Standards-Based Grading: Core Principles and Current Implementation Debates

References

• Ausubel, D. P. 2012. The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Boston, MA: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Black, P. J., and D. Wiliam. 1998. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 5 (1):7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). 1956. Taxonomy of education objectives Book 1-Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, B. S. 1971. Mastery learning. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice (pp. 47–63). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Brookhart, S. M., T. R. Guskey, A. J. Bowers, J. H. McMillan, J. K. Smith, L. F. Smith, M. T. Stevens, and M. E. Welsh. 2016. A century of grading research: Meaning and value in the most common educational measure. Review of Educational Research 86 (4):803–48. doi:10.3102/0034654316672069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruner, J. S. 2009. The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coffey, M. 2023, March 18. “Grading for Equity” isn’t grounded in reality. Thomas B. Fordham Institute. https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/grading-equity-isnt-grounded-reality.
   Google Scholar
• DeVoe, J. 2023, February 9. APS transitioning to new grading style but many parents are giving it poor marks. ARLNow. https://www.arlnow.com/2023/02/09/aps-transitioning-to-new-grading-style-but-many-parents-are-giving-it-poor-marks/.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, J. 2019. Grading for equity: What it is, why it matters, and how it can transform schools and classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Francis, E. 2021. Deconstructing depth of knowledge: A method and model for deeper teaching and learning. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. 2015. On your mark: Challenging the conventions of grading and reporting. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. 2020. Get set, go! Creating successful grading and reporting systems. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. 2023. Giving retakes their best chance to improve learning. Educational Leadership. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/giving-retakes-their-best-chance-to-improve-learning.
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. 2024. Engaging parents and families in grading reforms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R., M. Townsley, and T. Buckmiller. 2020. The impact of standards-based learning: Tracking high school students’ transition to the university. NASSP Bulletin 104 (4):257–69. doi:10.1177/0192636520975862.
   Google Scholar
• Harden, R. M. 1999. What is a spiral curriculum? Medical Teacher 21 (2):141–3. doi:10.1080/01421599979752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heflebower, T., J. K. Hoegh, P. Warrick, and J. Flygare. 2018. A teacher’s guide to standards-based learning. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research.
   Google Scholar
• Heflebower, T., J. K. Hoegh, and P. Warrick. 2014. A school leader’s guide to standards-based grading. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hess, K. 2018. A local assessment toolkit to promote deeper learning: Transforming research into practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Hoegh, J. K. 2020. A handbook for developing and using proficiency scales in the classroom. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Link, L., and T. R. Guskey. 2022. Is standards-based grading effective? Theory into Practice 61 (4):406–17. doi:10.1080/00405841.2022.2107338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowell, B. R., K. Cherbow, and K. L. McNeill. 2021. Redesign or relabel? How a commercial curriculum and its implementation oversimplify key features of the NGSS. Science Education 105 (1):5–32. doi:10.1002/sce.21604.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzano, R. J. 2010. Formative assessment & standards-based grading. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research.
   Google Scholar
• Marzano, R. J. 2000. Transforming classroom grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
   Google Scholar
• Marzano Resources. 2023. Proficiency scale creation. https://www.marzanoresources.com/proficiency-scale-creation.html.
   Google Scholar
• Mathews, J. 2021. December 26. Abolishing grades on homework will hurt the neediest kids. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/12/26/homework-grading-curve-arlington-assignments/.
   Google Scholar
• Mathews, J. 2022. July 24. Teachers forced to do even more under policies opposed to bad grades. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/07/24/schools-homework-grading-policy-teachers/.
   Google Scholar
• National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGACBP), Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). 2010. Common Core state standards for mathematics. Washington: NGACBP & CCSSO.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connor, K. 2022. A repair kit for grading: 15 fixes for broken grades. Winneconne, WI: FIRST Education Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Popham, W. J. 2011. Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (6th ed.). New York: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, A., J. McMaken, J. Hwang, and R. Yang. 2011. Common core standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher 40 (3):103–16. doi:10.3102/0013189X11405038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rantz, J. 2023. July 16. Rantz: Mom took on ‘equity grading’ to get child the ‘F’ she earned. 770 KTTH. https://mynorthwest.com/3907806/rantz-mom-took-on-equity-grading-to-get-child-the-f-she-earned/.
   Google Scholar
• Schimmer, T., G. Hillman, and M. Stalets. 2018. Standards-based learning in action: Moving from theory to practice. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
   Google Scholar
• Schimmer, T. 2016. Grading from the inside out: Bringing accuracy to student assessment through a standards-based mindset. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
   Google Scholar
• Townsley, M. 2022. Using grading to support student learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Townsley, M., T. Buckmiller, and R. Cooper. 2019. Anticipating a second wave of standards-based grading implementation and understanding the potential barriers: Perceptions of high school principals. NASSP Bulletin 103 (4):281–99. doi:10.1177/0192636519882084.
   Google Scholar
• Townsley, M., and C. Lang. 2023. A parents’ guide to grading and reporting: Being clear about what matters. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Townsley, M., and N. Wear. 2020. Making grades matter: Standards-based grading in a secondary PLC at Work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, N. 1997. Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments on mathematics and science education (Research Monograph Number 6). Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, J. & Kruse, J. W. 2012. Springing into seasons: Using students’ ideas to inquire about seasons. Science Scope, 35(6), 26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, J. & Townsley, M. 2022. Debunking myths of standards-based grading: Addressing the concerns and providing some strategies for implementing alternative grading practices. The Science Teacher, 90(1), 29–33.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, J., Chibnall, D., Lange, W. R., & Clausen, D. 2024. Making light work of gravity: Scaffolding middle schoolers’ thinking to help them understand gravitational lensing. Science Scope.47(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08872376.2023.2290285.
   Google Scholar