Standards-Based Grading: An Equitable Approach to Assessment

Equitable assessment practices measure students’ performance by using methods that are most appropriate to the individual learner. Standards-based grading is an excellent example of an equitable assessment practice, one that reflects a student-centered pedagogy.

At Utica College, Xiao Xiao, Professor of Mathematics, uses and advocates for standards-based grading. He notes that students learn material at different paces. Traditional grading practices measure whether students have learned the required material within a specified amount of time (e.g. by the end of every week, by the end of every month, and then by the end of the semester). In contrast, standards-based grading focuses on measuring whether students have learned the material by the end of the semester while giving frequent feedback along the way. It helps level the playing field for slow learners and encourages deeper learning for everyone.

Standards-based grading requires the instructor to articulate clearly the precise learning objectives addressed in the course.  Students are informed on a weekly basis what learning objectives will be covered and assessed in the course. If a student does not do well on a specific assessment, the instructor provides feedback on his/her/their performance, directs the student to additional resources related to the material, and then gives further assessment opportunities for students to achieve the related learning objective(s). By making each assessment low stakes, students are not punished if they need more time to learn the material.  

Xiao notes that mistakes are valuable to learning. He states, “Mistakes should be expected when a person is learning something new. Traditional grading punishes students for making those mistakes that are part of the learning process, especially when students don’t learn fast enough.”

He further maintains that using standards-based grading in a course enhances student success. Since the precise learning objectives are clearly articulated, students know exactly what they are expected to learn. This approach works especially well in courses where student backgrounds and levels of academic preparation vary.

Xiao additionally notes that standards-based grading may have the added benefit of minimizing academic dishonesty in the virtual learning environment. He explains, “Students are given frequent low-stake quizzes and, if needed, future assessment opportunities to demonstrate their learning. They are provided with ongoing feedback to promote their learning. There are no monthly big exams that might invite cheating.”

While Xiao believes that standards-based grading is less work than traditional grading because instructors no longer have to spend time considering partial credit, he says preparing a course where standards-based grading is used takes a significant amount of time.

“If someone wants to use standards-based grading, I recommend prepping a month or two in advance.”

Xiao concludes that standards-based grading forces him to think hard about what he really wants students to learn in his classes and what he considers less important for them to know. “It helps instructors to clarify what kind of learning students should achieve,” he says.

And without question, that is good pedagogy and good assessment.

 

Equitable Assessment Practices

 Erick Montenegro and Natasha A. Jankowski advocate for the importance of using various methods to assess students’ knowledge as opposed to a one-size-fits-all approach. They write, “There is an assumption at play in the field of assessment that while there are multiple ways for student to learn, students need to demonstrate learning in specific ways for it to count” (Equity & Assessment, page 6). Since the mid-1990s, researchers have argued that most assessment measures are not culturally responsive or designed with respect to nontraditional and underserved populations. We need to change that if we are truly committed to equity in our educational offerings.

So how might we begin?

Give students agency in our assessment processes. Assessment, whether it is course-level or institution-level, should be something we engage in with students, not something we do to students or to judge students. Some faculty have asked students to help them develop the learning objectives for a program or course. This helps students understand better what they are expected to achieve and gives them greater ownership of their learning.

      Students might also be invited to develop the rubrics that will be used to measure their performance. By collaborating on rubric criteria, students are asked to think carefully and reflect deeply on what constitutes an exemplary performance as opposed to a mediocre one.

      Students definitely have a rightful place at the table when faculty and/or administrators gather to interpret and analyze assessment results. When analyzing survey results, for example, it is helpful to know how students understand the questions or define specific terms.

      Dis-aggregate results or data to see if we are achieving equity. When considering student performance in our programs or at the institution, if the N is large enough, it is worth dis-aggregating the findings by demographic groups to see if there are gaps in student performance. If certain groups of students are performing better than others, we are not achieving the goals of equity.

         Ask equity-minded questions. At its best, assessment is thoughtful inquiry into student learning. If we explain performance gaps by saying “Some students just aren’t prepared,” we are being deficit-minded, not equity-minded. If we continue to have courses intended to “weed out” students, we are being deficit-minded, not equity-minded. Instead of saying the students are not prepared or can’t make it, ask if we are providing the right kinds of opportunities to prepare them and are we assessing the efficacy of these opportunities.

Conversations about equity and our assessment processes are starting to take root. These discussions offer us new ways to think about student learning—how it is achieved and how it is demonstrated. As Montenegro and Jankowski observe, “If assessment is about demonstrating learning, then we need to allow students the space to show their knowledge . . . [H]ow we assess and the process of assessment itself . . . should align with the students we have, empowering them with narratives to share and document their learning journey” (Equity & Assessment, page 15).

References

Finley, Ashley and Tia McNair, Assessing Underserved Students' Engagement in High-Impact Practices.  AAC & U: Washington, D.C.. 2013. 

Montenergo, Erick and Natasha A. Jankowski. A New Decade for Assessment: Embedding Equity into    Assessment Praxis. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment, January 2020. 

Montenergo, Erick and Natasha A. Jankowsi. Equity and Assessment: Moving Towards Culturally Responsive Assessment. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment, 2017