Grades, points, and the assault on learning.

Let me clarify, grades probably aren’t the enemy…I don’t think.

Best case scenario: they can offer a clear snapshot of progress over time, a way to communicate where a student is and how far they’ve come. When thoughtfully designed, grades can support learning.

But that’s not usually what happens.

More often, grades become the goal rather than the reflection of learning. Students begin to chase points instead of questions. Curiosity takes a back seat to calculation: How many points is this worth? What do I need to get an A?

And once that shift happens, learning subtly changes.

This is not a new idea or reflection by any means, I know. BUT I think it’s important to keep coming back to as our assessments, instructional practices, schools and world continue to evolve.

So let's dig in!

The System We Inherited

Modern classrooms are built on systems designed to manage complexity: multiple learners, limited time, finite resources. Teachers construct units, design assessments, and assign grades to track progress through that structure.

That’s school.

But within these constraints, efficiency often wins. Reusable assignments, standardized rubrics, and point-based systems become necessary tools to keep everything moving. And while they help us function, they don’t always help students learn deeply.

In an ideal world, each learner would follow a personalized path, one that adapts, responds, and grows with them. In reality, most classrooms simply don’t have the capacity for that level of individualization.

So we do the best we can. Hrmph. 

A Question Worth Asking

Lately, I’ve found myself coming back to a deceptively simple question:

Why do we grade the way we do?

Not just how, but why.

After years of teaching across K–12 and higher education, I’ve seen just about every grading system out there:

• Traditional A–F scales

• Total-point accumulation

• Weighted categories

• Curved grading

• Standards-based approaches

Each comes with its own logic and its own limitations.

I have opinions, of course. But what I’m more interested in now is something deeper: What does the research actually say?Where did these systems come from? And are they doing what we think they’re doing?

A Quick Look Back

Letter grades, for example, weren’t always the norm. The A–F system emerged in the early 20th century as a way to standardize reporting across institutions. It was efficient. Scalable. Easy to communicate.

But it wasn’t designed with modern understandings of learning in mind.

Research like A Century of Grading Research by Susan M. Brookhart and colleagues (2016) highlights a consistent tension: grades often mix multiple factors, achievement, effort, and behavior, into a single symbol. That makes them easy to record, but harder to interpret.

In other words, a grade doesn’t always tell us what a student actually knows. Which again…we know this! 

So… Why A–F?

The A–F scale persists largely because it’s familiar.

It’s widely understood by students, families, colleges, and employers. It simplifies complex learning into a recognizable format. But that simplicity comes at a cost:

• It compresses a wide range of understanding into a few categories

• It can mask growth over time

• It often emphasizes performance over learning

And perhaps most importantly, it can shift motivation.

When Points Become the Point

If you’ve spent time in a classroom, you’ve heard it:

• “Is this graded?”

• “How many points is it worth?”

• “Can I redo this for more credit?”

These aren’t bad questions. They’re logical responses to the system we’ve created for our students.

But they reveal something important:
Students are learning how to navigate school, not necessarily how to engage with learning itself. And there are arguments for that to be sure. But is that what we want? I’m not convinced.

What About Standards-Based Grading?

Standards-based grading (SBG) tries to address some of these issues by focusing on mastery of specific skills or concepts rather than point accumulation.

Instead of averaging everything into a single score, SBG asks:

• What does this student know?

• What can they do?

• Where are they still developing?

In theory, it separates academic achievement from behaviors like effort or participation, providing a clearer picture of learning.

In practice, implementation varies widely.

Some systems do this beautifully, offering meaningful feedback and opportunities for growth. Others struggle with consistency, communication, or alignment. I’ve really enjoyed working in schools where  SBG is the norm. 

What Does the Research Say?

Across decades of research, a few themes emerge:

• Grades are most useful when they reflect achievement only (not behavior or compliance)

• Feedback has a stronger impact on learning than scores alone

• Opportunities for revision and iteration support deeper understanding

• Clarity in learning goals improves both performance and motivation

None of this is particularly surprising. But it does raise a bigger question:

If we know what supports learning… why do our systems so often fall short of that ideal?

Where I’m Headed Next

As someone grounded in science, I tend to approach problems iteratively:

• Observe what’s happening

• Ask better questions

• Look at the evidence

• Test ideas and refine

Grading feels like one of those “hidden in plain sight” problems, so normalized that we rarely stop to examine it closely.

But when we do, it opens up something much bigger: a conversation about what we value in education, and how our systems reflect (or distort) those values.

This is the first step in that exploration.

Next, I want to dig deeper into:

• What makes feedback actually effective

• How different grading models impact motivation and equity

• And what practical shifts are possible within real classrooms, not ideal ones

Because at the end of the day, this isn’t just about grades.

It’s about learning. And whether our systems are helping or quietly getting in the way.

References

Susan M. Brookhart, S. M., Thomas R. Guskey, T. R., Alex J. Bowers, A. J., James H. McMillan, J. H., & Michael T. Smith, M. T. (2016). A century of grading research: Meaning and value in the most common educational measure. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 803–848. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316672069