15 Fixes for Broken Grades -- Who said they were broken?

The first time I heard of this book, about 8 years ago, many of my colleagues wondered "who said that our grading system is broken? 

People sitting in that initial meeting mumbled "well, this too shall pass". But, guess what? It hasn't passed! This book has caused educators to take a serious look at grading practices and how and why we give grades.  Initially the ideas were shocking and caused a lot of negative reactions from teachers, especially regarding the thought of not giving kids zeros (because according to this book, isn't giving a kid a zero for not doing an assignment assessing behavior?)

These ideas have caused a paradigm shift in FCPS.  Just last week changes in the Grading and Reporting Policies were announced by FCPS. You can see those here http://www.fcps.edu/is/schoolcounseling/documents/HSGradingReporting.pdf

Many of the ideas have been encouraged and are now becoming the root of new policies (such as discouraging/eliminating zeros).   I have included some of my own personal reactions here. And, while the items below are reactions to the fixes, for the most part, I agree with them philosophically and therefore would not change them.

• Fix 1:  Don’t Include Student Behavior.  This principle is strongly held by many educational practitioners today.  Grades should be based on mastery of the material. My classes reflect this philosophy.   While in theory, I agree with this, in practice and philosophically I do believe that by including some assessment of behavior can encourage the development of personal responsibility and a strong work ethic.   It also can help provide a record of behaviors that support mastery.  In years past, students could receive credit for being on time and positive behaviors in class.  I want to encourage students to develop strong, academic behaviors and to not rest on innate cognitive talents. Having innate cognitive talent is a wonderful thing, however, at some point in a gifted person’s life, they too would benefit by positive academic behaviors. Additionally, behavior such as participation can enhance the quality of a class discussion and raise level of learning in a class.  It would be nice to be able to recognize these contributions of students who do participate.  
• Fix 3:  Don’t punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades.  This idea is plausible in theory as using reduced grades as a punishment for cheating violates the ideas of Fix 1-that is grading on behavior. As a practitioner, I ask what other effective deterrent does a teacher have to discourage cheating.  Generally speaking, isn’t a person motivated to cheat on an assessment by grades?  What else does a teacher have to deter students from cheating?   
• Fix 13:  Don’t use information from formative assessments and practice to determine grades; use only summative evidence.  This idea fits nicely with the ideas from Fix 1 in that formative assessments could be reflective of a student’s academic behavior.  However, for years, I have included formative assessments as part of a student’s grade to encourage effort.  This has been important to me philosophically as I have mostly taught AP US History.  Knowledge and understanding of this subject is not innate but learned.  Typically, students who work hard on formative assignments find that this effort helps them master the material.  By including formative assessments and practice into a grade, it provides recognition ( and credit) for work done and helps students who are not strong test takers.  Including formative assessments in the grade allows for the teacher to keep a record of these efforts and the development of skills.