Reframing Grading

The words we choose to describe something make a big difference: Whether it is a protest or a riot or an insurgence is a recent example, of course. Those shifts in diction shape how we interpret the information.

As I wrap up the quarter with my seniors, I am doing something I’ve done before, but this year I described it a little differently, and this has completely changed the way many of my students are approaching it.

The short of it: Instead of a cumulative final project or recall-the-facts exam, my students in senior English are compiling a portfolio of work samples of their choice. They then reflect on how each shows their growth on or progress toward any of the ten core outcomes of my class. They write (or narrate) reflections where they describe what the outcome means, what aspects of their work show growth or proficiency related to the outcome, and so on. They can also make whatever revisions they want to improve any of their work samples, even if it was originally turned in back in September. Nothing revolutionary: I’ve done some variation on this summative assessment every year.

The little change I made? I reframed the way I described how I’d be grading. I’m using the same scales/rubrics (more or less) as always. But I made a point to describe my grading plan as “merit-based, additive grading” rather than “demerit-based, subtractive grading.” Basically: I’m looking for what you’re doing right rather than what you’re doing wrong. The line that resonated with many students: I’m not taking any points away.

When I introduced this, one class period in particular engaged in some good zoom chat conversation about how this was a relief. Instead of worrying they’d lose points for small errors, they could focus on showing whatever they knew how to do well. A while later, in a writing conference, one student remarked about how he liked the “additive” grading because he didn’t have to worry about meeting some arbitrary word count, he could focus on saying what he needed to say (he happens to be, unlike me, a man of few words). Another expressed relief because she was always worried about her grammar, but knowing that I wasn’t going to “take points away” for mistakes made her worry less about that.

Yes, I know that this is the essential premise of “standards-based” grading. But even that paradigm has a degree of “demerit” or “subtractive” language to it. (And if we really want to get into it, much grading that tries to pass itself off as “standards-based” is actually just “standards-referenced,” and that even many places that use a “standards-based” grade reporting system simply use demerit conversions to arrive at a score derived from what is lacking, not what is present, in a student’s performance… but I digress.)

What matters more than all of this is what my students heard: I am giving you credit for what you know and can do, not taking away credit for what you don’t know or can’t show yet. Write me a sentence and I’ll give you credit for what you do say, not punish you for what you don’t.

That little shift in how I explained my approach seemed to make a difference. Even though I, in my teacher brain, was viewing my assessment approach as standards-based, additive, and merit-oriented, if my students didn’t feel that, they’d start building the portfolio presuming I was looking to ding them for errors. They had all the points, and my mission was to find reasons to take them away.

Nothing I’m reflecting on here is new. Better teachers than me have been doing this forever. My great learning in this moment: My words, the way I explained grading, changed the way many of my students approached the task. Nevertheless, I still operate in a grading system of percentages and points-deductions. I wish I could say that every assessment I design and implement can be viewed through that additive lens.

The question I’m pondering for my own practice: What will it mean to to truly shift my assessment practices to be additive, not subtractive? And how can I use this to help my students see that every time they do work for me, it is about what they can do, not what they can’t?

3 thoughts on “Reframing Grading

  1. Inessa

    I truly love how you presented this grading system to your students. It’s so important to make students comfortable to show us what the know and not be overwhelmed with the stress of being perfect. As an EL teacher, I know that the only way my students can learn is they feel comfortable and safe. That is why I do not grade my students. They assess their own work and reflect on their progress. It helps to build accountability and ownership. Students then gain a greater sense of self-efficacy.

  2. Gretchen Cruden

    YES! I love this!

    This year I have had a few students struggling and who found themselves in very uncomfortable positions with their grades at the semester. It was so incredibly powerful to talk with them about the change over at semester, fresh starts and the idea of being able to move themselves forward. We discussed the challenge about thinking more about the effort they were putting in before and and how they want to handle the feelings of being overwhelmed by what as to come so they could take action. It really dawned on me how “adding” to grades instead of being “subtractive” and punitive was a way to keep their heads in the game.

    Thanks for the thinking!
    Gretchen

  3. Emma-Kate Schaake

    Thank you for this thoughtful piece on grading. I have been in so many meaningful conversations about standards based grading, but then we all return back to what our gradebooks want: points, deductions, and percentages. It seems like an uphill battle to actually change given our current grading system, but this gives me a push to try!

    I also really appreciate how you came to this understanding and the decision to make a change from the power of language. The words we use with our students matter, and giving them an opportunity to actually show what they know, not what they don’t, is invaluable.

Comments are closed.