I went to the LEAP meeting and saw verbal bullying and just plain poor manners by the FairGrade advocates. They reminded me of the occasional out-of-control parents on the sidelines screaming at the kids, the coach and the officials hoping to get that competitive edge.

The FairGrade premise has several logical flaws. First it presupposes that a student who scores a 92% in a course in Montgomery County school (and gets an A) has achieved the same mastery of the course material as a student who scores a 92% in Loudoun and gets a B+. FairGrade's refusal to acknowledge that tests from different school systems are based on different curriculums, that grade rubrics are different (homework, class participation, etc.) and that a student's peers affect performance means that their whole analysis is built on a false premise.

Second, FairGrade mistakes the difference between an apptitude score like the SAT and performance grades like AP tests and GPA. Rather than compare GPA and AP test scores between school systems (apples to apples) they crudely compared SAT and GPA (apples to oranges.) Their result is an exaggerated caricature dressed up as researched fact.

The FairGrade proposal is grade inflation. They focus on the benefit to students at the B+ margins but ignore the negative effect it has on those students already with As. Students with a 95 grade can no longer differentiate their achievement to colleges and scholarships from students with a 90 because both get the same grade and the same GPA under FairGrades proposal. FairGrade helps the B+ students by harming the A students.

Fiddling with grading systems every few years so that some students gain a competitive advantage at the expense of others is not educational reform nor fair. We should be focusing on reforms that help all students, not just the few with loud parents.

We want a grading system that differentiates achievement and encourages children to take tougher courses even if they get a lower grade. FairGrade is trying to take that away from us.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have nothing in this battle, but having attended private Catholic schools long ago and A was 93-100, B was 86-92, C was 78-85, D was 70-84, and Failing was 69 down.

There needs to be a national grading system for high schools. It doesn't matter if certain college admissions offices understand Loudoun, becuase the fast majority will see the GPA averages only.

In Virginia alone, NOVA kids already have a disadvantage for in-state admissions because they live here. Why penalize the kids when other systems are undercutting by a point or two. Level the playing field or adopt the tactics of the opposition.

Posted by Loudoun99 (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you Edward Myers. My thoughts exactly. As a parent of students who have put in extra efforts to earn the higher grades, I can not support other student's grades being boosted without the actual achievement. Also, you make a good point that you cannot necessarily say that a 92 in Loudoun is equivalent to a 92 in another county. I believe that the teachers will likely grade with the scale in mind so people may be unpleasantly suprised to find that the 92 their child formerly earned is an 89 under the new system (still a B and not even a B+).

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 9:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We are not going to get a nation of thousands of school systems into a common grading standard and even if we did the tests aren't standard so the GPAs aren't comparable. Why don't we scrap the GPA completely and just report the numeric scores. Let colleges, scholarships and businesses translate a 92 anyway they want. I still say a 92 is not comparable across the country but at least that number has more fidelity than the GPA. If more schools were to publish the actual numeric score instead of a sliced and diced GPA, then we would see more attention paid to academic achievement instead of these grade spin meisters like FairGrade.

(We lose precision and create reporting distortions when we convert a 92 into an A, B, or B+ and then convert it back into a GPA score by applying a numeric value of A=4, B=3, B+=3.5.)

Every time I hear "level the playing field" I understand the speaker is saying: "my child is smarter than yours and grades would prove it if only the grading system wasn't so unfair."

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 11:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I would love to see a numerical grade system and no letter grades. It makes perfect sense.
I can't think of any disadvantages. Can anyone else?

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

A numeric grade system would be GREAT. However, this is not happening today! Today a 92 score in Arlington gets their student an A and gets our student a B. I have read many places where the college administrator does not look at the grade scale, just the GPA. Therefore, the Arlington/Montgomery student gets a better GPA and better chance to get into college. Your argument would be valid if only Loudoun and Fairfax students were being considered, Edward and MLC1. Instead, other students have an unfair advantage.

Posted by tempo341 (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 5:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The school board is currently waiting to see what the Fairfax County Public Schools will do on the issue."

Wow, so much for leadership!!

This is the most ridiculous thing to waste anyonee's time on. If kids in other jurisdictions are getting an advantage, well, we should eliminate that. Simple.

Posted by louiebird (anonymous) on November 15, 2008 at 10:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fairgrade still can't name a single student from Loudoun who was denied admission because of the district's grading system.

Posted by dingus3 (anonymous) on November 16, 2008 at 5:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To the parent of elementary school students who calls this a "no brainer", would you still see it that way if your child was a high school student who put in the extra effort for a higher grade and now finds out that it was not necessary and that other students who did not perform as well get their grades lifted? And will you be the one who will tell our top students that the A+'s they worked for will now be downgraded to A's? Please tell me your "no brainer" plan to adjust every students grades so that it will be fair to ALL of our students.
In addition, because students will work o and teachers will grade to the grade scale in place at the time, a retroactive change in a grade scale WILL result in grade inflation.

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 16, 2008 at 5:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I wouldn't be for a retroactive change. But otherwise it's still a no brainer. I'm pretty sure a kid who gets a 92 has worked just as hard as a kid who gets a 94. We should afford our kids the same advantages of the surrounding jurisidctions.

Posted by louiebird (anonymous) on November 17, 2008 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Dingus, you have been making the same lame argument FOR other counties to have this GPA advantage. As far as I know, the college selection process is NOT public record. Simple question for everyone that is FOR the Arlington/Montgomery advantage, why do you favor their students MORE than our own ???

Posted by tempo341 (anonymous) on November 17, 2008 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just give them numbers AND letter grades. Then you won't have to change the system and no one has to do any extra work. Waiting on a Fairfax decision is an embarrassment for our School Board but not surprising, the only time we hear from Joe Guzman is when its time for re-election.

Posted by mattjack (anonymous) on November 17, 2008 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As for a student working just as hard for a 92 as a 94, I don't know about that. My child got a lot of 92's until she made the decision that she wanted to get A's and had to put in extra work. By your logic, if we go to a 10 point grade scale, then it could be argued that a student works just as hard for an 89 as a 90 ( or a 79 as an 80, etc.). There has to be a cut off point.

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 17, 2008 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

why don't they just put the percentage on the report cards like in new york. Everyone else in the country assumes the following
90's range A or A-
80's range B-, B, B+
70's range C-, C, C+
60's range D-, D, D+, or below 65 is failing
59 or below F.
So the school officials say area colleges understand, but what if students want to go to college out of the area? This is not grade inflation this is how it works in most of the country, or like in New York where it is done by the numerical average, which actually would help out more because the student who got a 93 would be rewarded with a higher gpa than a student who got a 90 where as in the letter system the two A-'s would equate the same in the figureing of the gpa

Posted by fish9669 (anonymous) on November 17, 2008 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is there anyone that can give me a specific example of where a Loudoun County Public School student didn't get into a school because of the grading scale?

Posted by bstokes (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 12:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Who has the authority to mandate the inclusion of the percentage grade in addition to the letter grade? The school administration? If so, where is Dr. Hatrick on this issue? The School Board? I hope not because then we have to wait for Fairfax to tell us what to do. JOE GUZMAN, WHERE ARE YOU? Can someone call Sheriff Simpson and file a missing board member report on him????

Posted by mattjack (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 7:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Personally, I am all for switching to a 10 point grading scale, mainly because it will give high school students an equal opportunity to get into a good college. (Since I am a high school student myself - I'm a junior, to be exact - this point is particularly important to me.)
And, to dingus and bstokes, why would you need an example of an LCPS student being denied admission because of the grading scale? The point of switching the scale is to make sure that that situation DOESN'T happen, if it hasn't already. If it has, then it's to prevent the situation from repeating itself. Better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it.
And another thing - to those of you that say that this will lead to grade inflation: first off, if this were true - or even a problem - why aren't all the 10-point grading scale schools (most of the schools in the country, in other words) scrambling to switch back to our current 7-point grading scale? And second, the only way to solve the grade inflation problem is if we all switch to this grading scale. And apparently, most of the schools in the country seem to understand this point, and thus are switching to this...well, not exactly NEW, but they're switching to a 10-point grading scale, anyway.

Posted by web_metroid (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Does anyone have any statistical evidence that the average GPA in one county is higher than in another? What are the mean GPAs and the standard deviations by county? Do the counties have targets for what percentage of a class can get an A, B, or C or a target average GPA? For example, if a teacher expects to give out 25% A's and 50% B's, that teacher can write an examination so that the A/B line falls at either 94% or 90%. But if another teacher plans to give out 40% A's, the resulting average GPA is going to be higher. The percentage point where you draw the A/B line is easily rendered meaningless by other variables.

Posted by charsj (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 9:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Charsj has it figured out. It's not the scale but the grading culture of the school. I asked LCPS for the grade data to test the Fairgrade hypothesis that Loudoun children were being disadvantaged by lower grades. I want to compare the grade received in a class and the AP Test score for our local school district to test which school districts are the easy graders. They refused to provide it.

Grade inflation is great for a year or two until colleges figure out (by comparing HS GPA and college GPA) that the grading culture has breed a bunch of slackers and then start courting kids from schools that have GPAs that are better predictors of student achievement in college. Colleges want children that will be successful, not ones with high GPAs. Otherwise we could win the college entrance jackpot just by adding 1 point to everyone's GPA.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 12:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr Myers,
You can go to the high school websites and get information, look for school profile ( you might need to look around, try under "Guidance" if you can't find it elsewhere). This information is sent by each school with the transcripts and I believe that it is on at least some of the school websites. As for the AP scores, I can't help you with that.
On another note, I agreee with Charsj,the teachers will grade to the scale in place.

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

charsj,
Don't use words like "standard deviation" and "statistics". They make peoples' eyes glaze over, especially the fairgradeinflators.

Posted by dingus3 (anonymous) on November 18, 2008 at 4:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dingus,
That's not necessarily true. You're only taking into account those of us in the population that know next to nothing about mathematics and statistics. (Mind you, I'm not to that level of Math yet, but it's only a matter of time...but that's beside the point.)
And to YOU, Mr Myers: Actually, nowadays I think that colleges place a bit more importance on GPAs when considering who gets in and who doesn't. For example, say they're looking at two different college applications, but they both list various accomplishments and activities of equal merit. Then they look at the GPAs. One happens to have a 3.9 GPA, while the other one has a 4.0 or so. Which one do you think they're going to accept?
And, I'm not sure that colleges are able to tell whether or not a child is going to be successful just by looking at an application. They have to actually observe the student and draw conclusions from those observations. Hence, the college admission problem - teachers and the administration of a particular college can't observe a student that wasn't accepted there.
Besides, GPAs aren't always indicators of a student's successfulness all the time. If their consideration procedures went the way you say they do, then there wouldn't be any point in adding the GPAs in the first place, anyway.
@ MLC: Could you explain what you mean when you say "the teachers will grade to the scale in place"? I don't quite get what you're saying.

Posted by web_metroid (anonymous) on November 19, 2008 at 11:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Metroid,
Grade to the scale in place: A teacher's current tests typically produce scores where 35% get As, 50% get Bs and 10% get Cs and 5% other. The teacher wants to maintain that grading profile so when the school changes to an easier grading scale (e.g.FairFrade) the teacher adjusts the test (makes it harder) so that the same grading profile remains -- 35% get As. Before FairGrade our hypothetical student would have graduated with a B average with a numerical score of 92. After FairGrade and teacher adjustment of the test the student gets a B with a numeric score of 89. If a college comes down to deciding between students with the same GPA, the one with a B equal to 92 looks smarter than the one with a B equal to 88.

Posted by EdwardMyers (anonymous) on November 19, 2008 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Metroid,
EdwardMyers answered the question exactly as I would have. I think those who envision their child's grades suddenly rising under the proposed "Fairgrade" system may find themselves disappointed.

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 19, 2008 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks for explaining that to me, EdwardMyers. And that does present a few good points.
Although, I noticed a key word: "hypothetical." That theory kind of presumes a lot. From what I can tell, what you explained was what I was told was called a "bell curve." And from what I'm told, not all teachers are required to do that (and a lot of the teachers don't. From my 3 years of High School experience, I've only run into 1 teacher that has used that "bell curve" in his tests. And THAT was because those tests were difficult enough as it is.)
And, though it may be true that a teacher's tests typically produce scores that fit that grading profile, that does NOT mean that every single teacher makes tests to produce those scores.
Though, admittedly, I guess this leaves a considerable amount to chance, in a way.

Posted by web_metroid (anonymous) on November 19, 2008 at 5:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I brought this issue up at my first Parent's Group Meeting in 1999 when my daughter was a freshman at Potomac Falls High School. The majority of the academic world in America views an A as 90's, B as 8o's etc. No matter what Loudoun educators think, when an admissions official with thousands of applications sees a "B" they think 80's not 92. This does have a real impact on students. WVU offers an automatic $2000 a year scholarship for students with a certain SAT or ACT score and a 3.0 GPA. My son who is a freshman at WVU would have been eligible for this scholarship had Loudoun used the same scale as the majority of the public schools in the USA.

Posted by howieswin (anonymous) on November 20, 2008 at 3:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Seriously, where is the board, where is Joe Guzman, where are the people who are supposed to be representing us???? Oh, I forgot, they are waiting on Fairfax to tell them what to do. Nice.

Posted by mattjack (anonymous) on November 20, 2008 at 9:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

any change must be retroactive to all students currently enrolled. right?

Posted by mrgreen (anonymous) on November 21, 2008 at 7:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Some people appear to be confused as to what "Merit Aid" is and is for. This is non-need based financial aid based on academic performance used by colleges in order to attract top academic talent. This is similar to the principle of granting athletic scholarship aid to attract top sports talent. Each college determines it's own criteria.
In the case of the WVU student, the school's criteria for that particular merit aid was (among other things) a 3.0 GPA. According to LCPS, a 3.0 was the average GPA of the class of 2008 graduates. Therefore, a student with a GPA of less than 3.0 is likely in the lower half of his/her graduating class. Why does this parent feel that their child is entitled to this merit aid? Would you feel that an "average" athlete perhaps a JV player or a second or third stringer should be entitled to an athletic scholarship?
Also, please note that the average GPA of the Class of '08 was a 3.0 (B). I always thought that C was average. So even under this supposedly difficult grade scale, our "average" graduates are above average. Interesting.
As for the comment about a grade scale change being retroactive, please read my prior post regarding this. A retroactive change is actually not possible and would be detrimental to the students who have worked the hardest to achieve the highest grades possible ( whether that is an A+ or a C).

Posted by MLC1 (anonymous) on November 21, 2008 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

amazing, i have to say a 7 point grading scale is something i curently envy.

The lowest "A" at my school is a 95!!!

I found this article while looking up reserch for a paper i'm writing and i must say i've found it very interesting and a huge eye opener for me, someone already ready for a change in my grading scale.

Posted by angela.durkan (anonymous) on December 3, 2008 at 10:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)