Activity 4.6

How to Convert Rubric Scores to Grades

---

Purposes:

1. To explore the issues involved when converting rubric scores to grades

2. To apply knowledge about grading and the role of rubrics in standards-based education to a specific case

Uses:

This activity is for an audience advanced in their study of classroom assessment. Prerequisites include: (a) knowledge about the reasons for changes in assessment and the place of assessment in standards-based instruction (see Chapter 1 text and activities); (b) a broad view of grading and reporting concerns and issues (Activity 4.2—Putting Grading and Reporting Questions in Perspective or Activity 4.3—Grading Jigsaw); and (c) Activity 4.8—Guidelines for Grading (which establishes that the main purpose for grading is communication and provides an opportunity to discuss sound grading practices).

Rationale:

Teachers want more than general discussions of issues surrounding grading and reporting. They want solutions to the situations that press them on a daily basis. One of these situations is the need to reconcile innovative student assessment designed to be standards-based and influence instruction (such as the use of rubrics to teach skills and track student performance) with the need to grade. This activity gives teachers a chance to actually make some decisions and plan a course of action.

Materials:

• Overhead projector, screen, blank transparencies, and transparency pens

• Overheads: A4.6,O1—How to Convert Rubric Scores to Grades Purposes, A4.6,O2—Six-Trait Model, and A4.6,O3—Discussion Questions

• Handouts: A4.6,H1—Six-Trait Model, A4.6,H2—Instructions, A4.6,H3—Memo

Time Required:

60-75 minutes

Facilitator's Notes:

1. (2 minutes) Introduce the purposes of the activity with Overhead A4.6,O1—How to Convert Rubric Scores to Grades Purposes.

2. (15-20 minutes) Context setting.

   Participants will read a memo written by a district assessment coordinator in response to a request for help from teachers who were attempting to reconcile their use of a writing rubric for instruction with their need to grade. The specific situation was that teachers had been using the six-trait model to teach writing and keep track of student progress. At the end of the grading period they said, "OK, we did six-trait. Now, how do we grade?"

   (Note: Although we use the Six-Trait Model in this case study, the same issues will arise with any multi-trait rubric.)

   In order to understand the memo written in response to this question, participants need to know a few things:

   • The district instituted use of performance assessment in writing for its positive influence on instruction and its ability to track student skill levels in a more useful fashion. The philosophy is this: If we clearly define what quality writing looks like and illustrate what we mean with samples of student writing, everyone (teachers, students, parents, etc.) will have a clearer view of the target to be hit. And, indeed, the process of determining characteristics of quality and finding samples of student work to illustrate them (and teaching students to do the same) improves instruction and helps students achieve at a higher level.

   • The characteristics of quality writing used by the district is embodied in a writing rubric called the "Six-Trait Model." Since the memo refers to the six traits, participants need to know a little about them. Overhead A4.6,O2 and Handout A4.6,H1 describe the six-trait model. (The entire six-trait rubric is included as Sample A.10—Six-Trait Model in Appendix A—Sampler.) The six-trait model should cover the same features of quality as other writing assessment methods used by participants. What tends to be different about the six-traits is the clarity with which they are written, the availability of student-language versions, and the emphasis on use in instruction.

     Each of the six traits is scored on a scale of one to five, where five is high. These are not intended to correspond to "A, B, C, D, and F." Teachers are encouraged not to use the traits in a lock-step fashion. Rather, they should use the traits that make sense in any given instructional instance, to weight them differently depending on the situation, and ask students to add language that makes sense to them.

   • Provide a brief overview of the methods in the memo for converting rubric scores to grades. The first and fourth methods are essentially logic processes. They don't require adding numbers at all. Method one essentially says that if the student has various patterns of scores, they should get thus and so grade. Several possible patterns and their relationship to grades are proposed. Method four asks that the teacher come up with rules for converting rubric scores to "percents." For example, an "A" might be equivalent to a score of "4" so "4's" would get 90%.

     The middle two methods require adding, multiplying and dividing numbers. For example, the second method requires adding up all the student's earned points and comparing it to the total possible points (e.g., 90%=A). A variation on this (method three) weights some traits more than others before comparing earned points to total possible points.

3. (5 minutes) Set up the activity.

   Participants will read and discuss the attached memo, Handout A4.6,H3—Memo, outlining several methods for converting rubric scores to grades. Then they will answer the discussion questions on Overhead A4.6,O3 and Handout A4.6,H2—Instructions:

   1. (Optional) According to Kohn, (see Activity 4.2) what level of question is: "We want to strengthen grading by improving the assessment on which grades are based; how do we combine the numbers at the end to come up with a grade?

      (The original question posed by the teachers corresponds to Level I/II as proposed by Kohn. They wanted to assess for purposes other than grading [continuous monitoring of student progress and student self-assessment], but then they also needed to combine the numbers at the end to come up with a grade. The goal in this activity is to encourage participants to solve this Level I/II question with Level III arguments. At Level III teachers question the entire enterprise of assessment and grading—why do we assess and why do we grade, and do our current procedures accomplish our purposes?)

   2. In this district, the purpose for using the rubric scoring scheme was motivating students, providing feedback (accurate communication of achievement in relationship to standards), encouraging students to self-assess, and using assessment to improve achievement. Although the primary purpose for grading should be accurate communication of student learning, might there be hidden purposes for grading that might conflict with the instructional purposes for the rubric?

   3. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each method for converting rubric scores to grades if the purpose for grading is to accurately report student achievement status and support the other classroom uses of the rubric?

   4. Which method would you recommend and why?

   5. How does this compare with current practice at your school? How might this change after today’s discussion?

      Note that there are no single correct answers to these questions. The goal is to have a sound rationale for the procedure chosen, regardless of what it is.

4. (30-45 minutes) Ask participants to read the memo and discuss the options. The following represent the discussions that teachers engage in when attempting to choose a defensible method. (Many of these discussion points raise Level III concerns.)

   • If the main purpose of grading is accurately communicating student achievement, the best method would be 1 or 4 because dry conversion of scores to percents masks important information, like whether a student has improved over time. Why not look at only the most recent work?

   • If we choose different methods, the same student could get different grades. Should we have a common procedure across teachers?

   • Every assessment should be an opportunity to learn. Which method would best encourage this goal? Probably, the one where students choose the work to be graded.

   • We have to be really clear on what the grade is about—how will it be used and what meaning will it have to students and parents. So different methods might be used at elementary and secondary.

   • Use of rubrics in the classroom and grading come from different philosophies about the role of assessment in instruction and learning. Many times grades are just used to sort students without having a clear idea of what the grade represents—achievement, effort, helping the teacher after school or what. If we have to grade, we need to select the method that keeps best to the spirit of the rubric.

   • Methods 2 and 3 can be misleading because a "3" corresponds to 60% which is often seen as an "F." Yet the description for "3" doesn’t seem to indicate failing work. Are we standards-based or not?

   • There is general dislike of the total points and weighting methods because they don't keep as much to the spirit of rubric use in the classroom or having the grading being an episode of learning. Groups tend to like methods that give them flexibility and encourage learning—the option to place more weight on papers produced later in the grading period or requiring students to choose the papers on which to be graded and providing a rationale for their choice.

5. (10 minutes) Get back together and discuss Handout A4.6,H2, items 4 and 5.

This document's URL is:

Home | Up & Coming | Programs & Projects: Assessment | People | Products & Publications | Topics

© 2001 Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory

Email Webmaster
Tel. 503.275.9500