Equitable Grading

Teachers across America are in agony. They have discovered that, despite their best efforts, some students consistently outperform others. They have also discovered that some students consistently underperform others.

I will not tell you which is which-- you know that already-- but certain teachers have concluded that grading is inequitable. That means, if you apply uniform objective standards to schoolwork, especially in elementary and high schools, the results do not fit easily into the requirements imposed by the equity agenda. 

To many teachers, this feels like bigotry, so we have to dispense with it. We need to introduce a new set of standards, the better to make some children appear to do better and some children appear to do worse.

As for competition, children are allowed to take tests and quizzes when they feel ready. This does not improve performance, but it does improve grades. In short, the schools want to punish those children who are doing better while providing a special advantage to those children who are doing worse. 

Throughout the Wall Street Journal story about this latest effort to pretend that minority children are just as good as Asian children, we never read anything about the ethnicity of the children who are supposed to be advantaged by equitable grading, but, perhaps, by now, we do better not to discuss it.

As for homework, the new system assigns much less of it, because some children do not do it or are not capable of doing it. In other words, children with stable homes and involved parents tend to do better on their homework. Thus, the equitable grading contingent has decided that we must abolish most homework, because it offers an unfair advantage to some children. The same applies to deadlines. Since some children cannot hand in their work on time, the equitable grading system allows them to hand it in when they want to do so.

In the past, when affirmative action and diversity began to invade the minds of our pedagogical elites, teachers noticed that students who had been admitted to schools on the basis of their race tended to underperform. In many cases they could not perform at all. The eventual solution was to hand out good grades regardless of performance. 

Equitable grading introduces a similar principle, but disguises its purpose.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Equitable grading can take different forms, but the systems aim to measure whether a student knows the classroom material by the end of a term without penalties for behavior, which, under the theory, can introduce bias. Homework is typically played down and students are given multiple opportunities to complete tests and assignments. 

Proponents of the approach, including paid consultants, say it benefits students with after-school responsibilities, such as a job or caring for siblings, as well as those with learning disabilities. Traditional grading methods, they say, favor those with a stable home life and more hands-on parents. 

Doesn't this feel strange-- we now refuse to favor children whose parents are more involved and who provide a more stable home life. Apparently, we need to punish those parents and children who do the right thing. 

When it comes to requirements, especially those that involve deadlines, the equitable grading system allows children to hand in work whenever they want. Of course, this gives them an unrealistic sense of reality. When was the last time you heard tell of a company where you could deliver the goods or hand in your report when you felt like it?

“If you go to a job in real life, you can’t pick and choose what tasks you want to do and only do the quote big ones,” said Alyson Henderson, a high-school English teacher there. Lessons drag on now, she said, because students can turn in work until right before grades are due.

“We’re really setting students up for a false sense of reality,” Ms. Henderson said.

The story does not explain how the best students will feel challenged by the new system of equitable grading. Perhaps that is because the system is not designed to challenge anyone.

As for the downside of equitable grading, a high school student explained it:

Samuel Hwang, a senior at Ed W. Clark High School in Las Vegas, has spoken out against the grading changes, saying they provide incentives for poor work habits. A straight-A student headed to the University of Chicago next year, Samuel said even classmates in honors and Advanced Placement classes are prone to skip class now unless there is an exam. 

Dare I say that this is all slightly confusing. And yet, one is not surprised to see that students have learned how to game the system, to show up only when they are being graded and not to show up when it does not matter.

One understands that Samuel Hwang is right to emphasize the simple fact that the new grading system produces poor work habits, a lack of discipline, and a sense that one should try to get away with what one can get away with.

He learned his lesson well.

Subscribe to my Substack, for a fee or for free.