Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Standards Based Grading topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lindberg task force proposes numeric proficiency scale, common retake rules for middle grades
Summary
District staff proposed moving sixth and seventh grades to a 4–3–2–1 proficiency scale averaged into semester A–F course grades, plus common retake and late-work policies; the plan preserves traditional grading for grades 8–12 and will be refined through April–May stakeholder feedback.
District staff presented proposals to change middle-school grading toward a numeric proficiency system and to standardize grading practices across departments.
Dr. Terara Sparks and a steering committee of secondary teachers and administrators told the board the changes grew out of a yearlong task force that gathered feedback from families, students and staff. "We use the feedback from this report from our community members, staff, students, and parents to inform the development of our district compass goals," the presenter said while introducing the work.
Why it matters: parents raised that standards-based reporting at the middle level made it difficult to see an overall course grade. In response, the task force recommended that for sixth and seventh grades the district adopt a 4–3–2–1 proficiency scale and average individual standard scores to produce a traditional A–F semester grade, giving families both granular and cumulative information.
What was proposed: the panel described four priorities that shaped recommendations: (1) an overall semester course grade for families, (2) clearer definitions of the highest performance level (EE), (3) consistent universal grading expectations across classrooms, and (4) meaningful feedback and next steps for students. For grades 6–7 the district would report proficiency on a 4–3–2–1 scale and then map averaged standard scores to A–F for semester reporting. Staff said this will “bridge the gap between elementary standards-based and then 8 through 12 traditional grading.”
High school approach and exceptions: staff said grades 8–12 will largely retain the traditional 100-point/A–F scale, but building-level practices (retakes versus reassessments, preparation-versus-assessment distinctions) will be reviewed so students and families see consistent rules. Presenters emphasized this is a phased, department-level implementation rather than a single, systemwide switch.
Parent communication and technical details: officials showed an Infinite Campus model to demonstrate how standards averages can roll up and said teachers and systems staff (Michelle McRoyy was named) are testing the display so parents will see both standard-level information and a single course grade. A board member asked whether proficiency-to-letter mappings will make it possible for students to calculate how to maintain an A; staff responded that the math is straightforward but may be more complex in practice.
Next steps: staff scheduled a task force meeting on April 21 for additional feedback, broader stakeholder communications in May, and summer work to create common rubrics and scoring guides. The plan will continue to the board advisory and teacher groups for refinement before any full implementation.
The board’s next procedural step: the district invited interested community members to the board advisory and task force meeting for further conversation; no formal policy change or vote was taken at this workshop.
