Lowering expectations doesn't lead to 'equity'

It's easier to get A's and harder to get an education, writes Fordham's Michael Petrilli. Expectations started falling and grades inflating before Covid, then went even lower. Now "equity" grading has made grades an even less reliable measure of achievement.

"Elite colleges can’t rely on student grades to send clear signals because almost everyone applying for admission gets straight A’s," he writes. "On the other end of the academic spectrum, our high school graduation rate is higher than ever, in part because standards for graduation —which are of course tied to getting passing grades in required courses — are lower than ever (yay?)."

Students learn more from teachers who are tough graders, research has shown, he writes. They do better in future years because they've learned to work harder.

But some "equity" reforms encourage students to ease up, writes Petrilli. Some districts have set 50 percent as the minimum grade for any test or assignment, including those never done. Others tell teachers not to grade homework or give points for turning it in. There are no late penalties for assignments.

Lowering expectations and eroding students' work habits doesn't just affect the low achievers, writes Petrilli. The "strivers and grinders" also will adapt. "If they build up a high-enough A early in the quarter, they know they can bomb some later quizzes or skip some assignments and still get what they need for their transcripts. So they put in less work."

He suggests letting teachers decide when and how to discount bad grades early in the term if students do better as they go on.

Clear rubrics and blind grading would reduce teacher bias, Petrilli writes.

"Equitable" grading "has exacerbated grade inflation," while providing "little evidence of greater learning," write Meredith Coffey and Adam Tyner in a Fordham brief.

Lenient policies "tend to reduce expectations and accountability for students, hamstring teachers’ ability to manage their classrooms and motivate students, and confuse parents and other stakeholders who do not understand what grades have come to signify."

A few equity-motivated grading reforms are worthwhile, such as "eliminating most extra credit assignments and implementing rigorous grading rubrics."

"Pop romanticism" -- the idea that incentives undermine students’ intrinsic desire to learn -- weakens the analysis in Off the Mark: How Grades, Ratings, and Rankings Undermine Learning (but Don’t Have To), writes Tyner.

Authors Jack Schneider and Ethan L. Hutt argue that "holding students accountable through measures such as grades and test scores is inherently misguided," writes Tyner. However, "many studies show benefits to students when they are held accountable for their academic performance, whether from strict-grading teachers, large cash incentives for academic success, or classroom reward systems."