Today, report cards featuring each of those reporting formats -- skills' lists, letter grades, and teacher narratives -- can be found in schools across the country. Each form has its supporters and its detractors -- both of whom are often found within the same school district.
The 1990s have been a decade of controversy in the area of report card reform, as parents and educators have increasingly clashed over the best way of reporting student progress.
Administrators in Florida, Oregon, New Mexico, and many other states as well have been forced to defend or abandon revamped reporting formats that did not include the traditional letter grades. Most protesting parents appear to agree with one Cranston mother who charges that the new formats are vague and subjective, while the traditional A, B, C format tells parents exactly where their children stand. "It's so objective," she states.
But is it?
Most parents regard the traditional reporting method as the most objective indicator of student progress. They see A, B, C, D, and F as an approximate representation of a numerical average of test scores, homework assignments, and class work, and most believe those grades accurately reflect their children's level of progress.
A study cited in an Education Week article, There's No Such Thing as Grade Inflation, seems to question that belief. Although 83 percent of the teachers in the study said they graded tests and class work according to the number of correct answers, many admitted it was not the only criteria they used. One-third to one-half of the respondents said they also took into account the difficulty of the work and student effort and ability when grading individual assignments. Further adjustment occurred when those individual scores were averaged for reporting purposes. According to the study, the scores were combined with other types of information, such as attendance, class participation, extra-credit work, effort, behavior, and teamwork, to determine final grades.
Furthermore, the author of the article states, different teachers use different combinations of those factors in different proportions when assigning a final, "objective" letter grade to each student.
Add to that the changing view of the meaning of specific letter grades (Does today's "C" mean average or slightly below average, for example?), and the problems multiply.
These inconsistencies often result in wide discrepancies in letter grade meaning, as classmates at different skill levels receive similar letter grades, while students in different classrooms, at the same skill level, receive different letter grades.
Educational leaders, aware of the inadequacies of the A, B, C grading system, have struggled to devise more effective ways of evaluating and reporting student progress. Often those efforts include lists of specific skills in a variety of subject areas and a reporting method that identifies an individual student's progress through the skill levels. Many educators feel that this method, combined with teacher narrative, better reflects student progress because it makes allowances for individual differences in learning rate and style, emphasizes real learning over test scores, and minimizes subjective considerations. The new report cards, they say, are actually more specific and more objective than the A, B, C format because they provide a truer picture of what a particular child is doing.
While they may provide a truer picture of student progress, they apparently do not provide one that parents can fully understand and interpret in meaningful ways. The new report cards, according to parents, are vague, complex, and confusing, are filled with educational jargon and meaningless notations, and fail to provide concrete information about their children's progress or position in the class.
According to Grant Wiggins, a report card consultant quoted in a Christian Science Monitor article, (Parents Push for Report Cards that Don't Require a Users' Manual), the real conflict is not over format. The problem is that parents and teachers have different goals and different expectations about the reporting process. "Educators," he says, "want to get away from comparison and parents want to hold onto it."
Teachers want to measure the success of each child, says Wiggins. They want to identify each student's strengths and weaknesses and report on the progress that student is making toward achieving individual goals.
Parents, on the other hand, want to know how their children are performing compared to other children. Knowing what their children are doing isn't enough, parents say. In order to understand what that information means, they need to put it into a recognizable context. They want to know if their children are working on grade level; if the quality of their is work better than, worse than, or the same as the work of other children in the same classroom and at the same grade level; if their children are succeeding or merely "progressing."
Both parents and teachers want accurate, understandable, and useful methods of measuring and reporting student progress. In order to provide it, schools must make an effort, whatever report card format they choose, to compare students' achievements, not to their own ability and not to the achievements of other students, but to objective, measurable performance requirements. "The trick," for teachers, according to Wiggins, "is not to make an insidious comparison. You compare students not against each other arbitrarily, but you compare their performances against standards."
A research report produced by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) of the U.S. Department of Education concluded with the same advice for parents. "Parents cannot rely solely on their children's grades to determine the quality of their education. In order to ensure that their children are receiving a world class education that prepares them for the 21st century, parents need external standards against which they can assess the performance of their children and their children's schools."
Report cards, many experts say, can -- and must -- provide that information.
Article by Linda Starr
Copyright © 1998 Education World