David Douglas workshop explores equitable‑grading pilot, data review and a consultant contract

David Douglas School District administrators, building leaders and teachers described a multi-pronged effort to explore equitable grading practices at a board workshop, reporting early data reviews, school‑level pilots and a contracted consulting engagement to support the work.

Presenters said the district has begun work to reduce punitive grading practices that penalize students for missing assignments rather than measuring mastery. Schools represented at the workshop described different implementation stages: one high school building reported a multi-step awareness process and planned department-level review of syllabi and late‑work policies; a smaller campus reported more advanced pilot work using rubrics and reassessment opportunities for students.

Why it matters: Presenters framed equitable grading as a change to better match grades to student learning rather than behavior or point‑chasing. They argued that replacing zeros and averaging with mastery-focused measures and reassessment opportunities can increase student persistence and reduce disproportionate impacts on marginalized students.

Key points and actions described - Contracted support: presenters noted the district used improvement funds to hire Linda Mansell (Creative Leadership Solutions) to work with building teams; presenters said the contract was approved in January and Linda has begun working with high‑school and Burridge teams. - Data review and awareness work: administrators said they reviewed grade distributions by teacher and department, asked department chairs to compare patterns and are identifying pockets of differing practices as an "awareness year" before policy changes. - Practices being piloted: examples included rubric‑based summative scoring aligned to standards, multiple reassessment opportunities, limiting the role of homework to formative practice, and attention to how zeros or minimum scores affect averages. - Implementation concerns: presenters and teachers raised workload and logistics concerns—managing reassessments for large caseloads, translating standards‑based measures to traditional transcripts for colleges, and communicating changes to students and families.

Voices and classroom experience School-level teachers and principals described practical effects: one teacher said building rubrics and aligning assessments clarified instruction and reduced extraneous point‑chasing; another said students responded positively when multiple attempts were allowed. Administrators described department‑level work to standardize syllabus language and late‑work policies so students see consistent expectations across classes.

Next steps and direction - Continue awareness and data review this year; convene department chairs to identify which practices are already in use and where differences exist. - Pilot changes in selected classrooms and provide professional learning for rubric design, assessment alignment and reassessment management. - Translate standards‑based measures into traditional transcript entries when needed for college applications; presenters said jurisdictions and many colleges perform their own transcript reweighting.

What was not decided - No board policy change or formal vote occurred at the workshop. Presenters described the work as ongoing and iterative; administrators emphasized a slow, school‑by‑school approach rather than an immediate districtwide mandate.

Ending Administrators asked for continued board support for professional learning and said they will return with pilot findings and suggested next steps.