Y.~rginif! lligh $chools Using o,r ConsjderinK...a 1 O-P(!int,. Grqding Scale.

Since Fairfax County Public Schools published "An Investigation of the Grading Policy" in December 2008, at least 16 other school districts in the Commonwealth have adopted a lO-point grading system. They are listed here by student population.

City/County . Number of High Schools Grades 9-12 Enrollment

Fairfax County 32 53,907
Virginia Beach 1 1. 22,854
Prince William County 10 22,299
Loudoun County 10 15,467
Chesapeake 7 13,381
Norfolk 5 9,187
Stafford County 5 9,014
Spotsy I vania 5 7,844
Portsmouth City 3 4,322
Roanoke City 2 3,610
Faquier County 3 3,572
Alexandria 1 3,010
Culpeper County 2 2,196
Orange County 1 1,586
Greene County 1 84iO
Madison County 1 617
Surry 1 3116

Recently converted to a 1 0- noint system 100 (31.00/0) 174,022 (45.6%) School Districts using a lO-point scale pre-Fairfax:

Arlington County (per Fairfax report) 3 5,558
Albemarle County 4 4,110
WiUiamsburglJCC 3 3,397
Montgomery County 4 2,901
Manassas City (S) 1 1.91 '7
Prince George County (per Fairfax report) 1 1,861
Warren COLU1ty (S) 2 ] ,738
Pu]aski (S) 1. 1,575
Charlottesville (S) 1. 1,246
King George County 1 1 ,24 Jl
Poquoson City 1 912
Giles County 2 768
Charlotte County 1 686
Manassas Park City 1 66:;
Falls Church City 1 649
Middlesex County 1 45 ]~
Mathews County 1 438

Previously ado nted a 1 0- Joint scale 29 (3.0%) 30,113 (7.90/0) -

I

School Districts now considering conversion to a 10-point system:

: ~, ~.

,:, ~' ~:::

I Suffol:k ¢ity' . ::~ :~ :~: ,: E' . = ~,:"'~ 3 ::. '

Note: These figures are based on a Madison County Public Schools "Grade Scale Review Committee Report" published in January 2010, supplemented by information in the Fairfax report and Spotsylvania's February 2010 report (S). Madison County indicated there were 322 high schools with 381,425 students in grades 9-12 in Virginia. "Fair Grades for Isle of Wight Students" independently verified and added to the Madison County report those schools known to already be using a 10-point scale, or that have adopted a 1 0- point grading system since the Fairfax conversion. These totals may not include all school districts currently using or considering a

lO-point grading scale.

10-5 .. 2010

In August and September 201 0, the following survey was sent to representatives from the 16 school districts thatfollowed Fairfax County's lead by converting to a 1 Il-point grading system.

Dear,

My name is Chuck Dunlap. I represent a group of concerned parents in Isle of Wight County attempting to get our grading scale changed to a 10-point system. We believe the existing 7- point system puts our children at a disadvantage when compared with students being graded on a

10-point scale.

Since you recently adopted a 10-point system, I was hoping you would answer a few questions. We would very much appreciate a bit of your time, as this information will be used to help formulate a recommendation to the school board. Once complete, please return this survey via email tofairgrades4iow@verizon.net. Thank you in advance for a timely response.

1. What prompted you to consider a IO-point grading scale?

2. Did you conduct your own study, independent of the Fairfax research?

3. Did you consider data from the Fairfax report in your deliberations?

4. If so, how important was that report in the overall context of your decision?

5. How long did the effort take, from introduction until the vote to adopt a 10-point scale?

6. What do you consider were the most compelling reasons to adopt a IO-point system?

7. Would you please provide a copy of your current grading scale, including pluses and minuses and any weighting factors (or instructions/web link to locate the scale online)?

8. Other comments/consideration you wish to share:

Thanks again for your cooperation. You are appreciated!

Sincerely,

Chuck Dunlap

"Fair Grades for Isle of Wight Students"

Responses were received from the following individuals (when personal responses were not provided, information was taken from other sources, if possible, such as news articles, school web sites, board minutes and/or published studies & briefings):

Virginia Beach - Kathleen O'Hara, Asst Superintendent, Media & Communications Development

Prince William County - Gail Fischer Hubbard, Supervisor of Gifted Education and Special Programs

Loudoun County - John Stevens, Chairman, Loudoun County School Board

Chesapeake - Patricia Powers, Asst Superintendent, Curriculum & Instruction

Norfolk - Information obtained from the Norfolk Proposed Revisions Briefing and Summary

Stafford County - Information taken from the Stafford County Public Schools web site

Spotsylvania - Information taken from Review Committee briefing slides and school board minutes at request of the superintendent

Portsmouth - Information taken from an article by Cheryl Ross, The Virginian-Pilot online, August 27, 2010

Roanoke City - Information was taken from the school district web site

Fauquier County - Karen Parkinson, Coordinator of Information (provided copies of school board minutes from February and March 2009)

Alexandria City - Dr Margaret May Walsh, Executive Director, PreK-12 Educational Programs

Culpeper County - Rob Hauman, Director of Curriculum, Instruction and Technology

Orange County - Robert Grimesey, Superintendent

Greene County - Jennifer Richter, Assist Superintendent for Instruction

Madison County - Renee Honaker, Director of Instruction

Surry County - Serbrenia J. Sims, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction

Responses provided below are essentially "cut and paste" entries from original

emails and/or reports. Minor editing was done 'where obvious misspellings or grammatical errors existed, or to format grading scales for ease of comparison. Blank entries indicate "no response" from the school district to the surveyor to specific questions, as appropriate.

1. What prompted you to consider a 1 O-point grading scale?

Virginia Beach

Two School Board members brought the issue to the larger Board in 2008 and asked that it be studied. Their interest was prompted by parent concerns.

Pri~ce William County

Results from both our School Board and from parents resulted in the creation of a Task Force to review our grading scale.

Loudoun County

L

OUf consideration of the change was prompted by a group of organized parents who advocated for a change.

Chesapea~e

Several years ago our School Board expressed interest in changing our grading scale.

Norfolk

Staffor~ Co~nty

S ~otsy lvania

At the beginning of the 2009-10 school year, the superintendent requested that a Grading Scale Committee be formed for the purpose of evaluating current grading practices in Spotsylvania County in comparison to other school divisions across the state of Virginia.

Portsmouth

Roanoke City

FaUQuier County

See response # 8

Alexandria

parents spearheaded a committee to look at the work done in Fairfax,

Culpeper County

Several surrounding counties were switching their grading scales. Parents and leaders within the district also believed our students were going to be at a disadvantage in competing for college entrance.

Orange County

Statewide trends among other school divisions. We desired our students to compete for college acceptance on a level playing field with students from other districts. We also wanted to align our scale with the scale that was applied to dual enrollment students by OUf local community college.

Greel]e ~,ounty

After speaking with many college admissions offices, we determined that they do not look at the actual grades of the students - only the GPAs. We wanted to ensure our students were not at a disadvantage by our 7 point grading scale. Previously, if our student scored a 92 on the 7 point scale they would receive 3.0 points, while a student from a 10 point division would receive a 4.0. We wanted to make sure OUf students were compared on an even playing field.

~adiso~ ~ounty

Concerned parents spoke at a School Board meeting and requested that we consider the change. We formulated a study group consisting of administrators and parents to investigate the research available.

The 1 O-point grading scale in Surry County was prompted after a VSBA meeting that was held in Williamsburg last November. Our five school board members and the superintendent were in attendance. After attending a session on the 10-point scale they agreed that it would be advantageous to Surry County and the admission of our students to colleges.

2. Did you conduct your own study, independent of the Fairfax research?

Virginia ~eac~

Virginia Beach conducted its own study. Three online surveys were conducted -- one for parents, one for staff and one for college admissions officers. A blog was established for the larger community to weigh in and a public hearing was held 011 the matter.

Princ~. William Cf}unn

Yes. We benchmarked against other school divisions in our geographic area. We also benchmarked against other comparable Virginia school divisions.

Loudo~n, Couon

W e analyzed the impact on our OWll district in various ways, and used the portions of the Fairfax research that were relevant for us.

Chesane~~tl

OUf school division Department of Program Evaluation conducted a study of grading scales in Virginia and, ITIOre specifically, of the scales used by our surrounding school divisions .. This study included information from Fairfax schools and also included surveys that were conducted with our parents, students, teachers, guidance directors and administrators.

Norfolk

Stafford County

Snotsylvania

Yes. A Grading Scale Committee consisting of administrators, teachers, guidance counselors, parents, and students met on a month.lybasis for the purpose of analyzing grading scale practices. Data was collected from over 1 00 school districts in Virginia.

Portsmouth

This past school year, a committee made up of school staff, including principals and leaders from the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, examined the grading scale and concluded Portsmouth should adopt the same scale most other divisions will use

Roanok~ Cin

FauQuier Counn

I I

See response # 8

Alexandria

parents researched other parts Of the country, in addition to Fairfax.

Culpel!er County

We did not do our own study. Several of the other counties had already done the actual research, so we used a lot of their data. Fairfax and Spotsylvania were sources.

Orange ~ounty

Yes. We formed a committee of staff members and conducted our own analysis of the research and of statewide trends.

~reene County

We had a committee that worked 011 this for over a year. They conducted some of their own research, but it frequently led them back to Fairfax's research.

Madison County

We used the Fairfax research, but also analyzed the potential impact on randomly-selected groups of our students. We also conducted surveys of our teachers and parents. OUf parents also did phone interviews with colleges frequently attended by our students. We also held community forums to gather information and answer questions,

Sura

As the Assistant Superintendent for Instruction, I conducted a comparison study of grade scales in the surrounding area, Virginia, and Nationally. Fairfax was included in this research as well.

3 & 4. Did you consider data from the Fairfax report in your deliberations? If so, how important was that report in the overall context of your decision?

Virginia Beach

While the Board received a copy of the Fairfax data, that was not a major factor in deliberations. OUf own data was the centerpiece of the discussions. It was our own data that was important in the decisionmaking process, not Fairfax's data.

Prince William CO!ln!y

Yes, we did consider that information. It was one factor in the decision.

Loud~un County

Different Board members and Administrators considered the data to different degrees. The [Fairfax] report informed our decision, I was not ready to vote until I had read it. I would not say it influenced the decision.

Chesapea~~

Norfolk

Stafford ~ounty

S~otsylvania

Portsmouth

Roano~e City

Fauquier <;ounty

See response # 8

Alexandria

Yes. Important, but additional parent research also resonated with the School Board. Competition for scholarships was a driving factor.

Culpep~r Coup!y

Yes, Fairfax data was used. We also surveyed the faculty members and posted a public comment blog. Most were in favor from the very beginning. The Fairfax report wasn't seen as overwhelmingly important in making the decision but was helpful,

Orange CO!lnty

No, not specifically. The topic was raised during a meeting of key instructional leaders from Region IV.

The subsequent discussion included remarks about Fairfax's work. But references to the Fairfax model did not play a major role in our final decision. It was noted in our first committee meeting.

Greene County

Y es and several other divisions. We used student data to demonstrate to the school board how a 1 0 point scale would positively impact a high achiever, average student, and struggling student. The committee also developed training sessions for teachers to ensure that A work stayed A work and we did not inflate or deflate our expectations.

Ma4ison ~ounty

Yes, see above. It was considered; however, the local anecdotal evidence held the most weight.

Surry

I did not see the full report from Fairfax, but I think that the research that I did was com_parable to their findings. Our only concern was a comparison point for Surry's current and proposed lO-point scale.

5. How long did the effort take, fro", introduction until the vote to adopt a 1 0- point scale?

Virginia Beach

The Board began discussing this issue in April 2009; in May 2009 the Board included as part of its legislative packet a proposal that the state develop a uniform grading scale; in June 2009 the School Board held a workshop to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of changing the grading scale. Administration advised the Board at that time that it was too late to implement a grading scale change for the 2009-1 0 school year because the logistics involved were considerable.

In a November 4 2009 workshop two Board members presented several grading scale options to the larger Board for discussion. On November 17 the majority of the Board decided what option they wanted to take forward for public input. A recommended public input process was presented to the Board at that time by administration and approved. The Board set the date for a public hearing in a December 15 workshop. all January 5, 2010 the Board received a presentation on the survey results as well as copies of the blog commentary. On January 6 the Board held a public hearing for interested citizens. On January 19 the Board adopted the new scale to be effective for the 2010-11 school year. In April 2010 the Board

affirmed an alignment of all supporting policies and regulations.

Prince William County

The entire effort took approximately one semester.

Loudoun Co"..:p.ty

This was nearly a year-long effort from the first discussion in the community until final passage.

Chesal!~ake

This research project was extensive and began in 2008. Our School Board voted for the change to a modified 10 point scale in the spring of2010 to become effective with the 2010-2011 school year.

Norfolk

Stafford County

Approximately seven months.

Portsmouth

Roanoke City

FauQuier County

See response # 8

Alexandria

Less than eight weeks

Cul~eper Counn:

The effort took about 8 months from the initial beginning of the committee to board approval.

Orange County

The committee was formed in October, 2009. A proposal was presented to the School Board on December 1, 2009. The School Board adopted the proposal on first reading and posted it for public review from February 3, 2010 to February 19, 2010" The School Board conducted a public hearing regarding the new policy on February 23,2010, and then approved the final version on March 2,2010. The new grading policy went into effect on July 1,2010.

Greene C01).oty

1 year- however most of it was for research. The issue was only before the board for 4 months.

Madisop. County

One year

Sura

OUf effort was expedited because it was initiated from the School Board. It was placed on the agenda in January and was passed in March.

6. What do you consider were the most compelling reasons to adopt a 10-point system?

Virginia Be~ch

I have included here a link to OUf Web page that addresses this question. This page includes a comprehensive Q & A fact sheet as well as a copy of the current grading scale. httQ://www.vbs~D~.91s.com/grades~~1.e2010/

Prince ~i!lj~,m County

The most compelling reason was the development of a grading scale that would be comparable with the grading scales of other school divisions in our region and in Virginia.

Loudoun ~ounty

Quoting what I wrote in February 2009: " it is the standard of the majority of districts ill Virginia and around the nation. In a chain of comparisons that it may be impossible (and even undesirable) to standardize, this is one link that can be made consistent."

Chesapea~e

Norfolk

*Provides students with opportunities to be more competitive.

*Makes grading more equitable for students who move between districts.

Stafford Coun:ty

S(!otsylvania

Researched fifty non-need based scholarships, They found that most do an initial screening based on OPA. Students who do not meet the GPA requirement are eliminated from further consideration. With 3L lO-point grading scale, students' GPAs are higher, increasing their opportunity for scholarship eligibility.

Tried to determine the affect of converting to a 10-point scale on grades distribution, graduation rates and number of drop-outs. Polled six school districts in Virginia that converted within the past five years. Determined there was insufficient time for empirical data collection. While strong data to support a change was not available, there was nothing to show a change was detrimental to students.

Portsmouth

,

The differences in grading scales and graduation requirements put Portsmouth students at a disadvantage, officials said.

Much of the research on grade scales is inconclusive on the matter of whether a particular scale helps or harms students. However, research does indicate that adding points to a student grade point average can make a difference in decisions about scholarships and admission to some colleges and, in particular, to certain honors programs at the college level.

The administration recommended a Ifl-point grading scale due to an overwhelming teacher preference

and current trends. A teacher survey found that 65.4 % preferred a l G-point system over the existing grading scale. Trends showed that many V irginia districts had approved or were considering a conversion to a lO-point system, and 75+ school divisions in 12 states had adopted 10-point grading scales in the previous three years.

Alexandria

Nuanced assessment information for students and competitive positioning for college entrance and for scholarships.

Cul~eJ!er Counn

Teachers and parents were anxious to put our students on an even playing field with other college applicants.

Although I recommended the proposed policy for School Board approval, I am not a great champion of the 1 O-point grading scale. Given the continued rise in student participation in dual enrollment, I see some justification in our need to align our existing grading policy with that of OUf community college. Our committee that recommended the new policy offered the following rationale:

- Align with counties in proximity to Orange County;

- Align with colleges across the nation use a 10-point scale;

- Ensure that our students are competitive for college entrance; and

- A 10-point scale appeared to enjoy the support of parents, teachers, and students.

Greene County

Stated in #1

I've attached a copy of our final report.

Surry

The most compelling reasons for adopting a lO-point scale was allow our students to be competitive in college admissions and scholarship competitions. We also wanted to align our grade scale to the scale that are used by colleges and universities.

7. Would you please provide a copy of your current grading scale, including pluses and minuses and any weighting factors (or instructions/web link to locate the scale online)? Note: the following responses may not include all nuances for each grading scale - e.g. weighting factors for honorslAP courses.

Virgini~ Beach

Grade Range GPA

A 93-1 00 4.0
A- 90-92 3.7
B+ 87-89 3.3
B 83-86 3~O
B- 80-82 2.7
C+ 77-79 2.3
C 73-76 2.0
c- 70-72 1.7
0+ 67-69 1.3
D 64-66 1.0
E <64 0.0 Additional credit is given for AP and specific IB and magnet courses.

Prince Will~am County

Grade Range GPA

A 90-100 4.0
B+ 87-89 3.4
B 84-89 3.0
c+ 77-79 2.4
C 74-80 2.0
D+ 67-69 1.4
0 60-66 1.0
F <60 0.0 Honors courses receive an additional 0.5 weighting factor; AP receives 1.0

L!)udoun C,ounty

Grade R~nge O"PA

A+ 98-100 4.3
A 93-97 4.0
A- 90-92 3.7
B+ 87-89 3.3
B 83-86 3.0
B- 80-82 2.7
c+ 77-79 2.3
C 73-76 2.0
c- 70-72 1.7
0+ 67-69 1.3
0 63-66 1.0
D- 60-62 0.7
F <60 0.0 ~hesal!eake

Grade Range OPA

A 93-100 4.0
A- 90-92 3.7
B+ 87-89 3.3
B 83-86 3.0
B- 80-82 2.7
c+ 77-79 2.3
C 73-76 2.0
c- 70-72 1.7
"0+ 67-69 1.3
0 64-66 1.0
E <64 0.0 Norfolk

Grade Range GPA

A 93-100 4.0
A- 90-92 3.7
8+ 87-89 3.3
B 83-86 3.0
8- 80-82 2.7
C+ 77-79 2.3
C 73-76 2.0
c- 70-72 1.7
0+ 67-69 1.3
0 64-66 1.0
E <64 0.0 Stafford Co~ntv

Grade R~!1ge OPA

A+ 98-100 4.5
A 93-97 4.25
A- 90-92 4.0
B+ 87-89 3.5
B 83-86 3.25
:8- 80-82 3.0
C+ 77-79 2.5
C 73-76 2.25
c- 70-72 2.0
D+ 67-69 1.5
D 63-66 1.25
D- 60-62 1.0
F <60 0.0 College-level courses (AP, IB, and DE) will continue to carry an additional 1.0 quality point. Only those dual-enrollment academic core courses that are equivalent to two semesters of college credit will be awarded 1.0 quality points.

S~otsylvania

Grade Range GPA

A+ 98-100 4.5
A 95-97 4.25
A- 90-94 4.0
B+ 88-89 3.75
B 86-87 3.5
B 84-85 3.25
8- 80-83 3.0
c+ 78-79 2.75
C 76-77 2.5
C 74-75 2.25
c- 70-73 2.0
D+ 68-69 1.75
D 66-67 1.5
0 64-65 1.25
0- 60-63 1.0
F <60 0.0 AP and Dual Enrollment classes receive 1.0 added weighting

Portsmouth

Grade Range GPA

A 93-100 4.0
A- 90-92 3.7
B+ 87-89 3.3
B 83-86 3.0
8- 80-82 2.7
C+ 77-79 2.3
C 73-76 2.0
c- 70-72 1.7
0+ 67-69 1.3
0 64-66 1.0
E <64 0.0 Roanoke Cill'

Grade R~nge GPA

A 90-100 4.0
B 80-89 3.0
C 70-79 2.0
D 60-69 1.0
F <60 0.0 Honor classes receive 0.5 added weighting; AP, IB and Dual Enrollment add 1.0 points

~ onco> CJ 0 ~donnnt:OtoC:C:J»;J> 0 (J ~ ~ OCJnnncocow::r>~ C1 > "-" o(,)t:O;l> a ~
--1 ~ + I + I + I + ~ = 0 + I + I + I .,., .. I"t ~ ~
pj ~ = ~ ~ ~ =
O-t ~ c, c, ~ 0-
0
CD = (D CD ro
~ ~
tr: = =
~ 0 .....
~ Q.. ~
0
n ., ., .,
=
••
e {j ~ = (j
= t/.J
Q co 0
= = (JJ. =
/\ 0\ .....J 00 ~ d iO 1\ ~ 0\ -.......l -.......l ~ 00 00 00 'D 'D \0 :::0 = ~ /\ 0\ 0\ ~ .....J ......J 00 00 00 'D \0 ;;0 1\ 0\ ......J 00 \0 ~ =
(1)
\0 \.0'-0 0 ~ ......J 0 W~ 0 W ~ 0 w 00 O~ 0 W ~ 0 w ~ 0 w 0\7 0 0 0
0\ § 0\ ~ 0 0\ p.j ~
I I I 0 I I l I 1 I I I I I I = (tJ I 1 I I 1 I I I I I ...... I I I ::1
Vl 0\ .....J 00 ~ 0\ 0\ -......l -......l -......l 00 00 00 "\.0 \.0 ~-d 0 0\ 0\ ......J ......J ~ OrO 00 00 \0 ~ ~ o 0\ ......J 00
I
~I
V1 00 '-0 CD 0\ \0 N 0\ \.0 N 0\ \.0 N ......J 0 CD -< 0\ \0 N 0\ \0 N 0'\ \0 N 0 CD \0 "\0 'D 0 (t>
0 0 (t) 0 0
§
~
0-
0-
........
~
...,.... .
0 ) + NW ~ CJ 0 I-d "~ + , • N N N W w w ~ ..p:.. CJ 0 0 ~ i'z ~ 4 Izrrd tv N N w W w ..p:.. C) 0 ,. l N w ~ 0

.. .. • • .. • • .. I • • • • .. .. • • :::::s .. .. .. • • ... • • • .. .. • .. • • I
0 0 00 0 ~ 0 0 LJJ 0\ 0 W 0\ 0 W 0\ 0 0 ~ 0 0 W ......J 0 W ~ 0 w ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~
~
>- > >-- >
~ t
0
•
Vi
~
(T)
~ ..
{JQ
::r
,...,..
......
::s
(JQ
~
0
~
0
~
....... .
>
~
~
(t)
n
CD
~ ..
<
CD
(J')
I- i

•
0 Greene COD.n!!

Grade Range GPA

A+ 97-100 4.0
A 93-96
A- 90-92
B+ 87-89 3.0
B 83-86
B- 80-82
C+ 77-79 2.0
C 73-76
c- 70-72
0+ 67-69 1.0
D 63-66
0- 60-63
-F <60 0.0 AP courses receive an additional 1.0 weighting factor

Madiso,D Coun!!

Grade R~n~e G-PA

A+ 99-100 4.3
A 93-98 4.0
A- 90-92 3.6
B+ 87-89 3.3
B 83-86 3.0
B- 80-82 2.6
C+ 77-79 2.3
C 73-76 2.0
c- 70-72 1.6
D+ 68-69 1.3
D 64-67 1.0
F <64 0.0 Surry

Grade Range GPA
A 90-100 4.0
B 80-89 3.0
C 70-79 2.0
0 60-69 1.0
F <60 0.0 8. Other comments/consideration you wish to share:

Virg~nia Beach

The majority of parents and employees who responded to the survey preferred the adoption of a new scale. However, the college admissions officers indicated that they took differences in grading scales into account in their deliberations and thus a 7-point scale was not a major disadvantage in their opinion. Please note that the majority of our School Board would not have supported the change if the district had not been committed to also increasing the rigor we are building into OUf curriculum.

Prince William County

* Provides students of Prince William County Schools the benefits of a 10 point grading scale.

* "Ensures that the letter grade choices available to teachers to assess student performance remain unchanged.

* Does not change the quality point system currently in place to compute the cumulative grade point average.

* Continues the current weighted grading system for courses deemed advanced or accelerated or for courses with an externally moderated assessment.

~odlldoun County

CbesaJ)eake

Norfolk

St,afford County

S)Jotsylvania

Portsmouth

The city struggles with one of the highest dropout rates in the state - about 20 percent in 2009. School officials hope dropping the graduation GP A requirement and aligning its grading scale with other divisions will help more of its students graduate within four years and have a better shot at getting into college.

Ro~noke ~ity

Fauquier County

As early as May 2008 the school board was discussing the pros and cons of a lO-point grading scale. In February 2009 the school board received a briefing regarding "theoretical" and "practical" perspectives surrounding the possibility of changing their grading system. At that time the administration recommended adopting a lO-point scale. The ensuing discussion addressed concerns that changing the scale would not significantly affect grades, and that there were more pressing issues to deal with. However, at least one member opined that she did not understand how anyone could say that maintaining the current grading scale was not going to have a detrimental effect on their students when compared to those in surrounding counties who were changing to lO-point systems. Others were in favor of a change due to public perceptions that the Fauquier grading scale was no longer comparable to other SChOOl divisions. The SChOOl board adopted a straight 1 G-point grading scale at their March 2009 meeting.

Alexandria

Parents and students are pleased with this grading scale. It has been in place for one full school year .. You may also want to check our new assessment policy and regulations .. They are available 011 the ACPS web site under School Board Policy Manual, I-Policies, IF A and IFA-R.

Orange County

We felt no com.pulsion to proceed with this process. There was no pressure from any staff members or parents, one way or another. We simply observed a statewide trend and determined that we owed due diligence to our students. OUf directors of secondary and elementary education co-chaired our committee and they provided outstanding

leadership in working with diverse views, We experienced very little public concern on the part of any party throughout the process.

Greene, County

M~dison County

Surn:

At its March 201.0 meeting, Surry County School Board voted to adopt a lO-point grading scale. This decision was based on the need for Surry County students to remain competitive in college admissions and scholarships ... It should also be noted that this new grading scale will not affect or change the requirements for any diploma seals, class rankings, Honor Roll designations, sports participation requirements, or other academic awards as defined by the Surry County School Board.