary for her to be assessed on this skill several times, even after she has demonstrated Mastery the first time. Further, I would want a record of her scores to be maintained.

As a parent I have questions: Is she consistently demonstrating this skill after she first demonstrated Mastery? Is this a skill she will need to revisit regularly in order to maintain?

So, I am asking her kindergarten teacher to assess the skill several times in several different ways. Let me add here, this is not simply my request. This is actually one of the Standards for Educational Testing and Assessment taken from the “Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (2014) published by the American Educational Research Association (AERA), American psychological Association (APA), and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), page 197:

Standard 12.9

Students who must demonstrate mastery of certain skills or knowledge before being promoted or granted a diploma should have a reasonable number of opportunities to succeed on alternate forms of the test or to be provided with technically sound alternatives to demonstrate mastery of the same skills and knowledge. In most circumstances, when students are provided with multiple opportunities to demonstrate mastery, the time interval between the opportunities should allow students to obtain the relevant instructional experiences.

Given that students should be given multiple opportunities to demonstrate a skill, I would add that the scores on those performances need to be recorded even if only as proof that multiple opportunities were provided to demonstrate mastery. With several performances and several reported scores should we combine these scores and if so, how do we combine these scores for reporting to parents?

Combining Scores for Reporting

At the Secondary School level, the use of categories and different forms of averaging and weighted averaging are commonly utilized. At the Elementary level, where narrative descriptors are utilized there is less agreement on what serves the best interests of students and parents.

The most common choices are (1) using the highest earned score (2) using an averaged or weighted averaged score, or (3) using a trend score.

Narrative descriptors usually fall in discrete categories but using any type of averaged score or trend score may result in scores that are non-integral and fall between assigned descriptor scores. Decisions will have to be made about the “return-score-range.” If Secure is 4.0 and Developing is 3.0 how do I assign a non-integral resultant score of 3.3, gained by using a trend algorithm or an average? Is that still Secure or is that Developing? Suppose mastery is 4.0 is 3.5 Mastery or is that approaching Mastery?

All of these are decisions that will need to be made based on what is most useful and serves the best interests of our students and their parents.

There is still lots of work to be done!!!!