Doug Reeves Elements of Grading

Book Review:  Elements of Grading by Douglas Reeves

The key question that Doug Reeves addresses in Elements of Grading is as follows: How can we make grading systems accurate, fair, specific, and timely?

Before answering this question, Reeves establishes an important premise: The primary purpose of grading is feedback to improve student achievement.

Reeves begins his inquiry by discussing is what he terms “the grading debate” - that is, the distorted perceptions of some educators about the purpose of grading and their subsequent inaccurate, unfair, and non-specific practices.   Reeves reveals the flawed logic behind the practice of assigning a zero for assessments not submitted.  A teacher who gives a grade of zero in such situations is making a moral judgment that goes like this:  The student deserves a zero as punishment, and this consequence is fair in that it teaches the student an important lesson.  The flawed thinking here is, of course, that the “zero” is neither an accurate nor a fair assessment of the student’s academic achievement.  

Accuracy:  In his chapter on accuracy in grading, Reeves shows that the practice of averaging undermines accuracy in that it does not reflect current student performance when the grade is awarded.  In other words, it does not reflect the student’s improved achievement over time or decline over time.  He uses the following humorous analogy to emphasize his point: “You would never decide whether or not to wear a coat on January 31 based on the average temperature during the month.”

Reeves offers 3 strategies for improving accuracy in grading:

1. Reality checks – comparison of student results in classes to external standardized measurements, and determination of whether students are receiving behavioural grades.
2. Collaborative scoring -  based on common rubrics
3. Avoidance of mathematical distortions – for example, not assigning zeros for work not submitted and not averaging marks

Fairness:   Reeves defines fairness in grading as follows: “The grade is a reflection of the student’s performance and the context of that performance.”  In other words, the disparities with which students begin their schooling – factors such as disabilities, impoverished living conditions, lack of parental support, etc. – should be taken into consideration in a fair grading process.

Specificity:  According to Reeves, the most precise way to grade a student is to report his/her performance relative to an objective standard. 

Timeliness:  Acknowledging Jeff Howard’s Nintendo Effect, which refers to the dramatic improvement in performance that students can make when they receive immediate feedback, Reeves provides 3 suggestions for teachers on how to improve timeliness:

1. Involve students in establishing academic criteria – Once students know the rules of the game, they can engage, with integrity, in self and peer assessment
2. Use the 3-column rubric -   Have one column for performance criteria, a second column for student self-assessment, and a third column for teacher assessment
3. Offer mid-course corrections – Since students who most need help do not usually ask for it, teachers must schedule assistance and intervention.

Reeves also offers some advice for administrators on improving timeliness:

-          Ensure that assessments are focused and brief

-          Create time for teachers to analyze and use feedback

-          Monitor the responses of teachers to student achievement data

Reeves concludes Elements of Grading by offering some advice for leaders on how to successfully implement change to teachers’ grading practices: articulate an explicit vision, specify behavioural expectations, and assess and continually refine the implementation.