Calvin's Bad Grades

Just saw this comic and couldn't resist posting it. I've argued before that grades aren't nearly as meaningful as we think they are, but that argument can be made from two perspectives. That Einstein got terrible grades and was a huge success means that grades aren't perfectly predictive of success, but it can also be used to excuse all sorts of behaviors -- as Calvin does in this strip.

Analyzing Pittsburgh's Newer Grading Policy

In my last post I discussed the latest changes to grading in Pittsburgh. Back in the fall they decided to create a minimum grade of 50 in order to decrease the number of students who are failing. Now they want to implement a system where students are graded 0-5 on each assignment.

It took me a little bit of thinking and tinkering, but I finally realized that the newly proposed system is actually even more lenient than the current system. I'll demonstrate why that is shortly. Below is a conversion table of six different grading systems, including the old, current, and new Pittsburgh grading systems. Here's a column by column explanation of each system:

1.) The old system -- grades range from 0-100
2.) The current system -- grades range from 50-100
3.) The new system -- grades range from 0-5
4.) Traditional letter grades
5.) GPA -- how letter grades are converted when computing GPA
6.) Standards-based grading -- 1 represents below basic, 2 represents basic skills, 3 represents proficiency, 4 represents exceeding standards (3 means a student is on grade level)

There are multiple ways to convert column 1 to columns 4-6. For example, some think 98 is an A+, some think it's an A. But what I have in the table should be really close to how it's usually done (the table is either how teachers I had normally graded or how I graded when I taught). Click on the table to see it in a readable quality.



So, what does this mean? How will this affect students? Let's take a look at four sample students to find out. Below are four very different made-up students. I've put the 100 point equivalent of the grade they'd receive under the new system at the top of each table.

Student A is all over the map. He does a little of everything and gets a wide range of grades. Under the old system he would've received a 55 and failed. Under the current system he'd squeak by with a 65. Under the new system he'd receive a D+ with the equivalent of a 68. If we graded by letter, GPA, or standards system he'd likely receive a D. Why is this? If we take the averages of every single grade possible under each system -- the equivalent of every grade from 0-100 -- the new system has the highest average grade among the three used in Pittsburgh. Meaning that if a student completed 101 assignments over the course of a semester and received every grade possible, they'd receive a 50 under the old system, a 63 under the current system, and a 65 under the proposed system.



Student B is a good student. He gets A's or B's on every assignment. Regardless of which of the gradings systems is used he receives an A-



Student C is a struggling student. He makes sure he turns in something every time, but sometimes it's decent and sometimes he just writes down whatever pops into his head and turns it in. As a result, he has a wide range of grades between 35 and 80. He would fail under both the old system and the current system, but would easily pass under the new system.



Student D is a C student when he feels like it, but doesn't bother doing his work half the time. Under the old system, he wouldn't have been close to passing. But under both the current and new systems he would just eke by.



Summary:
Under the new system, a 0 is equivalent to a 50 right now. In other words, although the new system seems to be designed so that students who put forth no effort get a much-deserved 0 in the grade book, the consequences of a 0 aren't really that dire. An A is still an A, a B is still a B, a C is still a C, a D is still a D. The only difference between the current and new systems is for grades between 1 and 59. Students who earn at least a D on every assignment will not be affected at all. Students who receive a D or above on some assignments and a 0 on every other assignment will not be affected at all. But students who complete at least a portion of an assignment, but receive an E will do better under the newer system than the current system -- and much better than under the old system.

Also, notice that the current and new systems are much closer to other alternative systems. Maybe it would be easier for everybody if students were simply graded A-E on each assignment and then we averaged those at the end of the term. It's less precise, but it's the simplest and most familiar system.

In short: passing was most difficult under the old system, is much easier under the current system, and will be easier still under the new system -- there's no possible combination of grades that will yield a lower grade under the new system than under the current system.

Pittsburgh's Newer Grading Policy

Give the people running the Pittsburgh school district credit . . . at least they're thinking up new ideas. A month into the school year they sent out a memo informing teachers that they were not to give grades below 50 regardless of whether a student completed an assignment or got 10% of the questions right. I was not happy when I read the news (nor was I any happier the next day when I thought it over), and even wrote a memo of my own.

Why? A number of reasons -- the largest among them being that making that change mid-year suddenly tells students that not doing work isn't that big of an issue. And in a district where student discipline and lack of effort are arguably the biggest issue in schools, that's not the right message to be sending. As a result of the policy change, students had little problem telling teachers that they didn't feel like doing the assigned work.

So now they're trying again. I'd heard that change was coming, and an article in today's Post-Gazette details the new system they've dreamt up, which they want pilot in two schools before the end of the year. Here's how the P-G describes the new system: "Under the new scale, work scored from 4 to 5 will be an A, 3 to 3.99 a B, 2 to 2.99 a C, 1 to 1.99 a D, and zero to .99 an E."

I have two reactions:

1.) Good for them for making the change. The article does a good job of describing how upset people were and why, including this quote:

"Some students have been refusing to complete assignments, telling teachers they'd take the 50 percent instead. Bill Hileman, a Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers staff representative, said 'the No. 1 problem with the 50 percent minimum was the negative impact on student behavior.'"

Changing it is clearly the right decision. Better yet, according to article teachers are now allowed to award zeroes when students make no attempt at completing an assignment.

2.) What the heck is this new system? Sometimes the wheel needs to be reinvented, but I'm not sure this is one of those times -- or at least not the right way. I see why they're doing it -- they want fewer kids to fail, and this system will do that. They're apparently quite convinced that the old system is capricious for kids who fail an assignment -- 60 out of 101 possible grades are failing which, apparently, means that the system is weighted toward failure. Here's the problem: every grading system has more than its fair share of flaws, this new one included. The end result is that they've made it more difficult for students to fail, but confused everybody more.

I'm going to follow this post up with an analysis comparing the various grading systems.