Our work to improve grading has always created both excitement and pushback: excitement because we give teachers–most of whom get no training in how to grade–the research and strategies to grade accurately and fairly; pushback because we challenge traditional grading practices.
During this current wave of hostility toward equity, people are prone to believe misconceptions about equitable grading. In the past few months, there has been an uptick in those misconceptions and pushback.
The biggest misconceptions are that Grading for Equity lowers expectations, and even gives preferences based on race or other circumstances. Grading for Equity does the opposite. After ten years of implementation in thousands of classrooms across the country, the evidence is in: Grading for Equity grades students entirely based on merit, and makes classrooms more rigorous.
The research on equitable grading could not be more clear: Traditional grading practices don’t tell the truth about what students know and can do, and they demotivate students, inflate grades, and lower academic standards. By contrast, equitable grading results in grades that reflect only what students have learned in a course–not their family income, race, special education designation, or first language. Grading for Equity reduces grade inflation and holds students accountable for their learning. Grading for Equity practices make teachers’ grades truthful.
Because every child benefits from grading that is accurate, fair, and merit-based, when people who are unfamiliar to Grading for Equity start learning about it, even if they are skeptical to other applications of “equity”, they become supportive of Grading for Equity (sometimes to their own surprise).
So if equity attracts misconceptions and hostility, why use the word “equity” at all, especially now? Standards-based grading and competency-based grading have similar approaches, but Grading for Equity is unique. We define “equity” as recognizing the reality that not every child starts from the same position and life circumstances, and our schools should ensure that every student is graded on what they know. Some people call this “accurate and fair grading” or “common sense grading” because it’s only by using the equitable grading principles and practices that grades can be trusted to tell the truth about what students have learned.
To those in classrooms or leading schools, districts or post-secondary institutions who worry about the difficulty of more equitable grading: Do not be afraid to do the right thing, and the right thing is to improve our century-old grading practices. Learn about equitable grading, consider contemporary research, and work in community with other educators and parents. Communicate clearly and truthfully about the deep flaws to our 100-year old grading practices–they are inconsistent from teacher to teacher, are mathematically unsound, invite subjectivity, and aren’t truthful–and why every student deserves and benefits from equitable grading. And build support by amplifying the stories of those who have experienced those benefits–students, teachers, parents. Join the thousands of teachers whose teaching and learning has been transformed because of their changes to grading. And if you have questions or need support, reach out to us.
Aren’t truthful and fair grades what we want for every student and family? Isn’t that what they deserve?
