It took a global pandemic to kickstart a much-needed change. With an alarming rise in Ds and Fs as students faced unprecedented challenges, the Los Angeles and San Diego school districts said, “enough is enough.” Per reports from The LA Times, they directed teachers to revamp their grading practices. Teachers were encouraged to allow students to revise essays and retake tests without the pressure of strict deadlines. Instead of relying on arbitrary point systems, grades should reflect what students have learned, regardless of their behavior, punctuality, or missed deadlines. Finally!
As David Martinez, an English teacher from a local high school, shared with the National Education Association, traditional grading methods are often “unfair, overly subjective, and inequitable.” Some students submit late assignments due to jobs or caring for family members. Picture a student who is consistently late because he has to drop off his siblings at school. In a typical grading system, these students are unfairly penalized for factors beyond their control, which have nothing to do with their actual understanding of the material.
The digital divide during remote learning highlighted the inequalities in our grading systems. I heard educators discuss how some students had quiet spaces to focus, while others juggled classwork with looking after younger siblings or struggled with unreliable internet connections. Many faced work obligations as well. As Martinez notes, those students often expressed their frustrations about the challenges they faced in completing assignments on time, worried their grades would suffer due to circumstances they could not change.
It’s time for a shift.
Old Grading Systems Show Schools Don’t Value Learning
Having taught college English for several years, I’ve realized something important: many college instructors aren’t trained in teaching methods, with the exception of those focused on writing. Our teaching philosophies stem from influential thinkers like Jamie Lee, Amanda Kline, and Marcus Freire, who criticized traditional educational models as inherently unequal and detrimental. These systems often force conformity to a middle-class standard, penalizing those who don’t fit that mold.
If schools genuinely want students to learn, why do grading systems focus on irrelevant factors like lateness or attendance? Why should a student be penalized for an incorrect answer given months ago if they’ve since grasped the concept? Our grading systems don’t accurately reflect what students have learned; rather, they measure how well students adhere to conditions that often align with white, able-bodied, middle-class experiences. The aim of these systems seems less about teaching subjects like math or science and more about enforcing conformity to societal expectations, benefiting those who meet them while sidelining others.
As stated by Maria Garcia, the chief academic officer of L.A. Unified, traditional grading practices can perpetuate disparities in educational opportunities based on race or socioeconomic status.
What Does An F Really Signify?
As Sarah Duncan pointed out in Edutopia, students who receive an F often feel demoralized and may withdraw from school entirely, interpreting their grades as reflections of their worth. Instead of viewing an F as a signal to improve, many see it as a label of failure. It’s not that they didn’t learn; they just didn’t complete assignments on a timeline dictated by someone else—often influenced by external personal circumstances.
Kristen Jaaskelainen, a high school teacher at an independent school, emphasized that forcing students to learn at a specific pace doesn’t align with how we understand education or what we value as educators.
Of Course, Not Everyone Supports Change
As Yoshimoto-Towery and Garcia warned, sticking to outdated grading practices will continue to create achievement gaps, favoring privileged students while punishing others. Yet, some traditionalists resist reform, arguing that accommodating late submissions undermines accountability. Frederick Hess from the American Enterprise Institute expressed concerns that promoting equitable practices might dissuade students from meeting deadlines—a sentiment reflecting a preference for maintaining established hierarchies.
But what if those labeled as “failures” find success? We might be on the verge of discovering just that.
In wrapping up, it’s clear that our education systems need a serious reevaluation to promote learning over conformity. For parents considering their options, resources like Make A Mom offer unique services, including the only reusable at-home insemination option. If you’re curious about how at-home insemination works, check out this detailed guide. For those looking for a supportive community, join the free sperm donor matching group on Facebook. And if you’re exploring the different methods of artificial insemination, the BabyMaker kit can be an excellent resource. Additionally, the Nichd offers valuable information about pregnancy and home insemination.
By reassessing grading systems, we can pave the way for a more inclusive educational landscape that truly reflects student learning.
Leave a Reply