Grading Practice Updates

  • Current FPS Grading Scale

    Beginning with the 17-18 school year the following grading scale was put in place for consistency in percentage and GPA values.

     GPA  4.0  3.0  2.0  1.0  0
     Letter Grade  A  B  C  D  F
     Percentage Equivalent  90-100  80-89  70-79  60-69  0-59

    Weighted Course Grades

    As FPS continues to transition its grading practices, we want to send you a communication that outlines a change that came about as a result of community feedback and a desire to keep our students competitive as they apply for college scholarships.   

     

    As a way to recognize the increased rigor in AP and IB coursework, starting with the 2018-19 school year AP/IB course final grades will be weighted:

     

        • A 1.25 multiplier will be used to calculate the final grade of these courses, which can increase the overall GPA for students taking those courses.  For example, if receiving an “A” in and AP/IB course, the new grade point used would be 5.0. Here is how each grade range is impacted by this multiplier:
          • 4.0 x 1.25= 5.0
          • 3.0 x 1.25=3.75
          • 2.0 x 1.25= 2.5
          • 1.0 x 1.25=1.25
        • This change will be put in place starting with this year forward, but will not be applied retroactively
        • As a system, we are now identified as a 4 point weighted (AP/IB only) grading system
        • Language about this change will now be included transcripts as well

     

    We will continue to share information as we evolve our grading practices.

    The Essential Expectations

    A running list of expectations as FPS implements changes to our grading practices. These expectations may change as we continue to live into these practices.

    • 70% summative and 30% formative is the minimum expectation.

    • If teachers within a common course are beyond the agreed upon summative/formative minimum (70/30, 80/20, 90/10, 100/0), they do not have to “go back” to the agreed upon minimum. For teachers beyond the agreed upon course minimum, the rationale for the higher expectations must be explained in the course syllabus.

    • There is NO extra credit. To clarify, from How to Grade for Learning, ed. 4, pg. 114:
      “There is a long tradition in middle schools and high schools, especially in the United States, of allowing students to boost their grades by doing things that have little or nothing to do with the learning goals...Grades are supposed to be measures of achievement, so it is appropriate that students have “extra” opportunities to improve their grades, but these opportunities must involve demonstration of the knowledge and skills in the standards, as the opportunities described previously did not. If these extra opportunities to improve grades are to be valid, it is equally important that the additional demonstration of knowledge and skill be at a higher level of achievement, not just more work earning more points. Thus, it is inappropriate to have bonus points on tests that simply make it appear that students’ achievement is higher than it really is. It makes no sense for a student to be able to score 70 points on a test that has a maximum recorded value of 50 points. Furthermore, the bonus questions are usually those that allow teachers to distinguish between students who are competent and those who are excelling, so all students should be expected to attempt these questions.”
    • HS ONLY: There should be no percentage threshold to access a reassessment since the purpose of a reassessment is to demonstrate mastery and pursue continual learning. Reassessment policies cannot be punitive or difficult to access. 

    • Reassessments are not required for formative assessments; they are to be used to inform you and the students of progress on standards/goals ONLY.  Formative assessment should be on-going, and this MAY include reassessment of previously taught skills if the teacher feels it is warranted.

    • ALL tasks in the summative category are eligible for reassessment, regardless of the label/description.