Ct898 Roper StandardCAEP1.2 770AnnotatedBibliography

I plan to further research the topic of standards-based grading.
I chose this topic because I feel

that it is what is around the corner in secondary education because I've already seen it
implemented in elementary and secondary schools. I also believe this to be one of the best ways
to communicate learning between students, teachers, parents, and the community.
A focus question I hope to answer through my research is "How can a teacher/school use a
grading system to provide effective feedback to students that goes beyond a simple percentage or
grade letter?". Another sub-focus question that I may be enlightened on as I research the above
question is "Does using a standards-based grading approach help to motivate or inspire students
to learn more compared to the 100-point scale letter grade system?".
Source 1
○ Source citation (APA format)
■ Reese, B., Compton, Cynthia, Cain, Pamela, & Cobitz, Christopher. (2015). The
Impact of Standards-based Grading on Student Academic Performance on
Standardized Assessments., ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
○ Source summary
■ Main argument or thesis
● “Few studies have been done that show if there is a correlation between
standards-based grading and student performance on standardized
assessments. This study explores the relationship between the two. A
medium, suburban school district in North Carolina has implemented
standards-based grading within the five elementary schools. This is a
mixed-methods study that reviews the implementation of and impact on
student and teacher performance before and after the implementation of
standards-based grading in grades 3 and 4.”
■ Key objectives/purpose of the study
● “One purpose of implementation was to increase student performance on
standardized assessments by having teachers focus assessing the students
on curriculum standards throughout the year.”
● “The general purpose of this research is to determine if standards-based
grading in grades three and four have a correlation with student and
teacher performance as determined by academic growth and proficiency
on standardized tests.”
■ Intended audience
● Educators in general along with faculty at Wingate University School of
Graduate Education
■ Author(s) background, viewpoint, theoretical approach
Author: Bridgette Anthony Reese
● Background
○ PERSONAL
■ Birthplace: Kannapolis, North Carolina 1973
○ EDUCATION
■ B.B.A. North Carolina Central University, 1995
■ M.Ed. University of South Carolina, 2010
■ Ed.S Wingate University, 2014
○ CERTIFICATES AND LICENSES
■ 6-12 Vocational Business, 1998
■ K-12 Principal, 2010
■ K-12 Superintendent, 2014
○ EMPLOYMENT
■ Principal, Kannapolis Middle School, Kannapolis, NC,
2012-present
■ Assistant Principal, Kannapolis Middle School, 2011-
2012
■ Career and Technology Educator, Kannapolis Middle
School, 2008-2011
○ MEMBERSHIPS
■ National Educators Association (NEA)
■ North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE)
● Viewpoint
○ I believe her viewpoint is that there is a disconnect between
traditional grading practices throughout the year and the
correlation of how standardized assessments are graded and
used.
○ Methodology of source
■ Methods used in the study
● “This study used a mixed methods analysis in which quantitative and
qualitative data were collected and analyzed to determine the effects of
standards-based grading on standardized tests and teacher efficacy.
Teacher interviews comprise the qualitative data to gain a personal
viewpoint on the implementation and teacher perspective on
effectiveness of standards-based grading. EVAAS data from 2012 and
2013 EOG results comprise the quantitative data as well as teacher
survey results obtained from the school district.”
■ Participants and the selection of participants
● “The subjects will be 20 teachers in grades 3 and 4 within Kannapolis
City Schools using standards-based grading in the classroom. Data is
being used that is collected by Kannapolis City Schools from students
and parents of students in grades 3 and 4. Participation in this study is
entirely voluntary.”
■ Theoretical approaches that informed the research
● The researched was informed by theories of standards-based grading by
Robert J. Marzano and Susan M. Brookhart among others.
■ Length of the study and important conditions to note
● The following was the listed only listed procedure in the study for the
teachers selected, “Complete a brief 10-15 minute survey addresses the
impact of implementing standards-based grading on how the practices
have impacted classroom instruction.”
● Limitations:
○ “The small number of years standards-based grading has been in
place in the school district as well as limited data from research
conducted nationally in regards to the relationship between
standards-based grading and standardized assessments.”
○ “During the 2013-2014 school year, North Carolina had a
renorming for EOG assessment data. This means that the scale
scores for each performance level were changed from the
previous year. Because of this, comparing EOG proficiency rates
from 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 became problematic. The
renorming created a limitation in that the current study compared
school years with different cutoff scores for proficiency and an
increase in the number of achievement levels (i.e. from four to
five levels) on the EOGs.”
○ “The 2013-2014 academic year will be the only year that
Discovery Education (DE) data will be available to compare and
predict achievement on EOG assessments.”
○ “Because this is a small district, there is only the opinion of
teachers in the five elementary schools over a two year period.
Teachers have only had two years of experience with
standards-based grading and reporting in which the teachers have
determined the performance levels of students.”
○ “This district is in the initial stages of standards-based grading;
therefore other factors such as time of implementation and
limited participation of outside resources play a role in
comparing the relationship between standards-based grading and
reporting and student performance.”
○ “The surveys administered to students were limited in the
response choices and teachers were allowed to interpret the
questions for limited English proficient students and students
with lower reading levels. The district administered surveys to
third and fourth grade teachers, students, and parents to gather
information on the process and implementation of
standards-based grading and reporting. This interpretation could
have an effect on how students responded to the questions.”
○ “All surveys were administered in English through an online
form.”
○ Findings/conclusions
■ Central findings and conclusions of the study
● “After reviewing the qualitative and quantitative data from the research
study on standards-based grading and reporting, the analyses show that
standards-based grading and reporting has not had a significant impact
on student performance as defined by standardized assessments in grades
3 and 4 for this school district.”
■ Analysis of the study’s findings/conclusions when compared with the other
studies; note similarities and differences
● “The findings of the study are supported by Guskey (2006) and Marzano
(2011) confirming that while standards-based grading has an impact on
teacher-based lessons and aligning activities in the classroom, there does
not seem to be a correlation between standards-based grading and
improved student performance on standardized assessments.”
○ Relevance
■ Explanation of the source’s relevance and contributions to your specific
topic/guiding question(s)
● This source was relevant to my topic of standards-based grading because
I think that school boards and politicians will still want to have data from
standardized assessments for the foreseeable future. I chose this source
because I wanted to see if there was significant research to support
standards-based grading practices, especially if it would appeal to those
who love standardized testing. It was also relevant to my guiding
question, "How can a teacher/school use a grading system to provide
effective feedback to students that goes beyond a simple percentage or
grade letter?" because it did state that the findings confirmed that
“...standards-based grading has an impact on teacher-based lessons and
aligning activities in the classroom.”
■ Any possible limitations of the source
● The limitations were that the study was done at a time of transition, early
on in the process of SBG implementation, and brief surveys were given
to only a elementary only teachers. There was limited room for response
by the participants and the researcher was a candidate attempting to
become a Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership. This limits the
time and autonomy of such a study.
■ Additional questions to consider after analyzing this source
● Did her recommendations ever get implemented?
● How many other studies on this topic have been conducted since this
report and do they concur with or reject these findings?
● What would the researcher do differently if she had the opportunity to
research this topic again today?
● Does she still feel strongly about supporting standards-based grading
practices after having her findings be unsupportive of the philosophy?
● Would these results be the same if this study were done with high school
teachers instead?
○ NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Reese’s
dissertation document.
Source 2
■ Hoernke, M., St. Maurice, Henry, Burke, Peter, Evert, Tom, & Houseman,
Kathryn. (2014). Perceived Effects of Standards-based Grading on Student
Assessments, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
○ Source summary
● “The following research question anchored the study: ‘To what degree
does a standards-based grading system affect the day-to-day classroom
assessment strategies a teacher employs?’”
● “The purpose of this study was to explore how the implementation of a
district-wide standards-based grading system affects the ways in which
high school teachers assess students’ academic achievement. The study
sought to better understand the evolution from traditional forms of
assessment within a point or percentage letter grading system into a
standards-based assessment system, in which grades are determined
using criterion-based references.”
● Educators in general along with faculty at Edgewood College School of
Education
Author: Mark A. Hoernke
● Background
○ “Mark Hoernke, Principal, Poynette High School & Doctoral
Candidate at Edgewood College”
● Viewpoint / Theoretical approach
○ “A standards-based reporting system allows grades to have
meaning and assists teachers to adjust curriculum throughout an
entire district.”
● “The variety and inconsistency among standards-based schools and the
uniqueness of RHS led the researcher to use a bounded, case study
format.”
● “This study demonstrated how a standards-based grading system affected
the day-to-day classroom assessment strategies teachers employed in one
school, here named Rural High School (RHS).”
● “The researcher gathered data from teachers at RHS. Since 2003, RHS
faculty and administration fully participated in a district-wide
professional development focused on Marzano’s Dimensions of Learning
(DoL) model (Marzano, 1992). In the 2013-2014 school year, 11 of 40
teachers who had participated in the 2003 DoL training continued to
teach at RHS. The district implemented a standards-based grading (SBG)
system during the 2008-2009 school year. In this system, RHS issued
report cards that were divided in course sections, each containing two to
five standards to be scored on a 0-4 scale. Achievement scores attained
within each standard determined the letter grade for that class. All 31 of
RHS’s regular education teachers used standards-based grading to report
the achievement levels of their students. Of RHS’s 31 regular education
teachers, 10 had participated in the 2003 DoL training.”
● “The researcher collected data from archives, observations, and
interviews. The district superintendent and building principal both agreed
to fully cooperate and assist with the study (Appendix A). The researcher
placed the introduction letter, consent form, and initial paper survey in
each of the 31 regular teacher mailboxes (Appendix B). Four teacher
volunteers placed their paper and pencil survey within a folder kept by
the RHS Attendance Secretary. The initial paper and pencil survey asked
the following three questions: 1. During which school year did you join
the staff of Rural High School (RHS)? 2. How many years of prior
teaching experience did you have before joining the RHS staff? 3. Would
you volunteer to participate in a study that explores how a
standards-based grading system affects the ways in which teachers assess
their students? Using the responses to the first question on the paper and
pencil survey, three teachers were chosen to participate based on the
school year they began teaching for RHS. Among four teachers who
expressed willingness to volunteer for the study, the researcher had one
volunteer with RHS teaching experience prior to the 2002-2003 school
year, two volunteers with experience beginning between 2004 and 2008,
and one volunteer with RHS experience beginning between 2009 and
2011. The researcher randomly chose between the two volunteers with
experience beginning between the years 2004-2008.
● “The study was theoretically based on O’Connor’s (2011) theory, which
states that as soon as a school is truly standards-based in both
assessments and grading, other improvements and evolutions in
assessment will logically follow. In this evolution of assessment
strategies within standards-based grading, “It quickly becomes obvious
that it is inappropriate to include factors other than academic
achievement, that it is necessary to have quality evidence that accurately
summarizes student achievement, and that the emphasis needs to be on
the learning process itself”
● “These volunteers were informed that the time requirement would be an
observation of one 90-minute class followed by a 60-minute individual
interview.”
● “Once a school becomes truly standards-based, it would only consider
academic achievement in its letter grade calculations. The study found
that participants believe that the rubric drives the academic grade and,
thereby, allows the teacher to focus on academic skills.”
● “The researcher found that participant teachers used clear, specific, and
understandable rubrics that provided the foundation of their formative
feedback systems.”
● “The participants sought to create skill-based assessments that allow
students to think, analyze, and apply in alignment to the lesson’s learning
goal(s).”
● “The participants in this study ultimately showed how the movement to a
standards-based grading system might give the structural support
necessary to improve assessment throughout an entire system.”
● “The study’s second conclusion to answer the main research question
stated that the participants used clear, frequent, and timely
communication designed to move the student closer to achieving the
academic standard. This conclusion persisted through every participant
observation and interview.”
● “The findings of the study support theories of Guskey, O’Connor,
Wormeli, and Marzano.”
○ Relevance
it clearly supports the notion that there is more effective communication
and feedback to students and parents using standards-based grades that
focus solely on academic of achievements instead of other factors such as
behaviors and participation efforts. It also connects to my question of
how a school can provide better feedback as opposed a letter grades and
percentages.
● “The researcher, who works as a school administrator for another district,
did teach within RHS for eleven years, three years in a standards-based
grading system. Although this experience provided what Creswell calls a
“prolonged time in the field” and, therefore, allowed the researcher to
develop “an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under study,” it
did require the same researcher to disclose and clarify a degree of bias
(p.192). The researcher worked as teacher, peer coach, and dean of
students at RHS, leaving those positions two years prior to beginning
work on this study. This familiarity may have affected the study by
having allowed the researcher insights into the RHS standards-based
grading system that other outside researchers may not have experienced.
The researcher explained that the main limitation of the study was that
the data gathered were most likely from the most confident and effective
standards-based grading 69 teachers in RHS.”
● How long did the he study the school outside of the 3 observations and 3
interviews with teachers?
● Why didn’t he focus on students at the school and their perception of
standards-based grading? Was this a legality, time, or logistical concern?
● Where are the responses and data from his studies on which he based his
conclusions? Why aren’t they attached to the report for review and
clarity?
○ NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Hoernke’s
Source 3
■ Corzine, E., Stewart, Kelly, Deets, Jed, & Doll, Brenda. (2016). Standards-based
Grading: Effects on Classroom Instruction, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
○ Source summary
● “Multiple parts of the classroom are impacted by switching to a
standards-based grading system including the teaching methods, content,
differentiation, and formative assessments.”
● “The purpose of this study was to determine if the implementation of a
standards-based grading system has an effect on classroom instruction. In
particular, how does the implementation of a standards-based grading
system impact the teaching methods, curriculum, differentiation, and
formative assessments being used in classrooms?”
● Educators in general along with faculty at McKendree School of
Education
Author: Elizabeth Corzine
● Background:
○ Education
■ McKendree University, 2016
● Doctoral Candidate in Curriculum and
Instruction
■ Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville, 2013
● Specialist in Educational Administration
● Masters of Science in Education: Curriculum
and Instruction
● Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education
○ Professional Experience
■ Triad School District, 2008-present Teacher
● Viewpoint
○ “It is the belief of the researcher that due to the renewed
emphasis on standards in the United States, several school
districts in Southern Illinois have started to change from the
traditional grading system to a standards-based grading system.”
● Theoretical approach
○ “Although some schools have gone through the process of
changing their system, it had not yet been identified if this had an
effect on the teaching methods used in their classroom (Urich,
2012). Even though educational researchers, such as Marzano
(1999), Wormeli (2006), and Guskey (2011), believe that there
should be a relationship between the grading system and
teaching methods, there were not any current studies that showed
this relationship (Guskey, 2011; Schmoker & Marzano, 1999;
Wormeli, 2006).”
● “The researcher conducted face-to-face interviews with the teachers. The
interview questions were centered on teachers comparing their teaching
methods, content, and differentiation styles used before and after the
implementation of a standards-based grading system in their classroom.
It also focused on the types of formative assessments being used.
Although there was guiding questions, much of the interview was
conducted using in-depth, unstructured interview questions so that the
researcher could understand how the teacher viewed the changes that
have taken place in his/her classroom since the implementation of a
standards-based grading system. As soon as the interviews were
conducted, the researcher began coding the interviews. All the interviews
were transcribed and the researcher looked for common themes that
occur throughout the interviews. The researcher looked for both
similarities and differences that occur amongst the group of teachers in
the sample.”
● “In this study the researcher conducted interviews and document
analysis. The main means for data collection was through interviews.
The researcher asked the subjects to produce documents used in the
classroom and documents used to prepare for the instruction of lessons.
The document analysis took place within the parameters of the interview
and the researcher requested copies of the documents brought to the
interview including gradebooks, formative assessments, summative
assessments, lesson plan books, example lesson plans, student work, etc.
if the participants were willing and able to provide copies.”
● “The participants in this study were eleven teachers from five different
schools in the Southern Illinois area chosen through 9 purposeful
sampling. The researcher is located in Southern Illinois, so the sample
was reduced to a geographical location within a two-hour driving
distance around the residence of the researcher. The teachers chosen for
this study have used a standards-based grading system, including a
standards-based report card, for a minimum of one year.”
● “The researcher chose a purposeful convenience sampling for this study.
A purposeful sampling allows the researcher to choose participants that
have knowledge and background in the area being researched.”
● “For this study, schools were chosen that have implemented a
standards-based grading system. The system had to be in effect for at
least one year in order for the school districts to be considered for this
study.”
● “This qualitative study used a phenomenological approach.”
● “The researcher conducted interviews at the participants’ school and in
the participants’ classrooms. Interviews varied in length from around
twenty minutes to an hour. During and after the interviews teachers were
asked to share documents with the researcher.”
● “As was stated in these studies (Mabie, 2014; Schmidt, 2008), the idea of
a standards-based grading system is that students, teachers, and parents
will be able to identify exact areas where their student is succeeding or
having difficulties. This study focused solely on teachers and not only
did it make teachers aware of individual student instructional needs, but
it made it almost impossible for them to continue teaching in the same
fashion they did in a traditional system. Teachers, due to their own
personal beliefs or teacher accountability, had to begin incorporating a
more diverse way of teaching. This diverse way of teaching included
individualizing their methods, assignments, and assessments to meet the
needs of their students. It was impossible for teachers to report grades or
score in a standards-based grading system without changing the way the
students were being taught.”
● “Teaching methods have been modified to better adjust to the
standards-based grading system and include a larger variety of
approaches.”
● “Teaching methods are more of a response to student need than a
pre-planned approach to teaching.”
● “Teachers have become more aware of the curriculum and standards that
are being taught at their grade level and other grade levels.”
● “The curriculum and content being taught in the classroom have been
better aligned to the standards.”
● “Teachers have a better understanding of the individual needs of students
and have used differentiation to meet these unique needs.”
● “The uses of formative assessments have increased in order to adjust for
more fluid groupings being used in the classroom.”
● “Teachers explained that since the implementation of standards-based
grading they have been able to recognize the performance level of their
students with more accuracy.”
● “ Many studies looked into the process of changing grading systems, but
there were not any current studies that researched the effects of changing
grading system in the classroom. Although future research in this area
should still be conducted, this study helped to lead the way to finding out
the implication of having a standards-based grading system.”
● “There were two main educational theories that supported the use of a
standards-based grading system in the classroom, Marzano’s idea of a
standards-driven school and Bloom’s theory of mastery learning, which
is in support of formative assessments and differentiated instruction
(Schmoker & Marzano, 1999; Gusky, 2005). This study identified how
standards-based grading supports both of these educational theories.”
○ Relevance
it discusses the impact this is having on classrooms. It goes into great
detail outlining how standards-based grading is a pivotal factor in
improving many other aspects of the school including my guiding
question of “"How can a teacher/school use a grading system to provide
effective feedback to students that goes beyond a simple percentage or
grade letter?" as well as my sub-focus question of "Does using a
standards-based grading approach help to motivate or inspire students to
learn more compared to the 100-point scale letter grade system?".
● “One limitation of this study was that although all the teachers being
interviewed are using a standards-based grading system the grading
systems might not all be identical. Most of the standards-based report
cards were created by the districts in which the teachers in the sample are
employed. The standards-based grading systems are all based on the
Common Core State Standards, also known as the New Illinois Learning
Standards, for each grade level. All of the 10 report cards have a number
system in which a greater mastery results in a higher number. The report
cards may vary slightly because each district developed its own way to
list the standards on the report card as well as the order and time period
in which each skill should be taught.”
● “Another limitation in this study is that the location of the study is being
restricted to Southern Illinois so that the researcher can conduct
face-to-face interviews. By conducting face to face interviews the
researcher hopes to capture the teachers’ body language, create a
comfortable environment for the teacher, and engage the teacher’s in
meaningful conversation. However, this study does use several different
districts spread throughout the Southern Illinois area.”
● “A final limitation is that since there was a limited number of schools in
the area using a standards-based report card, the amount of participants
was also limited. Many of the participants that agreed to speak with the
researcher were very involved in the implementation of standards-based
grading at their school as well. These teachers were more immersed in
the implementation of standards-based grading than the average teacher
switching to this type of system.”
● Do these results suggest that standards-based grading is the primary
element that needs changed in a school first or is it just one of the most
important?
● When and how should a school go about implementing a district-wide
change to standards-based grading? From youngest to oldest or vice
versa?
● Where would this same study possibly have different results and why if
all the research methods remained consistent?
○ NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Corzine’s
Source 4
■ Craig, T. A. (2011). Effects of standards-based report cards on student learning
(Order No. 3498282). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(926432787). Retrieved from
https://search-proquest-com.www2.lib.ku.edu/docview/926432787?accountid=14
556
○ Source summary
● “This research project examines the connection between the use of
standards-based report cards and corresponding student performance and
growth on the MCAS, a criterion-referenced assessment. The practical
goal of this research project was to build a quantitative foundation for the
expansion of the use of standards-based report cards to the secondary
level in public schools.”
● “This project will help to build understanding of the best practices of
reporting student progress and the elements that are essential to promote
student learning.”
● “The purpose of this causal-comparative study is to examine the effect of
standards-based report cards on the growth and performance of Grade 4
students on the Massachusetts measure of accountability. This study
examines the effect of the report card format on the grade level student
growth percentiles (SGP) and composite performance index (CPI) on the
2010 Grade 4 Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System
(MCAS) Mathematics Test.”
● “The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act’s accountability
designations and the resulting consequences have created a sense of
urgency for school leaders to develop reporting tools that can match
required accountability results… The intellectual goal of the project is to
examine the potential effect of standards-based report cards on the
growth and performance of students who are most at risk for
achievement.”
● Educators in general along with faculty in the field of Educational
Leadership within the College of Professional Studies at Northeastern
University in Boston, Massachusetts.
Author: Theresa A. Craig
● Background:
○ Doctoral candidate at Northeastern University (Boston).
● Viewpoint:
○ “The primary hypothesis of this study is: Fourth grade results for
students in the schools with standards-based report cards will
have higher percentages of growth and higher indices of
performance as measured by the MCAS Mathematics Test than
schools with non-standards-based report cards.”
● Theoretical approach:
○ “The theoretical framework of this study is developed from
theories of self-efficacy, the zone of proximal development, and
standards-based instruction. The underlying theory is that
feedback provided by standards-based report cards will improve
self-efficacy and increase motivation, thereby resulting in
increased opportunities for students to be in a zone of proximal
development. The increased opportunities to learn within the
zone of proximal development are evidenced by expanded
growth and improved performance. This research project is
grounded in the theory that providing an achievable goal (i.e. the
grade level content standards and indicators), removing
designations of failure and informing students of their progress
along a continuum promotes self efficacy and motivation,
provides opportunities for students to learn in a zone of proximal
development, and results in improved performance and higher
levels of growth as illustrated in Figure 3.”
● “A causal-comparative research methodology was utilized to examine
the effect of standards-based report cards on student growth percentiles
and composite performance indices on the Massachusetts Comprehensive
Assessment System. The basic causal-comparative design, sometimes
called a criterion group design, involves selecting two or more groups
that differ on a variable of interest and comparing them on variables. No
manipulation is involved. The groups differ in one of two ways: One
group either possesses a characteristic (often called a criterion) that the
other does not, or the groups differ on known characteristics (Fraenkel &
Wallen, 2009). This study involved one categorical independent variable
on which the groups differ – report card type.”
● “The target population of interest in this study is elementary students
across the state of Massachusetts. The accessible population for the study
is the 214 public elementary schools educating students in Grade 4 in the
southeastern region of Massachusetts (see Appendix B). Questionnaires
were sent to 214 principals of elementary schools. The return rate for the
questionnaires was 51% which resulted in 109 (N = 109) questionnaires
returned. Of the returned questionnaires 103 (N = 103) were viable as
participants for this study. This non random purposive sample population
of 103 elementary schools (N = 103) represents 48% of the 214
elementary schools that were targeted for the study in the southeastern
region of Massachusetts and 9% of the 1138 elementary schools in the
state.”
● “The theoretical framework that provides the foundation for this project
encompasses a review of the work of Albert Bandura, Lev Vygotsky, and
Richard Stiggins.”
● “The study is limited to one year of data (2010) and includes schools that
may have engaged standards-based report cards for varied periods.”
● “The initial questionnaire was designed to gather information on length
of implementation as a moderating variable but few respondents
provided this information so the data was not considered in the final
analysis.”
● “The current assortment of representations of progress from letter grades
to percentages to ordinal scales to abstract letter representations has not
clarified student or family understanding of student learning progress.
The growth and performance of students in schools using
standards-based report cards was not significantly different from students
in schools using non- standards-based report cards. This study does not
support the hypothesis that providing feedback to students and families
along a continuum of progress, as opposed to traditional letter grades or
percentages, results in higher levels of growth or achievement.”
● “In summary, the results of this study indicate that there is no statistical
difference in the improvement of student growth and performance in
mathematics for the general population of Grade 4 students regardless of
a schools type of report card.”
● “This study is framed by the theory that effective feedback, in the form
of standards-based report cards, promotes self-efficacy and motivation
and supports more opportunities for learning within the zone of proximal
development, especially for students who are at-risk for learning. The
review of the literature, the coding of 103 elementary report cards, and
the data analysis involved in this study have led the researcher to one
overall conclusion and four specific conclusions as follows:
○ Overall conclusion: Student feedback in the form of
standards-based report cards may be having little impact on
improving the growth and performance of students in elementary
mathematics.”
● Specific conclusions:
○ “1. There is a general lack of shared understanding among school
leaders about what constitutes a standards-based report card.”
○ “2. Given that this study found no significant difference in the
performance or growth of schools whether or not they use one
overall grade in a content area or several newly developed
performance levels, the efforts of school leaders to engage
stakeholders in this significant change may not be producing the
desired improvements in learning.”
○ “3. Report cards that grade on multiple grade-specific indicators
of proficiency in mathematics did not produce higher levels of
growth and performance for Grade 4 than report cards that
provided a single overall content grade, therefore school leaders’
should question the format of report cards that may burden
families with having to interpret achievement and progress based
on dozens of performance indicators.”
○ “4. Preliminary results of additional tests conducted in this study
suggest that the elimination of failing grades may have a positive
impact on growth for students who qualify as low income or
receive special education.”
○ Relevance
● The relevance of this source to my topic of improved feedback through
standards-based grading was that not all schools find success in the
implementation of the practice. Although these findings didn’t
corroborate my beliefs, it did give me insight that there is research
supporting the opposition’s argument against standards-based grading. It
shows me that it’s not a simple idea to support with total evidence and
support.
● “This research study is limited to Grade 4 mathematics results on the
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System. Grade 4 mathematics
was selected for study because the assessment has been administered
annually since 2002 and has the most data available. Educators in Grade
4 have the most experience in administering the MCAS test and
responding to the results. This study does not include results for other
grades nor does it include any other content area assessments.”
● “The sample size is a limitation of the study as it represents 48% of the
elementary schools in the targeted area of southeastern Massachusetts
and approximately 9% of the elementary schools in the state.”
● “The study does not account for standards-based practices that may or
may not be in place in the classrooms of participants.”
● “The rating of the report cards according to the ordinal rating scale and
the coding of report cards was completed by the researcher only.
● “The Standards-Based Report Card Product Rating Scale developed for
this study has not been utilized before and is a significant limitation of
the study.”
● Did the school studied abandon standards-based grading and reporting
altogether?
● Did the school modify their approach based on these results?
● Is the school having better success now with standards-based grading? If
so, why?
● How many other schools and studies have similar findings or was this
study’s results isolated and/or poorly obtained due to other factors?
● NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Craig’s dissertation
document.
Source 5
■ Franklin, A. E. (2016). Growth mindset development: Examining the impact of a
standards-based grading model on middle school students' mindset
characteristics (Order No. 10250679). Available from ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Global. (1864628975). Retrieved from
4556
○ Source summary
● “ By understanding possible connections between a standards-based
grading model and student mindset, educators can better understand its
impact on student learning. Results of this study provide additional
evidence to determine whether a standards- based grading model
supports development of a growth mindset, and whether this combination
leads to increased student achievement.”
● “The study aimed to identify any connections between standards-based
grading and incremental theories of intelligence to determine if these
variables positively influence student learning.”
● “The purpose of this study was to add to the research specifically in the
area of standards- based grading and growth mindset to determine
whether grading model has an influence on student mindset or belief
about intelligence.”
● Educators in general as well as the Dissertation Committee at Drake
University which included: Robyn Cooper, Ph.D., Chair Randal Peters,
Ed.D. Douglas Stilwell, Ed.D
Author: Anne E. Franklin
● Background:
○ Doctoral candidate for Doctor of Philosophy at Drake University
in Des Moines, Iowa.
● Viewpoint:
○ “Many communities are opposed to a shift to standards-based
grading as it can require an overhaul of the grade reporting
system (Erickson, 2011; Townsley, 2014). Most parents,
teachers, and administrators have grown up within a traditional
grading system and resist change due to a lack of understanding
and verification of its effectiveness (Marzano, 2000). However,
if empirical evidence shows a grading shift is connected to
growth mindset, a concept already shown to have a positive
impact on student achievement (Blackwell et al., 2007; Dweck,
2006; Molden & Dweck, 2006; Romero et al., 2014), these
results can provide evidence school leaders can use to support
their decision to embrace grading reform.”
○ “By understanding possible connections between a
standards-based grading model and student mindset, educators
can better understand its impact on student learning.”
○ “The research design was guided by Carol Dweck’s (2015)
theory of mindset as a conceptual framework which classifies a
student’s beliefs and behaviors regarding intelligence as either a
fixed or a growth mindset. Understanding the extent to which
grading models impact students’ views toward learning and their
influence on students’ beliefs about their intelligence can aid in
establishing grading practices that help to promote a growth
mindset, positive views toward learning, and positive beliefs
about one’s ability to change one’s intelligence.”
● “This quantitative study utilized survey research methodology based on
an objectivist epistemology and a post-positivist paradigm. Mertens
(2009) claims the philosophical orientation of the researcher influences
their paradigm and all of the assumptions that go with it. These
assumptions directly impact choices made during the research process
and must therefore be made explicit. According to Crotty (1998), an
epistemology provides “a way of understanding and explaining how we
know what we know” (p. 3). From an objectivist perspective, the
researcher acts to discover meaning rather than create it, which requires
use of the scientific method. This epistemological foundation provides a
framework for methodological choices of observation and
measurement.”
● “Participants in this study were seventh grade students from middle
schools with similar demographics from the suburbs of a city in the
central United States. Participants were recruited from middle schools
utilizing a traditional grading model and from middle schools using a
standards-based grading model. The survey was administered
electronically using Google survey software via classroom laptops.”
● “The framework of this study is based on Dweck’s theory of fixed versus
growth mindset, which has been extensively researched and shown to
have significant impacts on student learning. The purposes of this study
were to identify differences in students’ mindset characteristics based on
grading model (standards-based grading vs. traditional grading practices)
and determine the extent to which the grading model contributes to
predicting students’ growth mindset development. This study uses a
quantitative approach and survey research methodology.”
● “Data collection was conducted through a self-administered online
survey in order to determine characteristics of a student’s mindset at the
given moment.”
● “While it would be near impossible to draw information from an entire
population, a sample survey procedure allows the researcher to poll only
a select quantity of the population and produce inferences to be made
that can generalized (Rea & Parker, 2014). Data provided in surveys
allow the researcher to identify these trends and explore relationships
between variables. These sample results can then be generalized to a
population as representative of a “single point in time” (Vogt & Johnson,
2011, p. 87). Because a quantitative measure of the relationship between
participant’s mindset, belief about intelligence, and grading model was
needed for this study, survey research was considered the most
appropriate design.”
● “A concern with survey research is the potential for bias. Fowler (2014)
defines bias as a “systemic way that people responding to a survey are
different from the target population as a whole” (p. 10). The potential for
bias is increased when using nonrandom sampling techniques, presenting
biased questions, poor timing of survey delivery, restricting participant
access, participant honesty is in question, and sample demographics fail
to accurately represent the population (Fowler, 2014). Although efforts
were made to mitigate bias, it is always possible with survey research.
Thus, survey bias is a limitation in this study.”
● “Results of this study show clear connections between standards-based
grading and growth mindset characteristics. By isolating individual
mindset characteristics, differences between them emerged, better
informing understanding of how grading model impacts each aspect of
growth mindset. Results of t-tests showed a difference in belief about
intelligence by grading model, but grading model was not shown to be a
predictive variable in most of the regression analyses. However, belief
about intelligence was a predictive variable. Based on these findings,
belief about intelligence emerges as a key component connecting
standards-based grading to growth mindset characteristics. This finding
raises the concern regarding educators applying a standards-based
grading model with fidelity. Some studies have found no difference
between traditional and standards-based classrooms (Craig, 2011; Dean,
2014; Rosales, 2013). Theoretically, if the tenets of standards-based
grading are not followed with commitment, belief about intelligence is
unlikely to be shifted and there would be little increase in growth
mindset characteristics. The intended shift in student learning, the
ultimate goal of the large-scale shift to an alternative grading model,
would be less likely to occur. Thus, implementation becomes key in
order for a shift in grading model to be effective in influencing growth
mindset characteristics.”
● “These findings suggest that while there are differences between the two
groups of students based on grading model, standards-based grading no
longer has a strong enough influence on its own to be predictive of
growth mindset characteristics goal setting.”
● “Results of this study show appreciating growth mindset praise leads to
an increase in multiple mindset characteristics that positively influence
student learning, which aligns with findings in the literature (Dweck,
2003, 2015; McMillan et al., 2010; Mueller & Dweck, 1998; Skipper &
Douglas, 2012). Interestingly, fixed mindset praise was a significant
predictor only for goal setting behaviors. This finding indicates fixed
mindset praise possibly has more of a likelihood to positively influence
students’ motivation than previous literature suggests.”
○ Relevance
● This source was relevant to my sub-question of "Does using a
standards-based grading approach help to motivate or inspire students to
learn more compared to the 100-point scale letter grade system?". By
connecting the research of Dweck’s growth mindset to standards-based
grading, it helped to show a correlation that students who are graded
differently can be motivated differently. It analyzed the impact of
students understanding their grade and mastery of concepts to do better
as opposed to focusing solely on the letter grade implications.
● “There are a few limitations to this study. First, participants in this study
all attended a suburban middle school in the Central United States.
Results cannot be generalized to other geographical areas or rural/urban
school districts as the sample does not represent these populations.
Furthermore, the data collected were cross-sectional in nature. Since it is
not longitudinal, results represent only a single point in time.
Additionally, in a school utilizing a standards-based grading system,
some students may still receive traditional grades if they are in an
advanced math course. As such, the results may not be generalizable to
students who receive a hybrid of traditional and standards-based grades.”
● “A concern when investigating standards-based grading is the lack of a
single model for use. Each school district has the autonomy to adopt its
own set of guiding principles and implement its own unique alternative
grading model. Consequently, results regarding the use of
standards-based grading can only be generalized to districts using similar
guiding principles and policies for implementation. It is also possible that
teachers at the site utilizing a traditional grading model may still be using
standards-based teaching practices within the classroom. However, if this
were the case then there would not be differences identified in the final
model.”
● “There is also a chance that students may have been exposed to mindset
training in the course of their educational career. It is possible that these
students would have a disposition toward a growth mindset regardless of
their grading model.”
● How many other studies are there that analyze the relationship between
growth mindset and standards-based grading?
● How could this study be done differently instead of using a survey?
● Is there statistical data to support standards-based grading and growth
mindset correlation?
● Do students, especially those in this study, understand the connection
between mastery grading, standards-based reporting, and their ability to
improve using a growth mindset?
● NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Franklin’s dissertation
document.
Source 6
■ Miller, K. L. (2017). The development of student meaning and mindset through
the practices of standards-based grading (Order No. 10601758). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1952264982). Retrieved from
4556
○ Source summary
● “This research adds to the literature on the topic of standards-based
grading, specifically in a broad understanding of how standards-based
grading practices can affect student goal orientation and mindset at a
middle school level.”
● “This study supports the wider adoption of standards-based grading
philosophies. On a more specific level, the implementation of a
standards-based grading policy resulted in a positive, growth-focused
mindset at this new middle school, positively affecting the students in
this school both now and in their future educational/career paths.”
● “This study, conducted at a new middle school that instituted a
standards-based grading philosophy, explores the implications of this
grading structure on student meaning and mindset as evidenced in the
student practices. The broad purpose for the study is to construct an
understanding of the role of standards-based grading practices in
fostering a growth mindset in students. At an organizational level, the
purpose is to explore how the middle school students at a new middle
school made meaning of their learning based upon their interactions with
the school’s practices of standards-based grading and if this meaning
resulted in the development of a growth mindset towards their larger
potential for learning.”
● “Educational studies do not often employ a practice-theory framework.
Furthermore, researchers have not used practice theory to study how
student participation in standards-based grading practices shapes mindset
at a new middle school. The researcher confirmed this through a series of
searches on ERIC, Academic Search Premier, and ProQuest using varied
combinations of these search terms: standards-based grading, mindset,
middle school, secondary, grading, practice theory, new school, and goal
orientation.”
● Educators in general as well as the Dissertation Committee at Middle
Tennessee University which included: Dr. Kevin S. Krahenbuhl, Dr.
Nancy Caulkin, Dr. Heather Dillard, and Dr. Charles Farmer.
Author: Kari L. Miller
● Background:
○ Doctoral candidate for the Degree of Doctor of Education in
Assessment, Learning, and School Improvement at Middle
Tennessee University.
● Viewpoint:
○ “Middle school students encounter three years of new
experiences when they navigate through sixth, seventh, and
eighth grades, including those experiences related to secondary
teacher grading practices. As students interact with the structures
and practices of middle school, they make meaning for
themselves and form mindset qualities related to their capacity
for learning. Secondary teacher grading practices may contribute
to the development of unfavorable qualities in student mindsets.
Some students struggle to maintain a personal sense of value for
effort and perseverance during this challenging time of middle
school, and some may lose their confidence in their ability to
learn. Some students may develop fixed mindset qualities during
these fundamental adolescent years, which might include placing
importance on outperforming peers and performing well in front
of others. These adverse traits may transfer forward to their
experiences in high school or college and in their careers.”
○ “This study utilizes a grounded theory framework of qualitative
inquiry (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) along with a practice-based
epistemological approach, which holds that meaning emerges
from the practices of participants in an organization or social
grouping (Schatzki, Knorr-Cetina, & Savigny, 2001). The
information gained from the grounded theory research informed
an understanding of how students made meaning and adopted a
mindset from the practices of standards-based grading.”
● “At its core, this study adopts a practice theory approach, which holds
that meaning and sense-making emerge from the practices that happen in
an organization and the participants’ interaction with these practices
(Nicolini, 2012). A number of variations on practice theory exist (Bispo,
2015), but all practice theorists maintain a few fundamental concepts in
common. One of these common beliefs is the notion that when studying
organizations, a researcher must be concerned with the practices, not the
practitioners (Nicolini, 2012). In this study, then, the data gathered
pertains to student practices, not just the students.”
● “This study utilizes a grounded theory methodological stance, in which
qualitative data helps develop theories about the relationships among the
data points (Patton, 2015).”
● “This study adopts a design framework recently proposed by
practice-based researcher Bispo (2015). Shown as designed by Bispo in
Figure 2, this structure allows a researcher to choose the theoretical
framework that best aligns with the purpose of the study, which might
include ethnography, grounded theory, case study, or ethnomethodology
(Bispo, 2015).”
● “The following parameters guided the initial selective sampling of
participants.
○ “First, initial participants were seventh grade students because,
from the researcher’s experience, seventh grade students are
accustomed to the commonplace routines of middle school yet
are still willing to try new experiences and talk with their
principal and other adults. Eighth grade students, on the other
hand, sometimes adopt a false attitude of boredom and
self-important coolness, and by this grade, peer pressure
becomes an added factor that could influence the research. Sixth
grade students, again from researcher’s experience, often take
time to adjust to the patterns of middle school. Furthermore,
seventh graders at RMS already had one year to experience
customary middle school with traditional grading procedures.
Seventh graders provided an interesting group of participants, as
they had prior middle school experiences to compare with the
standards- based grading structure.”
○ “A second parameter for initial sampling was student
achievement. From the 210 students in the grade level, five high
achieving students (or students with all A’s in sixth grade), five
medium achieving students (or students with a mixture of A’s
and B’s in sixth grade), and five lower achieving students (or
students with B’s, C’s, and below in sixth grade) were randomly
selected for initial observation. While in some schools, lower
achieving students would receive C’s, D’s, and even F’s, at RMS
the lowest achievement band of incoming students were in the
range of B’s and C’s, with a very rare D. The randomly selected
students were of any gender identification, ethnicity, socio-
economic status, and homeroom affiliation. The parents of these
fifteen students received informed consent documents. If any
parents had declined their child’s participation, the researcher
would have selected an additional participant, still following the
same parameters above.”
○ “Following initial sampling, grounded theory methodology
allows for the refocusing on different participants, if the
emerging theories support that decision. In this study, the
researcher did not choose additional participants because the
initial purposeful sample and the interview data from this sample
provided rich information to draw consistent conclusions
regarding student mindset and meaning.”
● “The various meanings that students make from these standards-based
grading practices are numerous. However, one interesting possibility is
with regard to student mindset. Researcher Carol Dweck (2006) has
identified two types of mindsets that individuals may adopt. A fixed
mindset is one in which an individual believes that his or her capacity for
learning has a limit, and these individuals frequently orient their work
towards outperforming their peers and performing well in front of others.
A growth mindset, however, is one in which an individual believes that
he or she has an unlimited capacity for learning. Individuals with a
growth mindset have an orientation towards mastery, as opposed to
performance, and student learning and achievement may increase in
students who possess a growth mindset (Paunesku et al., 2015). The
standards-based grading practices of this new middle school may shape
student mindset towards learning.”
● “The researcher collected and analyzed two types of practice-related
documents as data in this study, one at the initial stage of the research
and the other after participant identification. The initial practice-related
artifacts were the attendance documents for remediation/Boost and flex
time activities, which provided information on student and teacher
priorities during this standards-based grading period. The researcher
collected these attendance documents for four weeks at the beginning of
the second semester of the 2016-17 school year.”
● “These four weeks occurred at the beginning of the second semester of
the school year, early January to early February.”
● “In conclusion, this study answered the two research questions that it
sought to understand. With regard to the meanings that middle school
students made from their interactions with the practices of
standards-based grading at a new middle school, the study identified five
findings. First, students appreciated that learning takes time and effort
and, second, that we all deserve multiple chances to learn. Third, students
felt that grades are important but so is learning, and fourth, grading
practices of teachers should reward time, practice, effort, and
perseverance. Finally, this study identified that students hold personal,
decision-making power with regard to their own learning. With regard to
the mindset qualities that middle school students adopted from their
interactions with the practices of standards-based grading at a new
middle school, the study identified six key findings. First, students
believed that they could change their learning potential through time and
effort and, second, that giving effort or practicing was not a sign of lesser
talent or intelligence. Next, to students, a moment of failure was not
hopeless or defining but was simply a problem that they could remedy by
learning from it and trying again. Fourth, students identified that people
who cared about them valued improvement and growth. In addition, they
realized that their ultimate potential for learning was not determined.
Finally, they believed that some challenges required time and effort that
they could not, or would not, give.”
● “The findings that students were embracing meanings that defined a
learning-focused outlook on schooling and grading, and that students
were shaping a mindset based upon celebrating growth and trying again,
were confirmation of the strong connections that can be made between a
grading for learning structure and a growth mindset-oriented school
culture.”
● ‘In addition, Dweck’s (2006) research on mindsets has certainly made a
mark on the American understanding of learning to one’s potential as
well as on teachers, parents, coaches, and business leaders who may
foster a growth mindset in those they serve. This study provides evidence
that the full, intentional implementation of standards-based grading is an
effective strategy to support a growth mindset in students.’
○ Relevance
● This source was relevant to my topic of standards-based grading and
sub-question of "Does using a standards-based grading approach help to
motivate or inspire students to learn more compared to the 100-point
scale letter grade system?" because it analyzed the influence on a
student’s mindset and meaning from a grade based on standards-based
grading. It helped to support my belief that and added to my knowledge
of the correlation of grading practices affect on students’ mindsets and
motivation due to the feedback received.
● “This research occurred with the acceptance of four important
limitations. First, a source of potential bias exists in the study, namely
from the researcher. Indeed, the researcher is the principal of this new
middle school and, as such, invested a great amount of time and care into
making the new school a successful venture. Clearly, the researcher was
a proponent of standards-based grading, or else the researcher would not
have implemented it in the new middle school. Therefore, this potential
bias was a limitation of this study.”
● “A second limitation was a threat to internal validity. While the
observations were not problematic, as the researcher conducted
observations of students and teachers on a daily basis, the interviews
presented the concern of validity. Quite simply, the principal interviewed
the students, which could potentially affect the answers that students
gave and could taint the results of the study.”
● “A third limitation was simply the overall imprecision of measures that
can occur with a qualitative research study of minors. The IRB-approved
interview protocol allowed for some open-ended questioning, but given
the normal constraints of time and inability to ask for every detail about
every aspect of the students’ interactions with standards-based grading,
the data show one piece of the larger puzzle. However, the random
selection of students from three different achievement levels, along with
the support of classroom observations and artifact data, present a
well-rounded picture of RMS students’ experiences with grading for
learning.”
● “Finally, this study occurred in a school that benefited from ideal
circumstances with regard to standards-based grading. A brand new
school building attracts top quality teachers, and the principal was easily
able to hire exceptional teachers who were fully committed to grading for
learning. Being a new school, staff members were still bonding and
establishing their identities, and they followed the school rules and
protocols with fidelity and respect. Standards-based grading and growth
mindset were fundamental ideals of the school from the very beginning,
and inaugural staff members actively worked to ensure they were
upholding the spirit of the organization. Therefore, the final study
limitation was that this research occurred in an ideal context.”
● What if this study were replicated in a school that was not under “ideal”
circumstances? Would the results be similar?
● Are there other studies that are similar to this one that had similar or
different results?
● Did the researchers potential bias affect the selection of the methodology
used in order to have favorable results?
● How could the researcher better study the use of growth mindset
language from teachers as well as attitude among students?
● NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Miller’s dissertation
document.
Source 7
■ Winton, T. W. (2015). Student and teacher perceptions of standards-based
grading and student performance (Order No. 3728021). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (1733692374). Retrieved from
4556
○ Source summary
● “Standards-based grading is facing many obstacles before full
implementation will be practiced or accepted.”
● “Standards-based grading is the tool which can relieve teachers from the
subjectivity and arbitrariness of current grading practices.”
● “Educators must be knowledgeable of standards-based grading in order
to meet the needs of students as they continue to progress through the
21st century. The move to standards-based grading must overcome some
obstacles and traditions.”
● “The purpose of this study was to explore students’ and teachers’
perceptions of standards-based grading to determine if there was a
significant difference on standardized tests scores between students
graded using standards-based grading and students graded using
traditional grading.”
● “The intent of this study was to examine the effect of standards-based
grading on student achievement and the perceptions of students and
teachers of standards-based grading. The significance of studying
standards-based grading was to provide educators with the research
necessary to make informed decisions when considering the transition to
standards-based grading.”
● Educators in general as well as the Education Faculty of Lindenwood
University within the School of Education on the dissertation committee.
Author: Terry W. Winton
● Background:
○ Doctoral candidate for Doctor of Education at Lindenwood
University.
● Viewpoint:
○ “Grading practices are grounded in tradition and not on
researched best practice (Jung & Guskey, 2011). Average scores
are determined using achievement indicators, behavior, and
progress, which are combined into a single grade, despite
evidence this grading practice has detrimental consequences
(Jung & Guskey, 2011). Grade averaging can be skewed by one
or two poor performances and, if the poor performances occur
early in the marking term, can significantly impact student
improvement or mastery when it comes to the final grade (Carey
& Carifio, 2011). Consequently, “Averaging is just one of many
common but questionable practices that can significantly distort
the accuracy of grading” (Erickson, 2011, p. 66).”
○ “Traditional grades can be an unreliable source for learning the
standards.”
○ “According to Reeves (2008), “If you wanted to make just one
change that would immediately reduce student failure rates, then
the most effective place to start would be challenging prevailing
grading practices” (p. 85). To understand the grading systems
used in schools, past and present, traditional and standards-based
grading practices were explored in the review of literature.”
● “This research was conducted using a mixed-methods design employing
both quantitative and qualitative research.”
● “Qualitative data were obtained to determine high school students and
teachers attitudes towards standards-based grading, and quantitative data
were gathered to determine if a difference exists between the
standardized scores of students receiving standards-based grading as
compared to those receiving traditional grading. Standardized
assessments analyzed included End-of Course (EOC) scores obtained
from the MODESE website for Wildcat High School and for all Missouri
students. Triangulation was achieved through the examination of school
artifacts, student and teacher perceptions, and student achievement data.”
● “Since the design of this case study was a single-case, the findings may
lack generalization (Crowe et al., 2011). Furthermore, this was an
exploratory case study.”
● “The population for this study was one rural high school in southwest
Missouri. As shown in Table 1, the school had 612 students, and the
ethnicity rate was 87.7% Caucasian, 8.5% Hispanic, 1.0% African
American, and 1.0% Indian (MODESE, 2013b). The school had 51.2%
of the students qualifying for free and reduced price meals (MODESE,
2013b).
● “The total population of the high school was considered to obtain a
random sampling of 12 students. All teachers in the high school who
have used both standards-based grading and traditional grading were
included in the sample.”
● “Students were chosen using the stratified sampling method, which
Bluman (2012) defined as a “sample obtained by dividing the population
into subgroups, called strata, according to various homogenous
characteristics and then selecting members from each stratum for the
sample” (p. 726). The strata were determined by grade level, with each
grade level (9-12) representing one strata. Random sampling techniques
were utilized to choose students to be interviewed.”
● “A total of 12 randomly selected students were interviewed. Teachers
were randomly chosen from each academic discipline. Two teachers
from each discipline were interviewed for a total of eight teacher
interviews.”
● “Many educators are tentative when asked to transition to an alternative
grading system (Potts, 2010). One system, standards-based grading, has
gained prominence with researchers. Standards- based grading provides
“a more comprehensive picture of students’ academic progress by
identifying specific areas of strength, as well as areas where additional
work may be needed” (Guskey & Bailey, 2010, p. 7).”
● “Armstrong et al. (2008) expressed a standards-based approach to
grading is more reliable because it clarifies teacher expectations for what
students are expected to learn. Comparatively, Miller (2013) concurred,
“A standards-based approach to assessment still holds students
accountable for the work they need to do to make progress, but leaves
teachers free to individualize and leaves students free to concentrate on
learning” (p. 112). Jung and Guskey (2011) agreed effective grading
systems have clearly expressed standards for what students are
responsible to learn.”
● “All student interviews were conducted during the school day during
advisory time in a single day. Teacher interviews were conducted during
in-service time and were completed in a single day. The high school
principal set the interview times and provided an appropriate setting to
conduct the interviews. The time between the completion of the student
interviews and the completion of the teacher interviews was
approximately two weeks.”
● “Qualitative data collected from this study provided mixed results on
teacher perceptions of standards-based grading. Only two teachers
preferred standards-based grading over traditional grading, while the
remainder of the teachers did not believe there was a difference from
traditional grading, felt standards-based grading created an atmosphere of
laziness, or did not have an opinion. Student perceptions of standards-
based grading were almost split evenly with six students preferring
standards-based grading, five students preferring traditional grading, and
one student with no opinion. Students and parents did not believe
standards-based grading prepared students for college or the workforce,
according to follow-up surveys given by the district.”
● “Therefore, it can be surmised the implementation of standards-based
grading does not yield a significantly positive difference on EOC tests.”
● “A consensus of teachers believed the main barrier to standards-based
grading was a lack of understanding of the system by parents and
students. As for disadvantages, teachers believed the time to reach
mastery and the ability to meet deadlines inhibited the effectiveness of
standards-based grading. Research question three revealed 50% of
students preferred standards-based grading, and 41.66% of students
preferred traditional grading.”
○ Relevance
● This study was relevant to my topic of standards-based grading and my
guiding question of "How can a teacher/school use a grading system to
provide effective feedback to students that goes beyond a simple
percentage or grade letter?" because it dealt with the attitudes teachers,
students, and parents had about the practice. Even if it could be
undeniably proven that standards-based grading was the best way to give
meaningful feedback to students and parents, this study goes to show that
it’s not so simple to implement and get people to buy in. There are some
deep-rooted traditions with old-fashioned grading practices that people
cling to out of familiarity and fear of change or the unknown. I see this as
relevant because it shows that there are roadblocks to consider beyond
proving a solution for my guiding question that revolves around
implementation and support.
● “There were three major limitations of this study. First, this research was
conducted as a case study of one southwest Missouri high school. Mean
EOC data were obtained from only one school implementing
standards-based grading and were compared to all Missouri students. The
number of students taking the EOC exams at Wildcat High School was
fewer than 200 students in each subject, each year, while the number of
Missouri student taking the EOC exams each year numbered in the
thousands.”
● “The second limitation was the implementation of standards-based
grading at Wildcat High School. Teachers of American History and
Government began using standards-based grading during the 2009-2010
school year, and five years of EOC data were able to be obtained from
these subjects. The remainder of the subjects (Biology 1, English 1 and 2,
Algebra 1 and 2, and Geometry) were implemented during the 2012-
2013 school year. Therefore, only two years of EOC data were able to be
obtained to compare the means with the EOC scores of Missouri
students.”
● “The third limitation was there were no assurances the EOC data
collected from all of the Missouri schools used traditional grading or
some other form of grading. Data, from Wildcat High School once
standards-based grading was implemented, were compared to all
Missouri schools to obtain mean scores and p value. While the EOC data
were limited to one school district which implemented standards-based
grading, generalization can be made about the overall significance of
standards-based grading on student performance. However, the study
cannot be replicated after 2014 due to changes in the EOC assessments.”
● Why did only two teachers favor standards-based grading?
● If the school and community had better explanations and training on
standards-based grading, would their support of it be different?
● What caused the students to be split on standards-based grading
practices?
● Why were there more students in favor of standards-based grading
compared to teachers? Does this say something about the effect students
noticed about SBG versus the amount of work and time it took to
implement it by teachers?
● If this school is still doing standards-based grading today, would these
results be the same if this study were redone?
● NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Winton’s dissertation
document.
Source 8
■ Rainey, L. S. (2016). The effect of standards-based grading on student
achievement: A correlational investigation (Order No. 10239976). Available
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1853474808). Retrieved from
4556
○ Source summary
● “Even though many districts have adopted standards-based grading, there
is an absence in the research that determined the correlation between a
student’s scores on the standards-based report card and student success
as evidenced by STAAR.”
● “Examining the correlation between standards-based grading and
STAAR achievement will provide additional research in the area of
standards-based grading. School district leaders can use the findings
from the current study to inform professional development needs as the
teachers in the district progress through the transformation to a
standards-based grade system. Furthermore, the findings may spur
in-depth grading discussions regarding the possible transformation of
district grading systems or the expansion of standards-based grading into
higher grade levels.”
● “Many leaders of educational institutions are adopting standards-based
grading systems in place of traditional grading systems. Standards-based
grading helps ensure grading is directly correlated to the mastery of
defined learning targets. The correlation of grades to the mastery of
learning targets gives grades meaning for all stakeholders and projects a
student’s progress towards mastery. Quality information provided
through student progress measures allows teachers to adjust instruction
and differentiate based on specific student need (Scriffiny, 2008).”
● Educators in general as well as the dissertation committee in the College
of Education at Dallas Baptist University.
Author: Lacey S. Rainey
● Background:
○ Doctoral candidate for Doctor of Education in Educational
Leadership K-12 at Dallas Baptist University.
● Viewpoint:
○ “The District believes when teachers clearly define the learning
targets for their students, teachers are able to assess students to
obtain a clear picture of their growth toward the mastery of the
standards. Learning targets are derived from unpacking the
standards. Standards-based report cards were developed based on
the learning targets to provide insight into the student’s
performance along the continuum of mastery. Standards-based
report cards are revised on a yearly basis taking into
consideration any change in the TEKS and feedback from
teachers in the District. Yearly professional development occurs
to focus on utilizing standards-based grading to drive student
learning and growth. With the current study, the researcher will
inform the efforts of educational leaders through an analysis of
the relationship between standards-based report cards to student
achievement on the STAAR.”
○ “Standards-based grading is a criterion-referenced method of
grading students based on product, process, and progress criteria
(Guskey, 2006; Muñoz & Guskey, 2015). Students are graded
individually on the set learning targets and given feedback and
opportunity for re-assessment to demonstrate mastery.”
● “In the current study, the researcher utilized an explanatory research
design. Creswell (2012) explained, “explanatory research design is a
correlational design in which the researcher is interested in the extent to
which two variables (or more) covary, that is, where changes in one
variable are reflected in changes in the other” (p. 341). The
characteristics evident in the current study are: a) the researcher will
correlate two variables; b) data will be collected at one point in time; c)
all participants will be analyzed as a single group; d) at least two scores,
one for each variable, will be collected for each participant; e) the
researcher will report the use of the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation
Coefficient, r, in the data analysis; and f) the researcher will make
interpretations based on the statistical test results (Creswell, 2012).”
● “The current explanatory research study included quantitative data to
identify relationships between student scores. The researcher explored
the relationship between student scores on the standards-based report
card and student reading achievement as evidenced by STAAR.
Additionally, the investigator determined if there is a correlation between
scores of limited English proficient students on the standards-based
report card and their reading achievement on STAAR and scores of
non-limited English proficient students on the standards-based report
card and their reading achievement on STAAR. Finally, the researcher
determined if there is a correlation between scores of economically
disadvantaged students on the standards-based report card and their
reading achievement on STAAR and scores of non-economically
disadvantaged students on the standards-based report card and their
reading achievement on STAAR.”
● “The current study was conducted in a large suburban school district in
North Texas. The enrollment of the District is approximately 27,000 and
continues to grow annually. The demographic makeup of the District is
diverse, composed of approximately 52% White, 32% Hispanic, and
12% African American (Texas Education Agency, 2013c). The District
has five high schools, including an alternative high school and advanced
technology complex, seven middle schools, 22 elementary schools, and
two early childhood centers.”
● “One elementary school within the District participated in the current
study. The elementary campus in the current study is a Title I campus,
which means the campus receives federal funds for students participating
in the Title I program. The campus has a two-way Dual Language
program. The two-way Dual Language program is a biliteracy program
where academic subjects are taught in English and another language; the
other language taught at the campus in the current study is Spanish. The
student population in the two-way Dual Language program at the campus
in the current study contains both students proficient in English and
students identified as limited English proficient (LEP). The elementary
campus has an enrollment of 721 students in grades Kindergarten
through fifth. Table 10 shows the school’s race/ethnicity information for
both years of data collection. Table 11 shows the school’s special
program participation percentages for both years of data collection.”
● “The researcher used the 2013-2014 third grade cohort and the
2014-2015 third grade cohort. The 2013-2014 third grade cohort took
STAAR the first year they had a standards-based report card. The
2014-2015 third grade cohort took STAAR after having a
standards-based report for two years, in 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.”
● “The sample size for the current study included 218 third grade students.
The current study involved 112 third grade students in the 2014-2015
school year and 106 third grade students in the 2013-2014 school year.
Students who did not take the standard STAAR were excluded. Excluded
were seven students who took the STAAR A in the year 2014-2015 and
eight students who took the STAAR Modified in the year 2013-2014.
These students were excluded from the study because the STAAR A and
STAAR Modified test format and number of questions asked on the
assessment are different from the standard STAAR. STAAR A is most
appropriate for students who receive special education services or
Section 504 services and routinely receive accommodations in the
classroom; the standard STAAR with or without accommodations is not
the most appropriate measure of the knowledge of the student. The final
administration of the STAAR M was in 2013-2014. The test was
designed for a small number of students who received special education
services. Additionally, students who are eligible for STAAR A or
STAAR M, when it was offered, may have a modified standards-based
report card and are assessed on modified TEKS per their individualized
education plan (IEP).”
● “Students who took the standard STAAR but received testing
accommodations were included in the study.”
● “Students who took the standard STAAR Spanish were included in the
study.”
● “Dressel (1983) stated a grade is “an inadequate report of an imprecise
judgment of a biased and variable judge of the extent to which a student
has attained an undefined mastery on an unknown proportion of an
indefinite amount of material” (p. 12). Grading has historically been
utilized for ranking students, motivating students to learn or punishing
them, sorting students into classes and courses, and often, teacher
evaluation (Brookhart, 2004; Tomlinson & Moon, 2013).”
● “A quantitative approach for data collection was utilized in the current
study. The researcher was able to collect data directly from the students’
standards-based report cards and the students’ STAAR Confidential
Student Report, Grade 3. The STAAR Confidential Student Report
contains information regarding STAAR, performance levels, and an
explanation of student results (Texas Education Agency, 2010). Both
data sets are available at the elementary campus in the current study”
● “In the current study, the researcher found evidence to suggest a
statistically significant relationship appears to exist between
standards-based report cards and student achievement scores on the
Grade 3 reading STAAR, measured for 2014-2015.”
● “Further, the relationship between the standards-based report cards and
reading achievement scores on STAAR for students with limited English
proficient status was strong.”
● “The current study’s findings supplement grading research by providing
support of the application of standards-based grading within a large
school district. Taking into consideration the lack of grading research on
the implementation of standards-based grading, this study’s findings
advise both research and practice. Although this research study was
conducted within a large diverse school district, the findings have the
potential to inform state and national grading practices.”
● “The relationship indicates standards-based grades can provide
educators, parents, and students with frequent communication regarding
student progress towards mastery of the standards and in turn, allows for
more insightful educational decisions (Guskey, 2002; McDaniel, 2010;
Nitko & Brookhart, 2011; O’Connor, 2010a).”
● “The outcomes of this study suggest standards-based grading may have
value beyond traditional grading practices. This supports previous
research by English (1992) who noted the benefits of standards-based
grading include providing a tool that assists teachers in achieving the
goal of aligning the written curriculum, taught curriculum, and assessed
curriculum (English, 1992).”
○ Relevance
● This source was extremely relevant to my topic of standards-based
grading and the effectiveness of this type of feedback. This study
confirms that students excel on standardized assessments when graded
using standards-based grading. It also supports the notion that students
are more inspired to show mastery on a concept when graded this way
rather than traditionally.
● “Generalizability: The study is limited to one campus in one suburban
school district and therefore, cannot be generalized to all campuses or
school districts in the state of Texas. Furthermore, the 2015-2016
STAAR data was not utilized in the current study since Educational
Testing Service attained the contract for STAAR in the 2015-2016
testing season. The contract involves the development, administration,
scoring, and reporting for STAAR. Pearson had STAAR contracted
services in 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, the two years the researcher
utilized to collect data (Texas Education Agency, 2015d). The current
study utilized data from STAAR when Pearson provided contracted
services. Therefore, the study may not be generalizable to future
correlations while Educational Testing Service owns the contract for
STAAR.”
● “Predictability: Pallant (2013) cautions that a “correlation provides an
indication that there is a relationship between two variables; it does not,
however, indicate that one variable causes the other” (p. 128). Even
though the results of the study show a relationship between the scores on
standards-based report cards and achievement as evidenced by STAAR,
a student’s scores on the standards-based report card cannot predict the
student’s score on STAAR.”
● “Extraneous Variables: The researcher cannot tease out all other
variables that could affect students’ growth in their performance on
STAAR. Variables that could affect student performance on STAAR
could include, but are not limited too, the effectiveness of the classroom
teacher, student motivation, or the designation of additional
accommodations to help increase the likelihood of better performance on
STAAR.”
● Why did students in this school do better on assessments when
standards-based grading was used compared to other studies where test
results weren’t significantly affected?
● Why didn’t the researcher focus more on surveys and interviews as
opposed to report card data collection?
● How often would this same study show similar results in other schools?
● Was this study influenced by bias?
● NOTE: Information inside of quotation marks were taken directly from Rainey’s dissertation
document.

Ct898 Roper StandardCAEP1.2 770AnnotatedBibliography

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ct898 Roper StandardCAEP1.2 770AnnotatedBibliography

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

I plan to further research the topic of standards-based grading.

I chose this topic because I feel

Вам также может понравиться