According to through Brown University’s Annenberg Institute for School Reform, eighth- and ninth-graders who learned from math teachers with relatively higher performance standards earned better test scores in Algebra I. The same students later saw their improved results carry forward to subsequent years of math instruction, and — contradicting fears that high expectations might cause kids to resist or give up — they were less likely to be absent from classes than similar students assigned to more lax graders. 

Seth Gershenson, an economist at American University and one of the paper’s co-authors, said the breadth and longevity of the positive results showed that they were not flowing from a quirk of testing. Rather, high standards “change the way students engage with school,” he argued.

“There really is a persistent, long-lasting sea change that students experience when they have a tougher grader,” Gershenson said. “And it’s not like you have to be super tough; any marginal increase in standards adds a little boost.”

The findings build on by Gershenson, which showed that pervasive grade inflation in K-12 settings — defined as student course grades that are considerably higher than their corresponding scores on end-of-year exams — is more prevalent in schools serving larger percentages of affluent students. They are also noteworthy in light of the post-COVID academic environment, which has seen many teachers either through personal initiative or in response to district mandates.

The study is built on grading and testing records for a huge swath of North Carolina students who took Algebra I in either the eighth or ninth grades. In all, the sample included over 365,000 pupils across nearly 27,000 classrooms and 4,415 teachers — a rich enough selection to allow comparisons between thousands of similar students assigned to different Algebra teachers over a 10-year span. 

To assess the impact of different standards, Gershenson and his colleagues used multiple measures of grading severity, again relying on the relationship between course grades (over which teachers have wide, though not total, latitude) and performance on end-of-year exams. For example, an Algebra teacher whose students tend to receive higher course grades than their scores would indicate is considered an “easier” grader, and vice versa. 

The researchers then sorted the teacher sample into four comparison groups, ranging from the easiest graders to the hardest, and charted the trajectories of their respective students before and after they took Algebra I. Disproportionately, the teachers grouped in the “toughest” quarter were likelier to be white, female, and more experienced than the sample as a whole. 

They also tended to achieve more in the classroom.

Across several metrics of academic success, students who were exposed to higher grading standards fared better than their peers. Compared with students who had previously demonstrated similar levels of math performance, those assigned to stricter graders saw larger scoring gains. Notably, those effects were both sizable and linear, meaning that the tighter the grading practices — moving from the easiest-grading quarter to the very hardest — the larger the improvement on test scores.

Students of tougher graders also maintained some of their scoring advantage into the next two classes of North Carolina’s math sequence, geometry and Algebra II. The effects were actually twice as large in Algebra II as they were in geometry, a nuance the authors specifically cited in the paper: Perhaps because of the similarities in content between the two levels of algebra, they theorized, students who were formerly held to higher standards did especially well in the later class, even though the effects should have faded more because of the further passage of time. 

“That suggests this wasn’t a pure grade-chasing effect where students crammed more for the test so that they could do better and get the grade they needed,” Gershenson explained. “Instead, it makes me think that there was some real learning that happened and was retained.”

‘Good for everybody’

Though it sets out to measure the benefits of tougher grading policies, the study jibes somewhat with research investigating the inverse phenomenon of grade inflation. According to the , a long-term analysis of student grades conducted by the U.S. Department of Education, the average high school GPA rose from 3.00 in 2009 to 3.11 in 2019. But performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, referred to as the Nation’s Report Card, stayed flat over the same period. 

That federal assessment when it appeared last spring, but it only covered the years before the pandemic. Another report, , found evidence of significant grade inflation over 2020 and 2021, with self-reported student GPAs climbing even as ACT scores themselves did not.

Not all education policy scholars are concerned about these revelations. Zachary Bleemer, a professor of economics at the Yale School of Management, that some grade inflation — whether at the university or K-12 levels — can correct inequalities in which student groups pursue intellectually rigorous subjects. (Female college students, in particular, to discontinue studies in economics if their initial grades are poor.) What’s more, ACT’s hypothesis could rightly be viewed with caution, given the organization’s potential interest in casting high school grades as less reliable than scores on college admissions tests. 

But it is also broadly reflected in accounts given by teachers themselves, who have sometimes as a response to COVID’s disruption to in-person learning. In big districts like , , and (home to Las Vegas), new standards have deemphasized deadlines and classroom behavior, giving students more time and chances to complete graded work.

Education authorities have justified those changes as an equity-minded strategy to keep students engaged who might otherwise become frustrated or fall behind in their studies. But Gershenson and his co-authors found no evidence that North Carolina students assigned to harder graders became alienated from school. In fact, those students were slightly less likely than their peers to rack up unexcused absences.

Best of all, whether measured by attendance or test scores, the results of higher standards were broadly similar for a range of different students. While higher-performing math students enjoyed marginally larger gains than their relatively lower-performing classmates, effects were ultimately beneficial across 20 different student categories — each differing by race, sex, class rank, and prior achievement level in math. 

Gershenson, who sees grade inflation as a significant problem that distorts how scholastic performance is interpreted, said the near-uniformity of his team’s findings was a strong signal that high standards are “good for everybody.”

“For none of these outcomes… is the effect negative. Sure, the effects are smaller for some groups than others, and they’re smaller for some outcomes than others. But on no dimension are students being harmed by higher grading standards.”

Between 2016 and 2021, the average GPA for students taking the test increased from 3.22 to 3.39. But scores on the ACT I — reflecting performance in English, math, reading and science — declined slightly, from 20.8 to 20.3. The trend was especially noticeable among Black students and those from low- to moderate-income homes.

The results, based on a sample of over 4 million students in almost 4,800 schools, reflect “persistent, systemic,” grade inflation, wrote the authors, both researchers at ACT. Following a recent from the National Assessment of Educational Progress — or NAEP — the ACT analysis provides further evidence that grades, which often include points for effort and class participation, don’t reflect objective measures of academic achievement.

The study found more grade inflation in higher-poverty schools. Edgar Sanchez, a lead research scientist at ACT, said it’s unclear why that’s the case and called the study “a starting point.”

But Seth Gershenson, an American University researcher who has the issue, attributed the problem to what President George W. Bush “the soft bigotry of low expectations.” Schools, Gershenson said, award passing grades “and let someone else deal with the lack of learning later on.”

His research also showed growing grade inflation over time in wealthier schools, where “more entitled parents and students” are putting pressure on teachers to give A’s so students can get into top colleges.

It’s unclear to what extent the relaxation of grading standards during the pandemic affected the study’s outcome, wrote the ACT researchers. California students, for example, were allowed to change their lowest grades. And reduced how much scores on end-of-course tests counted in students’ final grades. The authors noted that students who tested in the middle of a pandemic, especially the spring after schools shut down, “could be different from typical tested students” and also from those who didn’t test until 2021.  

At a time when more colleges and universities are making both the ACT and SAT for admission, ACT CEO Janet Godwin acknowledged the risk that the paper’s argument in support of standardized testing might seem self-serving, 

But she said the company has “a responsibility” to contribute to the conversation.

“We have the means and the data to do this kind of research,” she said.

Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank that has published Gershenson’s work, agreed that ACT has “a big dog in that fight.” Regardless, he agreed that current trends in grading are leaving students less prepared for higher education.

“The heart of the problem is that there aren’t any standards or guidelines for grading in most places,” Petrilli said. “Teachers are on their own, and don’t get much, if any, guidance. Nor do they get much training in [education] schools.”

‘In the dark’

Parents rely on grades to give them an accurate portrait of their children’s performance — especially since they are given more frequently than annual state tests, said Bibb Hubbard, founder and president of Learning Heroes, a nonprofit that helps parents become better informed about their children’s progress. 

But many parents might not understand that grades are sometimes more about effort than knowledge, she said. 

“When we ask teachers why they don’t share more with parents about student achievement, they report it is fear-based — fear of not being believed, of being blamed and of their principals not having their back,” she said. “The system is designed to keep parents in the dark about their child’s grade-level performance.”

In recent years, some districts have adopted an approach known as “standards-based grading” that educators say offers a more accurate measure of whether students are meeting expectations. It takes the emphasis off non-academic factors like turning in assignments early and attendance — practices that can vary from teacher to teacher.

The 3,000-student Pewaukee School District in Wisconsin, outside Milwaukee, implemented such a model in 2015. Students are graded on a one-to-four system, with one representing below expectations and four indicating advanced performance. 

“We didn’t want students’ grades dependent on whether they brought in a box of Kleenex,” said Danielle Bosanec, the district’s chief academic officer. “We wanted kids to stop chasing grades and start chasing learning.”

Parents bought into the plan because it allows students more than one chance at a passing grade on an assignment or test so long as they can demonstrate the additional work they did after their first try. The district agreed to convert final scores into letter grades for transcripts.

Bosanec also conducted her own research to test the connection between the new grading model and ACT scores. In general, she found that in a standards-based model, “as students’ grades go up or down, the impact on ACT scores follows suit.”

Despite the studies pointing to grade inflation, there’s no “widespread evidence that institutions have lost trust in GPAs,” said David Hawkins, chief education and policy officer at the National Association for College Admission Counseling. What colleges crave, he said, is more context. 

In the future, he thinks, like research projects or class presentations — used widely in some states like New Hampshire in lieu of tests — could become part of the admissions process.

“There is more to be mined from the student’s high school record than we’re currently getting,” he said. “We’re missing a lot of data about what students can do.”

The High School Transcript Study, from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, shows that high school graduates’ overall scores in math declined between 2009 and 2019, while science scores remained flat. 

Only students taking the most rigorous math courses — including precalculus or higher — scored at the proficient level. But even their average score declined from 189 to 184 over the 10-year period. During that same decade, the typical high school senior’s graduating GPA rose .11 points to 3.11, or roughly a B average.

Peggy Carr, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, which administers the NAEP program, suggested that the content of high school courses is not always “as advertised.”

“Algebra I is not Algebra I just because it’s labeled Algebra I,” she said during a Tuesday call with reporters, but noted that the reasons behind the mismatch are complex. During a separate interview with The 74, she added, “We do have evidence from prior investigations that these courses may say they’re doing one thing, but they’re suspect about the rigor.”

The good news, she said, is that more students of all backgrounds are taking higher-level courses — often because schools require them for graduation. She also noted that the average scores of Black students taking calculus have increased, from 161 to 177.

The lack of alignment between NAEP results and student performance in high school is not a new phenomenon. Officials reported the same trend in 2009, Carr said.

GPAs have increased for all racial groups over time, but since 1990, the gaps between Black and white students and Hispanic and white students have increased. The study also shows that students are earning their highest GPAs in career and technical courses or in those described as “other” — not in the core academic courses measured by NAEP. 

The findings, based on a sample of 14,300 graduates from 1,400 public and private schools, follow a series of NAEP results that point to sagging academic performance for the nation’s students. Data released last fall showed disturbing declines among 13-year-olds in both reading and math between 2012 and 2020. And the gaps between the highest- and lowest-scoring students have grown over time. More students, however, are taking tougher courses in high school. The percentage taking “mid-level” or rigorous courses, including Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses, has climbed since 2000 from 46 percent to 63 percent.

Some say the mismatch between students’ grades and NAEP performance reflects that students earn credit for tasks that don’t necessarily reflect learning. Others argue the traditional A-F grading system is and that grade inflation is rampant: Higher grades might boost students’ confidence and increase graduation rates, some experts say, but leave them less prepared for college.

Seth Gershenson, an associate professor of public policy at American University, who studied in 2018, said the pandemic has probably exacerbated grade inflation, but added he hasn’t seen any recent data on the issue. 

“Learning decreased, but a variety of pressures likely kept grades from dipping too hard,” he said. The current NAEP study only reflects scores and GPAs prior to the pandemic.

Carr said her team is already considering what adjustments they’ll have to make when they conduct the next transcript study in 2024, since it will focus on students whose education was disrupted by the pandemic, when many students completed courses online. Most districts across the country shifted to policies that kept grades from slipping below what they were when schools shut down in March, 2020. Some students also had opportunities during the 2020-21 school year to raise their lowest grades. 

In Ohio’s Oberlin City Schools, near Cleveland, high school history teacher Kurt Russell said there was some pushback from teachers at his school when administrators decided to give all students an A or a C on the work they submitted once schools shut down. 

But even before the pandemic, he said he noticed a shift toward allowing students to make up assignments that were significantly past due. 

“In the past, it was a 0 in the gradebook. Now I see a lot of teachers giving full credit for assignments that are very tardy,” said Russell, one of four current finalists for National Teacher of the Year. His policy is to knock off a letter grade for each day an assignment is late. 

“I think we still need to hold our students accountable,” he said.

Gershenson also studied teachers’ in 2020 and found that students learn more when teachers are tougher. 

“Teachers who set a higher bar for a good grade had students who went on to learn more, even after they left that teachers’ class,” said Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which published the study. “Students learned to exert more effort. They inferred that their teacher held high expectations for them. Teachers face a ton of pressure to give easy A’s. Those that don’t are real heroes.”

Non-achievement factors 

Some experts who study grading policy note that teachers traditionally consider a lot more than a student’s academic work when assigning final grades.

Matthew Townsley, an assistant professor of educational leadership at the University of Northern Iowa, said there’s a “widening disconnect” between GPAs and standardized assessments because course grades reflect a lot of non-achievement factors, such as attendance and assignment completion — regardless of the quality of student performance on  assignments.

The NAEP study, he said, could help strengthen the case for a movement called — giving students credit for what they actually learn and often more than one chance to learn it.

Some educators consider the practice more equitable because submitting assignments early or racking up extra credit points might be easier for students with high-speed Wi-Fi at home and access to private tutors, but can be an ongoing struggle for those in lower-income families. 

While were moving toward such a grading system before the pandemic, interest has spread as educators look for methods that don’t unfairly disadvantage students in poverty. 

“I believe schools seeking to separate achievement from non-achievement factors in their grading were not only well positioned to assess and communicate learning during the pandemic,” Townsley said, “but also to communicate learning in the future that better aligns with NAEP and other external measures.”