many teenagers and that they fulfill our demands because they are afraid not to. What I learned from these students made it impossible for me to con-tinue the practice of averaged grades. I had to find an alternative. I read the research, took long walks turning possibilities over in my head, and finally on a hot July day during summer break came up with an approach that worked. In this article I describe that approach in detail.

What the Researchers Say about Grades

In Fair Isn’t Always Equal: Assessing and Grading in the Differentiated Classroom, Rick Wormeli does not mince words as he calls for teachers to engage in honest discussion about grading:

There are some aspects of teaching that we keep in cages in hopes they will never escape. . . . We don’t share our concerns with our own grading approach or that of a colleague’s often, and we don’t spend time with each other determining the meaning of a C, an A, or discussing what constitutes a 3.5 on a rubric. . . . The day is upon us, however. It’s time to talk about grades, grading, and report cards openly, if we haven’t before, questioning assump-tions, embracing alternatives, and focusing on the promise of what teaching and learning can be. (89–90)

Douglas B. Reeves conducted an experiment with teachers and administrators all over the country that underscores the disparity of grading practices. He asked participants to determine a student’s final grade based on a set of ten individual grades:

The author discusses the benefits of a standards- based, student- centered approach to assessment.

111En glish Journal 103.1 (2013): 111–118

Jeanetta Jones Miller

A Better Grading System: Standards- Based, Student- Centered Assessment

have been experimenting with ways to individualize the learning ex-perience for high school students since I first heard James Moffett

speak at an Asilomar conference in 1991 and real-ized that my concerns about how we do school were shared and understood. Over the years I’ve found many ways to engage students in learning and to make grades a more accurate reflection of that learning; however, I continued to report progress as the average of grades for individual assignments, a practice that is not only widely accepted but also expected in high school. I wasn’t comfortable with this practice, but I couldn’t figure out how to take a student- centered approach to grading that would work with the school’s reporting system. A few years ago I conducted a survey of a representative cross- section of the junior class to gather informa-tion about how students define success. I catego-rized the responses by gender and academic level and found that every group defined success primar-ily as getting the grades necessary for admission to college. The responses to two open- ended questions about how the student defines success now and in five years frequently mentioned pressure and stress. The students’ comments suggest that many experi-ence high school as an ordeal that must be endured to get into college, get a good- paying job, and, fi-nally, sometime in the hazy future, get the secu-rity and happiness that will make it all worthwhile. Teenagers are not generally recognized for their ability to delay gratification, but the survey results indicate that delayed gratification is the norm for

I

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 111 8/28/13 4:22 PM

A Better Grading System: Standards- Based, Student- Centered Assessment

112 September 2013

leaves teachers free to individualize and leaves stu-dents free to concentrate on learning.

Student- Centered Approach

James Moffett and Betty Jane Wagner believed that we can trust students to want to learn when they are sure it is their learning rather than their com-pliance that is our first concern. In Student- Centered Language Arts, K–12, Moffett and Wagner argued that students and teachers should be partners in learning and that we need to “concentrate on keep-ing the ownership of the work and the goal- setting with the student” (251). Students don’t need end-less essays and tests to know they are making prog-ress: “If students are constantly producing and receiving discourse in great volume and variety, and if the teacher is freed from emceeing to circulate and observe, then good evaluation becomes possible without resorting to special activities that detract from learning and make students hate reading and writing. . . . Partner work, small- group discussion and improvisation, the writing workshop, rehearsal and performance, coaching from the teacher—all these reflect back to the learner the effects of his language actions” (243–44). As I explain in detail below, a student- centered approach does not relieve students of responsibility to participate in all as-pects of their class, but it does release them from the chore of doing assignments for the sole purpose of protecting their final grade.

To take a student- centered approach to as-sessment, the teacher needs to notice each student’s strengths and needs and act on this knowledge. Let’s say the teacher’s goal is for each student to be able to write an organized essay. While some students might need coaching on how to present and support ideas effectively, another student might have no is-sues with organization but need to be able to shift from exposition into narrative mode to breathe life into stilted language. Yet another student might need to let go of an essay that just isn’t working and try something new, which might interfere with his ability to finish the assignment at the same time as the rest of the class. Still another student, already an accomplished essayist, might be writing an ar-ticle for the school paper and need time for that. Moffett was clear that a student- centered approach is not “anything goes.” He wrote, “Let all parties

C, C, MA (Missing Assignment), D, C, B, MA, MA, B, A. The results ranged from A to F. In his discussion of these results in an article published in Educational Leadership in 2008, Reeves writes, “As this experiment demonstrates, the difference be-tween failure and the honor roll often depends on the grading policies of the teacher. To reduce the failure rate, schools don’t need a new curriculum, a new principal, new teachers, or new technology. They just need a better grading system” (85).

Standards- Based Grades

As he reports in Transforming Classroom Grading, Robert J. Marzano came to believe the most im-portant purpose of grades is frequent, detailed feed-back and, therefore, the best reference point must

be specific objectives, stan-dards, or other learning goals. He proposes several possible standards- based systems that might serve this purpose. Marzano’s work helped me see that instead of assessing indi-vidual assignments, I could

assess student progress toward mastery of stan-dards. The students would still have assignments and they would still have grades but the purpose would shift. The assignments would no longer be ends in themselves. I wrestled with how to do away with grades on individual assignments while still being able to report student progress as a number. The breakthrough came when it occurred to me that I could enter standards as assignments in the online grade book and report students’ progress to-ward mastery of each standard as a number between zero and ten. This system made it possible for stu-dents to receive the marking period and semester grades necessary for college transcripts and eligibil-ity for honor roll, at the same time that it gave me the flexibility to meet individual students’ needs.

When the goal is mastery of standards, it doesn’t matter that students might not complete exactly the same assignments or exactly the same number of assignments because the focus is on what the student is learning rather than how much the student is doing. A standards- based approach to assessment still holds students accountable for the work they need to do to make progress, but it

I wrestled with how to

do away with grades on

individual assignments

while still being able to

report student progress

as a number.

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 112 8/28/13 4:22 PM

113English Journal

Jeanetta Jones Miller

half a page in the course handouts (see Figure 1). I received only a few inquiries from parents. When these inquiries arrived, I thanked the parents for their interest, listened carefully to their concerns, provided additional detail, and held my breath. Without exception, the response was something along the lines of “Makes sense.”

Baseline Self- Evaluation

Early in the first marking period, I ask my students to evaluate their current level of progress toward mastery of the course standards. I use the students’ self- evaluation to generate the first entries in the grade book. These entries are revisited and revised in conferences toward the end of the marking period. I explain at the beginning of the year that scores for one marking period will not be averaged with the next. Instead, the scores will build throughout the year to reflect the student’s progress.

A few students may exaggerate their level of achievement but this can be cleared up with a little good- natured feedback and some serious discussion. Most students are honest and accurate about their level of achievement. Students need to receive the clear message that evaluation is a partnership be-tween themselves and their teacher. They also need to know that the teacher respects and acknowledges

know that all activities are assessed all the time, but don’t ever give the impression that the assessment is intended for anything but help and encourage-ment” (246).

Moffett urged teachers not to give grades at all, if they could be avoided. I have not found a way to do that, but I have been able to follow his second- best advice: “We recommend that teachers not give a grade to individual activities but only to the totality of a student’s work. . . . Make a blanket judgment on the whole of a student’s work for the marking period. This is easy to do when you look it all over at once and confer with the student about it. Bookkeeping for grades alone is minimal this way” (252). Once the standards- based, student- centered system was up and running, I found Moffett’s state-ment to be true. I was spending much less time on bookkeeping and much more time conferring with students and responding to their work.

Information for Students and Parents

When I first sent information about the new grad-ing system home, I expected plenty of emails and calls expressing concern. I wanted it to be clear that I was trying something new and to allay concerns without too much second- guessing. After much revision, the explanation amounted to less than

FIGURE 1. Explanation of Grading System

Students earn points for engagement in the process of learning and for progress toward mastery of standards as demonstrated by the student’s written and spoken performance and as documented by the student’s log and portfolio. In addition, each marking period, there will be one or two reading exams that combine an essay prompt with objective questions about texts, literary terms, and conventions of print. Each marking period will conclude with a student- teacher conference based on log, portfolio, exam, and a reflective essay called State of the Student. Students are expected to be active participants in the evaluation process. Students earn points for progress toward mastery of each standard:

10 points = Documented mastery 9 points = Major documented progress 8 points = Documented progress 7 points = Documented attempt

Each student’s progress toward mastery of standards is then converted into a conventional grade percentage derived from the number of points earned out of the total possible:

Performance Standards 150 possible points (10 each for 15 standards)Collaboration Standards 80 possible points (10 each for 8 standards)Reading Exams 50 to 100 possible pointsState of the Student 50 possible points

Total 330 to 380 possible points

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 113 8/28/13 4:22 PM

A Better Grading System: Standards- Based, Student- Centered Assessment

114 September 2013

The anchor standards for writing are presented in Figure 2 as a self- assessment chart. Similar charts for reading, speaking and listening, and language are available from jeanettamiller@gmail.com. For the initial self- evaluation at the beginning of the year, students will need to consider the standards in small batches with teacher guidance.

Work in Progress

Students need timely feedback on work in prog-ress that salutes original ideas, solid research, and effective use of skills as well as offering sugges-

what they have already accomplished. The baseline scores also make it plain that no one is starting from scratch.

In the past I have drawn course standards from a variety of sources, including local gradua-tion standards, scoring criteria for standardized tests, and skills identified as essential by the Col-lege Board. However, going forward I recommend using the already widely adopted Common Core State Standards. The anchor standards for reading, writing, speaking and listening, and language pro-vide a framework that students can use to deter-mine just how college and career ready they are.

FIGURE 2. Self- Evaluation Chart for Writing

Please check the box that most accurately represents your current level of achievement:

10 = I have mastered this skill 9 = I have strong skills in this area 8 = I made good progress in this area last year 7 = I can do this with feedback and support from the teacher ??? = I have not been introduced to this skill

Writing—Text Types and Purposes 10 9 8 7 ???

Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content.

Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective techniques, well- chosen details, and well- structured event sequences.

Writing—Production and Distribution of Writing

Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.

Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach.

Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate with others.

Writing—Research to Build and Present Knowledge

Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects based on focused questions, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation.

Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism.

Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.

Writing—Range of Writing

Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences.

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 114 8/28/13 4:22 PM

115English Journal

Jeanetta Jones Miller

natural consequences for putting work off and let-ting it pile up until it’s overwhelming. Most sec-ondary students have learned the hard way not to let this happen. I find that most of the work comes in during the requested window, with only a few students who need to talk about their situation. I log the work with a simple matrix (see Figure 3), so it’s easy to determine who needs follow- up with me. This approach sends a clear message to students that the teacher values thinking and writing more than compliance. It also prevents the teacher from feeling overwhelmed by five class sets of essays in one day.

Anecdotal Record

The anecdotal record gives the teacher a place to record narrative comments as well as notes on prog-ress. In Figure 4, I’ve included just two of many narrative comments, one from the beginning of the year and one toward the end. The anecdotal record is a great help in preparing for parent conferences and making placement recommendations.

Evaluation Conference

Toward the end of the first marking period, it’s im-portant to set up appointments to confer with each student about progress toward mastery of course standards. The first evaluation conference will take more time and planning than those later in the year, but it is time well spent. Students who are still dubious about an evaluation system that looks at their work as a whole to determine progress will be reassured by sitting with the teacher and talk-ing in detail about how they’re doing. I recommend emailing ahead of time a copy of the anecdotal writing record and a request that students write responses to questions that encourage reflection and goal setting. Assuming the teacher has saved all the drafts to a flash drive and can pull them up

tions for improvement. This feedback can occur in face- to- face conferences, in the margins of the student’s work, and via email, using tools such as Insert Comment. The student can also be invited to provide information about the current status of a writing project for the teacher. If the technology is available to both teacher and students, I strongly recommend asking students to send their work via email so comments can be typed directly on the project at hand instead of being handwritten. Stu-dents appreciate the detail and legibility of typed comments. Another important benefit of receiv-ing and responding to work online is that it can be saved to a flash drive set up by class and by student, so it takes just a moment to access the full array of the student’s work.

A teacher may want to individualize each stu-dent’s writing experience but feel stymied about how to handle due dates and late work. My sug-gestion here is to alternate periods of collaborative classroom development of a work in progress with periods of dialogue between teacher and student. The teacher can say, “I’d like to begin responding to your current work- in- progress this week. Please get a draft to me as soon as you can. If I don’t have one within a week, we should talk about your situ-ation.” This approach does mean that the teacher needs to log work in but makes it unnecessary to set a single due date for all students and then figure out how to enforce it with some form of penalty. I have seen some really nice teachers, who wouldn’t dream of making an unkind comment to a student, slash ten points per day of lateness from a 100- point assignment, wreaking havoc with the stu-dent’s grade point average. If queried, the teacher will say in all seriousness, “Penalties for late work teach an important life lesson,” and “It wouldn’t be fair to the other students not to take points off.” Another argument is that if there’s no penalty for lateness, students will wait until the end of the marking period to turn in assignments. There are

FIGURE 3. Work in Progress: Sample Log of Student Work

Entrance Interview

Occasional Paper

Nonfiction Narrative

Practice Analysis

Image Project Blog

“How to . . . “ Speech

Student A

Student Z

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 115 8/28/13 4:22 PM

A Better Grading System: Standards- Based, Student- Centered Assessment

116 September 2013

the student’s work for the marking period, with more emphasis on major projects and recent work than on small activities and work done early in the marking period. During our conference we might agree not to evaluate standards for which there was limited opportunity to demonstrate progress. Be-cause scores build over the year rather than being averaged, there’s no need for a student to feel anx-ious about a low score at the beginning of the year.

for reference, it’s simply a matter of student and teacher putting their heads together over these doc-uments and deciding what to enter in the second column of the evaluation chart. (The first column is the student’s self- evaluation from the beginning of the year.) If the technology is not available, the student can maintain a conventional writing folder and bring that to the conference. As Moffett ad-vised, the focus of the conference is the totality of

FIGURE 4. Alternative to Average Grades: Sample Anecdotal Writing Record

Summer Essay

Info/Issues, Narrative, Writing on Lit

Argument Illustrated w/ Scenarios

Character Analysis

Researched Nonfiction Narrative

Produce expository, analytical, and argumentative compositions that introduce a complex central idea and develop it with appropriate evidence drawn from primary and/or secondary source material, cogent explanations, and clear transitions

Resisted the idea of showing summer reading instead of telling about it

Solid central idea about Dwight Howard as role model but only one supporting source

Solid central idea about athletes as role models, supported with two sources

Solid central idea, insightful comments about Walter, some text support

Predictable central idea, could go deeper into the need to challenge one’s self and father/son rivalry

Demonstrate understanding and mastery of standard written En glish as well as stylistic maturity in their own writings

Fluent writer, few errors

Fluent writer, quite a few errors

Fluent writer, few errors

Fluent writer, some errors

Fluent writer, very few errors (I instead of me)

Demonstrate understanding of the conventions of citing primary and secondary source material

Could have included a list of books read but not required

Problem with format of internal citation, works cited entry formatted correctly

Cited web page instead of article, article instead of author

Correctly formatted internal text citations, no citation of background info, no works cited

Apt footnotes, works cited correctly formatted except for title

28 September 2010: You are a fluent writer and you did a decent job with the summer reading composition. As you will see from my comments, I’d like you to add a scenario to the beginning and do a little more thinking about your conclusion. (You may need to click on “Insert” and “Comment” in order to see my suggestions.) I’d like to see these changes within a week. In the meantime, please be thinking about a professional athlete who is a true role model, unlike Roy Hobbes. Your next writing task will be to do some research and writing about this person.

9 May 2011: I like your low- key style. I’m curious to know if you’re the only one that gets banged up by these family adventures or if the thrills and bruises are shared by other members of the family. It seems to me that there are some deeper themes in your narrative that you could bring to the surface. One of them is your own desire to test yourself against “the odds.” The other is the traditional idea that if we want our boys to grow into men they shouldn’t be coddled. It seems to me that your father has this idea in mind when he whips the tube around and hunts for the biggest wave to challenge your nerve and resilience. Just a thought . . .

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 116 8/28/13 4:22 PM

117English Journal

Jeanetta Jones Miller

percent. However, the weight can be set at 100 to prevent averaging. It can also be set at 80- 20 to allow for a formal exam. In other words, for the teacher who is interested, the technology to sup-port alternatives to averaged grades is likely to be an option already included in the system. All that is needed is the teacher’s determination to implement a better grading system, one that is accurate and fair to students.

Reading Exams

To confirm the potentially more subjective evalu-ation of the student’s work as a whole, I ask stu-dents to sit for a fairly traditional reading exam each marking period. I enter the reading exam as a separate item in the electronic grade book. Typi-cally the student’s score on the reading exam will be within a few points of the standards- based score. If there is a disparity between the two scores for a few students, it is probably because they didn’t bother to review key terms or because they suffer from test anxiety. In both cases I recommend offering a Form B of the exam, giving those who didn’t study a sec-ond chance to do so and using familiarity with the exam format to lower anxiety. If there is a disparity between the two scores for more than a few students, the teacher needs to reflect on several questions: Did the reading exam accurately represent what students worked on in class? Was the exam well written so students were not lured into incorrect or incomplete responses by ambiguously worded questions and prompts? Have the students’ standards- based scores been skewed because there is too much emphasis on affective skills and not enough on academic perfor-mance or vice versa? I recommend the use of recog-nition rather than recall items for the exam to not penalize the students who have limited recall mem-ory. When I ask for comments on the reading exams, the majority of students say they like them because the questions are fair and the formal exam gives them a chance to see how much they’ve learned from another perspective. A standards- based, student- centered approach to assessment does not mean the student will never experience a formal exam. The es-sential difference is that the teacher knows the pur-pose is to provide valuable feedback to students.

With her permission, I would like to end this article with the conclusion a student named Quincy

The original, handwritten version of the evaluation chart will have numbers entered in the student’s handwriting as often as my own because we pass the pencil back and forth as we talk. Students who have some lingering doubts about how this system would work and whether or not it would be to their benefit realize during the conferences how much in-fluence they have over their scores. The evaluation conference provides an opportunity for the teacher to make it clear that the student’s strengths and areas for growth are understood and the teacher is proud of the student’s efforts to master the stan-dards that are most challenging. As we talk, I add two or three specific goals to the anecdotal writing record, which I email to the student so we are on the same page about next steps.

The time needed for conferences with stu-dents is balanced by the reduction in time needed to grade and record individual assignments. The teacher’s time is spent in the ways that matter most, providing timely, specific, individual feedback and working in partnership with students to evaluate progress toward mastery of course standards.

The system I designed made it feasible to leave blank any standard not attempted in a par-ticular marking period if the student had worked hard and simply didn’t get around to one or two. However, I have had to deal with some procrastina-tors and with one student who did not turn in any written work. After consultations with the student, parents, and guidance, I determined that it would send the clearest message if I entered a zero for standards related to the lack of written work, but this was the only instance in which I used the zero. The procrastinators get the message when they see scores related to process and responsibility fall to six or seven on a ten- point scale. At the end of each marking period I used the Copy Assignment func-tion to enter the standards in the grade book for the next marking period and roll the final scores for one marking period into the next, making good on the promise that students would be able to build on their scores. The grade at the end of the second marking period was also the grade for the semester. The semester final grades, like the marking period grades, are not averaged. On a technical note, the typical setting in an online grade book for semester grades is 40- 40- 20, weighting each marking period at 40 percent and the midterm or final exam at 20

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 117 8/28/13 4:22 PM

A Better Grading System: Standards- Based, Student- Centered Assessment

118 September 2013

ing, and written feedback to strengthen my weak points. Instead of fearing the rejection associated with a B–, I have stepped off the precipice and taken risks. From daily read arounds to essential question workshops, I’ve learned to step out of my comfort zone and voice topics that speak to me.

Works Cited

Marzano, Robert J. Transforming Classroom Grading. Alexan-dria: ASCD, 2000. Print.

Moffett, James, and Betty Jane Wagner. Student- Centered Language Arts, K–12. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1992. Print.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. Common Core State Standards. Washington: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010. Print.

Reeves, Douglas B. “Leading to Change/Effective Grading Practices.” Educational Leadership 65.5 (2009): 85–87. Web. 23 June 2013.

Wormeli, Rick. Fair Isn’t Always Equal: Assessing and Grad-ing in the Differentiated Classroom. Portland: Sten-house, 2006. Print.

DeYoung wrote for her portfolio, letting a student have the last word on what it’s like to learn without the pressure of averaged grades:

I used to write for other people. I used to write for the grade. It’s sad to say but I did it often; my writing had become such a constricted and con-strued mess from staying within the confines of what I believed to be an A. It was not me; it was an attempt to please. No stream of consciousness because it’s not grammatical?

Okay.Times New Roman, typed, 12 point font, no

exceptions? Okay.This year, however, has been different. This year

I’ve seen writing treated as artwork, pieces of prose treated as masterpieces; it’s as if students expressing their innermost thoughts upon paper is too valu-able a thing to have a letter stamped upon it. . . . This year my writing skills have been honed, not labeled. I have been given suggestions for my writ-

Jeanetta Jones Miller taught for 25 years in public schools in Albany, California, and Newtown, Connecticut, serving as En glish department chair at Newtown High School from 2001 to 2011. Email her at jeanettamiller@gmail.com.

READWRITETHINK CONNECTION Lisa Storm Fink, RWT

The article begins with a survey asking students where they see themselves in five years. This lesson plan from ReadWriteThink.org also asks students to begin to think about their future. They further explore their thoughts by answering a set of prewriting questions. Next, they read and discuss the poem “Ex- Basketball Player” by John Updike, analyzing the details and the format of the poem. Students are then introduced to a writing assignment in which they write a poem about themselves in five years. They write their poems and go through a series of peer feedback and revisions. Two copies of the final versions of the poem are given to the teacher—one for the portfo-lio and one to mail to students in five years. http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom- resources/lesson- plans/poem- possibilities- thinking- about- 943.html

Help Shape NCTE Positions by Submitting a Resolution

If you have concerns about issues that affect your teaching or if you’d like to see NCTE take a stand on a posi-tion you support, you have an opportunity to be heard! Propose a resolution that may be voted upon and passed at NCTE’s Annual Convention.

For further details on submitting a resolution, to see resolutions already passed by Council members, or to learn about proposing position statements or guidelines other than resolutions, visit the NCTE website (http://www.ncte.org/positions/call_for_resolutions) or contact Lori Bianchini at NCTE Headquarters (800-369-6283, ext. 3644; lbianchini@ncte.org). Resolutions must be postmarked by October 15, 2013.

EJ_Sept2013_B.indd 118 8/28/13 4:22 PM