Review of "Grading and Reporting in a Standards Based Environment" by T. Guskey and L. Jung

Journal Review of “Grading and Reporting in a Standards Based Environment: Implications for Students with Special Needs”

Ray Etheridge

Western Washington University

Guskey, T. and Jung, L., (2009) Grading and Reporting in a Standards Based Environment: Implications for Students with Special Needs. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 53-62.

Review

The article is a fairly frank discussion about how we, as educators can deal with students special needs and yet also maintain proper records in regards to student’s abilities. The authors begin with a brief description of the current state of affairs in regards to students with special needs and the increasing trend of Standards based testing. Their review of the literature is short but detailed and serves as a good introduction into the heart of their subject, namely how do we deal with the legally required former and maintain the rigor and intent of the later? It is there contention that we need a more precise grading system than we currently use, in which all aspects of a student’s work is lumped together to produce a single letter grade. In such a system the actual achievement of required grade standards (product), the energy expended (effort or as they term it, process), and improvement in ability (progress) are lumped together and the difficulties and limitations of such a system as discussed. Should a student with special needs be failed if they do not reach standards for a grade, even if they tried as hard as they could and actually made significant progress toward their IEP goals, clearly not! Yet how can a single letter grade reflect this. It cannot. The solution is elegant in its simplicity. Record each grade separately. However this idea is not the main part of the article for they not only reach this conclusion, which, of course, has been reached before, but provide a five step plan for clearly implementing such a system for use by a school. The five steps are 1) Establish Clear Standards for Student Learning that differentiate between product, process and progress, 2) Ask if the Standard needs Modification for the student, 3) Ask what type of change is needed, a simple accommodation or modification in product standard, 4) If a Modification is needed what is it, and 5) Record such a change in the IEP noting in the student’s record that a modification was made. Which such tools the parents, special needs teacher, staff, general education teachers and administration are provided with far more exacting details and information that they need to ensure the student’s success than any simple letter grade could provide. Since the note that a modification was made does not violate IEP or confidentiality rules those that need to know have access to all appropriate information without violating confidentiality or federal law. The article then ends with an extensive bibliography.

The article is well written, and while some might call the writing style dry, it manages to convey its message in clear and distinct detail. This message is simple-our current grading system, in which a single grade is assigned for all coursework, is insufficient to properly address the educational needs of modern students, schools and teachers. By providing clear guidelines for an improved system, with a well thought out decision tree as the hallmark of the article I find this article extremely valuable as a new educator as it provides a clear tool for address the needs of those students most at risk in the current system. I am very interested in learning more about this idea as well as what the response to this idea might be from other educators, administrators and legal experts. To be honest I might even suggest that it is possible to go a step further, after all why limit “Modification” to just students with special needs? Why not include all types of modifications from AP classification or any course assignment that is not typical for the program. In this way the term and concept of modification can be used to maintain a student’s anonymity but allow for noting any sort of alteration, difference or variation in education for those that need, and have the right to know, what information they need to properly address any and all student’s educational needs, special or not.