Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grading Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lexington 1 staff propose mixed grading system; board asks for policy alignment and February vote
Summary
District academic staff recommended preserving standards-based progress reporting through 3rd grade, switching to traditional letter grades in 4th–5th, and adjusting secondary grade weights to 70/30 (major/minor). Board members requested policy revisions and asked administration to return with a clear recommendation and policy edits in February.
Mary Gaskins, Lexington County School District One chief academic officer, presented revised grading recommendations on Jan. 28 as part of the district’s alignment with a new strategic plan.
Gaskins told the board the elementary proposal would keep feedback-driven progress reporting for pre-K through 3rd grade in core subjects (math, English language arts, science and social studies), and transition 4th and 5th graders to traditional letter grades for those same core subjects in the 2025–26 school year. The elementary plan includes: four rating categories for progress reporting (no progress, partially met, approaching met, met), professional learning for teachers, and enhanced communication with families. Kindergarten–5th related-arts teachers would use a consistent rating scale; students in kindergarten–5th grade special education self-contained classes would continue to receive standards-based feedback tied to IEPs.
At the secondary level, staff recommended a change in grading language and weightings. Casey Calhoun and other secondary leaders proposed removing “formative” as a graded category and renaming graded work into minor and major assessments. They recommended a 70/30 split (70% major; 30% minor) and a minimum of three major assessments per grading period, with clarified reassessment rules: one choice retake per grading period (for full credit up to 100) and additional recovery reassessments limited to bringing a major-test score up to 80 after required intervention or tutoring.
Board members asked detailed questions about the rationale and evidence. Gaskins said the recommendations were a synthesis of focus groups, teacher and parent advisory councils and other stakeholder input gathered this year; elementary recommendations reflected the most common positions across that feedback. Staff also said the district will need to revise policy IKAB/IKR to match practice and will provide those policy changes to the board.
Several trustees urged a cautious, evidence-based approach. Trustee comments included requests for: - Clarification on whether the elementary transition should begin in 3rd or 4th grade (several board members and many speakers recommended 3rd grade as a pivotal year because of Read to Succeed accountability). - Research citations comparing standards-based grading and traditional grading; staff said they will provide research summaries to the board. - Clear guidance on how the district will identify and support high-performing (gifted) students within any approach.
Gaskins and her team told the board they will return in February with a formal recommendation and aligned policy language for the board to consider. In discussion the board signaled support for the secondary recommendations and asked staff to prepare a policy revision and an implementation plan and to continue stakeholder outreach on the elementary proposal. No final board vote on grading policy took place on Jan. 28.
What’s next: Administration will bring a formal grading-practices recommendation plus proposed policy revisions to the board in February 2025, including research citations and a communication/implementation plan for teachers, families and students.
