Prepared by: Maria Elaine Madula and Anna Montecalbo

Subject: Assessment and Learning 2

CHAPTER 9

GRADING AND REPORTING

Let us think for a moment on how students react every time that they are receiving their grades.
There are those who are happy, thankful while other are amazed. In the same manner, there are
students who are sad and doubting on the type of grades they have received. Whatever are their
reactions, grading and reporting student progress is one of the hardest thing to do on the part of the
teachers mainly because of the many decisions to be made and factors to be considered. Aside from
these, it is very time consuming and complicated but must be defensible. What then are grades and how
are we going to report them are the concerns of the last chapter.

Grading, otherwise known as marking, is the process of assigning value to a performance

especially of the students. It is also a responsibility that all classroom teachers must bear. Marks,
likewise, serve as a primary source of data in making decisions for many administrative, educational
guidance, and admissions undertakings. In its typical application, marking requires teacher to compile
results of multiple assessment to make summative evaluations of student performance.

For Chatterji (2003), marks are a means for communicating and reporting individual
performance/progress on a range of academic, social, or physical domains o appropriate communicate
levels of academic achievement to students and their parents or guardians in summary form.

Meanwhile for Gallagher (1998), a grade is an expression of judgment, usually a symbol – letter,
number or mark – that indicates the degree to which intended outcomes have been achieved. For him,
the major purpose of grades is to communicate how well a student is doing in the several academic
(subject) areas and in non-academic, affective areas such as citizenship, conduct, and effort.

The task of reporting student progress cannot be separated from the procedures used in
assessing student learning and development. If instructional objectives or learning targets have been
clearly defined in performance terms and relevant tests and other assessment procedures have been
properly used, Linn and Gronlund (2000) stressed that grading and reporting become a matter of
summarizing the results and presenting them in understandable form. But the task is still a perplexing
one, however, because the evidence of learning and development must be presented on a very brief
report from that is understandable to a variety of users (students, teachers, counselors, administrators).

9.1 BASIS FOR GRADING

 What a grade should reflect depends on the subject or topic being graded. We generally talk
about grades in relation to reading achievement, math achievement, and so on. However, grades are
also assigned in areas like conduct, study skills, and responsibility. Recently, we have learned about
performance-based and portfolio-based assessments systems where the mark is based on a collection of
work or behavior samples in conjunction with documentary evidence of achievement. When grades are
related to academic subjects, grades should reflect academic achievement, and nothing more. Grades
for attitude, effort, improvement, conduct, and so on should be recorded separately from marks.

Grades are assigned to provide feedback about academic achievement in order for students to
be compared according to their achievement. Marks often reflect factors other than achievement and
are often assigned according to a variety of marking systems.

9.1.1 Methods of Reporting Grades

Throughout the history of education in the country, numerical grades have been the primary
method of reporting student progress in school although there are some that make use of letter grades.
In some cases, especially at the elementary level, the report from also includes a series of work habits
and personal-social characteristics to be checked by the teacher. But still, various types of marking or
methods or reporting grades are being used in the schools. Balagtas and Francisco (2004) have
summarized these as follows:

Marks/ Grades/ Ratings are symbols which:

A. Could be in-
 Percent such as: 70%, 75%, or 89%
 Letters such as: A, B, C, D or E
 Descriptive expressions such as: Outstanding (O), Very Satisfactory (VS), Satisfactory (S),
Moderately Satisfactory (MS), Needs Improvement (NI), etc.
B. Could represent-
 How a student is performing in relation to other students (norm-referenced grading)
 The extent to which a student has mastered a particular body of knowledge (criterion-
referenced grading)
 How a student is performing in relation to teacher’s judgment of his or her potential
(grading in relation to teacher’s judgment)
C. Could be for-
 Certification that gives assurance that a student has mastered a specific content or achieved
a certain level of accomplishment.
 Selection that provides basis in identifying or grouping students for certain educational
paths or programs.
 Motivation that emphasizes specific material or skills to be learned and helping students to
understand and improve their performance.
D. Could be based on-
 Examination results or test data
  Observations of student work
 Group evaluation activities
 Class discussions and recitations
 Homework
 Notebooks and note taking
 Reports, themes and research papers
 Discussions and debates
 Portfolios
 Projects
 Attitudes and so on.
E. Could be assigned by using:
F. Criterion-referenced grading or grading based on fixed or absolute standard where grade is
assigned based on how a student as met the criteria or the well-defined objectives of a course
that are spelled out in advance. It is then up to the student to earn the grade he or she wants to
receive regardless of how other students in the class have performed. This is done by
transmuting test scores into marks or ratings.

Example: A score of 82 out of 100-item test could be equivalent to 91% rating using this formula:

Rating/Mark = Score X 50% + 50%

No. of items
Where: score denotes the test score obtained,
50% multiplied by a score is constant or considered the base mark
No. of items denotes the number of test items in the test
50% added to the fraction denotes the base mark
 Norm-referenced grading or grading based on relative standards where a student’s grade
reflects his or her level of achievement relative to the performance of other students in the
class. In this system, the grade is assigned based on the average of test scores. The rating
scales that are used in assigning grades are:
1. The four-point rating scale which uses the median and quartile deviation of test scores
to group the scores into four and each group is assigned the corresponding grade of A,
B, C, and D or 1, 2, 3, 4.
2. The five-point rating scale which uses the mean and the standard deviation of the test
scores to group the scores into 5 and each group is assigned the corresponding grade of
A, B, C, D or F or 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5.
For example, a score of 80 out of 100-item test may not get a passing mark if
most of the students scored 90. The score 90 would mean the average score
and 80 would mean a score indication a performance below the average
performance.
 Point of Percentage grading system whereby the teacher identifies points or percentages
for various tests and class activities depending on their importance. The total of these points
will be the bases for the grade assigned to the student.
 Example:
Periodical tests 30% or 30 points
Quizzes 20% or 20 points
Projects 20%
Recitation 20%
Attendance 10% or 10 points

9.1.2 Other Methods of Reporting Grades

Meanwhile, with Borich and Kubiszyn, marking systems may be considered along two
dimensions:

 Type of comparison involved, and

 Types of symbols used.

Virtually, marks of the students are based among:

1. Comparisons with other students.

This is a marking system which is based on “grading on the curve,” meaning that the
grade or mark of a student depends on how his/her achievement compares with the
achievement of other students in the class. This is also called norm-referenced grading which
was mentioned earlier wherein certain proportions of the class are assigned As, Bs, and so on.
Sometimes districts or schools encourage grading on the curve by specifying the percentages of
students who will be assigned various grades such as this example of distribution:
Grade Percentage of Students
A 10
B 25
C 40
D 20
E 5

2. Comparisons with established standards. In this marking system, what is relevant is whether a
student attains a defined standard of achievement or performance. Grades are assigned based
on the percentage of test items answered correctly and without any concern as to whether the
rest of the class did better, worse or about the same. In hindsight, grades depend on how well a
student’s performance compares with pre-established standard.
This system is considered to best suit the primary function of marking which is to
provide feedback about academic achievement. Once standards are established, comparisons
among schools and students may be more easily made.
3. Comparisons with aptitude. Aptitude is another name for potential or ability. In this system,
students are being compared to themselves and marks are assigned depending on how closely
to their potential students are achieving. At the beginning of the school year, potential of the
students are determined. Thus, students with high aptitude or potential who are achieving at
 high levels would get a high grades, since they would be achieving below their potential. But
they would be considered to be achieving at their potential. This relationship among aptitude,
achievement and marks in marking system are clearly illustrated:

Aptitude Level Achievement Level Marks

High High High
Average Average
Low Low
Average High High
Average High
Low Average
Low High High
Average High
Low High
4. Comparison of achievement with effort. This system is somewhat similar to comparing
achievement with aptitude. Students who get average test scores but have to work hard to get
them are given high marks. Students who get average scores but do not have to work hard to
get them are given lower grades. In spite of problems that could plague the use of this marking
system, the advantage that could be cited here is that it could serve as a motivating factor to the
slower or turned off students. However, it could also be a deterrent to the brighter ones for they
could see the system as unfair. It seems obvious here that the primary function of marking
which is to provide feedback about academic achievement is not well served by such a system.
5. Comparisons of achievement with improvement. This system makes use of the pretest and the
posttest where the improvements of the students are being compared between the results of
the tests at the beginning and end of instruction. Students who show the biggest progress get
the highest grades. Problems may arise in the part of the student who does well on the pretest
for his/her improvement may likely to be less than the overall for a student who does poorly on
the pretest. In order to play safe, some students are trying not to do their best in the pretest
when this system is being processed.

9.1.3 Assigning Letter Grades

The traditional use of the letter-grade system is to assign a single letter grade (e.g, A, B, C, D, F)
for each subject. In some cases, a single number (e. g., 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 or 100, 95, 90, etc.) is used instead of
a letter, but the marking system is essentially the same. This system is concise and convenient, the
grades are easily averaged, and they are useful in predicting future achievement. However, they have
several short coming when used as the sole method of reporting:

1. They typically are a combination of achievement, effort, work habits, and good behavior.
2. The proportion of students assigned each letter grade varies from teacher to teacher.
3. They do not indicate a student’s strengths and weaknesses in learning.

These limitations of the single letter grade make them difficult to interpret and us.
 Just because there are schools that utilize the A, B, C, D, E marking system, most teachers will be
faced with the problem as assigning letter grades. This involves questions such as the following:

1. What should be included in a letter grade?

2. How should achievement data be combined in assigning letter grades?
3. What frame of reference should be used in grading?
4. How should the distribution of letter grades be determined?

Other schools use an expanded version with plus and minus signs to increase the number of
categories: A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, D+, D, D-, F. These increased number of categories allows teachers to
indicate whether a B grade is high (B+), low (B-) or “solid” (B), although these finer discriminations in
performance are more difficult to perceive.

When all of these have been considered, the time to do some computations with the use of the
measures of central tendency, measures of variability, standards deviation, etc. will be of much
importance to be able to come up with correct interpretations and assign grades that are defensible and
fair.

9.1.4 Pass- Fail Grades

Pass-fail grading is another form of norm-referenced grading and is also known as credit/no-
credit grading in which everyone who achieves the criterion of acceptable performance passes, and
everyone who does not, fails. With its minimum competence in the course – the point below which is
designed “fail” – is usually determined relative to typical student performance in the subject. The
rationale behind offering this option in college and some high schools is to entice students to take
courses for which they might not otherwise risk their grade-point averages. A pass-fail system usually
results in a reduction of achievement levels due to students’ reduced motivation. The use of this system
will not ensure an unambiguous communication, is discouraged generally, and is justified only for use in
some elective subjects.

However, like any two-category system, the pass-fail option is easy to use but it offers less
information than the traditional A, B, C, D, E system. It provides no indication of the level of learning
and, thus, its value for describing present performance or predicting future achievement is lost. Also,
effort is frequently directed toward merely passing rather than a higher level of achievement. Despite its
shortcomings, however, the pass-fail option can serve the purposes for which it is intended if its use is
restricted to a minimum number of courses.

A pass-no grade marking system is often used for courses taught under a pure mastery learning
approach. Here, students are expected to demonstrate mastery of all course objectives before receiving
credit for a course and a simple pass is all that is important to indicate mastery.

9.2 METHODS OF EQUATING GRADES

Teachers do not have any control with which symbols or marking system are to be used to
assign marks at the end of a marking period. But with regard to combining the components of the
grading system, careful consideration is at its best. Remember that the main purpose of marks is to
provide feedback about student achievement. Therefore, it should be as accurate as it could be. To
make this possible, consider the following methods of equating grades of which do you think is
applicable to the grading system of a certain school.

9.2.1 Front-end Equating

This approach requires that we immediately convert all grade assigned to a 100-point scale (i.e.,
percentage) by dividing the number of options obtained on every component by the total number of
point possible correct points on a test would be assigned a grade of 82.

(41/50) x 100 = 82

This has been a common practice among many teachers. If all the components (e.g., tests,
quizzes, etc.) are similarly converted, then all grades will be in the same 100-point scale.

The following examples are two ways where we could accomplish this method of equating.

Marking Formula No. 1 – “One, Two, Three Times Plan”

Recitation and seatworks:

All grades recorded will be totaled and averaged. The average grade will count once.

Example recitation and seatworks grades:

78, 80, 83, 85, 77, 90, 88, 79, 92, 86 =838/10 = 83.8 = 84 average

Quizzes:

All of the quizzes are totaled and averaged. This average will count two times.

Example of quiz grades:

80, 74, 85, 77, 89, 82, = 487/6 =81.16 = 81 average

Periodical Test:

This grade will count three times.

Example of periodical test grade = 57/75 =76

Then, the final grade for a certain grading period would be computed as follows:

84 (one time) + 81 + 81 (two times) + 76 + 76 + 76 (three times) = 474/6 = 79

Marking Formula No. 2 – “Percentages Plan”

 In this method, a teacher determines a percentage for each component. For example, recitation
and seatworks will count 30% of the grade; quizzes will count for 30%; and periodical test will count 40%
of the grade.

Using the same scores as we previously obtained, a student’s mark would be computed as
follows:

30% of the 84 for recitation and seatworks is 25.2

30% of the 81 for quizzes is 24.3, and

40%of the 76 for periodical test is 30.4

Then, 25.2 + 24.3 + 30.4 = 79.9 = 80 is the final grade.

(This is different from the previous grade because of the weight put on each component.)

9.2.2 Back-end Equating

This approach is the opposite of the front-end because this requires conversion of the scores at
the “back-end rather than at the beginning of the process.” But both approaches will lead us to the
same outcome. With the “back-end” approach we decide how many points each component of marking
system is worth on a case-by-case basis.

Here are the procedures behind this approach:

STEP 1: Identify the components are marking system and assign each component a weight. Remember
that a weight is the percentage of total points a particular component carries. For example:

Component Weight

Homeworks and seatworks 15%

Quizzes 20%

Periodical Test 30%

Performance Tests 20%

Portfolio 15%

STEP 2: Total the actual points earned for each component and divide this by the possible points and
multiply by 100. The results represent the percentage of points earned for each particular component.

Homeworks and seatworks 65/80 = 81.25%

Quizzes 36/50 = 76%

Periodical Test 57/70 = 81.43%

 Performance Tests 72/80 = 90%

Portfolio 16/20 = 80%

STEP 4: Multiply each of these percentages by the weights assigned, as shown here, and then sum these
products.

Homeworks and seatworks 81.25 x .15 = 12.19

Quizzes 76 x .20 = 15.2

Periodical Test 81.43 x .30 = 24.43

Performance Tests 90 x .20 = 18

Portfolio 80 x .15 = 12

Totals 81.8 = 82

9.3 GUIDELINES FOR REPORTING GRADES

Aims
 Present test results in understandable language, not jargon
 Put test results in context of total pattern of information about the student
 Keep it brief and simple
Actions
1. Describe what the test measures
o Use a general statement: e.g., “this test measures skills and abilities that are useful in
school learning”
o Refer to any part of the test report that may list skill clusters
o Avoid misunderstandings by:
a. not referring to tests as “intelligence” tests
b. not describing aptitudes and abilities as fixed
c. not saying that a test predicts outcomes for an individual person (can say
“people with this score usually….”
o Let a counselor present results for any non-cognitive test (personality, interests, etc.)

2. Explain meaning of test scores (chapter 19 devoted to this)

o For norm-referenced
a. explain norm group
b. explain score type (percentile, stanine, etc.)
c. stay with one type of score, if possible
o For criterion-referenced
a. more easily understood than norm-referenced
b. usually in terms of relative degree of mastery
c. describe the standard of mastery
d. may need to distinguish percentile from percent correct
 3. Clarify accuracy of scores
a. Say all tests have error
b. Stanines already take account of error (because so broad). Two stanine difference is
probably a real difference
c. For other scores, use confidence bands when presenting them
d. If you refer to subscales with few items, describe them as only “clues” and look for
related evidence.

4. Discuss use of test results

 Coordinate all information to show what action they suggest

9.4 DepEd ORDER ON GRADING AND REPORTING STUDENTS PROGRESS

DO 79, S. 2003 – ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF LEARNING AND REPORTING OF STUDENTS’

PROGRESS IN PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS AMENDED BY DO 82, S. 2003 –
AMENDMENT OF DEPED ORDER NO. 79 S. 2003 ON ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF LEARNING AND
REPORTING OF STUDENTS’ PROGRESS IN PUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS
October 10, 2003

DO 79, s. 2003

Assessment and Evaluation of Learning and Reporting of Students’ Progress in Public Elementary and
Secondary Schools

To: Undersecretaries
Assistant Secretaries
Bureau Directors
Regional Directors
Schools Division/City Superintendents
Heads, Public Elementary and Secondary Schools

1. This Department, responding to the need for an assessment and evaluation system that truly
reflects student performance, issues the following guidelines in the assessment and reporting of
students’ progress:
1.1 Grades shall not be computed on the basis of any transmutation table that equates zero to a
pre-selected base (such as 50 or 70) and adjusts other scores accordingly.
1.2 Grades shall be based on assessment that covers the range of learning competencies
specified in the Philippine Elementary Learning Competencies (PELC) and Philippine Secondary
Schools Learning Competencies (PSSLC). The test shall be designed as follows:
-60% easy items focused on basic content and skills expected of a student in each grade or year
level;
-30% medium-level items focused on higher level skills; and
-10% difficult items focused on desirable content or skills that aim to distinguish the fast
learners.
This design shall apply to all forms of traditional as well as non-traditional assessment whenever
 applicable. It should be stressed that “easy” does not mean items that only require simple recall.
1.3 Scores shall be recorded as raw scores, totaled at the end of each
grading period and then computed as percentages (i.e. [student’s score + highest possible score]
x 100).
1.4 Attainment of at least 75% of the competencies is required to pass each subject.
1.5 Sixty-five percent (65%) shall be the lowest grade that shall appear in the report card. The
student’s true grade below 65% shall be retained in the class record.
1.6 Grades in the different subject areas shall be computed based on the percentage weights
allocated for the various components (e.g., quizzes, participation, projects, and periodical test)
as defined in DECS Order No. 80, s. 1993, for the elementary level, and DepED Order No. 37, s,
2003, for the secondary level. A sample table of equivalence for the distribution of weights is
attached as Enclosure I, for reference.
The use of rubrics or scoring guides for non-traditional assessment is strongly encouraged.
Prototype rubrics are in Enclosure 2.
1.7 The final grade in each subject, for both elementary and secondary levels, shall be computed
as the average of the four periodical grades.
1.8 Non-traditional assessment (e.g. open-ended questions, performance-based assessment and
portfolio assessment) appropriate to the learning area shall be encouraged to complement
traditional assessment (e.g. multiple choice, completion type and matching type) in order to
gather holistic information about student performance.
2. Pertinent provisions and/or sections of DECS Order Nos. 80, s. 1993 and 66, s. 1995; and DepED
Order Nos. 37 and 70, s. 2003 which are inconsistent with this Order are hereby revoked or
amended accordingly.
3. These new guidelines shall be adopted in all public schools effective the Second Grading Period
of SY 2003-2004.
4. Immediate dissemination of and compliance with this Order is directed.

9.5 CRITERIA FOR REPORTING SYSTEM

They’re a good idea

 Sensible to supplement letter grades
 Have separate ratings for achievement, citizenship, etc.
 Good example on p. 385
How should you develop one?  The system should be:
1. Guided by the functions to be served
 will probably be a compromise, because functions often conflict
 but always keep achievement separate from effort
2. Developed cooperatively (parents, students, school personnel)
·        more adequate system
·        more understandable to all
3. Based on clear statement of learning objectives
·        are the same objectives that guided instruction and assessment
·        some are general, some are course-specific
·        aim is to report progress on those objectives
·        practicalities may impose limits, but should always keep the focus on objectives
4. Consistent with school standards
·        should support, not undermine, school standards
 ·        should use the school’s categories for grades and performance standards
·        should actually measure what is described in those standards
5. Based on adequate assessment
·        implication: don’t promise something you cannot deliver
·        design a system for which you can get reliable, valid data
6. Based on the right level of detail
o detailed enough to be diagnostic
o but compact enough to be practical
a. not too time consuming to prepare and use
b. understandable to all users
c. easily summarized for school records
o probably means a letter-grade system with more detailed supplementary reports

7. Providing for parent-teacher conferences as needed

·        regularly scheduled for elementary school
·        as needed for high school

9.6 DO’S AND DONT’S EFFECTIVE GRADING

Guidelines for Effective Grading

1. Describe grading procedures to students at beginning of instruction.
2. Clarify that course grade will be based on achievement only.
3. Explain how other factors (effort, work habits, etc.) will be reported.
4. Relate grading procedures to intended learning outcomes.
5. Obtain valid evidence (tests, etc.) for assigning grades.
6. Try to prevent cheating.
7. Return and review all test results as soon as possible.
8. Properly weight the various types of achievements included in the grade.
9. Do not lower an achievement grade for tardiness, weak effort, or misbehavior.
10. Be fair. Avoid bias. When in doubt, review the evidence. If still in doubt, give the higher grade.

9.7 CONDUCTING PARENT-TEACHER CONFERENCE

Productive when:
 Carefully planned
 Teacher is skilled
Guidelines for a good conference
1. Make plans
 Review your goals
 Organize the information to present
 Make list of points to cover and questions to ask
 If bring portfolios, select and review carefully
2. Start positive—and maintain a positive focus
3. Present student’s strong points first
·        Helpful to have example of work to show strengths and needs
·        Compare early vs. later work to show improvement
4. Encourage parents to participate and share information
·        Be willing to listen
·        Be willing to answer questions
5. Plan actions cooperatively
·        What steps you can each take
·        Summarize at the end
6. End with positive comment
·        Should not be a vague generality

·        Should be true

7. Use good human relations skills

DO
·        Be friendly and informal

·        Be positive in approach

·        Be willing to explain in understandable terms

·        Be willing to listen

·        Be willing to accept parents’ feelings

·        Be careful about giving advice

DON’T
·        Argue, get angry

·        Ask embarrassing questions

·        Talk about other students, parents, teachers

·        Bluff if you don’t know

·        Reject parents’ suggestions

·        Be a know-it-all with pat answers