These tables illustrate the importance of helping students complete high school and become college or career ready, since the impact of education on their employment potential and earnings is so very dramatic.
The connection between education and employment also has an alarming effect on the U.S. economy. Education policy experts Tabitha Grossman, Ryan Reyna, and Stephanie Shipton (2011) observe the following:
By 2018, it is expected that the United States will need 22 million new college degrees and at least 4.7 million new workers with postsecondary certificates but will produce 3 million fewer degrees than needed. Unfortunately, there is evidence to suggest that significant portions of the student population in the U.S. are insufficiently prepared for postsecondary education…. In 2011, just 25 percent of high school graduates nationwide who took the ACT standardized test scored at a level that indicates readiness for entry-level, credit-bearing college coursework without remediation in all four core subject areas. A higher percentage, about 28 percent of the U.S. students who took the ACT test met none of the readiness benchmarks. (p. 4)
Grossman et al. (2011) have contrasted the growing demand for an educated workforce with disappointing data regarding student achievement. U.S. students’ low ranking on the ACT sounds a national alarm to educators, as well as to parents, since employment and earnings have connections to levels of educational attainment. The United States’ traditional social mobility has declined dramatically. Niall Ferguson (2011) reports the significance of these conditions in detail:
A compelling explanation for our increasingly rigid social system is that American public education is failing poor kids. One way it does this is by stopping them from getting to college. If your parents are in the bottom quintile, you have a 19 percent chance of getting into the top quintile with a college degree—but a miserable 5 percent chance without one.
The Benchmarking for Success report sounds similar warnings (NGA, CCSSO, & Achieve, 2008):
The United States is falling behind other countries in the resource that matters most in the new global economy: human capital…. The U.S. ranked high in inequity, with the third largest gap in science scores between students from different socioeconomic groups. The U.S. is rapidly losing its historic edge in educational attainment as well. As recently as 1995, America still tied for first in college and university graduation rates, but by 2006 had dropped to 14th. That same year it had the second-highest college dropout rate of 27 countries. (pp. 5–6)
According to figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, “The U.S. has one of the highest college dropout rates in the industrialized world” (as cited in NGA et al., 2008, p. 11). That same report calls on state leaders to:
Tackle “the equity imperative” by creating strategies for closing the achievement gap between students from different racial and socioeconomic backgrounds in each of the action steps…. Reducing inequality in education is not only socially just, it’s essential for ensuring that the United States retain a competitive edge. (p. 6)
It is clear that we, as educators, parents, and citizens, face new challenges in our efforts to recapture our former high rankings in educational attainment, employment opportunities, and economic stability. A critical piece of this equity imperative is adopting grading practices that are fair and clear and that give hope to students who are willing to work until their work is acceptable.
College Dropout Rates
As you’ve seen, educational attainment is closely connected to earning potential. Grades that students earn in high school are important not only for graduation rates but also in qualifying students for college admissions and scholarships. For example, most colleges require minimum grade point averages (GPAs) for admission; many states offer college scholarship money based on high school GPAs. Grades are therefore tied directly to earning potential. Qualifying for college admission can be challenging but is only the first step in achieving a college degree. Earning a bachelor’s degree typically takes the traditional four years of class attendance (either in person, online, or a combination of the two), completion of assignments, study, exams, lab work, conferences with professors, internships, and more. But the U.S. college dropout rate after freshman year is over 30 percent, and widespread grade inflation in high schools may be a causative factor in that statistic, as students haven’t truly mastered the standards necessary to excel in college (Goodwin, 2011). Grade inflation results in higher scores given for work that in the past would have earned a much lower score. Consider the following facts about grade inflation.
■ Between 1991 and 2003, the mathematics and English grade point averages of students taking the ACT outpaced the rise in their ACT scores in those subjects (Woodruff & Ziomek, 2004).
■ High school students’ scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress’s (NAEP) reading section declined between 1992 and 2005, while students reported an upturn in grade point average between 1990 and 2005—from 2.68 in 1990 to 2.98 in 2005. In addition, the percentage of students who reported taking college-preparatory classes rose from 5 to 10 percent during that period (Schmidt, 2007).
State legislators are moving toward funding formulas based on college graduation rates rather than on enrollment rates. Funding formulas are how legislators decide how much money a state will provide its universities and colleges. In states where funding is based on graduation rates, colleges are raising selection criteria. This change may require high schools to develop grading practices that inform colleges (and students) what students have truly mastered. When high schools provide recovery credits that do not include standards-based content mastery, such as a minimum requirement for the student to pass an end-of-course test for that particular state, it can lead to students receiving diplomas they have not earned (Center for Public Education, 2012). One study found that 47 percent of students did not actually complete a college- or career-ready curriculum (Gewertz, 2016a; Gewertz, 2016b). We believe recovery credits have a place in schools, but they need to reflect some level of content mastery, not just time spent earning credits in a computer lab. Grade inflation appears to be a major factor in creating this dilemma, as is the lack of common standards on which mastery is based. Grade inflation is detrimental and misleading to students, parents, counselors, and potential employers. Should individual teachers have the freedom to determine their own grading practices when the outcomes for students are so critical? It’s time now to reassess our grading policies.
Standardized Assessment
The Common Core State Standards, or similar standards codified by some states, are another reason to reconsider and improve assessment practices and policies by standardizing grading criteria. The CCSS offer teachers the opportunity to implement the kind of uniformity—while maintaining flexibility where it’s needed—that can change grading practices. Having a set of common standards brings greater consistency in our grading practices, as does having common assessment approaches such as the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, as do assessment options for students with disabilities.
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers
Two different consortia, which the U.S. Department of Education funded, are implementing overall assessments of student attainment of the CCSS. Information at www.smarterbalanced.org/assessments details the plan developed for the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). Information at www.parcconline.org/assessments represents the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers’ (PARCC) plan. Information at www.ets.org/global relays information about standardized assessments available around the world.
SBAC and PARCC complement the CCSS and are in varying stages of implementation throughout selected states. Both offer formative and summative assessments (Grossman et al., 2011). Educators in CCSS discussions often emphasize summative assessments.