Some educational psychologists believe that the grading system is invalid. Most of these perspectives come from the idea that grades are given too subjectively and are not an accurate measure of whether or not a student has learned the material. Yet, it must be emphasized that teachers are given a curriculum of information they are expected to teach their students. Educational psychologist of The College of New Jersey, James Allen, states that “the only way to test whether or not this information has been learned, however, is through some form of measurement (i.e. scores) and eventually they are expected to summarize their assessment into a numerical score or letter” (219). This summarization is called “summative evaluation.”
Considering graded assignments, participation, and non-graded assignments, summative evaluation can be used to determine the extent to which the student has grasped the information at hand. As this form of evaluation is used for each class, all grades are then subsequently recorded on a report card. Although a report card may seem like a daunting piece of mail for each student to receive and show their parents, it actually serves great value. While all grades may not be to the standards of the student, their parents, or the teacher, the summative evaluations of their performance in each subject articulates their ability to master the information presented to them in each course (Bailey and McTighe (1996) qtd. in Allen 220). Grades are a way for the student to determine which subjects they cannot completely master and demand more attention in regards to practice. For teachers, the grades of their students reflect how effectively they are teaching the information that they are expected to have their students master.
While summative evaluation is a method with good intent, there are many flaws that inhibit its ability to be an effective form of self-evaluation for students. The main flaw lies in the invalidity of the grading systems used by teachers. In a study done by Cross and Frary, they found that two out of three teachers believe that effort, student conduct, and attitude should influence final grades of students. Further, they explain that “although these factors may indirectly influence students’ achievement of content knowledge, subjective – and often unknown to the teacher – factors such as these complicate the ability to interpret a grade since these factors may directly conflict with each other and distort the meaning of a grade measuring academic achievement” (220). Therefore, when these other factors are included in an assessment of students’ mastery of information, it becomes difficult to differentiate between self-evaluation with respect to academics and self-evaluation of outside factors, such as character.
Further, this directly relates to an issue with a later discussed viewpoint, which is the creation of an “even playing field.” The Campus Writing Program of the University of Indiana outlines the process teachers must endure to be eligible to assign grades to students with full trust that they are valid. However, the validity of these grades are unclear because of the lack of coherence in the beliefs about grades held by parents and students and those held by the education community (Baron qtd. in Allen 219). In a study done by Kain (1996), it was shown that even in the same school, teachers often hold very different views about the purpose of grades and fail to communicate with their colleagues about their grading practices (qtd. in Allen 219). Thus, self-evaluation based on teacher assessment seems to be invalid and arguably unreliable because of the evident deviation from the grade norming training that exists within schools; if evaluation varies from teacher to teacher, then grades as a method of self-evaluation incorporates too many factors to be able to be consolidated into one letter or score.
The Impact of Grades 