Chapter 7-9 Questions

KBug

Chapter_9_Grading_and_Student_Evaluation_TF.ppt

Home >Education homework help >Chapter 7-9 Questions

McGraw-Hill/Irwin

Chapter 9:
Grading and Student Evaluation

Classroom Evaluation of Student Performance

9-*

Grading is Personal

What are your most vivid memories of the grades and marks you received in school?
In regard to grades, do you in general have more positive or negative feelings, impressions, and recollections?
What specific feelings or emotions would emerge when your report card went home?
Everyone has been affected by grades in some way, and that’s why such strong feelings and emotions are often attached to those memories. Your students will be no different.

9-*

Personal Reflection

1. As a student did you like getting grades on your work?
2. Did you think the grades you received were fair and accurate?
3. What did the grades that you received tell you about your performance?
4. Did you receive any additional information from your teachers beyond just a recorded grade?
5. In your opinion, what function(s), if any, do grades perform for a student?

9-*

Grading Defined

Grading is the formal evaluation of student work which involves determining the value and quality of that work, based on some set of standards or performance criteria, and then providing some formal recognition of that value to the learner, usually in the form of some grade, number, or mark.

9-*

Evaluation

Evaluation involves the actual process of judging and determining the quality of work of a student.
Determining whether some product or performance is excellent or outstanding versus something that is satisfactory involves the reviewer, in most cases the teacher, making that judgment.
Moreover, this judgment should not be arbitrary but based on some recognized set of criteria.

9-*

More Definitions

A grade usually constituted by a letter, symbol, or other performance marker is used to represent the quality of a student’s work or performance. In addition, the term “mark” is generally used to describe the collection or summation of a series of grades over a specified time period such as a quarter or semester.
A grade or mark by its construction and design is a unitary or single representation that actually is made up of multiple measures or elements that reflect a considerable amount of information regarding a student’s performance.

9-*

Assessment and Grading are not the Same Thing

Classroom assessment is the larger comprehensive and dynamic process of reviewing and enhancing student learning, whereas grading and evaluation serve a more circumscribed, but nonetheless important, role in judging and determining the quality and worth of students’ products or performances in the classroom.
Therefore, the grading process should then be viewed as an integral part or element of a classroom assessment program and not as the sole purpose and function of the system.

9-*

Why Do We Grade?

It’s an official requirement that teachers must perform.
It’s purpose is to communicate information about a student’s academic performance.
Grading is used administratively to determine rank in class, credits toward graduation, promotion decisions, etc.

9-*

Grades Have Many Uses

Grades are considered, and exclusively for some situations, in the following educational decisions:
Promotion to the next grade
Honor roll selection
Academic awards (e.g. valedictorian)
Graduation
Consideration for honors courses

9-*

Grades Have Many Uses

Scholarship selection
Selection of future courses
Remedial help or tutoring
Vocational or career planning
Admission to college or graduate school
Obtaining high school credits
Others?

9-*

Essential Purpose for Grades

A primary purpose of grading that should always be recognized and understood is to provide a clear picture and measure of a student’s academic accomplishment and progress.
If a grade, no matter what form it takes and how it is constructed, does not do that, then it ceases to be an accurate evaluation of a student and his or her academic progress.

9-*

Grading: A History

Prior to the 20th century in America, no formal grading systems were recognized or needed as teachers were viewed as having complete authority for judging the academic progress of their students.
Grading systems began to emerge with percentage grading (a scale ranging from 0 to 100 that indicated the percentage of material that the student had learned) as a popular approach among educators in the early part of the 20th century.

9-*

Grading: A History

That system was later surpassed by the more popular categorical grade systems that involved a three point scale (excellent, average, and poor) and the contemporary five point letter grade system (excellent – A; good – B; average – C; poor – D; failing – F), which most of the general public recognizes and is familiar with today.

9-*

Grading: A History

Concerns with the inconsistency of grades created interest in a pass-fail system, but that was short lived as the standard letter grade system became strongly entrenched within education in the later decades of the 20th century and has continued to the present day.

Grading and Today’s Classroom

A Starting Point

9-*

Questions to Ask in Constructing Your Grading System

1. What do you want and need your grading system to do for you as a teacher?
2. How is the collected information from this system to be used?
3. Who is to benefit from this information?
4. What measurement procedures will be used in determining the grades of my students?

9-*

Three Central Issues Surrounding Grading for Teachers

There exist at least three central grading issues that every teacher must address:
1) What grading system will be used to evaluate student work?
2) What will make up the actual construction of grades in my class?
3) What comparison or reference base will be used to assign grades to students?
These are critical areas that teachers must carefully examine and decide on if they are to be truly effective in evaluating the work and progress of their students.

9-*

Comparison Types

Along with identifying a grading scale and the composition elements of what a grade is and will represent in your classroom, an overall framework or reference point is needed to give a grade perspective and meaning.
The most common grade comparison models include norm-referenced, criterion-referenced and aptitude or self-referenced.

9-*

Norm-Referenced Model

Norm-referenced grading involves comparing a student’s performance to a specific group, such as a classroom or a grade level, in order to see where that performance falls relative to the performance of that entire group.
With this approach, specific percentages of grades are typically preset so that only a certain number or quota of A’s; B’s, C’s, D’s and F’s are given by the teacher.

9-*

Norm-Referenced Model (NR)

This is known more generally as “grading on the curve” and this approach is used in classes when instructors want to limit the number of high marks, spread or distribute student performances, and avoid grade inflation.
It also frees the teacher from any grading dilemmas and subjective calls since the number of grades is already predetermined as part of the system. This approach is also erroneously viewed by many teachers as reflecting a higher grading standard and rigor.

9-*

Norm-Referenced Scale

Grade Percentage of Students Receiving Mark
A 10%
B 20%
C 40%
D 20%
F 10%

9-*

NR Limitations

To start with, the norming group that is to be used as the comparison is very important and of course reference groups can vary considerably. For example, if you are a typical student and you walk into a classroom with a group of academically superior students, then you will likely need a miracle to survive in this class.
On the other hand, is you are fortunate enough to enter a class that is made of students who are at the bottom of the educational food chain, then this is your lucky day. Clearly, each outcome is highly dependent upon the constituency of the groups.

9-*

NR Limitations

Most importantly, norm-referenced grades are based on a student’s positioning within a group and are not linked to the acquisition of specific learning goals or outcomes.
As a student, you could theoretically do well with a low comparison group and really not know the material very well, or conversely not do well at all with a high comparison group but know your stuff fairly well.

9-*

NR Limitations

Also consider this, if you have students who consistently score or perform in the middle to the bottom relative to their peers (and you have or will have students like this), then that is where they will stay and their grades will reflect that position. In essence, they become “stuck” in that relative position within the group or class, and there is no real incentive or motivation to move beyond it because they can’t.
The teacher also suffers as a portion of students are always going to do poorly and/or fail no matter how well the content is taught.

9-*

And More Limitations

Finally, the percentage of students who can receive a specific grade is arbitrary and completely under the control of the teacher. For example, 10, 12, 15, or 20% of students could be assigned A’s and the same variability can be demonstrated with the other grades. Those determinations are controlled exclusively by the instructor, so the percentage cutoffs of certain grades can and do vary which makes grade comparisons very difficult.

9-*

Criterion-Referenced Model

Criterion-referenced grading involves comparing a student’s performance to a specific and predetermined performance level or standard of work.
If a student meets a certain performance level or score (e.g. acquires a certain number of points based on work completed within the class) according to set learning standards, then the student receives the grade associated with that level or score.
No preset number of grades is established as with the norm-referenced model. Therefore, all students who reach a certain level receive that grade (e.g. an A) no matter if the entire class reaches that level. Conversely, many or most students could also receive poor grades depending upon the performance levels that are demonstrated.

9-*

Criterion-Referenced (CR) Model

Criterion-referenced grading is recognized as the most commonly utilized grading model in the schools.
The criterion-referenced aspect to the grading usually falls within two general categories: performance-based criteria or percentage-based criteria.
Performance-based criteria involve the listing and completion of specific learning accomplishments and competencies that students must demonstrate in order to receive a particular grade or rating. These accomplishments can take the form of specific work products (e.g. classroom projects, portfolios, reports, presentations) in which rubrics, or other assessment measures, are used to review and score each item based on the appropriate criteria and learning standard(s).

9-*

CR Model

Percentage-based criteria are based on the percentage of items answered correctly on assessment measures that are constructed and aligned with identified learning targets and outcomes. Cutoff percentages are set at particular performance levels and used to designate certain levels of mastery of the material.

9-*

CR Model

Cautions are still in order with criterion-referenced grading. The grading system is connected to recognized standards of performance and this reality must be recognized and understood by the students who are expected to acquire them.
Because the potential for all students to do well exists with this model, the general public along with even some educators may view this as a less rigorous and effective grading system. This is an inaccurate perception, but one that still exists and must be recognized.

9-*

Self-Referenced (SR) Model

An aptitude comparison or self-referenced model involves comparing each student’s learning progress against their own estimated ability.
Grades and evaluation of progress is made based on how closely the student’s performance lines up with his or her estimated abilities as judged by the teacher.
If a student’s classroom performance is comparable to or exceeds his or her estimated ability (high, average, or low), then high marks would be provided. But if progress is not seen as measuring up to one’s ability, at any level, then lower marks would be given.

9-*

Self-Referenced Model

This system may work well for high ability students (e.g. gifted or talented, superior athletes and performance artists).
However, when a broader range of abilities is considered the lower ability students are more likely to receive inflated grades based merely on their lower expected ability levels.

9-*

SR Model

The major issue with this model involves the accurate identification and quantification of student ability and then judging progress based on those measures.
The aptitude grading approach could prove useful in evaluating the learning progress for a limited group of high-end students. However, in general this model does not serve as an effective grading system for the majority of learners regardless of their estimated ability levels.
We must not forget that everyone has the capacity to learn, and usually at high levels. It’s our job as professional educators to make sure we effectively teach, assess, and evaluate that learning progress.

9-*

Grading Systems

The most commonly implemented system is categorical by design and requires performances to be evaluated based on letters (e.g. A, B, C, etc. and “+” and “–” are sometimes added to the letter grades).
Other systems may include percentages (e.g., passed 90% of the material in the course); standards-based performance indicators (e.g., ratings such as exceptional, proficient, etc.) or simple binary options like pass or fail.

9-*

Grading Systems

The narrative format typically involves an individualized and detailed written review of each student’s performance at the end of a grading period.
Grading systems can even include checklists where individual skills are reviewed and evaluated. In addition, combined systems that incorporate elements of different grading systems are also used.
Each system evidences particular strengths as well as limitations, so careful consideration is warranted no matter what system is chosen.

9-*

Letters are nice, but…

Most people recognize that getting an A is better than receiving a C but beyond that point no specific information is provided that is used to separate or differentiate the grades. Descriptors are sometimes included to describe each of the markers to help provide some qualitative difference.
For example, the descriptor “excellent” is often associated with the grade of A while C is described as “satisfactory” or “acceptable.” These descriptions provide additional clarity and help to create more of a qualitative separation of the performances between the grades.

9-*

Detail is Lacking

But even with descriptions, no detailed information regarding the student’s performance is provided with this method. Symbol-based methods, like letter grades, simply lack the capacity to provide detail and richness of a student’s work or performance.

9-*

Know Your Letter Limitations

The simplicity of utilizing a single grade or symbol is viewed by many as its greatest limitation.
When the collection of information from many different measures is combined into one summative entity, then a tremendous amount of information and detail is not recognized which further dilutes the accuracy and meaning of that single mark.

9-*

Know Your Letter Limitations

Also, the selection of letter grades can and do vary since cutoffs between grade categories are arbitrary and what becomes “A-work” may not really differ from “B-work.”
When you hear a teacher say, “I know what an A is in my classroom,” just remember every teacher will likely have a different viewpoint and estimation of what that “A” really is.

9-*

Numerical Grading

Another common grade reporting method is numerical grades which involve the use of number ranges or bands (with 100 set as the ceiling of the range) that are typically connected to or paired with letter grade equivalents. For example, the common 10-point grading scale is as follows :
Grading Scale Letter Grade
90-100 A
80-89 B
70-79 C
60-69 D
Below 60 F

9-*

Numerical System

In addition, an overall composite number can be generated, usually through the process of averaging all collected scores to obtain a final summative score, to provide a summary mark regarding a student’s work over an extended period of time. This number scale allows for more precision and discrimination of a student’s performance as compared to letter grades.
However, consistent with the letter grade system, the numerical grade system still requires collapsing a huge amount of student information into a single number or score.

9-*

Numerical System

Like letter grades, it is still hard to determine what a score (e.g., 82% versus a 79% in American History) really means. The score is still only a summarization of the student’s performance based on what was collected as evidence for that student over a specified time period.
Also, percentage cutoffs at the various levels are arbitrary which can blur the accuracy and purpose of the system.

9-*

Grading Reality

School District A uses an 8 point scale (e.g., 93-100% is an A, 85-92% is a B, 77-84% is a C, 70-76% is a D, and 69% and below is a F) while school district B uses a 10 point scale (e.g., 90-100% is an A, 80-89% is a B, 70-79% is a C, 60-69% is a D, and 59% and lower is a F).
So the English paper that received a score of 91 is a B in School District A, but in School District B it’s an A. Try to explain that to the student who goes to School District A. As you might imagine, these cutoffs and ranges can be difficult to justify and defend.

9-*

Other Grading Options

Pass-fail is a simple binary system that only acknowledges two possible grading outcomes: 1) the passing of a course or program, or 2) the failure to pass a course or program.
This type of system is not used extensively in the K-12 arena, but it still can be found in post-secondary instruction where it originated as an alternative to grade-based classes.
Due to the impact of academic standards-based instruction on P-12 education, school districts across the country have been working on designing grading and reporting procedures that track the progress of students’ achievement relative to required academic standards and outcomes.

9-*

Standards-Based Report Cards

As part of the academic standards-based movement within P-12 education, most states have identified grade level learning goals and standards within the primary content areas (e.g., math, reading, language arts, social studies, science) of instruction.
This allows teachers to focus on performance or “evidence” indicators for those standards as benchmarks, or “learning mile markers” are reached documenting the learning progress of the students.
Reporting methods and progress reports attempt to record student progress relative to identified standards, as well as the specific student learning skills and outcomes that are embedded within those standards.

9-*

Standards-Based Method

With standards-based reporting methods, performance level descriptors are used to describe student progress relative to grade-level standards. Student progress can be described several ways which can involve numerical ratings (e.g., 1 beginning standard level – 3 meets standard level), achievement descriptors (e.g., emergent, proficient, etc.) or even behavioral explanations (e.g., rarely evidenced, consistently evidenced, etc.).
This allows the teacher to provide more detailed feedback to the students regarding their progress as well as to their parents. This is important as many listed skills within standards may require the entire academic year before they are acquired and mastered.

9-*

Standards-Based Grading

Standards-based grading can generate considerable information regarding a student’s learning progress.
It can provide a meaningful picture of a student’s achievement, as well as provide clarity to skill areas that require more work and attention.
From an instructional perspective, this reporting format is much more informative and detailed than the traditional letter or numerical grade systems.

9-*

Limitations

However, this informative system comes at a cost as it requires considerable time and effort on the teacher’s part to orchestrate, document, and evaluate student performances that must be reviewed.
This grading method is more complicated and may not be well understood or received by parents. It may provide too much information especially for parents who are trying to find out, “what grade did my kid get?”
Standards-based grading “fits” better at the elementary level because of the skill emphasis whereas at the middle and high school levels instruction is generally more content focused and organized.

9-*

Limitations

Due to a greater range of courses and programs of study, a standards-based reporting system is more difficult to effectively use at the high school level. Another potential drawback is the use of grades after high school (e.g., transcripts to college, information to employers, etc.).
College admissions requirements typically require grade point information and not providing this kind of information could adversely affect students as they attempt to enroll.

9-*

Even More Methods

The narrative grading format typically involves an individualized written review of a student’s performance that focuses on his or her particular learning accomplishments or skill acquisitions as well as continuing needs and/or learning issues or problems that must be addressed and remediated.
Few school districts utilize a complete narrative approach to grading. However, some schools include brief narrative response options to accompany a more standard or traditional grading and reporting system.

9-*

Narrative Method

The distinct advantage to the narrative approach is that rich, detailed information on student performance, particularly when feedback is provided relative to specific skills or goals, is obtained and can be used to direct further instruction and learning.
Unfortunately, providing this kind and level of feedback requires considerable time that teachers may not have in their already overloaded schedules.

9-*

Narrative Method

Standardized comment menus are available with computerized grading programs, which allow teachers to select and print onto students’ report cards specific comments or remarks.
Be aware that these responses are sometimes perceived by parents and students alike as impersonal and generic as the same identical comments can be reported by several different teachers for the same child.

Deciding the Makeup of a Grade

What Should a Grade Reflect?

9-*

What Should Make Up a Grade?

The elements that are selected and the evaluation practices that are followed are just as significant as the scale that is used to provide and describe the evaluation mark or grade.
So what really makes up a grade? It actually depends upon you the teacher. The evaluation measures (e.g., tests, quizzes, projects, homework, etc.) that are selected by you and used within a designated marking system (e.g., letter grades, percentages, rating, etc.) constitute the grade or official performance record or mark for students.
The selection of the evaluation factors, and the relative weighting or impact of those factors, should depend on the purpose and the intended use of the grades.

9-*

What Will Make Up Your Grade?

Examine the following and then decide what components(s) or elements you would use (and why) in the academic evaluation of your students as part of your grading and evaluation system:
Tests
Quizzes
Homework
Effort
Class Participation
Class Attendance

9-*

What Will Make Up Your Grade?

Projects
Work habits
Attitude
Extra Credit
Portfolios
Improvement
Behavior
Other Elements?

9-*

Be Sure of the Why

The “why” and reasons behind the selections provides you with the insight into what you, as a professional educator, value and hold as important in the evaluation of your student’s work.
That is really the most critical issue because the reason(s) behind the selections must exist and be evident to a teacher as well as any other interested party or audience including students, parents, colleagues, or other community members.
A teacher must be clear about their evaluation system before they can make it clear to anyone else.

9-*

The Goal of Grading

Obtain enough valid information to make a fair grading judgment about a student.
Clearly communicate the level of the student’s academic performance that can be supported with evidence.
Judgment should be based on formal student evidence (tests, projects, performance assessments, etc.).

9-*

Product, Process, and Progress

To help in the grading selection process, it is important to examine and clarify what aspects of learning your grading system will address and document.
Guskey and Bailey (2001) contend that grading systems can be differentiated based on three broad learning criteria categories: product, process, and progress.

9-*

Product

A grading and reporting system that focuses on product evidence collects information on the learning accomplishments of a student typically at the end of an instructional period. Final or summative products are most important and relevant within this kind of system.

9-*

Process

Process criteria or evidence usually represent non-achievement factors such as effort, participation, attendance, and other related variables that would be considered and included in evaluating students.
Homework could also be considered a non-achievement measure since it functions as a practice activity and does not require an immediate or on-demand demonstration of a skill or proficiency which is necessary when completing a test or in-class performance.

9-*

Progress

In regard to progress criteria, a teacher is most interested in the extent of the student’s learning during a specified instructional period.
Has a large amount of progress been made or just a small amount relative to where the student started when the instruction started?
Questions like this could and would be answered as part of this grading domain.

9-*

Progress Evidence

Identifying what reading level a student is at the end of instruction as compared to when he started the program would serve as progress evidence.
In addition, even though students would likely show different progress points (i.e., evidence different levels of achievement) at various grading periods, their relative progress and rate of learning could be examined and compared for the entire class or group.

9-*

Provide Information on All Three

It has been found (Brookhart, 1993, Friedman & Manley, 1992, Stiggins, Frisbie, & Griswold, 1989) that teachers consistently use and combine several different grading elements together when designing their grading systems, thereby creating a potentially confusing picture of what truly is considered important and necessary when measuring and evaluating student achievement and progress in the classroom.
Guskey and Bailey (2001) recommend that the three grading domains (i.e., product, process, and progress) be recognized within a grading system but evaluated and reported out separately in order to provide a more comprehensive and detailed evaluation of student work.

9-*

The Grading Troika?

Since the product measure serves as the achievement indice, a student’s grade or mark would be based on his or her performance on this dimension.
The process level can examine and report on important non-achievement factors such as effort, participation, homework completion, attitude, or attendance.
Also, information and description on the student’s actual progress over the instructional period can be provided. With this approach, a much more accurate, robust and detailed evaluation of a student’s performance is possible.

Grading and Students with Special Needs

Evaluating the Progress of All Your Students

9-*

Grading Students with Special Needs

As a teacher, you will have students with special needs in your classroom and perhaps for significant amounts of time. Due to federal legislation, in the form of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA-97), it’s reauthorization in 2004 (IDIEA-04), and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in 2002, few if any real instructional boundaries now exist between regular and special education students.
With the passage of this legislation, special education students are expected to be taught, to the greatest extent possible, and integrated into the same educational curriculum and settings as has been afforded their general education peers.

9-*

Special Needs Students

In addition, students with special needs are expected to participate in and pass the same district and state-wide assessments and achievement tests.
Accommodations and alternative assessments are recognized for some identified students; however, in general all students are being held accountable to the same academic and achievement standards and are expected to learn and at high levels.

9-*

Grading Issues

In most instances, special education teachers are viewed as the teacher of record, and as such possess the primary responsibility of reviewing, scoring, and grading work for the special education students.
However, districts vary and certainly with collaborative and team-teaching practices the opportunity exists for shared evaluation. This is especially the case when students with special needs spend a majority of their instructional time in academic content classes with typical students and work on mastering the same instructional goals and outcomes.

9-*

Grading Issues

Given the teacher’s expertise in a content area (e.g., science or math), he or she is in the best position to collect evidence on any student’s progress relative to that area, and to evaluate their progress in mastering that material.
In addition, always remember to check the listed learning goals in an identified student’s IEP as that represents the legally binding educational and instructional contract between the student and the school district (Munk & Bursuck, 2003, Brookhart 2004).

9-*

Grading Approaches for Students with Special Needs

What can and should be comforting is that the information that has been reviewed for grading applies to all students, including those that are identified and receive special education services.
When grading, an essential key point that must be addressed is determining what the students will be evaluated against; the criteria or criterion that will be used as the performance standard in the evaluation of the students’ work.

9-*

Grading Approaches for Students with Special Needs

As reported and discussed in Guskey and Bailey (2001), there are four basic approaches that are considered regarding grading policies for students with special needs that are served in regular education classes:
1) Uniform grading standard for all students
2) Grading based on effort
3) Grading based on progress
4) Making grading adaptations

9-*

Uniform Grading Standard

This approach holds that if the learning criteria are consistent and expected to be the same for all students, then the same grading and review process should be followed no matter the student and his/her status.
Even with accepted and recognized modifications and adjustments to instruction or assessment assignments, as stipulated in a student’s IEP, all student work would be evaluated and held to the same standards when determining a student’s grade; in essence, an absolute standard of performance that must be met in order to receive a specified mark or grade.

9-*

Not a Level Playing Field

For the identified students that possess a strong academic background and skill set this approach may be warranted and seen as appropriate, as these students truly experience the full ranging impact of inclusion.
However, the reality of this approach is quite drastic for the majority of students with special needs, as considerable evidence demonstrates that these students as a collective group demonstrate disproportionably higher rates of low to failing grades compared to their non-disabled peers (Donohue & Zigmond, 1990, Valdes, Williamson, & Wagner, 1990).

9-*

You Will Likely Have Students at Different Places in the Educational Race

When it comes to traditional and current grading efforts and procedures, a level playing field does not exist for students with disabilities and they are more likely to experience academic failure and are at high risk for dropping out of school (Zigmond & Thorton, 1985).

9-*

You Will Likely Have Students at Different Places in the Educational Race

In addition to meeting the same standard of performance, students with disabilities are also placed in the situation of acquiring those standard(s) within the same amount of academic instructional time as their non-identified peers.
However, according to Gettinger (1989), significantly more engaged time is required for low achieving students, and with some educational outcomes six times as much time may be needed.

9-*

Grading Based on Effort

Grading a student with special needs or any student for that matter on effort is an extremely imprecise approach that involves a totally subjective judgment from a teacher.
Even if effort as a concept is defined and measured by certain behaviors (e.g., attendance, participation in class, work completion), it does not reflect a student’s actual achievement or accomplishments, and that should be the primary purpose of any grading system.
Therefore, using effort as the sole measure of a student’s grade even if the student has limited abilities is not advised.

9-*

Grading Based on Progress

Grading based on progress reviews the actual amount of growth or change in a student from a specific starting point to a recognized end point.
For this approach to be effective, learning goals and objectives must be identified and known to the learners as well as the completion of periodic learning checks provided over the instructional time period in order to ensure learning progress.

9-*

Student Progress

One of most desirable aspects to this approach is the recognition of individual accomplishment and progress which is highly motivating and extremely reinforcing for any learner.
Recognition of progress whether documented in lessons successfully completed as part of an on-line course, reading rate increase over a three week period, or independent usage of a library for a research project, serves to maintain a student’s interest, confidence, and persistence in completing the work and meeting the goals of a lesson.

9-*

Student Progress

Students whose instruction is directed through the use of an IEP can be well served with a progress-based grading system.
However, as noted by Guskey and Bailey (2001), there are conditions that must be recognized.
First, individual standards of performance are appropriately generated and based on the unique needs and qualities of the student and his or her learning program.
However, comparisons beyond the individual aren’t meaningful and appropriate. For instance, a progress-based grade for one student who meets a certain set of outcomes will likely mean something else for another student who accomplishes a different set of objectives.

9-*

Student Progress

In addition, the performance standards that are selected could be too demanding or not demanding enough with obvious consequences associated with either selection.
As with all grading methods, careful consideration must be made since with any system there will always exist limitations and potential drawbacks.

9-*

Grading Adaptation

The grading adaptation approach involves teachers making grading adjustments or refinements to their existing grading system for their students with disabilities.
This is a common approach among teachers (Bursuck, Polloway, Plante, Epstein, Jayanthi, & McConeghy, 1996), and according to Guskey and Bailey (2001), the typical adaptations teachers find useful include, “grading on improvement, basing a grade on meeting the objectives specified in an IEP, and assigning separate grades for product (achievement) and for process (effort and class behavior)” (p. 117).

9-*

Grading Adaptations

Adaptations fall into three general areas: 1) changing grading criteria; 2) providing supplemental information; 3) using other grading options. Teachers will often use one or more of these options when making grading adjustments for students with special needs.
The lack of consistency and organization surrounding this issue is not surprising, as most school districts lack uniform policy regarding grading and most teachers rely on themselves in regards to grading considerations (Polloway, Epstein, Bursuck, Roderique, McConeghy, & Jayanthi, 1994).

9-*

Three Performance Measures

When these approaches are collectively examined and reviewed, Guskey and Bailey (2001) make the case that the best and most equitable grading option is the same one that was described earlier.
Since a single grade or mark is really not adequate to provide all the information that needs to be provided when the grading and evaluation of a student’s performance is involved, a multi-measure grading system is necessary where information on product (which serves as the achievement measure), process (effort and behavior variables), and progress (improvement over the course of instruction) can be provided and recorded.