Key Takeaways
1. Traditional grading practices are outdated and perpetuate inequity
Grades are clearly an extrinsic, contingent reward—if you perform well in the course you'll get a higher grade. Grades also function as an extrinsic, contingent punishment—perform well in the course or you will get a failing grade.
Historical context. Traditional grading practices emerged in the early 20th century, reflecting the industrial era's focus on sorting students for factory work. These practices, including the 100-point scale and averaging scores, are mathematically unsound and disproportionately punitive.
Perpetuating inequity. Current grading systems often:
- Reward students with more resources and support
- Punish students for factors outside their control (e.g., late work due to family obligations)
- Incorporate teacher biases in subjective categories like "effort" or "participation"
- Demotivate struggling students by making redemption mathematically impossible
By clinging to these outdated practices, schools inadvertently widen achievement gaps and reinforce systemic inequities.
2. Accurate grading focuses solely on content mastery, not behavior
If we want to interrupt and dismantle the education structures that have allowed and perpetuated the achievement and opportunity gaps, we have to find ways to reduce the influence of biases that operate without us even realizing it.
Content over conduct. Accurate grades should reflect only a student's level of academic mastery, not their behavior, effort, or circumstances. This means:
- Eliminating points for homework completion or classroom conduct
- Focusing solely on summative assessments that measure content knowledge
- Using standards-based grading to clearly communicate mastery levels
Benefits of accuracy. By separating academic performance from other factors:
- Grades become more meaningful indicators of learning
- Students understand the direct connection between content mastery and grades
- Teachers can address behavioral issues separately without conflating them with academic ability
3. Bias-resistant grading eliminates subjective criteria and environmental factors
Grades should be based on valid evidence of a student's content knowledge, and not based on evidence that is likely to be corrupted by a teacher's implicit bias or reflect a student's environment.
Removing subjectivity. To resist bias, grading should:
- Eliminate categories like "participation" or "effort" that invite subjective judgment
- Focus on clear, objective measures of content knowledge
- Use rubrics and standards-based grading to reduce ambiguity
Environmental equity. Bias-resistant grading accounts for differing student circumstances by:
- Not penalizing late work (which may be due to home responsibilities)
- Eliminating extra credit (which favors students with more resources)
- Providing multiple opportunities to demonstrate mastery
This approach levels the playing field and ensures grades reflect learning, not privilege or circumstance.
4. Motivational grading supports growth mindset and provides redemption opportunities
The way we grade should motivate students to achieve academic success, support a growth mindset, and give students opportunities for redemption.
Fostering growth. Motivational grading practices include:
- Allowing retakes and revisions on assessments
- Using minimum grading (e.g., 50% as the lowest possible score) to prevent mathematical hopelessness
- Emphasizing most recent evidence of learning over averaging all scores
Redemption opportunities. By providing multiple chances to demonstrate mastery:
- Students learn that initial struggles don't define them
- The focus shifts to continuous improvement rather than a single high-stakes performance
- Intrinsic motivation increases as students see direct connections between effort and results
These practices create a more supportive learning environment where mistakes are viewed as opportunities for growth rather than permanent failures.
5. Transparent grading clearly communicates expectations and paths to success
A student can hit any target that they can clearly see and that doesn't move.
Clear expectations. Transparent grading practices include:
- Using detailed rubrics to communicate criteria for success
- Implementing standards-based grading to show specific areas of mastery
- Providing exemplars of high-quality work
Student empowerment. When grading is transparent:
- Students can self-assess and set meaningful goals
- The path to improvement becomes clear and actionable
- Trust increases between teachers and students
By "lifting the veil" on grading practices, teachers create a more equitable system where all students understand how to succeed.
6. Equitable grading separates academic performance from "soft skills"
Equitable grading distinguishes and connects the means for learning effectively—the "soft skills," the practice, the mistakes—from its ends—academic success, and utilizes the broad and diverse universe of feedback and consequences, of which only one part is a grade.
Decoupling skills and grades. While "soft skills" like time management and collaboration are important, they should not be included in academic grades. Instead:
- Provide separate feedback on soft skills development
- Help students understand the connection between these skills and academic success
- Use alternative methods (e.g., self-reflection, peer feedback) to build soft skills
Focus on self-regulation. The most critical soft skill for long-term success is self-regulation. Equitable grading practices can foster this by:
- Teaching students to set goals and monitor their own progress
- Providing opportunities for self-assessment and reflection
- Creating a "community of feedback" where peers support each other's growth
By separating soft skills from grades, teachers can more accurately assess academic mastery while still developing crucial life skills.
7. Implementing equitable grading requires a shift in mindset and practices
Reading this book will make you re-think the way you assess students and will inspire you to enact a system that encourages revision and redemption instead of compliance and corruption.
Mindset shift. Moving to equitable grading requires educators to:
- Question long-held beliefs about the purpose of grading
- Recognize how traditional practices may perpetuate inequity
- Embrace a growth mindset for both students and themselves
Practical changes. Key steps in implementing equitable grading include:
- Adopting standards-based grading systems
- Eliminating penalties for late work and providing retake opportunities
- Focusing solely on summative assessments for grade calculations
- Using rubrics and clear communication to increase transparency
Overcoming challenges. Educators may face resistance from:
- Colleagues accustomed to traditional practices
- Parents concerned about college admissions implications
- Students initially confused by new systems
However, the long-term benefits of increased equity, motivation, and accurate assessment of student learning make this shift worthwhile.
Last updated:
FAQ
What's Grading for Equity about?
- Focus on Grading Practices: Grading for Equity by Joe Feldman examines how traditional grading methods can perpetuate educational inequities and advocates for more equitable systems.
- Equity in Education: The book argues that grading should be part of an equity agenda, helping all students, especially those historically underserved, to succeed.
- Three Pillars of Grading: Feldman introduces three pillars for equitable grading: accuracy, bias-resistance, and motivation, which guide educators in creating fair grading systems.
Why should I read Grading for Equity?
- Transformative Insights: The book offers insights into how grading impacts student learning and motivation, challenging educators to rethink their practices.
- Practical Strategies: Feldman provides actionable strategies and tools for educators to implement equitable grading systems immediately.
- Addressing Inequities: It helps educators understand how traditional grading may harm marginalized students and offers ways to create inclusive environments.
What are the key takeaways of Grading for Equity?
- Grading Practices Matter: Grading practices are crucial to student success and can either support or hinder learning, necessitating critical examination.
- Avoiding Zeros: Feldman suggests avoiding zeros in grading, as they disproportionately affect students and do not reflect their knowledge accurately.
- Focus on Mastery: The book encourages focusing on students' most recent performance for a more accurate assessment of learning.
How does Joe Feldman define equitable grading in Grading for Equity?
- Three Pillars: Equitable grading is defined through accuracy, bias-resistance, and motivation, serving as guidelines for supportive practices.
- Accurate Representation: Grades should reflect a student's mastery level, based on valid evidence rather than subjective interpretations.
- Bias-Resistant Practices: The system should minimize implicit biases, ensuring fair evaluation regardless of background or circumstances.
What are some specific methods for improving grading practices mentioned in Grading for Equity?
- Minimum Grading: Implement a policy where no student receives a grade lower than 50 percent to prevent the negative impact of zeros.
- 0–4 Grading Scale: Use a 0–4 scale instead of 0–100 to reduce emphasis on failure and provide clearer performance representation.
- Focus on Summative Assessments: Base grades solely on summative assessments to reflect learning rather than assignment completion.
How does Grading for Equity address implicit bias in grading?
- Awareness of Bias: Feldman stresses the importance of recognizing implicit biases that can affect grading and encourages reflection.
- Excluding Subjective Criteria: The book advocates for excluding criteria like participation and effort from grades to ensure fairness.
- Creating Bias-Resistant Practices: Strategies include using anonymous grading and focusing on objective measures of knowledge.
What are the challenges of implementing equitable grading practices according to Grading for Equity?
- Resistance to Change: Educators may resist changing grading practices due to attachment to traditional methods and fear of losing control.
- Complexity of Grading Systems: Existing systems' complexity can overwhelm teachers, making it hard to shift to equitable practices.
- Need for Professional Development: Ongoing training and support are necessary for educators to adopt new practices effectively.
How can teachers ensure that their grading practices are accurate and equitable?
- Regular Reflection: Teachers should regularly assess whether their grading practices accurately represent student learning.
- Use of Clear Criteria: Establishing and communicating clear grading criteria ensures fair and transparent assessments.
- Collaboration with Colleagues: Developing consistent practices with colleagues can create a more equitable grading environment.
What role does motivation play in Grading for Equity?
- Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation: Feldman emphasizes fostering intrinsic motivation rather than relying on extrinsic rewards like points.
- Growth Mindset: Grading practices should support a growth mindset, encouraging students to view challenges as learning opportunities.
- Feedback for Improvement: Constructive feedback, rather than just grades, can motivate students to engage and improve.
How does Grading for Equity suggest handling homework in grading?
- Homework Exclusion: Feldman argues against including homework in grades, as it often doesn't reflect true understanding.
- Focus on Mastery: Homework should be practice for assessments, encouraging learning rather than point accumulation.
- Encouraging Completion: When not graded, students are more likely to complete homework for their own learning.
What are the benefits of using rubrics according to Grading for Equity?
- Clarity and Transparency: Rubrics provide clear evaluation criteria, making expectations transparent for students.
- Empowerment for Students: They allow students to self-assess and identify improvement areas, fostering ownership of learning.
- Consistency in Grading: Rubrics ensure consistent grading across students and assignments, reducing bias and subjectivity.
What is the significance of minimum grading in Grading for Equity?
- Mathematical Accuracy: Minimum grading prevents harsh penalties for early failures, creating a supportive environment.
- Opportunity for Redemption: It allows students to recover from poor performance and demonstrate improvement.
- Positive Impact on Motivation: Minimum grading enhances motivation by showing a path to success despite setbacks.
Review Summary
Grading for Equity receives mixed reviews. Many praise its ideas on equitable grading practices, emphasizing accuracy, bias-resistance, and student motivation. Readers appreciate the book's research-based approach and practical suggestions. However, some criticize its repetitiveness, underestimation of teachers' mathematical abilities, and lack of peer-reviewed studies. While some educators find the concepts transformative, others argue implementation challenges exist. Overall, the book sparks important conversations about grading practices and their impact on student equity, though opinions vary on its effectiveness and practicality.
Similar Books
Download PDF
Download EPUB
.epub
digital book format is ideal for reading ebooks on phones, tablets, and e-readers.