Aligning the Portrait of a Graduate with Grading 

By Dr. Shantha Smith, Chief Executive Officer

As I returned from the FullScale Symposium, where I had the privilege of learning alongside innovative educators from across the nation, I was struck by how many conversations centered on the Portrait of a Graduate and what it truly means to bring that vision to life.

Across the country, districts are crafting Portraits of a Graduate, beautifully designed, community-driven visions that define what skills and competencies students should know and be able to do when they leave our schools.

They describe learners who are collaborative, creative, critical thinkers, resilient, self-aware, and engaged citizens. These portraits hang proudly in district offices, on classroom walls, and across websites as a public declaration of what we believe our students deserve.

As powerful as these portraits are, I am wondering how we can make sure every part of our system lives up to the vision they describe. How do our grading practices reflect or fall short of the qualities we say matter most?

If our Portrait of a Graduate paints a vision of students who think critically, take risks, reflect, and grow, yet our grading systems continue to reward compliance, punctuality, and test performance, we are sending students two very different messages about what success truly means.

When Vision and Practice Live in Silos

This is where our work with schools becomes most urgent and meaningful, helping them bring coherence between vision and practice. Too often, districts design their Portrait of a Graduate in one room and discuss grading practices and policies in another.

One group talks passionately about developing critical thinkers, collaborators, and resilient learners, while another quietly averages homework points and late penalties into final grades.

At Crescendo, we’ve seen how these well-intentioned initiatives often live in silos, each powerful on its own but disconnected in practice. Grading is not just a technical adjustment; it’s a moral and strategic alignment between what we say we value for students and how we actually measure their learning.

When these two efforts come together, the system gains integrity. It begins to tell a coherent story, one where every policy, practice, and grade reflects the kind of graduates we aspire to develop.

A System Designed for a Different Era

The traditional 0–100 grading system was built during the industrial era, when schools were modeled after factories and the goal was efficiency, sorting, ranking, and certifying students for a workforce that valued uniformity and obedience.

That system may have served its time, but it wasn’t designed for the world our students are entering now.

Today’s graduates face a world defined by complexity, collaboration, and creativity. Artificial intelligence is reshaping industries faster than curriculum committees can meet. Employers and colleges alike are saying, “We need young people who can think critically, adapt, learn continuously, and work well with others.”

And yet, our grading systems often do the opposite.

• They reduce learning to numbers.
• They reward speed over depth.
• They penalize early mistakes rather than celebrate growth.

If we truly believe in the aspirations embedded in our Portrait of a Graduate, our grading systems must evolve to reflect that belief.

The Disconnect Between Vision and Practice 

Imagine a district where the Portrait of a Graduate highlights “resilience” as a key competency. Then imagine a student who struggles at first, revises their work multiple times, and ultimately demonstrates mastery, only to earn a C because the teacher averages early low scores into the final grade.

What message does that send about resilience?

Or consider a district that values “collaboration,” yet grading systems rarely acknowledge the role collaboration plays in deepening individual understanding.

At Crescendo, we believe grades should always reflect an individual student’s understanding, but that doesn’t mean collaboration should be invisible. The real power of collaboration is how it expands individual learning. When students engage in dialogue, exchange feedback, and co-construct ideas, their thinking deepens and their understanding grows.

Instead of grading the group, we work with teachers to use strategies that show how collaboration supports individual proficiency. Students should clearly see how learning with others strengthens their understanding and how that understanding is represented in their grade.

We cannot say we value one thing and then grade students on something else.

In one of our sessions at the FullScale Symposium, Joe Feldman reminded us that you cannot teach student agency through compliance. That insight captures the heart of equitable grading. If we want students to take ownership of their learning, our grading practices must invite reflection, revision, and choice, not obedience.

The Power of Equitable Grading

Equitable grading is about providing accurate, bias-resistant, and motivational grades. It ensures grades communicate what students know and can do, not how well they’ve complied with adult expectations.
When grading becomes equitable, it becomes transformative.
It shifts the teacher’s role from “gatekeeper” to “coach.” It changes grades from a tool of judgment to a tool of growth.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:

• Clarity and transparency: Teachers use 0–4 proficiency scales aligned to priority standards.
• Separation of behavior from achievement: Effort and punctuality don’t distort learning evidence.
• Opportunities for redemption: Students revise and reassess to show evidence of new learning.
• Feedback drives continuous learning: Reflection and iteration drive progress.

Equitable grading doesn’t just change numbers; it changes narratives. It tells students, “You do not have to be defined by your first attempt. Learning is an ongoing process.”

The Intersection and the Promise of Coherence

When districts align grading with their Portrait of a Graduate, something powerful happens: coherence.

Students begin receiving consistent messages about what success looks like. Teachers gain clarity and confidence about what they’re aiming for. Families start to see grades that actually tell the story of learning, growth, and readiness for the future.

This coherence transforms grading from a collection of classroom practices into a system that reflects shared values.

Grades stop being the end of the conversation and start becoming evidence of the learning journey we’ve promised our students.

Why This Alignment Matters Now

We are living in a moment when the call for relevance in education has never been louder. Caregivers are questioning traditional grading. Colleges are experimenting with mastery transcripts. Employers are rethinking credentials altogether.

Districts that align their Portrait of a Graduate with equitable grading are not just changing policy; they are living their values.

When districts bring their Portrait of a Graduate and grading into alignment, they send a clear message about what matters most. Together, we begin preparing students not for the world we grew up in, but for the world they are inheriting.

 Follow Dr. Shantha Smith for insights on equitable grading and transformative leadership.