CHS Grading Committee proposes changes to policies dealing with grade accountability

By Shayan Ahmad
<[email protected]>

According to Jeremy Weprich, member of the CHS Grading Committee and senior, the CHS Grading Committee has proposed a new design for the school’s grading and cheating standards. Weprich said the committee is comprised of faculty, parents from the PTO board and students.

“The purpose of the committee is to reexamine the way grades are accounted for at our school,” Weprich said. “Throughout the year, we have been meeting and discussing the meaning of grades, whether they should be purely academic or combine behavioral aspects as well.”

Weprich said that currently, the school’s grading system combines both academic and behavioral facets of students. He said this means that in the school’s grading system now, a student can be punished for his lack of behavioral discipline -for example, not turning in an assignment or attempting to cheat during a test- even if he knows the coursework of the class.

“Right now we mix the two,” he said. “So if a student doesn’t turn in his work on time, even if he understands all the material, he can be given a lower grade or a zero, even though that’s a fault in behavior on his part.”

According to Rhonda Eshleman, committee chairperson and assistant principal, the committee has discussed the possibility of completely separating the two ideas. “We found out we’ve got a lot of fixing to do,” she said. “We talked about what CHS would look like if grades reflected only your academic performances.”

Eshleman said this would divide punishments for conduct difficulties and schoolwork problems.

“Teachers might call home if students don’t do work, then have them come into SRT,” she said. “Then if they don’t show up, they will have to stay after school. There will be a series of steps, just like we have with hall sweeps.”

Eshleman also said the school will for the first time create a comprehensive policy on cheating.

“Currently we don’t have a policy at all when it comes to cheating,” she said. “We’ll create one and put it in the school handbook as well.”

According to David Chiang, another member of the committee and senior, the group does not have formal legislative power however.

“The committee was created solely to advise,” he said. “The school was looking to revise the current standards and see if there were any problems, and the wanted a support group. We don’t have full decision power.”

Weprich also said the group was created only to provide support and recommendations and has no power to enforce or directly create rules. After explaining their recommended policies, the school board will come to a conclusion about the future of CHS grading standards.

“The school board has decided that next year will be a pilot year for teachers to implement these recommendations,” Eshleman said. “We’re letting teachers try different strategies, then at the end of the year look at what was successful. That way we’ll find out what works for students.”

According to Eshleman, this means that the new policies will not be widespread and ubiquitous in the school for the 2011-2012 school year. Instead, they will be piloted by some teachers, and a decision as to whether or not to use these strategies fully at CHS will be made at the close of the year.